locoboy
|
| posted on 5/5/08 at 03:20 PM |
|
|
1.4 k series
At stoneleigh in the indoor for sale section there was an orange mk indy with a 1.4 k series in it from a metro GTA.
I know is a 1.4 and only 105 bhp but does anyone know if these can be ripped straight out of the car an transplanted straight in?
the guyy seling it was not that mechanically minded or knowledgable so wasn't worth an ask but he said he needed to get the bell housing
machined.
Is there not a bell housing that will allow you to put a type 9 onto a K series?
 
K series 1.4
If it can be run on the bits grabbed from the donor then it looks like a compact and (probably) cheap engine.
Any comments welcome.
ATB
Locoboy
|
|
|
|
|
Griffo
|
| posted on 5/5/08 at 03:34 PM |
|
|
I think you can buy the bellhousing from caterham but it aint cheap if i remmeber correctly.
also the metro GTA engine is just a 16v K series found in the rover 200, 400, 25, 45 and ZR so u might find one cheaper than taking it out of a GTA
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 5/5/08 at 03:47 PM |
|
|
Metro's had a simpler security system than Rovers
Best easily found source is a 214SEi mid 1990s --
|
|
|
stevec
|
| posted on 5/5/08 at 04:24 PM |
|
|
I have a couple of the late twin plug Motorola ecu's that have no anti theft bits in them and will run with just normal powers and earths. If
you need to put a later engine in it.
Steve.
|
|
|
locoboy
|
| posted on 5/5/08 at 04:32 PM |
|
|
Cheers Steve,
Its early days yet as im still considering which engines will give me the cheapest and easiest installation.
I will keep you in mind if i end up going K series though.
ATB
Locoboy
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 5/5/08 at 04:38 PM |
|
|
Note that the Caterham bellhousing is designed to be used with the heavy duty (i.e. V6) Type 9, so you have to use an appropriate spacer if you have a
standard Type 9. You also need to fit a pilot bearing to the end of the crank.
|
|
|
Griffo
|
| posted on 5/5/08 at 06:35 PM |
|
|
One quick question...why the 1.4?
the 1.6 and 1.8 are exactly the same size and the vvc is only slightly bigger due to a different head/inlet manifold.
With regards to the security side of it, can the security systems not be carried over to the kit car? trick a few sensors here and there maybe? just a
though.
|
|
|
locoboy
|
| posted on 5/5/08 at 06:37 PM |
|
|
1.4 will proabably be cheaper to buy, cheaper to run.
All of which keep the costs down for the build and the running.
[Edited on 5/5/08 by locoboy]
ATB
Locoboy
|
|
|
dhutch
|
| posted on 8/5/08 at 07:36 AM |
|
|
Not this one is it?
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=88146
Daniel
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 8/5/08 at 09:57 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by locoboy
1.4 will proabably be cheaper to buy, cheaper to run.
Cheaper, more easily available and the power characteristics suit a light car better. The 1.6 and standard (non-vvc) 1.8 only have a small power
advantage in standard form anyway (~6bhp for 1.6, ~14bhp for 1.8).
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 8/5/08 at 01:10 PM |
|
|
Yep the 1.4 is the dogs danglers very free revving in the 104 ps version --- 81 ps version from the poverty spec 25 only differs in having a
throttle stop on the throttle body to prevent the butterfly fully opening.
1.8 is just about OK in the 135 ps version but most 1.8 from MGF, saloon and Freelander only put out between 116 and 118 ps
1.6 isn't bad but output again varies a bit with model year 112 to 116ps
I am almost sure it might also be possible to fit the distributer ignition from the very early 1990's carb 8 valve 1.4 to the 16 valve engine.
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
