MG-Rover.org Forums banner

ZR 1.6 Rolling Road: The results

8.6K views 71 replies 21 participants last post by  wallsy1703  
#1 ·
Keefo, Catterall1 and myself attended a RR day on Saturday. This is the results from my 1.6 ZR, so i'll let the pictures do the talking, but i'd just like to publicly say thanks to AA Autosport and ZandF Tuning for the work they've done on the car.


Image



Image
 
#3 ·
Touching 150 at the fly, nice - Still only slightly more powerful than standard though ;)

Power curve is nice too. Torque curve does look odd though, I would guess that's down to it running a custom map?

Hi mate, i had a janspeed 4-2-1 manifold and bought the janspeed sports cat for the 105/120.

When the exhaust place fitted it, they mentioned that they had to make an adaptor to fit the exhaust as the exit pipe from the cat was smaller than everything else, so i have a feeling that this is restricting things. But they only mentioned it after hacking it all together :(

The site i bought them from, did not mention pipe sizes etc, they just had a drop down box for the cat for the 105/120 and one for the 160, which i feel is the one that i really needed, so i don't know where i stand now :(
 
#6 ·
I'm starting to think that the 1.6 K series is the strongest of the lot tbh.

150bhp (or near enough) is fairly impressive! What mods are you running again?

I remember my mate's old 216 bubble was a little rocket ship.

Perhaps I should ditch the plans to VVC my mini at some point and start thinking instead about just dropping a 1.6 in there. It would certainly be cheaper and easier!

cheers
Ben
 
#12 ·
lol I totally agree. I worked it out last night that it still has less torque than a standard 1.8 K series, so no idea how much the extra bhp would help compensate for this.

So i'm still non the wiser as to what sort of 0-60 the car would be doing. :D
 
#16 ·
Should you be losing 30%+ from the flywheel to the wheels??

Is there a way to improve that? I don't know a huge amount but it seems like there is a lot of 'wasted' power.

I know it's not much but I thought in most cases you expect to lose around the 20% mark if not a bit less??
 
#17 ·
Power at the Fly is just a "figure" IMO, you shouldn't take masses of notice of it as it's not being put onto the road. However - the Power at the Flywheel is generally a more accurate measure than what the WHP is when doing comparisons (as WHP is slightly lost on the Dyno as you use it to turn the Dyno itself).

25-30% is a usual figure lost to wheels, there isn't much you can do. It's lost through the Energy being spent other places - heat, having to turn the gears in the oil, resistance from the road surface, noise, "play" in components etc
 
#20 · (Edited)
Nice figures, there! :broon: I have two points of concern, however;
  1. For each subsequent run, WHP goes up, but Flywheel HP goes down. How does that work, gearbox getting nice and heated up?
  2. 40-50bhp transmission loss, WTF??! :bigeyes: I shall see if I have my old ZR's Dyno run printout when I get home from work, fairly sure I didn't lose that much (even as a percentage - admittedly my little 105 only started with 101bhp :lol:)
Still, good result, anyway! 7,500rpm FTW! :smug_git:



edit: Bonus point of concern no 3;
  • What's going on with that massive AFR spike at 2k rpm? Needs moar fuel! :D
(won't let me change that last bonus point to a 3, no matter how much I edit the BB code! :twak:
 
#22 ·
when i originally had the car remapped, it still had a standard exhaust fitted, so it was left to run a little bit richer to compensate for the restricted exhaust, so when i finally replaced it all, i knew it was going to run a bit rich, but the RR guys said that it was still well within safe limits, and is nothing to worry about.
 
#25 ·
I had been thinking VVC, but would require losing the tf cams and needing another full remap, so not really the way I wanted to go. I think port and polish would be the final installment, beyond that, I'd sooner have a stock 1.8vvc and start from scratch with that.
 
#37 ·
Thats very odd how its "lost" that much power through transmission losses imo. When I had my old 1.4 16v engine on the dyno it was 103bhp ATW with minimal transmission losses and that was using the same R65 gearbox as you have fitted to your ZR. I belive your ATW figure is accurate but after seeeing 127bhp from Pandy's 1.6 metro with similar cams fitted I would be more inclined to say you had ~130ish ATF rather than nearly 150bhp.

Otherwise, good result and hopefully next meet you can show it off to everyone :D
 
#38 ·
Thats very odd how its "lost" that much power through transmission losses imo. When I had my old 1.4 16v engine on the dyno it was 103bhp ATW with minimal transmission losses and that was using the same R65 gearbox as you have fitted to your ZR. I belive your ATW figure is accurate but after seeeing 127bhp from Pandy's 1.6 metro with similar cams fitted I would be more inclined to say you had ~130ish ATF rather than nearly 150bhp.

Otherwise, good result and hopefully next meet you can show it off to everyone :D
Well to be honest, the gears have never been the best since i originally bought the car. I have the usual trouble getting the car into 1st and reverse, but they are pretty shocking throughout. Have to give it quite a bit of revs from a standing start to get away smoothly, so i'm wondering could it be the gearbox that is causing the loss?
 
#39 ·
Get yourself a loan / Remortgage the house Wallsy and buy a Quaife SCCR box ;). Bye bye power loss through transmission, hello awesome sound and being able to bang it through the gears without a clutch :)

Trust me, once you've driven a car with a straight-cut box you'll be addicted to the noise and how you can quite literally lift off and "bang" it straight into gear!
 
#40 ·
Get yourself a loan / Remortgage the house Wallsy and buy a Quaife SCCR box ;). Bye bye power loss through transmission, hello awesome sound and being able to bang it through the gears without a clutch :)

Trust me, once you've driven a car with a straight-cut box you'll be addicted to the noise and how you can quite literally lift off and "bang" it straight into gear!
lol unfortunately i rent my property, and struggle to get through the month as it is without having a loan on top of all the other bills :D

I literally have been waiting for the gearbox to give up the ghost. Do you think it could be the culprit?
 
#41 ·
I'm not good enough with Transmission to answer that! I can just about with a lot of struggling rebuild a PG1 box haha! I'm sure someone else will be able to try work it out.

Eitherway I'd advise you to go for a PG1 conversion when your box does give up to ghost, extremely easy to do :)
 
#43 ·
I'm not good enough with Transmission to answer that! I can just about with a lot of struggling rebuild a PG1 box haha! I'm sure someone else will be able to try work it out.

Eitherway I'd advise you to go for a PG1 conversion when your box does give up to ghost, extremely easy to do :)

Oh I will be, theres no worries there. Don't really fancy replacing the gearbox over and over again :) how much do PG1's tend to go for nowadays?
 
#48 ·
Theres more than likely nothing wrong with it, its just down to the dyno operator fiddling with transmission loses in the software. Were there 4WD cars running on the same day? As those are the kind of losses you'd be looking at for something 4WD, certainly not something FWD.
 
#50 ·
Also, my car was the first one on the rollers.

Regarding replacing the gearbox. I don't have the pennies to swap this at the moment, but I do have AA parts cover, which would cover it, but I would have to wait for it to break and break down somewhere before I could claim :)
 
#57 ·
Sorry to drag it up but only just seen this. Those are interering results, as you know mine is a very similar setup bar me running a standard exhaust manifold, no ZandF remap and a VVC inlet and I ran lower BHP figures with less transmission loss (although it was still a fair amount) but higher torque, which was slightly better than a stock 1.8 iirc. My torque curve is also much smoother also.

Did you come to any conclusion as to why your torque is wibbily wobbily?

At the time for my exhaust setup I was running a stock manifold, with a baffled decat and a metro GTi catback exhaust so I think I might have gained a HP or two if I had my Scorpion exhaust on, and my gearbox is, touch wood, as good as ever so that may have helped my curve.
 
#58 ·
Sorry to drag it up but only just seen this. Those are interering results, as you know mine is a very similar setup bar me running a standard exhaust manifold, no ZandF remap and a VVC inlet and I ran lower BHP figures with less transmission loss (although it was still a fair amount) but higher torque, which was slightly better than a stock 1.8 iirc. My torque curve is also much smoother also.

Did you come to any conclusion as to why your torque is wibbily wobbily?

At the time for my exhaust setup I was running a stock manifold, with a baffled decat and a metro GTi catback exhaust so I think I might have gained a HP or two if I had my Scorpion exhaust on, and my gearbox is, touch wood, as good as ever so that may have helped my curve.

Hi mate.

The Torque curve, i'm not entirely sure why it blips, but my previous dyno results when it was a standard 1.6 were similar to be honest. When I emailed these latest results to ZandF they were confident they could smooth it all out with some tweaking, which i will no doubt do at some point in the near future. It's also worth noting that the Janspeed 4-2-1 manifold and sports cat were fitted to the car after the remap.

Transmission loss, for now remains a mystery. On the day there were 5 other cars, all of which were outputting what was expected of them, but I remember the ZS having quite a large transmission loss too.

I'm still running the original R65 gearbox on it, which to be honest, has never been that brill since i bought it. In an ideal world I would simply just replace it, but whilst it's still functional, it's not really top of the list of priorities.

So for now, I have 2 plans of action.

Firstly, i'm going to get the brake system checked out sometime in the new year. There is no problem with braking itself, but I posted a while ago about the drivers side wheel having quite a squeel to it, which now appears to have rectified itself, but the general opinion was that the caliper may be seizing, so there is a possability that could be affecting things. I doubt it will explain the above, but I want to rule that out for sure.

Second plan of action is in March, when the Merseyside Meet usually organise a RR Day at WGT which use a Dyno Pack. It's claimed to be more accurate than a normal RR, so between the 2 sets of results, I should have a better idea of whats what.


Cheers

Dave