|
|
Post by melx5 on Oct 7, 2017 11:10:31 GMT
On and off over the four year of ownership I've considered turbo, supercharger itb's etc but I like the reliability of the car and tbh I'm far to lazy to have to strip and rebuild every two mins because somethings gone wrong, or it needs further tuning. No doubt there are those of you who have done all of the mentioned mods without any problems but there will also be plenty who spent more time under the bonnet than they did driving the car.
Question one I guess is cylinder head, I know I can raise the compression by either skimming the MK1 head or swapping it for a MK2/2.5, although I'm ruling out the 2.5 simply because I'm staying with the std ECU and without piggy backs it can't control the VVT, so that leaves the MK1 or 2. I again like the idea of sticking with my own head as the cars low mileage, I've done the oil changes etc so it cuts out the paranoia of buying a piece of scrap, of course I can be persuaded depending on the next question. Which head will give the best gains?, A MK1, skimmed with fast road cams (no porting) or a MK2 with stock cams (providing I can find a good one)
If I stay with my own head and run raised compression/fast cam will I end up with a peaky motor that will need to be above 5k all the time or will it remain tractable?
If I use the MK2 stock head would I have more or less the same peak bhp but a better spread of power?
If I was to use the MK2 will I also need to swap the exhaust/intake manifolds and CAS?
I'm not prepared to spend hundreds on intake/exhaust to get 5 extra bhp so which ever way I go the parts need to bolt on and outwardly appear pretty much stock!
I know Blink, Skuzzle etc can give me over 150bhp (flywheel) but 10-15% for say £500 makes much more sense to me!
|
|
|
|
Post by FFS Corders on Oct 7, 2017 14:25:45 GMT
You will be best served by having a chat with Blink and Skuzzle about your plans and budget as they will be able to go through options on head skim etc
A MK2 head doesn't directly fit with a MK1 inlet manifold unless you use an adapter plate. When I fitted my mk2 engine I used the MK2 VICS manifold and summit racing rpm switch to power the butterflies. With the MK2 engine, a Jackson racing cold air intake and maxim works exhaust manifold I have 20bhp over the MK1 engine I killed. This cost just under £600 for engine, inlet and exhaust manifold but was offset by selling numerous surplus engine parts from the swap
With the MK2 engine running VICS the power is higher across the range and keeps increasing once past 5200 revs when the VICS goes to the high rpm mode whereas the MK1 graph drops off
I'm not sure if running cams on a standard ecu would have as much effect as a MK2 head with MK2 inlet manifold - this is something Skuzzle or blink will be able to help with
You can use the MK1 CAS and exhaust manifold with a MK2 head. If using the MK2 inlet you need to re use the MK1 throttle body but use the MK2 throttle cable
|
|
|
|
Post by melx5 on Oct 7, 2017 15:09:20 GMT
Thanks for the reply
I see Danst sells an adapter for £85 so the parts are out there, just a question of which head/cams/inlet will give me best bang for my buck.
I'd like to know the difference just raising compression makes, as thats my starting point whether its with the stock head or the MK2
Guess I'll be ringing Skuzzle on Monday
|
|
|
|
Post by Rickster on Oct 11, 2017 7:31:45 GMT
I've got a skimmed head - 40 thou, do I notice a big difference not especially, and tbh for standard class competition a mk2.5 is what I would have, as getting the benefits of the mk1 engine mods with a standard ecu is not ideal. I think Skuzzle is your best bet - I think I would benefit from at least setting the timing on mine on his dyno, just using 14deg and leaving it there is probably not optimum with the skimmed head. Reprofiled cams will also make a big difference, but if you go too "race car" it becomes less usable as a daily?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rickster on Oct 11, 2017 7:36:19 GMT
Meant to say - my mate upgraded his exhaust and claims that has made a noticeable difference to his mk1 1.8, I suspect this is mostly due to the 4 branch manifold?
|
|
|
|
Post by melx5 on Oct 11, 2017 18:47:31 GMT
I rang around and was told to either go f/i or leave it stock, there may be n/a power available but its going to take more than a head skim and reground cams to make a real difference.
So I guess I'm going to stay stock and just look for some twistier roads.........
Thanks for the replies
|
|
|
|
Post by minty on Oct 12, 2017 8:27:38 GMT
I rang around and was told to either go f/i or leave it stock, there may be n/a power available but its going to take more than a head skim and reground cams to make a real difference. So I guess I'm going to stay stock and just look for some twistier roads......... Thanks for the replies Interesting! Thanks for the update. |
|
tsp
Chats A Lot
Posts: 439
|
Post by tsp on Oct 12, 2017 22:14:31 GMT
There is a guy on retro rides that had a cool MX5 on bike carbs. He said no matter what he did it was never as exciting as a Honda vtec.
I guess the MX5 just lends itself to being charged!
Shame really... As like you I'd love a pokier NA!
|
|
|
|
Post by Rickster on Oct 13, 2017 7:09:11 GMT
For NA power then v6 3.0 Jag engine is fantastic but it costs more than FI
That's why turbo is so popular- unbeatable bang for buck, it gives willy wagging dyno figures for lowest relative cost!!
|
|
|
|
Post by myothercarsa2cv on Oct 13, 2017 7:46:49 GMT
The Mazda engine was originally designed to be boosted. Don't deny it's purpose in life 😃
|
|
|
|
Post by Rickster on Oct 13, 2017 22:15:07 GMT
The Mazda engine was originally designed to be boosted. Don't deny it's purpose in life 😃 It was also originally designed to be transverse and fwd, look forward to that conversion😉 |
|
|
|
Post by myothercarsa2cv on Oct 13, 2017 23:04:10 GMT
The Mazda engine was originally designed to be boosted. Don't deny it's purpose in life 😃 It was also originally designed to be transverse and fwd, look forward to that conversion😉 Hush you 😜 |
|
|
|
Post by melx5 on Oct 15, 2017 21:12:12 GMT
Well guess I don't need to tune my Eunos, out today and had a blast with another mx through Leicester and caught him so quickly he asked me if the car was turbo.
1.8 v 1.6 I think
|
|
|
|
Post by Vindi (Russell) on Oct 24, 2017 17:42:31 GMT
Well guess I don't need to tune my Eunos, out today and had a blast with another mx through Leicester and caught him so quickly he asked me if the car was turbo. 1.8 v 1.6 I think I got asked the same thing going round Rockingham ... only he was in a 1.8 and I was in an NA 1.6. There's no noticeable difference between 1.6 and 1.8, the drivers differ a lot though |
|
le sigh