MG-Rover.org Forums banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
54,941 Posts
The 5AS unit.

Rewiring for the extra sensors you will be missing, plus a lamda emulator.

Why are you going this route? Getting to 160bhp is much easier in other ways.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,334 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
just seen a cheap 160 ecu on fleabay however i wont bother if its that much faf got a 52mm tb 160 exhaust with decat and a pipercorss vector seems very quick to me but im trying to get a bit more push it up to 160 or maybe beyond. just seen a superchips icon race with the programming lead however its of a 1.4k series from a metro. the guy seems to think as its memms its should be compatible. what do u think stu since uve got one on ure vvc coupe.
cheers mate
 

·
Registered
mini_the_real_one
Joined
·
11,237 Posts
Si and I discussed this the other night. Worked out with all the costs its just not worth it, cause the 160 isn't that much faster than a VI. Might as well leave it on ebay. You firstly have to make MEMS3 fit your wiring, which won't be simple as its not plug and play to the mk3 loom. Then you have to get MEMS3 to give a signal to the clocks for the milage (you'd need 160 clocks then). You also need to feed the ECU with a second lambda signal.

Its just too much worth, for little performance gain.
Steve
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
54,941 Posts
Although a mems2 ECU cna be made to work pretty much like the mems3 unit. It does mean you need the lamda emulator, but can keep the original dials.

Not 100% on exactly how it is done as mine was done for me by some mates at lotus. The processor on mems2 isn't up to loading new maps into it completely like you can with mems3 though. So unless you really have a specific reason for doing it, then don't bother.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,222 Posts
Not worth the trouble imho. Mems3 uses a lot of different sensors that you'll also need. When we replaced the engine of my Vi for a Mems3 Trophy engine, we decided to keep Mems2, because rewiring and changing the sensors was to much trouble. We also kept the original inlet manifold with injectors etc, because of this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,824 Posts
Striker said:
We also kept the original inlet manifold with injectors etc, because of this.
Striker,

That could partially explain why your car develops as much power as it does, earlier mems 2 VVC engines up to circa year 2000 had higher flow injectors, whereas mems 3 160 engines had cylinder heads with better gas flow.

Looks like you've got the best of both.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,222 Posts
I learn something about my car everyday :D. I didn't know that, thanks for the information :cool:. That does explain it I guess :p.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Striker what's you output?

Another question i have that somebody may be able to answer is: When fitting the vvc engine (with let's say Mems2) with the R65 box, what happens with the crank sensor in order for the ecu to recognise its input. Would it work if the 1.6 flywheel and sensor is kept? Is the pattern on the back with the flywheel of 1.6 and 1.8 different? If so, does the 1.8 flywheel fit?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,222 Posts
The Icon for a non-VVC K-series definately won't fit a VVC as the VVC uses two coils. Did I make up for hijacking your thread now? :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Sorry for the highjack :) That's a good output striker !!! So what are the differences between the 160vvc and the other one, in terms of sensors, coils etc. Did you just swap all the sensors from you older engine?
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top