Joined
·
15 Posts
I have a 1.9 SEFI what ever the hell that is. I hear about turbo charging and turbines and nos, what are these mods and can I do them?
Can I turbo charge it?
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Joined
·
8,351 Posts
isn´t the 1.9 SEFI a 2nd gen LX engine? This is how I understand the different engines:
1st Gens:
~1.9L LX with 90 hp, 106 lb ft torque and the
~1.9L GT H.O. with 110 hp, 115 lb ft torque
2nd Gens:
~1.9 LX SEFI (?) with 88 hp, 108 lb ft torque and the
~1.8L GT with 127 hp, 114 lb ft torque
I wonder why Ford didn´t give the 2nd gen GTs have more torque? I mean 1st gens beat them out by 1 lb foot...
1st Gens:
~1.9L LX with 90 hp, 106 lb ft torque and the
~1.9L GT H.O. with 110 hp, 115 lb ft torque
2nd Gens:
~1.9 LX SEFI (?) with 88 hp, 108 lb ft torque and the
~1.8L GT with 127 hp, 114 lb ft torque
I wonder why Ford didn´t give the 2nd gen GTs have more torque? I mean 1st gens beat them out by 1 lb foot...
Joined
·
8,351 Posts
Oh yeah, sorry. SEFI means Sequential Electronic Fuel Injection. I think 2nd gen GTs use just EFI. which is good enough for me
![]()
From what I hear, the 1.9sefi isn´t robust enough to handle the boost a turbo puts out. That´s why people like blade will turbo their mazda 1.8L, which is made of forged parts that can withstand those compression pressures that a turbo can put out, but a wimpy little 1.9L sefi will likely explode, sending shrapnel into yourself and nearby pedestrians.
Joined
·
1,495 Posts
The 1.9 SEFI will handle a turbo, but not many people have done it. It´s much more complicated due to the distributorless ignition also. Remember the old 1st gen escort turbo´s were 1.6 cvh´s which is what the 1.9 is based off of. Now a 1st gen 1.9 is a lot easier to turbo, but that´s another story.
Joined
·
8,351 Posts
I´m thinking if you build up any engine right you could turbo it no problems. I was thinking about turbo´ing my 1991 Geo Metro 1.0L until I wrecked it, but in retrospect it was a SOHC and it might not have done well with the extra volume of air going into it. But I think it could have been done, if done right.
sorry guys didn´t mean to sound like a moron back there. I was really tired when I read that post and didn´t see the "S" in front of the "EFI". The only reason I wanted to know what year it is, is that a 1st gen can be turboed easily if you use the one out of the EXP escort. As for the 2nd gen escort, it would probably be easier (i think) to convert your car over to the 1.8L. Or you can even attempt something harder and put the 2.0L in from a 3rd gen zx2 (check out chadgore´s car in the showcase). Personally I would get a get a 1.8 and turbo that because its alot easier (and cheaper)...(and cooler!)
SOHC tend to be torque-ier under boost then DOHC´s. Yeah you can pretty much boost anything. The only question is what kind of compression ratio´s will you be hitting under boost and how much boost will it take on the stock internals.
I had a roommate with a D16Y8 in his 99 Civic EX. He was running .54BAR which is like 7.8psi. Honda stock internals are crap and it held that much. So I would say its possible.
With the ignition problem, wont an MSD Sport Compact box work ? They work on distributorless honda´s.
I had a roommate with a D16Y8 in his 99 Civic EX. He was running .54BAR which is like 7.8psi. Honda stock internals are crap and it held that much. So I would say its possible.
With the ignition problem, wont an MSD Sport Compact box work ? They work on distributorless honda´s.
DOHC is only worth some extra marketting stickers to the car manufacturers. You can run both 2 and 4 valve/cyl heads from a SOHC, and you can make a more compact head by elliminating rocker arms in DOHC configuration, but when you get down to it, all DOHC really means is that you´ve got two cam shafts, whoopty dooo.. unless you´re planning on adjusting the cam timing on each shaft independantly then the differences in engine tuning abilities are slim. Variable valve timing can be made more efficient with DOHC than SOHC, but we don´t have that do we
Now, as far breathing abilites under boost.. DOHC and SOHC really don´t matter much in the long run of engine building and tuning.. except that SOHC are usually cheaper since there are less parts.
Just ask the guys in the funny cars running built up pushrod engines.. it doesn´t matter how many valves or cams you have, but how effectively you use the ones you do have.
Beaverboy
[ This message was edited by: Beaverboy on 05-01-2003 14:02 ]
OMG Beaver, what planet did you come from. I´m sorry, I feel slightly insulted by your comments. I hope its just from lack of experience.
The DOHC heads are more volumetrically efficient and will ALWAYS be more efficient in stock form. The limitation of a SOHC head is like 65%(unless you have a cool HO head like the yamaha´s on an 89-95 SHO)
Base VE for a DOHC is like 75%. Percentages may not mean that much to you but a different of 10% increase of VE on a DOHC head on high revs can be up to like 70HP ! Just think if I increased the VE to 95% of my 1.8L I would be gaining as much power as a pretty high mileage 1.9L puts out total!!!
Most higher VE DOHC heads require better balance in the motor, that´s why they rev to like 7k - (1G MR2 hits -->
![]()
7.8k revs.
Under boost it makes a HUGE difference too. A DOHC head because of naturally being able to flow a higher VE will produce gobs more power if you keep the pressure the same between both test motors.
Realize too that the main reason why nitro motors are using big block displacement and pushrods is because; THEY CAN´T RACE IF THEY DONT. When you get into Nitro (top fuel, etc.) racing they dont even allow you to use an ECU, PCM, whatever you want to call it to control the motor...only for data collection to better tune the motor.
If there was some law saying you couldnt drive a car on a public highway unless it used big displacement, and 40% efficient motors and got 11 gallons to the mile then I guess you´d be right on.
But I can´t argue, with low efficiencies those cars are still producing upwards to 8000 HP to the ground! Its INCREDIBLE. But still apples and rotton oranges for a comparison.
Back to the Geo Metro comment. the Suzuki Swift is a rebadged Metro with a 1.3L DOHC j-spec motor. There´s a Swift on SpeedOptions.com that was car of the month for Dec. On 20psi it put out over 350hp. Dont knock a turbo´d metro if you see one.
<img src=http://mercury.pr.erau.edu/~bladej/escortweb.jpg>
Jason Blade, 93 EGT Turbo
[ This message was edited by: TheBlade on 05-01-2003 15:08 ]
The DOHC heads are more volumetrically efficient and will ALWAYS be more efficient in stock form. The limitation of a SOHC head is like 65%(unless you have a cool HO head like the yamaha´s on an 89-95 SHO)
Base VE for a DOHC is like 75%. Percentages may not mean that much to you but a different of 10% increase of VE on a DOHC head on high revs can be up to like 70HP ! Just think if I increased the VE to 95% of my 1.8L I would be gaining as much power as a pretty high mileage 1.9L puts out total!!!
Most higher VE DOHC heads require better balance in the motor, that´s why they rev to like 7k - (1G MR2 hits -->
Under boost it makes a HUGE difference too. A DOHC head because of naturally being able to flow a higher VE will produce gobs more power if you keep the pressure the same between both test motors.
Realize too that the main reason why nitro motors are using big block displacement and pushrods is because; THEY CAN´T RACE IF THEY DONT. When you get into Nitro (top fuel, etc.) racing they dont even allow you to use an ECU, PCM, whatever you want to call it to control the motor...only for data collection to better tune the motor.
If there was some law saying you couldnt drive a car on a public highway unless it used big displacement, and 40% efficient motors and got 11 gallons to the mile then I guess you´d be right on.
But I can´t argue, with low efficiencies those cars are still producing upwards to 8000 HP to the ground! Its INCREDIBLE. But still apples and rotton oranges for a comparison.
Back to the Geo Metro comment. the Suzuki Swift is a rebadged Metro with a 1.3L DOHC j-spec motor. There´s a Swift on SpeedOptions.com that was car of the month for Dec. On 20psi it put out over 350hp. Dont knock a turbo´d metro if you see one.
<img src=http://mercury.pr.erau.edu/~bladej/escortweb.jpg>
Jason Blade, 93 EGT Turbo
[ This message was edited by: TheBlade on 05-01-2003 15:08 ]
Please don´t be insulted.. I think you missunderstood part of what I was saying, and I overdid myself on the other part thanks to my little bias towards my SOHC bimmer. Sorry about that.
Okay, ´DOHC as a marketing ploy´, I sort of said that in a round-a-bout way, didn´t I? Well, I take it back.
![]()
I do understand the benefits of DOHC being a)shorter valve lift (and therefore softer valve springs) b)the ellimination of rocker arms and c)more surface area through which to pass gasses through the head.
All I was really trying to say about the Metro was that even being a SOHC, it can still handle a turbo quite well. (I suppose I could have just said that). In my driveway right now is a 2.2L Subaru with two SOHC heads featuring 4 valve/cylinder (Y shaped rocker arms). A correctly sized turbo will do wonders for a stock long block operating in the stock rpm range... because within that stock RPM range, flow is adequate considering the 4 valves. Should I want to up the rev limit, double valve springs will probably allow me another 1500-2000rpm
![]()
, but the efficiency will drop off dramatically due to all the power going to compressing the springs.
![]()
Now, I´m not saying that the Metro is a 4valve/cyl SOHC unit, but even 2valve/cyl SOHC units have done fine under boost. Take 1.8L and 2.0L BMW m10 motors for instance (the one´s I´m familiar with) 300hp is quite possible on pump gas with a simple turbo cam and oversized valves, the right piping, fuel pressure and turbo.
So please, don´t think of me as having just fallen off of the proverbial turnip truck (or alien planet as the case may be), but one that fell off long ago and bumped his head
![]()
Okay, ´DOHC as a marketing ploy´, I sort of said that in a round-a-bout way, didn´t I? Well, I take it back.
All I was really trying to say about the Metro was that even being a SOHC, it can still handle a turbo quite well. (I suppose I could have just said that). In my driveway right now is a 2.2L Subaru with two SOHC heads featuring 4 valve/cylinder (Y shaped rocker arms). A correctly sized turbo will do wonders for a stock long block operating in the stock rpm range... because within that stock RPM range, flow is adequate considering the 4 valves. Should I want to up the rev limit, double valve springs will probably allow me another 1500-2000rpm
So please, don´t think of me as having just fallen off of the proverbial turnip truck (or alien planet as the case may be), but one that fell off long ago and bumped his head
Joined
·
838 Posts
Just a note about the Top Fulers... They use 4 valve heads as well.
But onto the Main topic.... If I were to boost a 1.9 SEFI engine I would get ahold of a 1st gen HO head. Since the SEFI used flat pistons, the domed Combustion chamber in the HO head will allow for lower compression, not to mention the bigger intake and exhaust valves on the HO head. Double Plus.
But onto the Main topic.... If I were to boost a 1.9 SEFI engine I would get ahold of a 1st gen HO head. Since the SEFI used flat pistons, the domed Combustion chamber in the HO head will allow for lower compression, not to mention the bigger intake and exhaust valves on the HO head. Double Plus.
Anyone here actually turboed their 1.9L? (sorry, I am very new to scorts)
What are the results?
With an upgraded valve train, what kind of revs can I expect out of the bottom end? For instance.. the m10 motors I mentioned earlier have no problem with 10k rpm (but the built heads max out near 9k sustained).
1.9L Bore x Stroke?
What are the results?
With an upgraded valve train, what kind of revs can I expect out of the bottom end? For instance.. the m10 motors I mentioned earlier have no problem with 10k rpm (but the built heads max out near 9k sustained).
1.9L Bore x Stroke?
Joined
·
838 Posts
Bore 82mm (3.23in)
Stroke 88mm (3.46in)
Stroke 88mm (3.46in)
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
