NA1.6 Stock internals... advice please!
#46
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,100
From a technical standpoint, there aren't a lot of people who won't admit that the 1.6 is worse than the 1.8, and from a financial standpoint, the few hundred extra dollars to get a 1.8 longblock into the car has such a huge, huge impact on the performance and driveability of the end result. If you start down the rabbithole with a 1.6 manifold and downpipe, it's hard to justify backtracking and starting over, which is why I push people who are thinking about turboing a 1.6 pretty hard towards a 1.8 right from the start. There are a lot of people who have turbo 1.6s who wish they had a 1.8, but I've never met a turbo 1.8 guy who's thought for more than two seconds about swapping back to a 1.6.
There are still folks out there who insist the 1.6 is in some way better, and I'll never understand those people.
#47
So why do they do it then? "Because I want to" would be stubborn. "Because I already have the 1.6" is ignorant if we are talking about building a good turbo setup, as a few hundred for a 1.8 swap is a drop in the bucket next to $5k for a turbo kit.
What does that leave? I am genuinely curious, not trolling.
#48
I'm a terrible person
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 7,174
Total Cats: 180
So why do they do it then? "Because I want to" would be stubborn. "Because I already have the 1.6" is ignorant if we are talking about building a good turbo setup, as a few hundred for a 1.8 swap is a drop in the bucket next to $5k for a turbo kit.
What does that leave? I am genuinely curious, not trolling.
What does that leave? I am genuinely curious, not trolling.
Timing because it just worked out that a lot of parts I wanted to buy already could be packaged with a built 1.6 for a great deal. Most of those parts will easily work with a 1.8 IF I ever decide to upgrade. A lot of power on a 1.6 is still a lot of power.
Science because at the end of the day I'm doing this to learn. And I can learn just as well on a 1.6 as I can on a 1.8. Everything I learn about the MS3x, E85, tuning, etc... can be applied to a 1.8.
Do I plan to switch to a 1.8 some day? Sure. But that day is very far off. If I was starting from stock would I choose a 1.8? Yes. But I'm not.
In the end I'm sure you could apply some stubbornness and ignorance to my decisions, but it doesn't matter. I'm having fun and have no regrets. I've done some pretty dumb things in the past with my Miatas and learned that I really just like wrenching on them and messing around.
One could argue that wasting money on a 1.8 is dumb too. There are so many better platforms out there. We should really be pushing to get make swapping to other engines easier.
Last edited by Braineack; 08-23-2013 at 08:51 AM.
#49
So why do they do it then? "Because I want to" would be stubborn. "Because I already have the 1.6" is ignorant if we are talking about building a good turbo setup, as a few hundred for a 1.8 swap is a drop in the bucket next to $5k for a turbo kit.
What does that leave? I am genuinely curious, not trolling.
What does that leave? I am genuinely curious, not trolling.
For me, It's because I already have a 1.6 with a 40k mile crate motor in it and I beat the **** out of it for the last year or so with absolutely zero mechanical issues. Also, every thing has been upgraded to 1.8 components such as brakes, torsen, flywheel, clutch, etc. The motor had perfect compression and leak down test and I know it can it's healthy to handle some boost. Compared to buying used 1.8 with unknown history that I would not have as much confidence in.
Secondly, I sourced a 1.6 turbo kit for dirt cheap so I pulled the trigger.
Thirdly, My goal for my first turbo miata is to get experience with forced induction. A log mani stock block miata is not my dream car and end goal. But at my age and budget a built 1.8 custom turbo setup that can me huge power is not feasible.
Yes, as almost everyone says, if I could start over I'd buy 1.8. But "live and learn". I think a 1.6 build will give me good experience to learn from and make enough power to keep a very novice driver scared on a track so I'm following through with my build.
EDIT: it looks like me and FRT_Fun are in the same boat.
#50
So why do they do it then? "Because I want to" would be stubborn. "Because I already have the 1.6" is ignorant if we are talking about building a good turbo setup, as a few hundred for a 1.8 swap is a drop in the bucket next to $5k for a turbo kit.
What does that leave? I am genuinely curious, not trolling.
What does that leave? I am genuinely curious, not trolling.
Granted that the 1.8 are vastly superior than the 1.6, but not everyone is looking to achieve the same goals. Instead of it being another thread on debating if it's cost effective to do anything to a 1.6 compared to a 1.8.
Just agree to disagree. I mean modifying a 20+ year old car is very idiotic in the grand scheme of things.
#51
And I'm pretty sure making almost 360 whp out of a 1.6 with a basic LOG manifold, STOCK intake, STOCK throttle body, NO VVT, no "superior" flowing 1.8 head, eBay special turbocharger, or that extra displacement is still a lot of power, and more power than most make with turbo 1.8l.
And there is still more to come.
Also, I am not one claiming the 1.6 is better, never have and never will. Never once have I said it's "more revy" or some crap like that. To be quite honest I think both the 1.6 and the 1.8 are inferior engines with what is available, are they fun to build up and boost and build crazy NA ITB throttle response cars, sure. Is it fun to go whoop *** on people and then explain they just got beat with a whole 96 cubic inches, you bet your *** it is. <- that was my reasoning for it.
Last edited by RyanRaduechel; 08-22-2013 at 01:25 PM.
#52
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,504
Total Cats: 4,079
And I'm pretty sure making almost 360 whp out of a 1.6 with a basic LOG manifold, STOCK intake, STOCK throttle body, NO VVT, no "superior" flowing 1.8 head, eBay special turbocharger, or that extra displacement is still a lot of power, and more power than most make with turbo 1.8l.
anyways, i don't reserve my 1.6L hatred to the motor alone, I extend it to the entire 90-93 model years and everything shitty about them as well.
and don't take this as a personal attack; I drive an inferior 1.6L as well, which also makes better power than a lot of 1.8Ls*.
*when they run wastegate and I run 15psi.
#53
So to count we have 2 "ignorance" ("If I could do it over I'd do a 1.8) and 1 "stubborn" ("I just don't feel like pulling the engine") with Ryan not giving a clear answer.
I understand you all had your 1.6s already, but that is exactly the point Sav was trying to make.
As for swaps, the F20C seems relatively straightforward, but everything else will require significant work because modern cars with better modern engines aren't front-engine-RWD. So we have oil pan/steering rack issues like the K swap, or heavy fab work needed for transmission/diff mounting of a new transmission/diff. Whereas with a 1.8 swap you need motor mounts and brackets. Quite a difference.
I understand you all had your 1.6s already, but that is exactly the point Sav was trying to make.
As for swaps, the F20C seems relatively straightforward, but everything else will require significant work because modern cars with better modern engines aren't front-engine-RWD. So we have oil pan/steering rack issues like the K swap, or heavy fab work needed for transmission/diff mounting of a new transmission/diff. Whereas with a 1.8 swap you need motor mounts and brackets. Quite a difference.
#54
Elite Member
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 2,101
Total Cats: 180
Now putting '94 1.8 with vvt together... slowly - maybe a little quicker if someone would send me an estimate/invoice
FYIW, I put 275rwph/235tq on my internally stock 1.6 before taking out the HG - and that not related to the motor. Do I regret turboing it at the start? - not at all
Last edited by GeneSplicer; 08-22-2013 at 02:02 PM.
#55
and if someone mimicked your build, exactly, but used a 94 block instead of the 1.6L, it would be vastly superior in every way. There's no arguing that.
anyways, i don't reserve my 1.6L hatred to the motor alone, I extend it to the entire 90-93 model years and everything shitty about them as well.
and don't take this as a personal attack; I drive an inferior 1.6L as well, which also makes better power than a lot of 1.8Ls*.
*when they run wastegate and I run 15psi.
anyways, i don't reserve my 1.6L hatred to the motor alone, I extend it to the entire 90-93 model years and everything shitty about them as well.
and don't take this as a personal attack; I drive an inferior 1.6L as well, which also makes better power than a lot of 1.8Ls*.
*when they run wastegate and I run 15psi.
But you are wrong, if someone mimicked my build exactly but with a 1.8 they wouldn't make any more power, they'd be running into the same spark blowout I am... but now if the spark wasn't an issue, then yes they would make more power.
I tell people it's just a gay little 1.6 Miata, then I add some cash to the race, then I go take said cash lol
Ask Vlad, I try and race people every time we are tuning lol
#60
yes... Its 2013...... im FINALLY prepping for a 1.8 swap... I dont doubt the superiority of the 1.8... but IF... and thats a BIG if.. the 1.8 doesnt perform better than my 1.6, Im going to come back to this thread, and poop EVERYWHERE... ALLOFIT!!!
Actually.... Ill come back and poop everywhere regardless...
Actually.... Ill come back and poop everywhere regardless...