You would definitely need a VVC EUC and wiring harness to get it to run.
I suspect its not been does before as there is little point when there are loads of ready made 1.8VVCs out there. I would also suspect the power output of a 1.6 VVC is not to dissimilar to a 1.8 non-VVC, which would be far easier to fit as an upgrade as it will run off a 1.6 ECU and not require any harness changes.

 

You would definitely need a VVC EUC and wiring harness to get it to run.
I suspect its not been does before as there is little point when there are loads of ready made 1.8VVCs out there. I would also suspect the power output of a 1.6 VVC is not to dissimilar to a 1.8 non-VVC, which would be far easier to fit as an upgrade as it will run off a 1.6 ECU and not require any harness changes.

ive ran a 1.4 of of a 1.6 ECU before but was told you can only step down a size not up. is this true?

 

IIRC the 1.4, 1.6 and 1.8 are interchangeable (ECU) but the VVC is specific to "fire" the vvc mech.

 

IIRC the 1.4, 1.6 and 1.8 are interchangeable (ECU) but the VVC is specific to "fire" the vvc mech.

that's exactly right although the fueling map's are very slightly diferent between ecu's

 

that's exactly right although the fueling map's are very slightly diferent between ecu's

I thought I had dreamt it when I read it back to myself :dunno: :lol:

 

if you use a 1.4 ecu on a 1.8 engine it will run but will not run smoothly at idle, its driveable but at idle it "hunts" and i wouldnt want to drive one for any length of time like that

 

I notice there are two thicko's on the auction who can't read the auction properly. It clearly atates it was a 'Prototype' for Rover yet they still ask if it's a 1.8 VVC?:iwstupid: :slap:

 

I notice there are two thicko's on the auction who can't read the auction properly. It clearly atates it was a 'Prototype' for Rover yet they still ask if it's a 1.8 VVC?:iwstupid: :slap:

yeah i noticed that aswell. did rover make one? or is this just a DIY project?!

 

1.4 crank in a 1.8 block = 1.6 K series short stroke.
Steve

 

1.4 crank in a 1.8 block = 1.6 K series short stroke.
Steve

Really? I didn't know that before.
So the 1.6L would have a lower compression ratio then the 1.8L then, right?

 

1.4 crank in a 1.8 block = 1.6 K series short stroke.
Steve

Actually the block casting was the same across all damp liner K series engines, be they 1.1, 1.4, 1.6 or 1.8

The difference was in the liners. The 1.6 was effectively a bored out 1.4 and the 1.8 was a long stroke 1.6.

I don't doubt there was a 1.6 VVC. I know for a fact that a 1.4 VVC existed as a prototype.

 

Really? I didn't know that before.
So the 1.6L would have a lower compression ratio then the 1.8L then, right?

indeed it does unless you have custom pistons , btw, it sounds immense when revved up
Steve

 

Actually the block casting was the same across all damp liner K series engines, be they 1.1, 1.4, 1.6 or 1.8

The difference was in the liners. The 1.6 was effectively a bored out 1.4 and the 1.8 was a long stroke 1.6.

I don't doubt there was a 1.6 VVC. I know for a fact that a 1.4 VVC existed as a prototype.

oh yeh, of course the blocks are the same, if you use a combination of the other 2 (1.4 and 1.8) you can make your own 1.6. Being as its stable in a 1.8 bore, VHPD head can sit on top.
Steve

 

oh yeh, of course the blocks are the same, if you use a combination of the other 2 (1.4 and 1.8) you can make your own 1.6. Being as its stable in a 1.8 bore, VHPD head can sit on top.
Steve

One inquisitive mind here.
Is the valve diameter of the VHPD so big that only the 1.6L would allow enough valve clearance unless you do funny things to the piston crown with the 1.8L?

 

not really mate. we used a 1.8VVC engien to do our 'experiment'.

If i'm over my mates in the next month or so, i'll take pictures. the engine lasted about 20 minutes on the bench. But revving it to 9.5k rpm killed it. He's trying to do it to put in a cateram :S
Steve