It was a joke, to be a smartass.... I know if someone had my setup but with a 1.8 it would make more power. That has never been in question.

You say plenty of power over me, I'm actually curious as to what that number would actually be.

 

And it would be no-ones fault but your own.

 

Next logical step from a 1.6/1.8 turbo is a LsX swap

 

$500+ for a 1.8 motor and $200 for a swap kit is not a drop in the bucket compared to my $600 turbo kit before EMS

Add MS and injectors about $1300 kit... still not a drop in the bucket IMO.

 

Very true...
I have no doubts in the 1.8 superiority. lol

What was the Most noticeable thing you noticed with your swap?

And, i dont get the 1.6 being revvier than the 1.8... the 1.6 really isnt all that revvy. Did YOU notice anything in that aspect with your swap?

 

$500 is about average, ive seen them more and less expensive. mine was $200. if you search hard enough, im sure one can be sourced pretty cheap. As for a $200 swap kit... screw that, Fab it all up.

 

You choose not to swap a 1.8 despite knowing it is superior, that's stubborn. If you were lazy you would just drive a stock 1.6 and not mod it at all.


That's why I qualified it with 'good turbo setup' (no offense). When you add $700 for a torsen, $500 for a 3" exhaust, $500 for a clutch, etc. suddenly $500 for a 1.8 is a drop in the bucket.

Also if you're going MS anyway, what do you need from the 'swap kit' besides mounting brackets and mounts?

 

Probably not as drastic as you'd expect(some people really think it's +100hp/trq).

But you would make more power lower which you could probably not use anyway since you already have traction issues. And you still want more power.

Worse comes to worse and you just end up with a perfect street car that makes 240/240 and runs flawlessy everyday, am I right?

 

I think the 1.6 debate on this forum fails to miss a major point - just because something is better doesn't mean is necessary or the alternative is 'wrong'.

It's a matter of context/priorities

-For those building a no compromise track car (if there is such a thing), going with a 1.6 would be foolish.

-For buying into the miata platform, going with a 1.6 would be foolish.

-For those looking to make a quicker-than-stock street car which might see some non-competitive autoX/track time, a 1.6 would be perfectly fine AND DURABLE.

As for a 1.6 being 'revvier' than a 1.8 ... complete bullshit. I have a 1.6 and a 1.8. The 1.8 just has more low end torque therefor it feels flatter or less peaky/'revy'. The only advantage to a 1.6 is the cheaper purchase price and the oil/coolant feed ports on the side of the block

 

Low end torque. Lots of it.

And the bp4w with a b6 flywheel is way "revvier" than my 1.6 ever was.

 

and that people will, literally, throw away big power parts and built motors for pennies. But I'm not complaining


Edit: That .gif is the best thing to happen to this forum since Joe's pancakes

 

I figured thats what i would be looking at, more low end power. the 1.6 has NO low end power, boosted or otherwise. The "revviness" is IMO just an excuse as to why people DONT swap. I can see keeping with the 1.6 if you really dont have good power goals, and just want to play around, but i dont think theres a better alternative if you want REAL power.

You dont have any slippage issues using the B6 flywheel?

 

at 3500-4000K it would be around 100tq.

when you compared nitrodann's 325rwhp gt2560 22psi dyno with hrk's 332rwhp gt2560 19psi dyno.

hrk made 240rwtq at 3500.
nitrodann made 150 at 3500.

similar to Soviet's EFR dyno:



compare the blue and red solid TQ outputs.


anyways...digress..

 

94/95 1.8 block can be had wit "advantageous ports"

 

this... WIN...

I saw that post, and was like, "WHA?!?!?!" went to the basement to look... they are there (Phew).... Almost let slip the dogs of war...

 

Come on now. You know it's supposed to be "all things equal except..." And using a line from a graph that has been considered bogus.

Edit: No idea what I'm arguing here. I only care about anything from 4.5k and up.

 

And now we get to the heart of it.

Which makes me wonder why this comment pissed all the 1.6 owners off?

If the only advantage is cheapness, why throw money at cheapness? I have yet to hear someone with a turbo 1.6 say "If I had to do it again, I would stick with my 1.6." So why is Sav advising a noob to do what you all wish you could have done offensive?

 

That is the point many 1.6 owners have made in this very thread BEFORE sav. It's not like he came up with this vastly superior method of just getting a miata with a 1.8.

And I never said if I could do it over with a 1.8 I would. I did it exactly how I wanted given the circumstances.

 

Nah, not yet at least. Really have not pushed this motor yet, BUT i assume on stock internals I'll be limited by the rods bending before that happens.

It has the ACT XT clutch for the 1.6 which is rated to 240 ft/lbs at the wheel.

 

It's not really a debate. Not sure why people are getting so uppity about people doing 1.6 builds. No one here EVER recommends them when people ask, so no one is getting misinformation. Yet every time someone with a 1.6 posts something half the forum feels it necessary to question why they still have a 1.6.