Who to talk to about low end torque on 16 valve 1.6 engine?
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
You might talk to these folks. I do not have any experience with them personally.
http://www.reynoldsmachine.com/engines.htm
http://www.reynoldsmachine.com/engines.htm
Call brent from Trail tough....He knows these motors very well!!ECF said:
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
Joined
·
1,386 Posts
I wonder why so many ppl run the 16 valve, the 8 valve makes peak torque at 1000 rpm lower than the 16v... 
Joined
·
1,021 Posts
I think it is because most people run enough gearing to not really have the torque peak location be a real issue.Titanium said:I wonder why so many ppl run the 16 valve, the 8 valve makes peak torque at 1000 rpm lower than the 16v...
The DD crowd appreciates the 16V for highway speeds. It makes good usable power on the highway, is quieter than the 8V.
To my knowledge there is not much you can do wrt aftermarket parts for the 16V. Calmini makes a header, but the stock one is damn good to begin with. The biggie about the Calmini header is the weight savings.
AKAIK there are no cams; there was a guy a couple years ago that got Crane to custom grind something but then the EFI system wouldn't play nice with it. Probably needs more fuel pressure and/or injectors at that point. I'll guess you could get an honest 140 hp if you were prepared to do the full rice rocket treatment.
IMO, go fast goodies on a truck engine are a waste. No point if you are going to submerge the thing.
Just my spin.
[email protected]
(resident bastard)
Yes but if you look at the torque of the 16v.....it exceeds the 8v through outTitanium said:I wonder why so many ppl run the 16 valve, the 8 valve makes peak torque at 1000 rpm lower than the 16v...
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
Joined
·
1,386 Posts
Very interesting, didnt know that, got some numbers ?RudeZuk said:
thanks guys, I'm not looking for the full one rice rocket treatment but I would appreciate lower end torque numbers, who isn't with these engine? Also I'd just like to add that I have found the following figures on horse power and torque curves and the 16 valve definitely exceeds that of the 8 valve.
Joined
·
1,021 Posts
If low end torque is really a problem, think about lower gearing...ECF said:
I dunno if that matches your wheeling type/style but that is the direction I would look. Maybe dual t-case would give you the flexibility you want/need?
[email protected]
(resident bastard)
Joined
·
1,021 Posts
Btw, if you have the HP/TQ curves in digital format think you could forward me a copy?
[email protected]
[email protected]
Joined
·
4,833 Posts
I can only think of a couple of things you can do for torque. If you have a huge exhaust system, then shrink it down to a respectable size. About the only other option is get some cams made up for it.
That motor is really tuned for horsepower, not torque. I like the little guy. They like to be driven hard, and seem to love the higher rpms. If you can stand it, gear it with that in mind. My buddy runs a 16 valve with a GRS1, 4.6? R&P and 33" tires. It turns a few rpms at highway, but not as bad as when he had the GRS2 in there. Off road it does pretty well with that gearing. But it still stalls pretty easy if you are not used to it.
-Wayne
That motor is really tuned for horsepower, not torque. I like the little guy. They like to be driven hard, and seem to love the higher rpms. If you can stand it, gear it with that in mind. My buddy runs a 16 valve with a GRS1, 4.6? R&P and 33" tires. It turns a few rpms at highway, but not as bad as when he had the GRS2 in there. Off road it does pretty well with that gearing. But it still stalls pretty easy if you are not used to it.
-Wayne
Joined
·
1,473 Posts
This is a quote from Brent at TT:
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51712
Jim
From this thread:
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51712
Jim
Guys, you gotta understand that gears are not everything....
Let's play the example game....
.
Motor 1's power band runs from 2500 rpm to 6500 rpm.
Motor 2's will pull from 1000 rpm up to 5500 rpm.
HP is bases on torque*rpm. So, the higher you make torque the higher the HP number will be. In the example, if actual torque is the same, motor 1 makes more HP because it is at a higher RPM....
Now look at Rock crawling (crawling, not RACING. I'm excluding bump'n run slickrock).
Say you have 150:1 gearing for Motor 1 and 100:1 for motor 2.
Motor 1 can pull with the tires moving 17rpm to 43rpm (or 1.8 - 4.6mph, on 36's).
Motor 2 can pull with the tires moving 10rpm to 55rpm (or 1.1 - 5.9mph, on 36's).
You'll notice that Motor 2 has better control at low speeds (1.1 vers 1.8mph) even with 50% more gear for motor 2. Also notice that you've got much more 'instantant accelaration' with motor 2 because it can PULL over a tire speed range from 1.1 to 5.9mph. That's a factor of 5.4 vers Motor 1's 2.6! This shows most in the cases where you need to 'Bump' a ledge. And is also MOST important when you are running a standard transmission. Under serious conditions, you just can't shift and you don't have the torque converter to raise the motor's RPM to pull a higher gear!
Now with all that said. If you wan't to lower the power band of the 16V, consider an adjustable cam timing sprocket(s). As I recall, 4 degrees (crank angle) retard will move your power band down about 200 rpm. Also, you can bump your compression and advance your timing (stop before detonation ). All that, with some exhaust back pressure will help build low end performance at the price of some top end, of course...
Let's play the example game....
.
Motor 1's power band runs from 2500 rpm to 6500 rpm.
Motor 2's will pull from 1000 rpm up to 5500 rpm.
HP is bases on torque*rpm. So, the higher you make torque the higher the HP number will be. In the example, if actual torque is the same, motor 1 makes more HP because it is at a higher RPM....
Now look at Rock crawling (crawling, not RACING. I'm excluding bump'n run slickrock).
Say you have 150:1 gearing for Motor 1 and 100:1 for motor 2.
Motor 1 can pull with the tires moving 17rpm to 43rpm (or 1.8 - 4.6mph, on 36's).
Motor 2 can pull with the tires moving 10rpm to 55rpm (or 1.1 - 5.9mph, on 36's).
You'll notice that Motor 2 has better control at low speeds (1.1 vers 1.8mph) even with 50% more gear for motor 2. Also notice that you've got much more 'instantant accelaration' with motor 2 because it can PULL over a tire speed range from 1.1 to 5.9mph. That's a factor of 5.4 vers Motor 1's 2.6! This shows most in the cases where you need to 'Bump' a ledge. And is also MOST important when you are running a standard transmission. Under serious conditions, you just can't shift and you don't have the torque converter to raise the motor's RPM to pull a higher gear!
Now with all that said. If you wan't to lower the power band of the 16V, consider an adjustable cam timing sprocket(s). As I recall, 4 degrees (crank angle) retard will move your power band down about 200 rpm. Also, you can bump your compression and advance your timing (stop before detonation
). All that, with some exhaust back pressure will help build low end performance at the price of some top end, of course...
Joined
·
2,419 Posts
Re: Re: Who to talk to about low end torque on 16 valve 1.6 engine?
don't forget to put the helium in your roll cage
:flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2:
yah and brents the one who says not to rebuild 1.6 engine because there no good if you do it ruins the factory protetive layer or some shit like that .RudeZuk said:
don't forget to put the helium in your roll cage
:flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2:
Joined
·
343 Posts
The only thing I didn't like about my 16v was using the smaller
flywheel required when you are running a Samurai tranny.Every-
one who initially drove the rig would kill the engine when taking
off from a stop.I made a thicker flywheel and this cured the
problem.
flywheel required when you are running a Samurai tranny.Every-
one who initially drove the rig would kill the engine when taking
off from a stop.I made a thicker flywheel and this cured the
problem.
Joined
·
2,419 Posts
no offence to brent he is very smart and his new rig is nice and so are some of his products but but some of the stuff he says you just wanna
Re: Re: Re: Who to talk to about low end torque on 16 valve 1.6 engine?
i've had a 16v in my truck for 2 years now.....has worked out well....i just welded a cherry bomb to the collector and let it go.....it's one really pissed off hornet when you stomp the stupid pedal:flipoff2:
there might be more truth to this than you think.....zuk engines do have that throw away type appeal to them....i have yet to hear of anyone getting reliable service out of a rebuilt engine for much more than a year.....might just be the type of gas we got on the east coast or something thonozuk said:
i've had a 16v in my truck for 2 years now.....has worked out well....i just welded a cherry bomb to the collector and let it go.....it's one really pissed off hornet when you stomp the stupid pedal:flipoff2:
Joined
·
2,419 Posts
i know why bents say that tho is becuz he's blow up to rebuilt 1.6 with in the first week of having them in his rig
my dad has had his in for about a 2 years and have had no problems with it and the one dave build never heard of any trouble about his motors
my dad has had his in for about a 2 years and have had no problems with it and the one dave build never heard of any trouble about his motors
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!