GTI 180 Saxo ???

11th March 2010, 15:51

Has anyone put a 206 GTI 180 lump in a saxo ??? that would be an immesne build ?

11th March 2010, 16:03

personally i'd rather fit the gti-6 engine. Its cheaper to buy and easier to tune. The 180 engine is quite tall as well.

11th March 2010, 16:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by KamRacing

personally i'd rather fit the gti-6 engine. Its cheaper to buy and easier to tune. The 180 engine is quite tall as well.

+1

11th March 2010, 16:47

Fair enuff just wondered if anybody had actually done this and was it worth it ??

11th March 2010, 16:54

Dont believe anyones done it no, not a particularly great engine though to be fair. Not a bad lump, but not special enough to go to the trouble of squeezing it into another bay. Not a great amount of parts out there for it compared to other possibilities too.

EK9 engine would be a good shout, if it can be made to fit. K series Rover lumps have been done before, great engines with masses of tuning options already available.

11th March 2010, 16:57

Seen one put in a 205 gti - it was running bodies and OMEX and was meant to be rapid !

11th March 2010, 17:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by raunchz

Seen one put in a 205 gti - it was running bodies and OMEX and was meant to be rapid !

Seen it in person it was manic
don't think it'll go in a saxo to well though

11th March 2010, 17:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexB

Seen it in person it was manic
don't think it'll go in a saxo to well though

Just shows it is do'able though !

I don't think it'd be hugely difficult to put in a Saxo - if you had half a bit of common sense and some ££££ and could weld

11th March 2010, 17:10

But why that engine, just because its PSA? Surely youd need the 206 interior loom and all that malarky, would make more sense to go with a better developed engine from a manufacturer thats had more experience with 1600+ NA lumps, would be the same amount of work and monaes but a better result

Or stick a 6 pot BMW lump in it, right through the bulkhead

11th March 2010, 17:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by TU-Tuning

But why that engine, just because its PSA? Surely youd need the 206 interior loom and all that malarky, would make more sense to go with a better developed engine from a manufacturer thats had more experience with 1600+ NA lumps, would be the same amount of work and monaes but a better result

Or stick a 6 pot BMW lump in it, right through the bulkhead

It was run on OMEX, so engine loom was custom, can't imagine the 205 interior needed many sensors from the engine? I can't remember if it had gauges in the dash

I think it had a bucket load of torque (more than a high spec NA vts motor I'd imagine) and 200bhp ? I might be wrong on the power figures though

11th March 2010, 17:16

http://www.saxosportsclub.com/Forums...c/t=49336.html

11th March 2010, 17:19

Love that, looks great and obviously been done well. Very useable too.

Wasnt slating it by the way, just that if your going to the effort of putting a 2.0 in theres a fair few options out there and many of them are already at those power figures, some being lighter too.

11th March 2010, 17:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by TU-Tuning

Love that, looks great and obviously been done well. Very useable too.

Wasnt slating it by the way, just that if your going to the effort of putting a 2.0 in theres a fair few options out there and many of them are already at those power figures, some being lighter too.

Yey definitely, can think of some very fruity 2.0's that would be more than enough in the front of a Saxo

11th March 2010, 17:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by raunchz

It was run on OMEX, so engine loom was custom, can't imagine the 205 interior needed many sensors from the engine? I can't remember if it had gauges in the dash

I think it had a bucket load of torque (more than a high spec NA vts motor I'd imagine) and 200bhp ? I might be wrong on the power figures though

It should have more torque as it had more capacity than a VTS

I think with those modifications though a gti-6 engine would make slightly more power.

12th March 2010, 11:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by TU-Tuning

Dont believe anyones done it no, not a particularly great engine though to be fair. Not a bad lump, but not special enough to go to the trouble of squeezing it into another bay. Not a great amount of parts out there for it compared to other possibilities too.

EK9 engine would be a good shout, if it can be made to fit. K series Rover lumps have been done before, great engines with masses of tuning options already available.

Haha i would rather Eat my own face than put in a rover k-series engine , they've gotta be some of the worst engines EVER made lol , EK9 engine would be awesome though, i've seen a few people attempt to do the k20a conversion , rear wheel drive one tho.

12th March 2010, 11:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by MiDnighTcLuB

Haha i would rather Eat my own face than put in a rover k-series engine , they've gotta be some of the worst engines EVER made lol , EK9 engine would be awesome though, i've seen a few people attempt to do the k20a conversion , rear wheel drive one tho.

the rover engine is a honda.

12th March 2010, 12:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by db_sax

the rover engine is a honda.

NO IT IS NOT
k series engine is rovers own
fitting a 2.0 anything in a saxo is a big job
alot cheaper = easier to get 180 from a 16v tu
all things are possible --but waste of effort is my opinion.on top of that the 180rc is a fly /by wire engine so lots of problems with ecu ,s etc .
as for fitting it in the back .
yes you can do anything ,doesn,t mean its a sensible use of funds

12th March 2010, 12:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by axsaxoman

NO IT IS NOT
k series engine is rovers own
fitting a 2.0 anything in a saxo is a big job
alot cheaper = easier to get 180 from a 16v tu
all things are possible --but waste of effort is my opinion.on top of that the 180rc is a fly /by wire engine so lots of problems with ecu ,s etc .
as for fitting it in the back .
yes you can do anything ,doesn,t mean its a sensible use of funds

Kwl kwl, i thought Honda had some engines in the Rovers, Kseries being one of them, but just read the Kseries engine replaced a honda engine in the rover which then became Rover Coupé, Cabriolet and Tourer instead of the 200 and 400.

12th March 2010, 14:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by MiDnighTcLuB

Haha i would rather Eat my own face than put in a rover k-series engine , they've gotta be some of the worst engines EVER made lol , EK9 engine would be awesome though, i've seen a few people attempt to do the k20a conversion , rear wheel drive one tho.

Whys that then? Must be something good with them as theyre used in Caterhams and 7's, Atoms, the Elise and all sorts of kitcars. The VVC ones are awesome

Honda and Rover had their own K series ranges, which makes things fookin confusing especially as the two were swapping chassis' and later on engines at the time lol, youd think they would have come up with different codes

12th March 2010, 14:57

The K series is a very light engine so has its advantages. The problems are well documented and easily fixed. There were two areas off the top of my head which were fixed with a better head gasket and a better thermostat. Its still very light compared to many newer engines

13th March 2010, 00:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by raunchz

Yey definitely, can think of some very fruity 2.0's that would be more than enough in the front of a Saxo

Would it be a big job to squeeze a 205 gti 1.9 XU engine and box into a saxo?

13th March 2010, 15:38

honda engines in the rovers we're the best type of rovers basicly , the actual ROVER k series engine is absoloubt gack , headgaskets usually go at about 57000 and the actual head can warp which is what can cause the gaskets to go , its a shame really coz the 1.4 16v was making 105bhp , if they had actually taken more time indevloping it then rovers wouldn't have got such a bad name

13th March 2010, 15:44

actually?

13th March 2010, 15:45

oh BTW its pointless as the GTI 180s were well under powered, about 166hp iirc. you can get near that with cams and head work on a VTS engine.

13th March 2010, 23:52

Yeah 160bhp is par for the course with cams/head/manifold/exhaust/ecu

A £2500 turbo conversion will see you to 200bhp I think the TU engine is totally awesome IMHO and shouldn't be swapped out. Too much like a PITA.

Andy

14th March 2010, 10:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by MiDnighTcLuB

honda engines in the rovers we're the best type of rovers basicly , the actual ROVER k series engine is absoloubt gack , headgaskets usually go at about 57000 and the actual head can warp which is what can cause the gaskets to go , its a shame really coz the 1.4 16v was making 105bhp , if they had actually taken more time indevloping it then rovers wouldn't have got such a bad name

most of the problems with k series engines are user inflicted
not changing antifreeze every two years which causes corrosion of gasket ,follwed by failure .people not changing thermostat after changing h/gasket --cos its not in a easy place .radiatos rotting the cores out after 4-5 years ,whic then cuase overheating ,then gasket .
not replacing h/bolts adn using an uncalibrated torque wrench to set intial h/bolt tension ,noy cleaning out h/bolt holes ,so the intial teanison ends up being incorrect .
they are not a bad engine .but being all aloy do not suffer poor maintainence well.
if you see a newr freelander you will notice thermostat postion is moved to front of engine i -- to cure the water temp problem .

14th March 2010, 10:47

Thats then thing though , unless you know how to maintain your engine well theres basicly not alot of point of getting a k series engine, anywhooo being saxperience maybe we should stop talking about rovers lol