1.6, 1.8, 2.0 Physical size
05-16-2010, 12:31 PM
#1
1.6, 1.8, 2.0 Physical size
I have a 1.6 in my kitcar and planning upgrades. With the 1.6 the oil pan has 3.5 inches of clearance and the hood sits on the engine- so a little snug. I would think the 1.8 is the same size but what about a later 2.0? Looking at Flying Miata site the 1.8 has more potential and larger should have more. Where do I look for physical dimensions? I'm shopping for used upgrade components. Mines the yellow car. thank you
Reply
0
0
05-16-2010, 01:08 PM
#2
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,027
Total Cats: 6,593
The 1.6 and 1.8 engines are similar. The bore-to-bore spacing is slightly larger on the 1.8, with the result that the engine is an inch or two longer overall.
The 2006 and later 2.0 engine is from a completely different family, and I can't recall seeing any dimensional comparisons of it. I can tell you that it has a different bellhousing pattern from the NA and NB engines, so unless you want to swap out your transmission as well, I'd forget about the 2.0 engine. It also flows "backwards" relative to the 1.6 / 1.8, with the intake and exhaust positions swapped on the head.
The 2006 and later 2.0 engine is from a completely different family, and I can't recall seeing any dimensional comparisons of it. I can tell you that it has a different bellhousing pattern from the NA and NB engines, so unless you want to swap out your transmission as well, I'd forget about the 2.0 engine. It also flows "backwards" relative to the 1.6 / 1.8, with the intake and exhaust positions swapped on the head.
Reply
0
0
05-16-2010, 01:16 PM
#3
Joe thanks for the reply. The 1.6 is a short nose, I have length available for a 1.8 but haven't yet sized an intercooler. Swapping intake/exhaust is actually better for street driving as it puts the exhaust away from me. I'd have to check the trany sizing also then with a 2.0.
Reply
0
0
05-16-2010, 01:16 PM
#4
Why do you want a bigger motor? How about just bolting a small snail it now?
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
Reply
0
0
05-16-2010, 04:53 PM
#8
Staying 1.6 was my first line of thinking but the add on's or redo's of internal parts quickly exceed the price of a motor. I'm guessing that low mileage wrecker 1.6 are getting scarce if I keep hp below where I need aftermarket internals. Are 1.6 internals much less expensive than 1.8 ?
Reply
0
0
05-16-2010, 05:30 PM
#9
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 5,155
Total Cats: 406
Staying 1.6 was my first line of thinking but the add on's or redo's of internal parts quickly exceed the price of a motor. I'm guessing that low mileage wrecker 1.6 are getting scarce if I keep hp below where I need aftermarket internals. Are 1.6 internals much less expensive than 1.8 ?
Also, why do you need built internals? You an get big gains on stock internals.
Unless you want a 350 hp locost...
Reply
0
0
05-16-2010, 05:37 PM
#10
How much power are you looking for? What does that car weigh? I would imagine with 200 whp that thing would be a rocket. Bolt on a 2554 or 2560, 3" exhaust, 12 psi and be full of win.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
Reply
0
0
05-16-2010, 09:23 PM
#12
Elite Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 2,320
Total Cats: 13
Most people here use the Megasquirt system, and it seems to work really well. I'm using the AEM EMS, and it's awesome. I also am selling one for a friend if you're interested (it still costs more then the megasquirt though).
Reply
0
0
05-16-2010, 11:05 PM
#13
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
Reply
0
0
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
JesseTheNoob
DIY Turbo Discussion
15
09-30-2015 02:44 PM
