Max rpm on my build? yes it's already built
I agree with that extremely generalized statement. It is very simple.
That says nothing for why oil pump gears fail, or that yours failed under what conditions, or what improvement you have measured with a different oil pump. This forum is supposed to be no BS, actual data, actual experience, not hearsay.
That says nothing for why oil pump gears fail, or that yours failed under what conditions, or what improvement you have measured with a different oil pump. This forum is supposed to be no BS, actual data, actual experience, not hearsay.
so after that I hopped on the "bandwagon"
this was a spirited driven street car too. I dunno
Reply
0
0
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 18,643
Total Cats: 1,870
From: Beaverton, USA
I'm on the bandwagon of "i want my motor to live > laptimes" you may be on a different bandwagon.
Reply
0
0
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,718
Total Cats: 830
From: Detroit (the part with no rules or laws)
I stop making power after around 7350rpm. And my engine is built for over 8k rpms.
So it's useless except for rev matching and decelerating.
So it's useless except for rev matching and decelerating.
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Newb
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 30
Total Cats: -7
From: Walnut Creek, CA
ok mister 18psi ,.
i have my reasons for using a 1.6. i don't care if you like them.
1. California
2. 1.6 weigh less not much but they do. so the weight is further back.
3. i don't like running a oil feed line from the other side of the world
4. same motor the car came with. kinda nice.
5. easily within my power goals
cams not on the list for a reason at the time of engine build. ran out of money
we decided it was the easy thing to change later. will change them with the new turbo setup
i have my reasons for using a 1.6. i don't care if you like them.
1. California
2. 1.6 weigh less not much but they do. so the weight is further back.
3. i don't like running a oil feed line from the other side of the world
4. same motor the car came with. kinda nice.
5. easily within my power goals
cams not on the list for a reason at the time of engine build. ran out of money
we decided it was the easy thing to change later. will change them with the new turbo setup
Reply
-1
-1
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 18,643
Total Cats: 1,870
From: Beaverton, USA
ok mister 18psi ,.
i have my reasons for using a 1.6. i don't care if you like them.
1. California Why is this a reason?
2. 1.6 weigh less not much but they do. so the weight is further back.
3. i don't like running a oil feed line from the other side of the world A 94-95 block would do the same
4. same motor the car came with. kinda nice. I mean its nice if you want to keep a shitty motor
5. easily within my power goals easier to make less for more on a 1.8
cams not on the list for a reason at the time of engine build. ran out of money
we decided it was the easy thing to change later. will change them with the new turbo setup
i have my reasons for using a 1.6. i don't care if you like them.
1. California Why is this a reason?
2. 1.6 weigh less not much but they do. so the weight is further back.
3. i don't like running a oil feed line from the other side of the world A 94-95 block would do the same
4. same motor the car came with. kinda nice. I mean its nice if you want to keep a shitty motor
5. easily within my power goals easier to make less for more on a 1.8
cams not on the list for a reason at the time of engine build. ran out of money
we decided it was the easy thing to change later. will change them with the new turbo setup
Reply
0
0
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 18,643
Total Cats: 1,870
From: Beaverton, USA
I have a 1.6. I don't like it. The lack of torque is quite annoying. And I put the TD04 on recently. I kind of like it. It cost $50 bucks and should be good for a bit more power when I build the VVT motor I have.
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Newb
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 30
Total Cats: -7
From: Walnut Creek, CA
and almost no one can really tell. the difference is actually not much. after a build and the turbo yes . but with the 6 speed it really becomes negligible
Reply
0
0
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 18,643
Total Cats: 1,870
From: Beaverton, USA
I've ridden in both. 1.8's have quite a significant increase in torque, and seat of the pants feeling. They spool a good couple hundred RPM's sooner. Add VVT and you have another 500rpm of spool.
I have a 6 speed. I don't see your point.
I have a 6 speed. I don't see your point.
Reply
0
0
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 18,643
Total Cats: 1,870
From: Beaverton, USA
I see a 50ft/lb difference until the boost difference comes in and power goes up.
You must be pretty damn un-observant to not notice 50ft/lbs.
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Newb
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 30
Total Cats: -7
From: Walnut Creek, CA
Reply
0
0
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Newb
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 30
Total Cats: -7
From: Walnut Creek, CA
i kept the motor because my now passed away girlfriend of 5 years helped me pay for the car and some of the motor parts ... I don't have a better reason. and i don't think any of you do... so this is my forever car/motor.
i came here for multiple opinions. not to be judged because of motor size all 150 cc of it
i came here for multiple opinions. not to be judged because of motor size all 150 cc of it
Reply
0
0
