so what does everyone thinks best for a series2........ 2.1zvh..... 1600cvh or a 1900cvh?????

 

2 litre zetec turbo

 

1.6cvh













but then im biased as i have one

 

Depends what you want it for mate!

IMO keep it old skool, 1600cvh

 

depends what you want from the car big bhp figures have been proven from all 3 of those choices

 

im prob gonna keep it 1600 unless someone changes my mind
steel rods and all that....dreading adding up all the price!

 

2L zetec turbo

 

In an ideal world 1600 cvh but as said its just the costs. Simple fact you can get cheaper power from a zetec up to around 300hp.

 

go for the zetec mate get them for pennies and big hp easy

 

What do you want out of the engine?

 

about 250bhp

 

defo the zetec then mate so easy to get that figure plus you get more low down grunt

 

Do you have a budget?

I don't think people should jump on the bandwagon when they don't know the proper details etc.

 

im just gonna talk to some tuners and ask about prices and stuff under 3000 really

 

1.6 CVH everday

 

u can do a budget Zetec turbo for that sort of money...easily achieve 230-250hp no probs on standard head, cams, T3 turbo, calibra turbo pistons, standard rods, OFAB mangement, remap, decent intercooler

i cant see the above costing more than say Ł2k-Ł2.5k IMO

oh and if u go for one...let me know if u can find an oil pump for the thing LOL

bassboy

 

 

im going for a 1900cvh

 

Why go for 8 valves when you can have 16????

Depends how much of the work you are willing to do yourself?

If you are the DIY type you can build a great 250 bhp zetec turbo for about Ł600 including management and turbo!

With the money you have in your budget 400bhp should be easily achieved.

HOWEVER, if you have no mechanical knowledge and don't wish to attemp building an engine i would triple those money figures.

 

Thats because you are 8 valves short!

 

How so? How many Zetec 16v RST's have more breath at the top than my CVH 8v??

2? Both of those have considerably more horsepower than mine.......

 

If you can get a zetec head cheapo use that

 

Bollocks to zetec

Keep it a propper rs turbo with the 1.6cvh

 

Give me the valve sizes for cvh and a zetec and i will write you an essay.

 

i dont want a 2lt zetec really..... i wouldnt be able to build it myself
cvh is a good engine

 

Why not? Zetec is just as simple as a cvh. An early zetec with hydralic lifters really is about as easy to rebuild as engines get.

The CVH is not that good an engine! The valve train/rocker ratio is designed with high valve spring loads and to top it off, lubrication of the cam lobes is not great.

Don't belive me? Ask a cam company how many cam kits they sell for CVHs

I've seen ERSTs making sod all power because they are running 100k mile cams with sod all cam lobe left

 

theres the way it drives too i think we need to consider


dont think a low down power band is a good thing for a fwd car ( or its gearbox )


you need to test drive a few to decide imo as some people like ragging out side of schools/ burger king on a friday night and some people like motorway driving at high speeds and most the ersts ive tested seem to run out of puff at 120ish (they still accelerate but dont seem to keep going like my cossie does ) i guess its due to limited boost or fear of breaking rods


id would like to test drive a 25psi erst but then only one ive been in properly was oranocos,,,,,,,,, and thats just fucking mental at low speeds and dont get traction untill 3rd where it torque steers all over the place,,,,,,, its fun but i can only imagine what its like to change lanes when ragging it at high speed , but hes a nutter of a driver too which could also explain it

 

Garage19 - It doesn't matter what theory you apply. Surely you can't doubt that an engines ability to breath is important for top speed runs and Zetec's just don't seem to be able to do it without LOTS of development/horsepower.

I know it's not feasible, but I really do think that if you could get the same power out of a CVH as a high powered Zetec 16v the CVH would be faster. I know that some will hate that remark and there is no way of ever proving it, because a 600bhp CVH is about as likely as a very unlikely thing.

Remember, my statements relate to top speed (in the context of the conversation about an engines ability to breath), we all know the Zetec's have good low down torque.

 

they all have their benifits.....price is prob the main issue for most people!

 

a) So you are saying it is not feasable to get the same power out of a 1900 CVH as a zetec??? Why would that be then..... surely you have just backed up my point!

b) If they both had the same power....... why would one be faster than the other (subject to gearing)

Think about why it is so unlikely! Modern performance engines don't go to all the hassle of having 4 valve heads just for fun.

 

I'd go 1.6 CVH..........you could have the best of both worlds and track down some of those super rare 16v CVH heads that I've seen in Europe?

 

RB26 or SR20DET.....




Only way to get decent reliabliity

 

1.6 cvh

 

I'm not saying i know best, I'm just saying that I know on a typical car engine a 4 valve head will out perform a two valve head above say 4-4.5 k. I've seen the evidence and it is fairly common knowledge this is because of the greater total valve circumferences.

Am i a tuner/builder? Yes i build and tune my own engines!

 

if the budget allows an Audi TT engine would be a good choice! It has lots of valves!!!

 

My point is, put my 320bhp 1600CVH 8-Valve against a 320bhp 2100 Zetec 16-Valve and I would race it for log-books to the end of Bruntingthorpe main straight. Same weight/gearing etc too.

I am not over-confident in anything else, but for some reason I have faith in that. Why?

PMSL @ Martin. Now there's an idea.