1600 Gti Engine Id/differences

[309jazzpanda 39]

Regarding the 1600 xu engines am I right that there were two different versions? a 105hp and a 115hp version. I read somewhere that the only difference is the 115hp had the 1900 head and cam fitted to it, is this correct?.

 

Now i need to id my 1600 i've got in the 309, purchased the engine 3 years a go and don't know the vehicle it came out of so i need to know where the engine code is on the engine, there is two tags on the top of the head but on is snapped in half and I can t make out the writing on the other tag. Any other way to id this engine?

[Anthony 1,000]

Actually, there's three versions of the 1.6 GTi engine, as there's two variants of the 115hp lump - the earlier higher compression B6D (9.8:1), and the later lower compression B6E (9.25:1). The 115hp engines did have the same head as the 1.9 GTi engines, but the camshaft is different.

 

Besides the engine tag, the only easy way I can think to ID the two engines is with bits that are easy to swap, so not the most reliable - the B6D has a female dizzy cap that is retained by a pair of latches, and the coil is on the wing (so no mounting lugs on the inlet manifold) whereas the B6E has a male dizzy cap the same as a 1.9 that is retained by a pair of screws, and the coil is mounted on top of the inlet manifold. Worth checking the cambelt tensioner as well, as late B6E's had the eccentric tensioner which was never fitted to B6D's, although early B6E's still used the spring tensioner.

 

Someone else may know of a more definite and reliable way to ID the two, as like I said, both of those parts are easily swapped.

 

The early 105hp 1.6 GTi engines are pretty rare now. As far as I know the engine tag is 180A or B6A on those, and the big give away at a glance is that there isn't a breather takeoff on the cam cover unlike the 115hp engines.

[309jazzpanda 39]

thats very useful, i've got a female dizzy cap on mine and the eccentric tensioner not the slider one, well thats good i was worried it may be just a normal low horse power 1600 engine it was veeeeeeeeeery slow when i drove it for the first time the other day but it does need setting up

[Miles 331 1 Cars]

eccentric tensioner are only found on 1.9's

[Baz 421]

Besides the engine tag, the only easy way I can think to ID the two engines is with bits that are easy to swap, so not the most reliable - the B6D has a female dizzy cap that is retained by a pair of latches, and the coil is on the wing

 

Not sure this is correct, in my experience B6D's have had both types of dizzy cap as well as coil, B6E's are later ('90>) and as we know those dizzy caps were around before then, with the coils coming in around the same time but i don't think it's related.

Edited August 12, 2012 by Baz

[Anthony 1,000]

eccentric tensioner are only found on 1.9's

I've had / worked on a couple of 1.6 GTi's with the eccentric tensioner on them now. Both were 1992 models.

 

It's possible that they've been changed at some point, but on both of them, all of the other bits that change along with the tensioner were correct as well - the belt covers, the water pump etc - which isn't generally the case if someone's bought the wrong belt and tensioner and just fitted it anyway. There was no obvious marks where the spring tensioner and it's fixings would have been either

 

(equally, I've seen plenty of 1992 1.6's that have the spring tensioner too!)

[Anthony 1,000]

Not sure this is correct, in my experience B6D's have had both types of dizzy cap as well as coil, B6E's are later ('90>) and as we know those dizzy caps were around before then, with the coils coming in around the same time but i don't think it's related.

It's not perfect, granted, but more often than not it'll be right as most of the engines will fit that pattern. The ones that won't will be in the months when the spec of the cars were seemingly a bit random anyway due to them being parts-bin specials around the Phase 2 changeover.

 

In many ways it's all somewhat academic anyway given that so many of them are different to how they left the factory anyway, hence my disclaimer that it's not a particularly reliable way to ID them.

 

Even the engine tag isn't concrete proof of what the engine is anyway, seeing as there's enough of them that have been rebuilt and re-blocked over the years, and that's before you get to the ones that have been modified. To be honest, I've never noticed any noticeable difference in performance between the two 115hp 1.6 engines anyway, or should I say, I've never noticed that one type seems to be on average quicker than the other (as obviously there's a massive variation in performance of individual engine anyway!)

 

AFAIK the dizzy cap and coil changed at the same time on 1.6's, around spring-summer 1990 with the rest of the so-called Phase 1.75 changes. 1.9's always had the male cap and hence was used with wing and inlet mounted coils.

 

Also, I think all the B6E's had the later thermostat housing that appeared in 1991 where the ECU temp sensor is on the back rather than a separate block, and equally, I think all B6D's had the earlier setup. Again though, easily and frequently swapped!

[Slo 283 1 Cars]

Is mine a BD6? The label seems to read as D6B. Its a phase 1 1987 E reg CTi and very rapid so if it is the high compression one that would explain its punchiness.

[Anthony 1,000]

D6B is a 1.9 GTi non-CAT - so while not for the reasons you're thinking, that would explain why it feels much more punchy than a 1.6

[Slo 283 1 Cars]

No way i've got a 1.9? seriously lol

[Anthony 1,000]

More than likely, yes.

 

It could be that the original 1.6 has been re-blocked into what was originally a 1.9 block (they're the same), but it's far more likely that someone has previously swapped the engine over at some point in the cars life. If you have a look at the sump, you'll likely see a spacer plate between the block and sump if it's a 1.9 and the sump is original.

 

A bit of welding rod or similar down the spark plug hole to crudely measure the stroke would tell you one way or the other for definite - 73mm stroke for a 1.6 engine, and 88mm stroke for a 1.9 (both share the same 83mm bore)

[Slo 283 1 Cars]

It has got the large spacer, I always did wonder why it had that after reading what you and others had mentioned about the spacer before in other threads. Well fk my old boots, all this time ive been telling folks its a 1.6 and people been saying its mighty impressively quick for a 1.6 then someone tells you its a 1.9 lol dayum and i've just had a good look through the first edition haynes manual chapter 13 supplement and there it is XU9JA (D6B) engine. Its got the coil on the inner wing tho i suppose thats not hard to alter is it. Is it likely ive got a 1.9 box then or are they same as 1.6? Its definately a be1. Theres no oil cooler either.

Edited August 13, 2012 by Slo

[Anthony 1,000]

1.9's were available with both wing or inlet mounted coils depending on age - wing mounted up to early 1990, and inlet mounted thereafter.

 

Gearbox could be either - clue is the revs/speed in 5th, with a 1.6 doing around 4200rpm at 80mph, and a 1.9 doing around 3800rpm at 80mph (assuming the speedo and tacho are accurate of course!). 1.9 engines on 1.6 boxes certainly feel punchy and quicker than they arguably are, so I suspect that's probably been retained on yours.

 

What injectors, ECU and AFM do you have, as that's something that often gets messed up when engine swaps are carried out? Ideally you want all 1.9 parts (yellow injectors, ECU ending 359 and AFM ending 109) but typically keeping all the 1.6 parts (blue injectors, ECU ending 340 and AFM ending 056) will work too. It's mixing up bits from the two that can result in fuelling issues.

[Miles 331 1 Cars]

Ignore the tag's too, they have been known to be changed, only the late blocks have the info stamped into them

What colour are the injectors?

[309jazzpanda 39]

well wish it turned out mine was a 1.9 ha ha, bloody slow thing

[Slo 283 1 Cars]

The injectors are orange

[Anthony 1,000]

1.9 items then more than likely. What is the part number on the ECU and AFM?

[Slo 283 1 Cars]

Don't believe this AFM 0 280 202 109 ECU BOSCH 0 280 000 359 Made in Spain

[Anthony 1,000]

Sounds like it's been converted properly then, which makes a pleasant change!

[Slo 283 1 Cars]

While its a nice surprise to find this out im also a tad pissed off about it too since a,.my insurance is now void b,. the car is classed as modified against the insurance. c,.but who's gonna know lol ive always bought 1.6 stuff for it too ffs oh well im this far } { from being tempted to do the turbo 8v conversion finding this out this late doesnt really matter i suppose

[Miles 331 1 Cars]

I think the age of thing of owners buying 205's do not know what standard is, How do they know if it's been lowered, Engine change etc, Even if you took it to a Peugeot Garage I doubt they would either

[Baz 421]

Or even an insurance assessor...

[ALEX 98 1 Cars]

eccentric tensioner are only found on 1.9's

 

The 1.6 engine I've just bought is a B6E with an eccentric tensioner.

I was supprised It had the tapped holes for the two studs to convert it to spring tensioer.

[309jazzpanda 39]

Or even an insurance assessor...

 

No they'd find out, eyes like sh*t house rats

[welshpug 1,621]

No they'd find out, eyes like sh*t house rats

 

 

naah, they haven't a bloody clue, even the one that had a look at mine had owned one himself!