Best Gear Box For A Mi16.

[engine killer 5]

One gearbox that hasn't been mentioned yet is the 1.9 GTi gearbox with a 1.6 final drive. I think its very well suited to a car that is used mainly as a trackday car. It benefits over the 1.6 alone by the longer first gear giving it slightly less tendency to wheelspin when trying a quick start. Max is still mid 130mph which is plenty quick enough.Its almost identical, there is a breakdown of the ratio's here on www.hi-speed.dk, on the earlier (pre 1992 & better suited imo) the only difference is fourth gear but I still think a better gearbox is the one I mentioned at the start of my post.

 

Graham.

 

 

agreed with it, have been using it fo both track and road and it is great. did 130+mph on the motorway @7,000+rpm and around 120mph at the track (would be better if i could drive better ). don't get much wheel spin with it at the traffic light.

 

after seeing the calculation of gearing on 306GTi6 gearbox, performance form 1st to 3rd are about the same as 1.9 gearbox with 1.6 final drive. but the 4th and 5th are shorter so they can pull faster and with the reasonable long 6th, you can still get good highway cruising fuel consumption. there is one huge downside, you get very limited right hand turn because of that almost 2 inches extra length on the gearbox. 3 points turn may becomes 5 points or even 7! tried a 306GTi6, gearing is good but when it comes to parking.... a nightmare.

[ada205 2]

after seeing the calculation of gearing on 306GTi6 gearbox, performance form 1st to 3rd are about the same as 1.9 gearbox with 1.6 final drive. but the 4th and 5th are shorter so they can pull faster and with the reasonable long 6th, you can still get good highway cruising fuel consumption. there is one huge downside, you get very limited right hand turn because of that almost 2 inches extra length on the gearbox. 3 points turn may becomes 5 points or even 7! tried a 306GTi6, gearing is good but when it comes to parking.... a nightmare.

Totally agree. My Mi is a sunny day car only, so parking and stuff aint a problem, but every now and then the 6speed box does make you look a right tw*t, something i'm pretty good at without the extra help! Remember getting stuck in traffic once cus of an accident, and at the front of the jam the police were making all cars do a u-turn and sending them back in the direction they'd came. The road was pretty wide, and all the "normal cars" were making it in one go, but come"zero righthand lock" ada's turn though, i'd no chance, but the car behind assumed i'd make it and followed closely, as did the car behind him, and the car beh..... Result? total grid-lock cus of my fecking gearbox!

 

Occasional complete humiliation aside though, i do love the 6speed, which is why i'm having such a tough time deciding to keep it or not on my next engine.

 

For the record, though these figures as based on memory, but definately in the right ball park, on the road clocks read in top, 2700rpm @60mph, 4900 @100mph, 6500 @140mph. Low gears are very like a 1.6 box, and in 5th shows more or less the same rpm to speed as you get with a standard 1.6 box, maybe just a tadge higher mph @ any given rpm. Having the 6th cog is nice though, it'll pull from 60 to off the clock very swiftly and smoothly, and it definately make's a significant difference to economy.

Edited May 26, 2006 by ada205

[taffycrook 2]

I have to disagree about the 1.9 box, its horrible with an Mi16.

 

This is what amazes me about the whole gearbox topic.

The mi has equal or more torque all of the time than the 8v and more power yet a box that has few downsides on a 8v motor is somehow horible on a 16v.

Please explain ....

Edited May 26, 2006 by taffycrook

[C_W 3 1 Cars]

This is what amazes me about the whole gearbox topic.

The mi has equal or more torque all of the time than the 8v and more power yet a box that has few downsides on a 8v motor is somehow horible on a 16v.

Please explain ....

 

Whilst "horrible" might be a touch extreme to describe it I would agree and say that it doesn't "suit" the characteristics of the Mi16 engine as well as the 1.6 gearbox (or 1.9 with 1.6 final drive) which makes it feel like a completely different engine, nice and torquey. With the 1.9 gearbox you feel like you're forever onto holding gears. Conversely I'd imagine a 1.6 gearbox on a breathless 8v and it wouldn't be that great (my 8v felt asthmatic over 6000rpm but was otherwise quick to that point)

 

The torque output Mi16 compared to 8v is debateable but subjectively it feels like it puts out less below 3000rpm, my Mi16 definitely felt slower than the 8v when running the 1.9 gearbox mid-range (50-70mph felt much slower) and it wouldn't drive as well as the 8v engine on twisty b-roads when you only wanted to use 3500-4500rpm and swap gears lazily.

[Simon B 3]

I have to agree with the people saying the 1.9 GTI box isnt great on an Mi16!! I have a good bit of experience on this as I have a Mi16 with a 1.6 box and my brother has an Mi16 with the 1.9 box. My car is far better in all ways except for the obvious high speed cruising bit.

 

I have recently driven to the Nurburgring and back (approx 1000miles actually on the road) and found that although its not ideal, the 1.6 box isnt THAT bad i dont think. Most of the journey was at 95mph, which is approx 4500rpm (or a touch more) and the car has a noisy exhaust which doesnt help. But myself and my missus didnt find it all that bad, so IMO i think the 1.6 box is the winner!

 

I also often use my 205 as my daily driver which involves a 90mile round trip with some motorway bits and i still dont mind the 1.6 box!

 

Gets the thumbs up from me!

[5150maxie 0]

my mi has a 1.9 box and as a daily driven car its a great box for my use but on a track i would love to try a 1.6 box. The power is high in the rev range so on a track 1.6 is good but 1.9 box to me suit my car and style of driving.Also 70 mph in second makes me beat most cars in thoughs quick stints front lights or to out run them of the roundabouts but thats my opinion.Still its a great car to drive anyway.

[petert 550]

--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Nigel B @ May 27 2006, 07:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->

...... so IMO i think the 1.6 box is the winner!

 

 

 

IMO the 1.9L box with a 4.43 Mi16 diff is the winner! It just nails you to the seat in every gear. Why gear it past 200km/h ?

 

Think about it. Overall 1st and 2nd are identical to an Mi16 box/diff, then it all gets closer........

Edited May 27, 2006 by petert

[Man3 0]

I'm with the 1.9 with 1.6FD crowd. I had a 1.9 a 1.6 and an mi box all at my disposal when I built my gearbox, took me ages to decide but I plumped for the 1.9/1.6 combo in the end as I thought there was no point giving it stupidly high gearing.

 

Sometimes I think about changing the 5th for something longer because it revs a bit high on the motorway (and its getting hard to shift into 5th these days, not sure why that is yet). I always decide against changing to a longer 5th though as the acceleration through all the gears is so relentless and addictive, it pulls so nicely in top from about 70 or so it would seem a shame to change it, although I might have to if the shift into 5th gets any worse, could it be the rods at all?

[Guest puglet]

its started off with std boxes now were into mix and match, fcuk it mi casting, quaife close ratios and atb with 4.8 CWP, put that in your pipe and smoke it

[Man3 0]

its started off with std boxes now were into mix and match, fcuk it mi casting, quaife close ratios and atb with 4.8 CWP, put that in your pipe and smoke it

 

 

Thats why i refrained from adding my opinion but when mix and match boxes started being discussed i thought i'd add my 2 pence.

[Alan_M 66 1 Cars]

I've got a 1.6 box on my Mi16, which in less than a year covered over 20,000miles. That included a fair bit of motorway driving too.

 

It really is'nt that bad, and my 205's partially stripped out with GrpN engine mounts and cage. So in a 205 with complete interior and softer mounts, it would be more tolerable.

 

I did find that in the wet, it was virtually impossible to get any grip from a hard 1st gear start so for my next engine i'm going to try my 1.9 box with a 1.6 FD.

 

I remember last time I drove the 205 after driving my tall geared 307HDi and thinking 'This car is just plain silly'. You only hang onto each gear for a few seconds each......1st..bam...2nd....bam. ..3rd...bam...4th.......bam.....5th (You'll be hitting over 100mph here )

[jackherer 543]

This is what amazes me about the whole gearbox topic.

The mi has equal or more torque all of the time than the 8v and more power yet a box that has few downsides on a 8v motor is somehow horible on a 16v.

Please explain ....

 

I know it has more torque, thats got nothing to do with it at all. The 8v revs from 0-6500 rpm and the Mi16 revs from 0-7200rpm so with the 16v you have to take each gear to silly speeds to reach the power band. I know thye have power low down but they have MORE power higher up that I like to be able to use without doing 50mph in first and 75mph or something stupid in second. The only thing an Mi16 with a 1.9 box is good for IMO is racing people away from lights which gets boring very quickly.

 

I've driven lots of 205s and 309s with lots of different engines and gearboxes and thats just my opinion on standard 1.9 16vs with 1.9 boxes, others may differ.

[taffycrook 2]

Most std mi16's make peak power a touch below 7k, many have rev limiters that cut in around 6950 rpm. The only mi16 I have had rev over 7200 was a superchips ecu car and that was mine. It had a 1.6 box BTW.

Its all to do with torque as the gear box just increases or decreaes torque by changing speed of the input v the output.

I do believe it is permitted to change up before the limiter unless you have carbs/TB's then its law to make as much noise as possible.

IMHO the 1.9 box makes a good choice but not ideal choice for a road car.

[jackherer 543]

Most std mi16's make peak power a touch below 7k, many have rev limiters that cut in around 6950 rpm. The only mi16 I have had rev over 7200 was a superchips ecu car and that was mine. It had a 1.6 box BTW.

Its all to do with torque as the gear box just increases or decreaes torque by changing speed of the input v the output.

I do believe it is permitted to change up before the limiter unless you have carbs/TB's then its law to make as much noise as possible.

IMHO the 1.9 box makes a good choice but not ideal choice for a road car.

 

I completely respect your opinion but its like we're driving different cars or something

 

I'll have to take your word for it on the RPM thing as I've never used anything other than the dashboard tacho but they certainly go a lot higher than 8Vs and therefore the speed in each gear is higher proportionally.

[KRISKARRERA 2 1 Cars]

Yeah well no Mi16 hits the rev limiter at less than 7000rpm regardless of what the rev counter says. Having had a 405 and then having same engine and management shifted to a 309 I noticed that the rev limit seemed to be at about 500rpm less, which shows how inaccurate rev counters can be.

 

I think a nice gearbox would be a GTI6 box with an Mi16 final drive. Shame it can't be done.

[aw11_hgt 0]

Which model year 1.6 has the close ratio box??

[SPGTi 2]

IMO the 1.9L box with a 4.43 Mi16 diff is the winner! It just nails you to the seat in every gear. Why gear it past 200km/h ?

 

Think about it. Overall 1st and 2nd are identical to an Mi16 box/diff, then it all gets closer........

 

 

I would have to agree with this. I am running this gear box + atb on a 8v engine and the way it pulls to the limiter in 5th is frightening. With the extra rpm of a 16v it would be even better.

 

 

Steve

[engine killer 5]

Which model year 1.6 has the close ratio box??

 

 

are they all having the same ratio no matter pre1988 or 1988onward (facelifted)?

 

1st = 3.251

2nd = 1.850

3rd = 1.360

4th = 1.069

5th = 0.865

f/d = 4.063

??? please correct me if i am wrong, thanks.

 

also, i have the following calculation for 1.9g/b with 1.6f/d and 306GTi6 for your reference

 

speed @7,000rpm

gear 1.9/1.6combo GTi6

1st 40 41

2nd 63 64

3rd 86 85

4th 109 104

5th 134 126

6th 151

 

engine speed interval when change @7,100

gear 1.9/1.6combo GTi6

1st

2nd 2,606 2,560

3rd 1,881 1,732

4th 1,519 1,332

5th 1,355 1,218

6th 1,165

 

 

I would have to agree with this. I am running this gear box + atb on a 8v engine and the way it pulls to the limiter in 5th is frightening. With the extra rpm of a 16v it would be even better.

Steve

 

 

i might have something wrong with the info i have received on 405Mi1.9 gearing, would someone be kind to correct my data?

 

1st = 2.370

2nd = 1.850

3rd = 1.280

4th = 0.960

5th = 0.750

f/d = 4.420

 

thanks.

[boombang 2]

I've skimmed the whole topic and agree with a lot said but here is my input:

 

I had a fully stripped 309 Mi with 175bhp and ran it on a 1.9 box. Had re-profiled cams giving a fairly short powerband and needed revving - loads of torque at 5k prm.

 

It pulled pretty well but lacked the punch that my old standard 405 Mi16 had (i.e. Mi16 with Mi box).

 

Then I changed the box for a 1.6 with Mi final drive - as it was a track car it was fantastic and mainly out of luck dropped the engine right onto the torque peak when changing gear.

 

I'm building a 1.9 8 valve rallycar at the moment so going for a 1.9 with Mi final drive.

 

I had all gearboxes and parts available but decided to go this route as believed I would get a slightly longer 1st and 2nd than on the 1.6 but similar 3rd 4th 5th. As top speed is of no matter it sounded the one to have.

[sorr 0]

Has anybody done back to back measured laps of a circuit with an Mi on different gearboxes? I think there may not be any noticible differences between a 1.6 and 1.9 gearbox in time and any percieved difference is subjective. In short the car is reving higher, so more noise so feels faster.

 

For example my other car, a Saab 9000 2.3 high pressure turbo, is long geared and as a result when driving feels slow as hell. But watch the speedo and it is actually damned fast.

 

On my Mi build I will be staying with the 1.9 box as it will allow lazy low rev driving if required and also let you get the power down in first without smoking tires. I am sure you may get an advantage using a lower ratio gearbox if you have an LSD, but without an LSD you would just spend time burning rubber.

 

So if anybody has back to back lap times please post them and prove me wrong.

[petert 550]

............. dropped the engine right onto the torque peak when changing gear.

 

at least someone is on the pace!

[C_W 3 1 Cars]

at least someone is on the pace!

 

All the GTi and Mi gearboxes as standard do that anyway don't they?

 

 

 

Has anybody done back to back measured laps of a circuit with an Mi on different gearboxes? I think there may not be any noticible differences between a 1.6 and 1.9 gearbox in time and any percieved difference is subjective. In short the car is reving higher, so more noise so feels faster.

 

Would be difficult to get it accurate and it would be subjective like you say. AND, subjectively the 1.6 gearbox does feel quicker but in reality might not be. But with circuits, the ideal gearing varies for each circuit.

[holemi 0]

to add another twist to the arguement , we are just starting our first mi conversion and have 3 gearboxes , a 1.9 gti , a bx 16v and a mi16 405 box...so by popular opinion the 1.9gti box is out ...so do we go for the bx box or the mi box??? , which i beleive to be different gearing ( 2nd car be reached in 60, ) , the car is pure track day car ...and can we use the 205 gti driveshafts with any of the mentioned boxes??? cheers les

[KRISKARRERA 2 1 Cars]

which i beleive to be different gearing ( 2nd car be reached in 60, ) ,

No that's all bulls*it. It's the same gearbox. I understand in my head why this "I must have a gearbox that allows me to do 60 in 2nd" mallarky is utter crap but I cannot put it into words that will describe why it is wrong.

[holemi 0]

kris bites again!!!!