1.6 - 1.9 Conversion?

[aldo56 0]

Ive got a 1.6 gti and am thinking of putting a 1.9 in it. Because im 19 an mi16 is not really possible due to insurance lol but would b great!

 

What are the main benifits of the 1.9 over the 1.6?? Is there a big fuel consumption difference?

 

Are there any difficulties in the swap?? Ive heard its basicaly the same engine with a different crank??

 

so it should drop straight in?/ also should i mate the 1.6 box to the 1.9?? any problems with this??

 

 

many questions i know lol but i need help !!!!!

 

cheers allan

[taffycrook 2]

Its been covered loads of times so do a search and all will become clear.

 

But for mine a well sorted std 1.6 is far nicer than a 1.9 bought from a scrapper. The choice is yours.

 

Insurance isn't much different mi16 to 1.9 so if you are thinking of a engine swop do one thats worthwhile.

[Pug_101 0]

Ive got a 1.6 gti and am thinking of putting a 1.9 in it. Because im 19 an mi16 is not really possible due to insurance lol but would b great!

 

What are the main benifits of the 1.9 over the 1.6?? Is there a big fuel consumption difference?

 

Are there any difficulties in the swap?? Ive heard its basicaly the same engine with a different crank??

 

so it should drop straight in?/ also should i mate the 1.6 box to the 1.9?? any problems with this??

many questions i know lol but i need help !!!!!

 

cheers allan

 

I didn't know about this forum untill after I got my car 1.9L. If I was buying it now with what i've learn't from this forum I would have bought a good 1.6L instead. There is very little improvement in power and the 1.9L engine has lazy characteristics. A good 1.6L should get 115bhp (check your model out) in std and they do make that power whereas the 1.9L is quoted as 130bhp at best (less on some models), but rarely make that power, so little to be gained.

I would suggest fitting the XU10 cylinder head to your engine (cheack it out with a search) keeping your camshaft and making sure the engine feeds (fuel, spark and timing) are in top notch condition.

The Cylinder head is very close to the look of a XU5 head that you could probably get away with out informing the insurance company as it would be a very hard mod to spot. This is your choice

 

Having driven a 1.6L I found it seemed so much lighter (although this maybe because mines a phase2 and the 1.6L was phase 1.5) than mine and better reving (I liked it).

 

Fitting a 1.9L gearbox will slow acceleration, but improve mpg over a 1.6L gearbox on any car.

 

Cheers

[aldo56 0]

hmmm the XU10 head convo sounds intresting, is it basicaly a bigger valved head, therefore increasing flow rates etc????

 

what modifications are needed to the head to mate it onto the xu9 block?? (exact details would be great as i wont be doing the machining myself and wil need to send it away to cylinder head express in inverness )

 

im also reading that you need to change some componets over from the standard head to the xu10???

 

is there anyone that has done a guide to this conversion?? i couldnt find any but im sure there will be one??

[Pete C 0]

My 205 was a 1.6 and has been converted to 1.9. I previously had a proper 1.9 and I prefer this one by miles - the 1.6 'box mated to the 1.9 gives it excellent acceleration characteristics.

 

It just goes, doesn't really matter which gear you're in. I don't care what people say about the 1.6 being better, I've always found 1.9s to be more pleasant to drive because of the extra torque low down. There may not be much in it in a flat out straight line race, but in day-to-day real world situations I'd go for the 1.9

 

So, in answer to your question, yes it is worth it, and keep the 1.6 'box!

[Pug_101 0]

hmmm the XU10 head convo sounds intresting, is it basicaly a bigger valved head, therefore increasing flow rates etc????

 

what modifications are needed to the head to mate it onto the xu9 block?? (exact details would be great as i wont be doing the machining myself and wil need to send it away to cylinder head express in inverness )

 

im also reading that you need to change some componets over from the standard head to the xu10???

 

is there anyone that has done a guide to this conversion?? i couldnt find any but im sure there will be one??

 

No mods needed to the head, just need the right gasket.

The inlet ports are different if I remember correctly so the intake manifold needs some work to fit. Not sure for exhaust.

Theres a lot of info on it if you can find the threads. I haven't done it so can'y tell you the in and outs of the conversion. Seemed straight foward though.

Try "XU10" or "xu10 head" with the search, lots came up for me.

Cheers

[steve@cornwall 100]

Just done a 1.6 to 1.9 conversion using 1.6 'box and though it may sound strange I would say that the different characteristics of the engines makes the 1.9 faster in reality but the 1.6 "feels" quicker . The 1.6 just seems so much "revvier" than the 1.9 which feels quite lazy in the lower revs by comparison. I changed for a low mileage engine rather than repair the headgasket and big ends on the 1.6 but if you're after driving fun rather than bragging rights with your mates, I'd stick with a good 1.6. My first ever 1.6 remains the overall quickest feeling drive of them all and was totally standard and well maintained from new. I don't think you can beat a GOOD 1.6 for grin-factor which is what I think an everyday driver gti is all about!

[DaveK 0]

The insurance difference between the 1.9 8v and 1.9 16v for me was an extra £20 per year, so if you fancy even more power go for the mi

 

im 20 btw

[24seven 104]

the 1.6 is an oversquare engine, giving more rev happy characteristics (which is probably why it's more fun). the 1.9 is undersquare, which is why it feels lazy but undersquare engines generally tend to have improved torque characteristics throughout.

Edited June 17, 2006 by 24Seven

[Pete C 0]

I don't know why you think the 1.9 is particularly lazy? It may be slightly more so than the 1.6 (although personally I haven't noticed), but if you want a lazy engine then try a Ford 2.8 V6 Cologne... that's lazy!

[Baz 421]

Just done a 1.6 to 1.9 conversion using 1.6 'box and though it may sound strange I would say that the different characteristics of the engines makes the 1.9 faster in reality but the 1.6 "feels" quicker . The 1.6 just seems so much "revvier" than the 1.9 which feels quite lazy in the lower revs by comparison. I changed for a low mileage engine rather than repair the headgasket and big ends on the 1.6 but if you're after driving fun rather than bragging rights with your mates, I'd stick with a good 1.6. My first ever 1.6 remains the overall quickest feeling drive of them all and was totally standard and well maintained from new. I don't think you can beat a GOOD 1.6 for grin-factor which is what I think an everyday driver gti is all about!

 

Agreed!!

[t16ryan 1]

I have had 7 1600 GTis and dont rate them at all i have a xs engined CJ that beats 2 of my mates 1600s, i have had over 10 1900s and they all are more responsive and drive alot nicer, i would go with a 1900 engine and 1600 box, Str8 swap just swap ECU over too,

[aldo56 0]

LOL that was all intresting stuff but i still dont know what to do

 

i guess it must be a personal preference and on how good a 1600 you have driven.

[steve@cornwall 100]

LOL that was all intresting stuff but i still dont know what to do

 

i guess it must be a personal preference and on how good a 1600 you have driven.

 

Is there any reason to change the engine you have? If not I'd leave it as-is and worry about possible changes when needed. If you need to change then be guided by budget and availability.Try and drive a selection of different cars-every one seems to differ and a good 1.6 will wipe the floor with a poor 1.9 anyway.

As long as you get the afm,ecu and throttle body from the 1.9 donor it is a straightforward swap over.Gearboxes are interchangeable but changing between be1-be3 requires the clutch cable & pedal and gearstick also. For be3-be1 also add the lifter-cable too.

[dazEmad 0]

I would say definatly go for a 1.9 with 1.6 box. Much better torque and you dont have to rev the knackers off for it to move quickly. Its a very combo if you can find a good 1.9 engine, i always felt the 1.6 suffered after 70 mph where as the 1.9 will carry on. Also I did notice that the 1.9 was much heavier on fuel.

[danpug 1]

I'm doing a 1.9/1.6 box conversion right now to replace my 1.6, should be done by the weekend all being well. Hopefully it'll be worth it.

[Simes 248 2 Cars]

Just to confuse you some more.

The difference in insurance between when my 1.9 was a 1.9 and now it's an Mi16 is no difference.

It remained the same.

Edited June 22, 2006 by Simes

[Ryan 99]

Even more bizarely my insurance actually got cheaper by going from a 1.6 to an mi16.

[Baz 421]

My insurance difference between a 1.6 and 1.9 is about a fiver, and a score for an Mi!!

[TEKNOPUG 3]

My turbo was about £50 more to insure

[GLPoomobile 958]

Is the 1.9 engine's lazyness compared to the 1.6 entirely down to the longer stroke, or is it the cam, or a combination of both?

[aldo56 0]

WHAAT>!>! im 19 so i really doubt i can get insured on a mi for reasnable money , its currently around 1200 for a 1.6 with no no claims althoguh that changes in august when ill have one. if anyone knows differently pleaes name companies!!

[TEKNOPUG 3]

Engine conversions are usually insured based on the group of the donor vehicle and I think you'll find that a Citroen BX 16v is cheaper to insure than a 1.6 205 Gti.........

[aldo56 0]

ahhhh i c!!!!

 

do you need to get an engineers report etc?? im not really familure on the conversion insurance, can somone explain??

[ledders 1]

I have multiple a couple of 1.6's and one 1.9 GTI I would stick with the 1.6 myself, sounds crazy I know my personal opinion that the 1.6 feel's faster and has the better handling by far = better fun. That's me don't know if anyone agrees? My tip the best upgrade for a 1.6 is rear disk conversion I spent hundreds trying to balance the drum's with no effect.