[Muldrew]

Does any one know the ins and out of putting an engine out of a 216si into a 214si. Will I need a new wiring loom or brain?

 

[Stu]

Straight swap. ECU, wiring etc all the same provided they are both 16v MPI engines.

 

[Muldrew]

cheers! any idea of what BHP the rover 1600 puts out?

 

[skanking pete]

109 ish methinks

 

[tommihayes]

109 ish methinks

There really isn't much point swapping the engine over to be honest. The 1.4 pushes out around 103ps and the 1.6 around 109ps IIRC so its really more hassle than its worth, if anything just save for a faster car or think of a different engine conversion ie 1.8/vvc

Or even tune the 1.4 with exhaust good air filter chip or whatever your budget can stretch to. Will get more power per pound than the cost of the 1.6 upgrade.

Although if your engine is totally broken and you can get a cheap good 1.6 engine and can afford the insurance for the mod then i guess why not

 

[18780]

109 ish methinks

i thought it was more like 120 ish.

 

[Dave]

i thought it was more like 120 ish.

Thats the non VVC 1.8 mate.

Cheers
Skelo

 

[Phil]

Im surprised because the amount of power the 1.6 gives out isnt that much more than the 1.4 really, it still does 0-60 9 tenths of a second quicker according to parkers. Must be down to the extra torque the 1.6 has 145nm compared to the 127 in the 1.4

 

[Samuel]

Im surprised because the amount of power the 1.6 gives out isnt that much more than the 1.4 really, it still does 0-60 9 tenths of a second quicker according to parkers. Must be down to the extra torque the 1.6 has 145nm compared to the 127 in the 1.4

Yeah its torquier and will have a bit more top end poke.
To be honest i cant see the point in just going up 1 engine step, as for the problems you are probably going to have, you may as well just buy a 216. Now dropping something that was never available into it, is something worth doing.

 

[Muldrew]

There really isn't much point swapping the engine over to be honest. The 1.4 pushes out around 103ps and the 1.6 around 109ps IIRC so its really more hassle than its worth, if anything just save for a faster car or think of a different engine conversion ie 1.8/vvc

Or even tune the 1.4 with exhaust good air filter chip or whatever your budget can stretch to. Will get more power per pound than the cost of the 1.6 upgrade.

Although if your engine is totally broken and you can get a cheap good 1.6 engine and can afford the insurance for the mod then i guess why not

Its more the fuel econmeny I was thinking of. I can't keep the petrol coming to the 1400cc. I was hoping the 1600cc would put out a bit more power and the weight of the car wound put less strain on the engine. But I can see the isn't really much difference in power

 

[ashy]

Its more the fuel econmeny I was thinking of. I can't keep the petrol coming to the 1400cc. I was hoping the 1600cc would put out a bit more power and the weight of the car wound put less strain on the engine. But I can see the isn't really much difference in power

Eh...? Smaller engined cars usually have better economony not bigger. The 1.4 K series has no problem pulling it's weight.
Drive more econonomically if you want to save fuel.

 

[18780]

Eh...? Smaller engined cars usually have better economony not bigger. The 1.4 K series has no problem pulling it's weight.
Drive more econonomically if you want to save fuel.

http://forums.mg-rover.org/showthread.php?t=130509&page=19 are you going to join in ashy?

 

[ashy]

http://forums.mg-rover.org/showthread.php?t=130509&page=19 are you going to join in ashy?

LOL... what does that have to do with this thread mate?
Maybe I will maybe I won't...I like to keep the mystery.....

 

[Muldrew]

Eh...? Smaller engined cars usually have better economony not bigger. The 1.4 K series has no problem pulling it's weight.
Drive more econonomically if you want to save fuel.

Driving economically bearly gettin 230 miles to the tank. The small engine is gettin it tight pulling the 17's around

 

[18780]

Driving economically bearly gettin 230 miles to the tank. The small engine is gettin it tight pulling the 17's around

dont tell me you have spent all this time trying to find a way to explain how a smaller engine is more efficient?.....lol.
anyway, the main principle is that internal combustion engines arent 100% efficient at burning fuel, more like 40% to 50%. so this means the bigger the engine more inefficient it will be, providing it works on same design, fuel usage etc. and i think two k series does compare.