Did we ever have in Australia the Mi16 with the D6C engines? This is the 160HP XU9J4 engine of (I understand) early Mi16 cars.
D6C engines
- Thread starter schlitzaugen
- Start date
Nope. Never got it.
The Xu10MI16 was the same as the european engines with 155hp. They dont create much compression though. An Xu9 88mm crank (1.9 MI16) can be swapped over to give 2045cc and high compression using standard pistons.
Cam
The Xu10MI16 was the same as the european engines with 155hp. They dont create much compression though. An Xu9 88mm crank (1.9 MI16) can be swapped over to give 2045cc and high compression using standard pistons.
Cam
So we only got the DFW engines ?
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2000
- Messages
- 11,455
This was because we needed to run unleaded.
BY the time Europe went to unleaded the XU10 was released, improved over the DFW but still not as good as the D6C.
Graham
Power. This was achieved with higher CR, different intake cam pulley (3deg advanced on the DFW engines to squeeze more dynamic CR out of their lower static CR), different engine management system, and all the sensors different too. No catalyst of course on the D6C. That's pretty much it.
I guess being an all alloy engine it is lighter too and am not sure the gain in torque would compensate the extra weight (not sure how significant the torque difference is).
Yea true. You thinking about the conversion for the 205? Sourcing pistons from the UK or decking the block and liners can achieve the higher comp.
Or do the above as mentioned and fit the longer stroke crank. Makes for a nice motor..
Cam
Or do the above as mentioned and fit the longer stroke crank. Makes for a nice motor..
Cam
There is a 2 row and 3 row version of the D6C, which of course we never got. Both had 10.4:1, the 3 row version has a knock sensor. All had #2 exhaust pulleys. Some had #2 inlet pulleys and some had #4 (even more advanced than a #3).
All the 1.9L Mi16's and BX16V in Oz had the DFW - 9.5:1, knock sensor, cat, #2 & #3 pulleys.
The DFW was/is common in many European countries and was an "option" in the UK.
The power and torque produced from a well rebuilt XU10J4 more than offsets the weight penalty.
I wouldn't be scared about sourcing XU9J4 pistons from the UK. The pistons are rarely scuffed/worn, even after huge mileages. Add new liners and new rings and you're in business again.
All the 1.9L Mi16's and BX16V in Oz had the DFW - 9.5:1, knock sensor, cat, #2 & #3 pulleys.
The DFW was/is common in many European countries and was an "option" in the UK.
The power and torque produced from a well rebuilt XU10J4 more than offsets the weight penalty.
I wouldn't be scared about sourcing XU9J4 pistons from the UK. The pistons are rarely scuffed/worn, even after huge mileages. Add new liners and new rings and you're in business again.
Not sure what you're talking about. The xu10 is rated at 155HP, the xu9j4 is 160. What is exactly the gain in having the heavier less powerful engine?
Even if it was more powerful, in a straight line perhaps it would benefit some, but when swinging it around corners, I am not so sure.
Besides from what I understand the many issues with shoehorning a xu10 in a 205 don't exist (or are smaller) if xu9 is used.
Even if it was more powerful, in a straight line perhaps it would benefit some, but when swinging it around corners, I am not so sure.
Besides from what I understand the many issues with shoehorning a xu10 in a 205 don't exist (or are smaller) if xu9 is used.
Private import?
I bought one over form the UK 5 years ago. That went to Canberra.
I think the weight can be offset by moving the Batter and using the smaller lighter XU10 starter etc.
It produces more power earlier in the revs etc. It also has 100cc more capacity and that helps add to the torque.
IMHO every 1.9 16v Ive driven in a 205 never felt as fast as the 2.0. Its just a nicer motor in terms or revs and lower RPM tractability. If your intending to rebuild the 1.9, I would seriously consider the XU9 crank in the Xu10. For the cost of the rebuild you can get free capacity gains just by fitting the 88mm crank. It also helps the low velocity speeds of the massive ports at lower RPM.
Cam
I think the weight can be offset by moving the Batter and using the smaller lighter XU10 starter etc.
It produces more power earlier in the revs etc. It also has 100cc more capacity and that helps add to the torque.
IMHO every 1.9 16v Ive driven in a 205 never felt as fast as the 2.0. Its just a nicer motor in terms or revs and lower RPM tractability. If your intending to rebuild the 1.9, I would seriously consider the XU9 crank in the Xu10. For the cost of the rebuild you can get free capacity gains just by fitting the 88mm crank. It also helps the low velocity speeds of the massive ports at lower RPM.
Cam
There's a few, like the one in my Mi16x4.
I did say from a "well rebuilt" engine. There's no issue fitting an XU10 into a 205. I have one in my race car. The weight difference is only 18Kg.
What is the potential of a D6B (imported) motor?