xsara vts engine

18th June 2007, 22:49

does any1 know if a 2.0i 16v xsara vts engine will fit in a saxo vtr engine bay or does any1 know sum1 who can help me? after a bit of a mad project rather than a turbo on a vtr engine,etc. cheers

18th June 2007, 22:54

not an amazing idea mate the xsara vts engine is reall really heavy so in my opinion it will blow the handling to bits. not really worth it to be honest. if u wan that engine put buy a 205 a stick it in there

18th June 2007, 22:54

Yes it will fit..

You will get the usual rubbish about the weight of the engine being too much etc, but if a 2 litre will go in a 205 and not ruin handling, then shouldnt be a problem in a saxo..Will need alot better than standard sus though imo..something stiffer.

May need alot of custom parts too so will be quite costly..

18th June 2007, 22:54

they wont fit straight in, try search as this has come up loads of times. one reason for why people dont put them in is due to the weight of the engine and the extensive modifications needed to fit it in but hey... anything is possible

18th June 2007, 22:55

have u any idea of the weight of the engine in question mate. the 205 was designed to house a big engine to start with. the saxo wasnt

18th June 2007, 22:57

Thats why i said use stiffer suspension etc..

What would the difference in the shell be then to handle the weight without ruining the handling?? All down to suspension.

18th June 2007, 22:58

but then the weight balance would ruin the saxo even more, you can buy good suspension but due to the incerased weight...will suffer from understear

18th June 2007, 23:00

So back to my question..whats different in the 205 that allows it to handle more weight at the front?

18th June 2007, 23:00

the engine bay on the saxo is a bit tighter than the 205 i think i may be wrong though never seen them side by side to compare.

in all honesty james i dont know whats different just talkin from what i have read about the affects on the 205's with this engine.

18th June 2007, 23:02

Yeah it may be a bit smaller, but will go in..

What i want to know is whats the difference between the 205's and saxo's when it comes to handling the weight in the 2 litre engine?

You will probably find its down to the chassis setup..

18th June 2007, 23:05

u've answered ur own question then mate like i said only talkin from what i've read from a few track tech people. forget my comments if u like only giving an opinion

18th June 2007, 23:07

I THINK its down to suspension..As i can see no other way in which the weight issue can be sorted..

Not getting at you dude..

And of course you have your opinion like i have mine.

18th June 2007, 23:14

could it not be down to a stronger chassis. as well as suspension

18th June 2007, 23:18

Maybe mate..

19th June 2007, 09:44

1. How many times has this come up? Search will give you about 300 answers

2. You can't shove a GTI-6 engine in the 205 without it affecting the handling, this is why the ally block Mi16 engine is so favoured. The 205 actually handles most sweetly in the 1.4 XS configuration

3. You can't affect the static weight distribution by changing the suspension, though a good suspension setup will go allong way to fixing dynamic flaws. For an example of this, check the Porsche 911 and it's big heavy engine hanging out of the back of the car.

4. The chassis on the 205 is weeker and more suseptable to flex than the Saxo

5. The reason this conversion is done on the 205 is that it's an XU engine, the same as the Mi and runs off the standard GTI BE gearbox. The saxo is totally different so would cost fuck loads to build.

6. If you want a good small car with the GTI-6 enigine, best bett is to flog the VTR and buy this

http://www.306gti6.com/forum/showthr...d=66798&page=1

I've travelled in it and it gave me the fear

19th June 2007, 09:58

lol theres nothing like a search but quite simply yes the engine will go in.
It wont ruin the handling but will certainly change the cars turn in characteristics. With the 205 the handling is not ruined by fitting the iron block engine. Theres something like 15kg difference between that and the Mi16 alloy block and quite simply not many people can actually notice the difference. As the saxo vts is iron block its not exactly light so fitting an xu engine will not make as much difference as you think.
Saying that the extra weight will alter the handling and I would fit stiffer springs to compensate. That really means matching the rear with a stiffer torsion bar to negate any understeer caused by the stiffer springs.
Instead of a gti-6 engine I would use the 1.8xsi engine and fit a gti-6 head as this uses an alloy block.
The reason why the 1.4 205 handles so well is the front/rear weight distribution. You get similar with the 309 gti as it has a longer wheelbase and wider track to the 205 gti which helps weight distribution and weight transfer under braking and cornering.

Oh and i'd like to point out that in my view the 911 is not flawed :d there are many very good reasons for sticking the engine where it is which helps acceleration and cornering stability. A bad handling car does not win a world rally championship

If it wasent a flat six then it might be a problem like the clio v6

19th June 2007, 10:45

Hahaha, the 911 is a flawed concept though, engine behind the rear axel. Technically a poor idea. Just goes to show that with 40 years of evolution you can get round most issues. 911 GT3 RS would be my first choice of wheels if I were to get all 6 numbers.

Which 1.8 engine are you refering to? - the XSI is a 2.0. Sounds like a good idea. I wonder if it could be mated easily to the MA gearbox. That would a good car make.

19th June 2007, 10:52

wasent there two varients of the xsi? well one engine is a 1.8 whatever car its fitted to lol We have one ready to fit to our 205 Rallye at some point when time allows.
Sod the MA gearbox lol The Be is matched for the engine, cheap and easily available.

19th June 2007, 10:57

I know the BE is a better box, just thinking in terms of beiong able to use off the shelf driveshafts...

The 306 XSI was a 2.0 8 valve, then a 2.0 16valve at facelift in 1997. Not sure but the 1.8 would be from a 206 XSi? That's still an 8 valve, though if the 16 valve head goes on then everyone's a winner

19th June 2007, 22:11

Gabbastard's on the money.

The Xsara VTS engine is an awesome unit. Way superior to any TU engine in fairness.
Its not all that much heavier than a Saxo VTS unit either, because they're both a iron block/alloy head type affair. The BE box on the Xsara lump weighs more than the MA box on the Saxo, but its still not excessive.

What is excessive is the amount of work required to fit one. Its a tight squeeze in a Xsara, let alone a Saxo. All XU engines lay back slightly so the whole thing takes up a shit load more room than a TU which sits upright. When you consider driveshafts etc as has already been mentioned, you're looking at a big job. Then theres the cooling too.
And your angle grinder will have to get friendly with the bulkhead

In short.....tune a Saxo VTS lump.

Or work out which engines from other brands will fit. I know of one that will bolt in and give amazing results, but to my knowledge no one has ever built one, so I'm staying quiet

19th June 2007, 22:44

we are going to be using the 206 gti engne as a starting point for my new engine, depending what we fins when we get our hands dirty and size things up, it may be possible where we can produce an element of an engine mount kit to get the 2.0l engine in place at least, and of course driveshafts thereafter, wether or not we can physically bolth the 2.0l in its 3 mounting points to the original 3 points of the 106 or not will have to be addressed, but nonetheless, even if welding and fabrication is neccessary (which i am 99% sure it will lol) we could still replicate what we do with mine and supply the same.

although the 2.0l (in my opinion) is only worthwhile in changing to if also modifying also, or at least the intention to further down the line when funds allow. But to beleive, oh . . . 'i am going to put a 170-180bhp 2.0l engine in and i am going to blare everything' is just naive to be honest. The only reason i am going for it is because of staying with the delivery of na power and the reliability of such and i have (nearly, not quite i know0 exhaust the 1600 in na form, soits the next logical step (although it will pain me not to be able to say . . . my favourite line of the summer . . 'its just a 1600 pmsl'. But of coursed i have different aspirations etc to the next person, so what is logical and worthwhile for me may be the complete opposite for you. For me it will give a further 60lb of torque and 70bhp at peak revs with god knows what else in the mid range. In my world, I am happy to go thorugh the learning curve of the 2.0l engine for that gain without going tc or sc.

Cost wise . . . god knows, suck it and see, if you are worried about costs (within reason i know) then you do have to ask yourself if you have to cut any corners (especially when changing engines) is it wise to even begin, food for thought in my experience and from others I have seen thats all.

cheers

Bic