[MikeyS]

hey guys just wondering if there are any bigger engines then a 1.6 that will fit in a suzuki jimny 98 or could you post a link if anyone has done a bigger conversion.
(i know anything over a 1.6 will be overkill of power just want to see what else is possible)

[vit1990]

Being a 98 Jimny it will be a G series motor. With an adaptor plate the J18 out of a Baleno or J20 out of a Vitara. You'll need loom, etc too.

[MikeyS]

what size engine is that? like litres wise? 1.8L??

[sideways]

Yes, a J18 is a 1.8l.

Anything different to a G16b is 100x harder to put in and anything more powerful will be pushing the Jimny driveline pretty hard.

[henno]

Just stick with the G16 and spend your money elsewhere.

[tanshi]

you do not need an adapter plate to fit a j18, it should bolt striaght up.

j20 would require some clutch mods

[MikeyS]

do you know anyone who has done the j18 conversion before that so i could ask him some questions??

[MikeyS]

henno i already have spent it elsewhere i have rear lock and (front in march) , 30" coopers S/T, arb bullbar with winch, 4" ORA lift kit and sierra transfer case next week.

starting to need more power just to push it around.

[MikeyS]

what is the difference between with the j18 and the j20???

[tanshi]

there are heaps of differences.
j18 was a front wheel drive engine and will require radiator hose mods. 1.8 litre came from the baleno gtx

j20 came from the sv420 vitara. 2 litre.

ive not done a 1.8 and i doubt many people have. i put a j20 in a sierra.

[HarryHoudini]

For the person who has plenty of money & spare time.

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Suzuki-Sierr ... 3ad&_uhb=1

[vit1990]

ebay ad wrote:

Details of the VW engine are:
-VW 1Y Model normally aspirated diesel engine 1.9 litre.
-70 hp (52 kW), 100 ft lbs (135 nm) of torque.

Compared to Suzuki engines:
-1.3 litre petrol engine 60 hp (45 kW), 76 ft lbs (103 nm) of torque.
-1.6 litre petrol engine 80 hp (57 kW), 94 ft lbs (127 nm) of torque.

1.6 would be my pick.

[sideways]

Neither would be my pic....

[tanshi]

of the efi versions which are 10+more powerfull than that baleno g16 is around 70kw

[Gwagensteve]

In the similar items there's a g13BB from a carry listed as an easy swap for a sierra.... Really? The last one I saw looked like an epic job to fit- manifolds, sump, accessory drive ect.

Steve

[TomDK]

I know it's and old engine.

But what about the G13B Twin-cam from a Swift GTI? Should bolt directly to the gearbox.

101 bhp, and should be pretty easy to get more out of this engine.

[Gwagensteve]

Not legal in this country as it's older than the recipient car. In any case, a g16b makes about 95hp and 25% more torque than the GTi.

Steve.

[jimny_timmy]

Gwagensteve wrote:

Not legal in this country as it's older than the recipient car. In any case, a g16b makes about 95hp and 25% more torque than the GTi.

Steve.

Is it that the motor can't be older, or it has to have the same emissions rating? Just curious as I was thinking about the m18 conversion for my jimny but can't get one that's 2010+ model

The way I see it, the m18 probly didn't change any over the years? Same as the m13 in the vet jimnys...

[Gwagensteve]

Yes, but it's up to you to prove it, with an emissions test possibly required.

Steve.

[jimny_timmy]

Cool thanks gives me an option I guess

[Gwagensteve]

To give you an idea what "proving it" means, here's the kind of logic process an engineer may go through.

Even if an M18 passes emissions in a Liana (or whatever they are in) a Jimny has shorter gearing, higher rolling resistance, and inferior aerodynamics. It also has a different exhaust configuration (Including catalyst location) and inlet configuration. All of those things will effect the cars tailpipe emissions. A Jimny is also likely to be heavier than the M18 donor car too, especially one that's non standard.

On the face of it, it's basically impossible to calculate the effect all of that will have on emissions. The M18 might pass, but it might not, and the engineer might not be too happy just assuming it will be OK.

The elephant in the room is that generally, fitting engines of the same year or newer just fly under the radar and everyone is happy to assume they meet current emissions. Of course, it's terribly unfair that if you found a 2010+ motor nobody will care about emissions but find a 2008 model motor and it's either a total no go or you need to do thousands of $$ of testing, but there you go, the line has to be drawn somewhere.

Steve.

[jimny_timmy]

Hmmm I would have just thought it'd have to comply with the emissions from the year of the car you're putting it into and they'd look at the specs of the motor being transplanted... I agree! What a load of BS

[henno]

jimny_timmy wrote:

Hmmm I would have just thought it'd have to comply with the emissions from the year of the car you're putting it into and they'd look at the specs of the motor being transplanted... I agree! What a load of BS

Kind of, but not really.

I mean, the cost of emissions testing every single vehicle with a heart transplant would be very costly... so I guess they just drew a line (like Steve said above) and just said "OK, let's just assume that anything of the same year and newer is good to go.".

Sure it's never 100% accurate and there are going to be instances where older engines COULD have less emissions than newer ones but I can understand why they made such rules - as clunky as they may seem at times.

[jimny_timmy]

Yeah I can see why too. But for example, the 2008 1.3 and 2010 1.3 are the same motor.... The 2008 1.8 would have passed the same emission testing the 1.3 did but can't be put in a car that's 2 years older with the same motor that passed the same year.... That is probably confusing to a few people lol