Mi16 Myths - Let's Get This Sorted!

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Right...I had plans for my Mi16 (225bhp goal) but it seems as often happens when many people speak up that confusion sets in and nothing gets done. I'm a doer - make plan, stick to plan, succeed, get reward.

 

I'm concerned now after a few chats and threads that the Mi16 is NOT as tuneable as I would have hoped.

 

I read a Puma article that FILLED me with hope regarding the engineering expertise of the Mi16 head design concerning obtaining more power. I had planned spending dosh on (at some stage) the bigger valves (that the head will accept already), gasflow and porting to take the head to its safe, everyday-use physical limits. I reckoned on about 20bhp. 30's nicer, but 20bhp will do fine.

 

Coupled with a decent carb/TB set up (was leaning towards Yamaha R1 bike carbs) to achieve the very decent 225 I was after.

 

After a conversation from a thoroughly believable chap - and you have to remember here that this guy wasn't trying to sell a thing, aka my company will get you 5bhp more than 'x' company - I'm of the opinion that these power increase claims could be rather ficticious.

 

All I'm looking for is an answer, which is likely very much based on physics. Air and fuel in versus same out IN A REAL WORLD situation. I'm not prepared to spend £300, and do without my car for a fortnight to get 7bhp, which I believe would be almost unnoticable. £300 to get 20bhp is a different matter.

 

So, at the risk of being banned from the forum - let PRACTICAL wisdom reign................

Edited September 21, 2006 by DrSarty

[smckeown 1]

search for the catcam inlet mod for the mi16. ~20bhp for next to nothinbg. Proven too I believe.

Sean

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

search for the catcam inlet mod for the mi16. ~20bhp for next to nothinbg. Proven too I believe.

Sean

 

Thanks Mck - Boombang mentioned you today (getting rear beam from him) re: performance upgrades. Really grateful for your input. Will do what you say.

 

Anyone else wanna rock the boat?

 

Dr S

[welshpug 1,622]

big pair of 45's.

 

higher compression ratio.

 

decent exhaust manifold, as unlike the 8v the manifold isnt as efficient (relatively)

 

balanced bottom end (i.e. build a blueprinted engine)

 

Set of pistons? can someone highlight the limitations of the Std ones?

 

plus of course the aforementioned headwork.

Edited September 21, 2006 by welshpug

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

The penny is dropping - NOTHING IS FREE!

 

Will try smckeown's advice, BUT your list literally would cost a testicle, albeit effective. What I'm saying is, without brixton massive upgrades, aka making a new engine altogether, are some major leaps achievable?

 

Sorry - you are right welshpug but I'm talking 'bolt on' upgrades not rebuilds. Respek!!!

 

Dr S

[welshpug 1,622]

:doh: wheres the doh smilie???

 

a cam or set of cams, exhaust and a pair of carbs then

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

No my welsh colleague, not a doh, everything you said was right. I am insignificant in the shadow of your engine knowledge.

 

What would be interesting to know is a few certanties, e.g., if you buy from kent cams their package for say £500 that means you get A,B,C work on your head plus a set of 'my old man's a dustman Kent cams with how's ya farva lift and duration', what genuine HP gain will that give you..as a matter of fact?

 

Exhausts and even inlet systems for that matter I've heard contribute rather insignificant amounts. What is the simplest route to get guaranteed, noticable power, short of doing the proper (welsh) thing and treating the engine to a bit of care, out of the car and working on it ground up?

 

In awe of the expertise on this panel I remain...yours faithfuly, Dr S

[Anthony 1,000]

It's always dangerous setting yourself a bhp target, as you're setting yourself up for disappointment more often than not - either you'll not reach that figure, or you'll get that power but make an engine you don't like in the process.

 

200hp would be easy enough to achieve out of a standardish engine wouldn't too much being spent on it. Below is a dyno printout for an engine that I built Kate on here that is quite a modest spec, and yet works very well - retains excellent low-end tractability like a standard Mi engine, and pulls like a train at top end.

 

 

The spec of that engine is:

• Standard spec rebuilt 1.9 Mi16 bottom end
  
• Standardish 1.9 Mi16 head (just had the ports tidied rather than any serious porting)
  
• Catcam inlet-only cam and standard exhaust cam
  
• Vernier pulleys
  
• Maniflow 4-2-1 exhaust
  
• Pumaracing throttle bodies
  
• Emerald ECU
  

Given that's 193hp on a fairly mild inlet-only cam, it's safe to say that more agressive cams would net 200hp+ very easily, but at a loss of some bottom end tractability. With that kind of power available without porting or larger valves, is there really any need unless you want monster power or you're competing?

[welshpug 1,622]

best off talking directly to some specialists like DES developments who build performance Mi16 builds (not plugging or owt, first name that came to mind) theyll be the best people to ask for advice as they do the builds from start to finish (though they dont do their won heads IIRC?)

 

I know of a 212bhp 205, I'll dig out the torque article...

 

as for the inlet cam I have heard good things, DES themselves reportd a 17bhp improvement on an engine they recently installed one into.

 

of course you need to know what your starting point is, heres mine - http://s47.photobucket.com/albums/f169/wel...=Picture013.flv 157bhp completely standard

[huxley309 0]

two guaranteed ways are carbs/bodies or cams

 

personally id head right for bodies as it leaves you the option of fitting a wilder cam with a mappable ecu rather than being limited by the std ecu

 

after that it gets harder,yes headwork should net you gains but peak hp isn't always the full story i chose the components in my car to give me a tractable engine with bags of grunt, and ive got that in spades but at a loss of potential peak hp, but i know i hate flat gutless engines you constantly have to rev anyway so i feel i got the best compromise

 

and no there is no cheap way cams alone were £650 with verniers..possibly more now, £1050 for hi comp pistons/liners £2800 for bodies and mapping time

 

also the person carrying out the headwork is vital...this is where you get a lot of your gain and possible losses which is why reputations are important in this area

 

hope this helps

Edited September 21, 2006 by huxley309

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Thank heavens for a voice of maturity and (an understated word) wisdom. Thanks Anthony.

 

Muppets like me can easily get sucked into 'blah blah' BHP when really what matters is a careful balance between (a) what do you want it for ( is it usable power AND © how much are you prepared to spend in terms of time and green mail?

 

That (as I expected) is a long list of components (read: cash & effort) for a 33bhp increase. Goes to show perhaps that some of the 'wild' claims are a bit......well....wild.

 

Dr S

[welshpug 1,622]

hehe, liking the "muppets like me" comment

 

but you have seen the light, 225 might be really good, but not if its a road car and you have to wind 8k revs to get it to go anywhere as quickly as say something like a rally spec 8v.

 

Anthony, is that graph a direct comparison from a std inlet to a catcams inlet?

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Not replying to myself here, just the replies I messed typing my garbage!

 

'Thread killer'...nice one, again a voice of wisdom often calms the cafuffle. But if welshpug and smckeown are right, and this catcam thing (providing it doesn't cost 12 bars of uranium 238 - mucho expensivo -) really does deliver 17bhp then you have to say it could be considered stage 1 for more USABLE power.

 

I appreciate that carbs/TBs are the next obvious route becauase of fine tunability, which I reckon begins to offer around 20-25bhp of proper, roadusable, none component stressing power. Cost I'm not sure of, but perhaps people can see where I'm going with this thread - what are the pound for pound, bang for buck tractable power upgrades for the Mi16 motor?

 

If it's spend £1000 to get this, proven boost of 27.5bhp then so be it - I'll most likely pay, but as Anthony said a willy nilly bhp figure based on claims and rubbish is not the way to go.

 

Dr S

[pugrallye 0]

I think you need to set yourself a lower target rich... 225 from an mi wouldnt generally be a nice drive on the road, had trouble with one i had with me this morning to pull off line cleanly, just wanted to hop and jump and ended up in a traffic light pair of streaks down the road, all i wanted to do was poodle away!!!

[Martin@PRD 0]

Driven, owned and built a few Mi16 over the years the best far set up was a standard rebuilt mi16 with 0.020 thou skim to the head, increased over lap with under and over sized Tensioners, the right cam sprockets, mapped fuelling and ignition (not piggy back) on the standard inlet manifold with a tweaked throttle body.

 

By best the far nicest Mi16 driving experiences I have had, it pulled so strong all the way up the rev band with still the mi16 pick up at 4k. If I was going to do another Mi16, this is what I would do, then stick an inlet cam in it.

[huxley309 0]

Well the thing is lets say you fit those cams first then later on you fit bodies, that leaves you with the option of fitting a wilder cam which means even more expense not to mention bodies will give you much more useable power throughout the rev range where with cams you might not be as fortunate, there is always a trade off at some point

Edited September 21, 2006 by huxley309

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Fair one Jon. As I said this was a cat amongst the pigeons thread to find out who really knew their stuff. I'm not and never was a BHP hunter. I can't believe I've lived as long without experiencing the standard Mi/205 combination - it is truly awesome. I just want a challenge to tweak it to max enjoyability/practicality without breaking me or the bank, and I KNOW it's possible.

 

Dr S

 

P.S. Whose oil pressure sender still won't work

[Anthony 1,000]

That (as I expected) is a long list of components (read: cash & effort) for a 33bhp increase. Goes to show perhaps that some of the 'wild' claims are a bit......well....wild.

You don't get something for nothin' in this world as they say.

 

The only way that you're going to get huge power for little money is by starting off with forced-induction engine (VAG 1.8T etc) and a simple chip and boost increase for £400 odd will net you 30-50hp gain easily. Getting significant power gains from what is already a fairly highly tuned NA engine is never going to be cheap.

 

You can get 175-180hp from an otherwise standard engine and management with a set of reprofiled cams (£150-200) or a Catcam inlet-only (£230), but beyond that you're going to need aftermarket management (possibly Megasquirt if you want to do it cheap) certainly.

 

Also worth remembering that the more power you have from the engine, the more you'll need to spend on the rest of the car to actually be able to use that power - brakes, suspension, LSD all going to need serious attention really when you're talking circa 200hp.

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Again Anthony proves to be a torch bearer. There is logically always a (matrix stylee) cause and effect. It seems therefore that £250 for a catcam, plus say £250 to have the standard head tidied and then (INSERT FIGURE PLEASE) to have a really decent fellow (or woman I suppose!) fine tune management and things would realistically net you 20bhp of usable road power, topping out at the 180bhp mark for a perfectly reasonable driving experience that wouldn't stress the nuts of everything and be a headache to maintain.

 

True or typical Dr S b*ll*cks?

 

Dr S

[pugrallye 0]

sounds about right rich, make it useable and flexible

sort your oil pressure on sun, lol or is that a challenge you wish to undertake? lol

i have a list of demands though!

Edited September 21, 2006 by pugrallye

[Martin@PRD 0]

Too make a engine make power you need to be able to control it, with the combination of mappable Ecu (ignition + fuelling) and venires you have total control. Once you have all these variables at hand future plans with cams, throttle bodies, exhausts, higher CR, ported head, big valves, forge pistons, bah bah bah would be used to there full capacity, this is were you see 25 form a cam, 20 from the head, on and on.

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Thankyou Martin, that's logical. The thought of Vernier pullies as with Vanessa Phelps sitting on my face is scary, but I'm sure if I understand them then I'll see where to go.

 

They say power without control is nothing - THEY are right.

 

Perhaps this thread will start a fight or something?

 

Dr S

Edited September 21, 2006 by DrSarty

[d-9 0]

Again Anthony proves to be a torch bearer. There is logically always a (matrix stylee) cause and effect. It seems therefore that £250 for a catcam, plus say £250 to have the standard head tidied and then (INSERT FIGURE PLEASE) to have a really decent fellow (or woman I suppose!) fine tune management and things would realistically net you 20bhp of usable road power, topping out at the 180bhp mark for a perfectly reasonable driving experience that wouldn't stress the nuts of everything and be a headache to maintain.

 

More or less true, however the standard management isnt mappable, so dont forget to add the £500 for a mapable ecu, then you might as well get bodies.

 

Kate recently got 193bhp from a rebuilt standard 1.9mi with puma bodies, lightly worked head, 4 branch and catcam inlet cam, and its very very good, although it'd be nice if the power came in a tiny bit lower down.

[base-1 17]

Going back to your original post.....

 

Right...I had plans for my Mi16 (225bhp goal)

 

I'm concerned now after a few chats and threads that the Mi16 is NOT as tuneable as I would have hoped.

 

I read a Puma article that FILLED me with hope regarding the engineering expertise of the Mi16 head design concerning obtaining more power. I had planned spending dosh on (at some stage) the bigger valves (that the head will accept already), gasflow and porting to take the head to its safe, everyday-use physical limits. I reckoned on about 20bhp. 30's nicer, but 20bhp will do fine.

 

Coupled with a decent carb/TB set up (was leaning towards Yamaha R1 bike carbs) to achieve the very decent 225 I was after.

You say you were after 225bhp, expected 20 maybe 30 from a Puma head, and then adding carbs or bodies to take you up to your goal. I think that's your problem/misguidance, assuming the non-rebuilt bottom end you put the head on is good enough to make standard power, you'd have 180-190 plus carbs/bodies. And everyone on here will tell you that just adding bodies to that will get you nowhere near 225bhp.

 

If you want a real 225bhp then search for Jonmurgies engine spec, he's just had one built. You wouldn't want it in a road car though, that's for sure

[petert 550]

Going back to your original post.....

You say you were after 225bhp, expected 20 maybe 30 from a Puma head,

 

Theoretically. It costs a buck load of money to make 225hp out of ANY 2L N/A engine, let alone a 1.9L.