16v Tubo - Really gonna work

[nickg123]

Been thinking about this...........the 16v engine isnt the best in the world, and they pop the head with standard power, simply bolting a turbo on isnt going to work is it?? Lets not kid ourselves, 200bhp out of that engine just isnt going to be safe IMO!

Prima did the Turbo conversion YEARS ago and how many do you see around? There must be a reason for this - it doesnt work!

Fair enough throw upwards of £4k and get the compression changed etc, but to be honest do you not think it would be cheaper and easier to but a 5 GTT lump in?? If you fully rebuild one from scratch, it would be far more reliable, and parts are easy to get for it etc, and theres loads of things around - people know this engine so well compared to the 16v.

Anyway, i dont want to cause a riot but im just trying to get my head around this 16v Turbo thing - because i personally dont think its a good idea!

 

[Tom]

of course it works

bb tunings one looked good and problem free running 315bhp

 

[nickg123]

Yeah but how much do you think it would cost you or me to get this sort of power???? I still think wed all be better off ditching the 16v lump and getting GTT lumps rebuilt and bolted in, theyre easier to work on too remember!

 

[ChavyBoy]

If you just a bolt on turbo for a normal aspirated car you are p155ing your money away and will eventually blow it up. A Turbo car has a lower compression engine and you may also need to upgrade the crank due to extra power going through, remap the fuel system etc etc the list goes on.

Saying that I wonder what a low pressure turbo would do to your family car.

If you are going to paint a wooden door you dont just Gloss straight on the wood, you have to take time to prepare the wood, rub it down and undercoat it. Its all in the preparation as to is a turbo. You cut corners and it inevitable what is going to happen.

As to the 1.8 lump or 1.4 its got to be the bigger. After all theres no subsitute for Cubic Capacity is there ! The bigger the end the more pull low down it would have thus getting over the turbo lag.

 

[geoff_clio182]

For BB Tunings I think you will be looking at around £5k upwards, so it aint cheap but there again your going to get reliability and power.

 

[philglover]

accept my f**king reply page!!!!

 

[philglover]

page wont accept my lanswer that i tried to post goddammit

 

[philglover]

Yeah it works, but seriously - whats the point?
its never gonna handle under that amount of power, the cars not designed to cope with it. The turbo conversion costs about as much as it does to buy a decent example of the 16v - and it wont hold its value so youll lose everything you throw at it. Fine if youre gonna keep it forever - but whos likely to do that?

 

[philglover]

Granted - its very impressive and theyve made quite a good job of it - i spent quite a while talking to the guy from BB and I get the impression that they know what theyre doing, but a rolling road graph is worth f**k all in the real world.

 

[philglover]

Youll be spinning up in 1st, 2nd and probably 3rd (which some people show off about but aint that impressive) Why do you think that manufacturers rarely make FWD cars with more than 200bhp as standard?
Wow, you can drive really fast in a straight line - woohoo, but youll never be able to corner on the edge as you can with a normal performance motor.

 

[philglover]

It was pointed out that the BB clio had more BHP than the V6, was faster etc etc. But you can take a V6 to a ton, jump on the anchors and itll stop in a straight line, id like to see the turbod 16v do that!!
Ive been thinking alot about mods and their pros and cons, but this is all my personal opinion and im sure that people will feel very strongly about it... so lets wait for the fireworks...

 

[philglover]

Thats better - sorry about that. The page doesnt seem to like answers that are too long - so i had to break them down - apologies!

 

[aaronc]

This is the turbo 16v from BB tuning:

http://members.lycos.co.uk/aaronchap/18.jpg

 

[nickg123]

Yeah valid points from everyone, but thats what im saying - if you want a Turbo Clio 16v, why not make it a Clio GTT as in my opinion this engine would suit it better as lets face it - at least it was designed to have a turbo, and theres at least enough room in the engine bay for it and a massive great intercooler!!

I suppose what im saying is unless you want to waste money big time, theres no real point in converting the 16v engine into a turbo - best off just take it out throw it away and stick a GTT lump in.

 

[Tom]

the clio/5turbo engine is cheaper to do but its just as unreliable with 200bhp++

its worth spending the money

 

[nickg123]

200bhp out of the GTT lump is cheaper, and more reliable mate i promise!! Its all about the fuelling, and making sure this is all set up properly, 200bhp would be easily maintained for every day driving if you had a nice GTT lump, you just have to get it setup - thats all.

 

[ChavyBoy]

But Nick you will get bags more torque with the 1.8 !

I can see where your coming from however but I would have something that was a bit different from the crowd if I wanted to turbo my 16v if I had one.

 

[nickg123]

I would too if i could justify the waste of money, i personally would just go for a 1.4 turbo - believe me, at 20 psi the torque is really not an issue, the car would just pull like crazy no matter what - and you arent really restricted on boost due to the compression being low - where as the 16v is such high compression youd need to run 10psi max which is rather dull.......

 

[Tom]

what about fitting a 172 engine?

 

[nickg123]

172 engine would be quite good but expensive, and not really any point for the gain youd get - main reason for changing would simply be for having a Turbo - well, thats why id change s/charger and throttle bodies are too expensive........ ahh but the noise with throttle bodies..............raaaa

 

[Glennclio16v]

If i had 7.5k to blow on my car theres only one thing id be spending it on!! BBPT low compression turbo conversion all the way!

Seeing the price list of components you can fully understand why the kit is soo expensive - because it all adds up! The labour charges are a very small amount of the overall cost!

And the performance stats speak for themselves!

 

[rockport]

interesting feedback peeps, agreed i feel this project is more suited towards toys for the rich kids.. £5000 has been confirmed for the low boost version, and £7500 for the high boost.... unless you plan on marrying your valver.. i feel thats better money invested into a integra r type or something....



only my view of course...

 

[nickg123]

Ive just been speaking to GDI who is a contact i had through the Turbo owners club, if i source a turbo and oil cooler, and charge cooler - i think i could get the 16v turbo charged for under £2000.......... i know im contradicting myself but if i could do it for around £1500 i might just think about it, could be quite cool - i just really miss my dump valves and turbo - thats all the car is missing!

 

[Tom]

you could do it for £5 just record the sound of a turbo+dump valve on cd

bingo

people would never know

(joke)

 

[TB1]

The GTT lump is VERY unreliable, even in standard form they were in and out of the garages more often than any other renault of its time (and thats saying something!).

The Ultra reliable ones with serious bhp (are not actually that reliable) have had 10s of thousands thrown at them to get them there, but you still cannot beat ccs...



Tony

 

[nickg123]

Well ive had a 200bhp 5, thats what i swapped this Dimma Clio with, i did have some problems - but that was due to the way that GT Tuning had set the carb up, it was running too lean and detonating, it eventually melted a piston - but with a full bottom end rebuild - which could be done at home, some proper head work, then a properly set up carb etc, theres nothing unreliable about it - trust me, ive learnt so much in the last year having owned my 5 etc, stripping the engine out - theyre not as bad as everyone says, the most common problem is people get a standard engine, turn it up to 15-20 psi then when it blows up they moan and tell everyone how unreliable they are etc...........

 

[Nick Read]

LOL thats all I can say.

Phil - I for one do not intend to ever sell my 16v. What would be the point? It already stands me in for far more money and time than Id ever get back for it. Some people are quite happy to buy one car after another in a futile quest for more power, more toys, more boot space, more style, more airbags, more fuel economy, more of whatever. Others stick to what theyve got and try to improve upon it.

And I dont quite see whats your point with the woohoo thing...are you saying that a normal 16v will somehow corner faster than a turbo 16v, as some kind of weird compensation for the fact that a 16v turbo will cane most things on the road in a straight line? You seem to forget that however a Clio is powered, it will always be a car that handles well. Admittedly when you get to cars with big bhp from the factory they tend to be rwd or 4wd. So what? If R5s can do it through FWD then how come theres some law against doing it to a Clio?

And whats the V6 braking thing about? How is a 16v that only weighs two thirds what a V6 does, going to find it difficult to brake in a straight line? I dont see how that has anything to do with the way the car is powered? Obviously it would be stupid to do a turbo job and then not go for big brakes. So you just put big brakes and/or multi-pot calipers on, I cant see what the big deal is...

Nick - Of course you can turbo a Clio for under £2000. But if youre spending £2000 on parts and doing all the labour yourself, what exactly is on your shopping list? Turbo, chargecooler and oil cooler? So how are you going to do the plumbing? Custom silicone hose lengths arent cheap by any stretch of the imagation. How are you going to fit the plumbing to the throttle body? Are you thinking of bodging it by fitting another injector and a pressure switch or of doing the job properly and running bigger injectors and proper boost sensing and spot on fuelling? Wheres about the turbo oil plumbing? Where are you putting the chargecooler and rad? What sort of engine management are you going to programme for yourself? Will it take care of ignition timing properly as well as fuelling? And many, many more...

Sorry if that sounds like Im getting at either of you, it just seems to be a backward step to have anything to do with a 1.4 pushrod engine in a Clio 16v when youve already got a decent well-designed lump in there whose one failing is a weak induction side. And it seems ridiculous to rule out something saying it cant be done, when it *has* been done and its working. Yes Prima turbos had a bad rep. But then again theres not a lot of work that comes out of Prima that has a good rep! Ask any serious Renault tuner and theyll tell you about the amount of Prima jobs they have to fix.

Theres no subustitute for CCs, if its a choice between a 1400 or 1800 turbo I know which one Id go for. Its not exactly rocket science turbocharging the F7P, low pressure turbo running on a standard engine or high pressure turbo running on a low compression engine. I dont see what the big fuss is about. Either will be reliable AFAIK, as long as the fuel is there in the right proportion and the drivetrain can take it.

 

[wongy008]

yeah interesting

but i gotta add my bit to balanced it out. lots to answer though

nickg

i know you had a 16v before and compared to your mental powered gtt yeah it felt flat unwilling and rather slow. i bet even yuor camd one dont feel up to much either. although much fast then a std 16v and prob keep up with a willy its still not blidingly quick. yeah you could do what you said, and there no denying the fact that a 1.4 gtt engine is very tuneable easy to work on but end of the day its very old technology. although fast, driving a gt leaves the driver a bit left it. it much more constant gear changes to use the torque and pull then reving the nuts of the engine. depends what you like.ive seen the 16v turbo in action as has nick r and to be frank with you lot you have to see it to beleive it, it pulls from low down all the way to the limiter and makes no fuss about it. i can probably honestly say that ive never seen a little car so damn quick. if i were to drive one it would feel special and rolling out of bb tunning you know you would be getting reliability and good power. for me the 16v turbo is a good thing, its more of improving what is already a good engine. yeah the 1764 lacks low down torque but hey the turbo rectifies this. plus ok its 5k + but look at what your getting. a car that will prob quarter in the 13s and do it all day long no probs,

also 5k does not seem that much for the work your getting done. how much was spent on your r5 engine by previous owner to get it to that spec a lot of dollar i bet

philglover

i see no probs with the clio handling the turbo at all. were no using no base model here. it is a 16v.when they were built they were very good handling car anyway and the package is very good. dont think anyone will be stupid enough to bolt on a turbo and leave the rest of the components anyway. anyone with any sense will improve damping and breaking accordingly

primma did not do many cos they charged abour 8k for a badge job. iff bb is anything like there demo car i see no probs with reliability



if i were keeping my clio i would def consider a turbo conversion, anything else is a waste of money.

wongy

 

[nickg123]

Well we shall see what theyre like, but i just wonder why people are only just getting excited about it when Prima did it over 5 years ago - why now do people suddenly think they need to stick a Turbo on what is already a relatively weak engine?

 

[Ben H]

No weaker than any other high rev, high power twin-cam 16v I know - I mean just look at the K-series!

 

[wongy008]

weak engine

why do you think that nick?????

i myself think its a relatively strong and reliable engine if looked after well. reno went to great lengths to design this engine and it made very very good race engine used in touring and rally cars. if you mean extraction of extra power cheaply then your prob right, but weak it aint

nick the reason people are getting excited anout it is its the first proper turbo conversion. prima are not the best of people to do thins and i would not even trust them to change my wheel let alone bolt on a turbo for 8k. bb tunning have been tunning 5s for about 20 years and built up a good reputation and name for them selves, there not gonna ruin that by doing a bodge job 16v turbo conversion

wongy

 

[helfire]

Well i think the 16v will most likly make a beter engine, its a newer more modern design, and if you put in the right components drop the compresion and fit a turbo it will most likly beat the old gtt lump, as said above its got the more cc. And for the price your paying it may be an all steel bottom end with forged pistons, and most likly capble or reliably handling the power output. The only week link may be the box.

Just my thoughts.

 

[rockport]

as a bit of an "off topic" i just found this on http://www.loot.comwww.loot.com

1993, full engine rebuild and supercharger conversion, 210 bhp, 17 inch Tooras, full s/s exhaust, flushed tailgate, debadged, de locked, full respray in Williams blue.

£5,000 ONO



prima springs to mind....

 

[philglover]

Sorry, maybe I didnt word it correctly - what i meant with the reference to the v6 was that it is built to handle that kind of power.
Every component is used to make the car as safe and reliable as possible when pushing over 200bhp, the 16v wasnt designed with those kind of power figures in mind -yknow?.

 

[philglover]

Im not saying that those things wouldnt be taken into account by the builder of the car though.
When cornering hard in a 16v, the suspension is set up to deal with the forces generated by the car, the weight, the speed etc. - seeing as renault never made a 16v Turbo, there arent components built to deal with that kind of power/forces that are generated. Its kind of a guessing game - Honestly, Im not knocking it or trying to pick holes in it, just my opinion thats all. If someones gonna do it then game on to em, hope it works and you can prove me wrong with a well balanced, reliable and safe car over a long period of time.
Nick - I dont plan on selling my 16v for a good while yet either! Its gonna be a classic soon, what with them getting written off and badly modified all the time! []

 

[Fred@BTM]

I was also chatting to the bloke from BB, and he told me theyre planning on either supercharging the V6 or dumping that engine and wacking in a williams turbo engine with 400bhp!!!

 

[philglover]

!!!

 

[Nick Read]

Well I think thats all settled then lads?Phil I understand what youre saying now and its fair comment..a V6 is built to drive with that sort of power, a 16v needs mods to be a safe car with that kind of oomph.. Good. Glad these things dont drag on forever like they used to in the last couple of months!

I think its like everything, we can speculate all we want but until theres one doing the rounds on the Queens highway, its all just talk. Personally I am certain that BB will not let a car leave the workshop that is not 100% reliable.

Rockport, youre spot on I reckon, sounds like a Prima job. Ive always said it seemed odd that all these mental Prima cars never seemed to be out on the streets and whoever the cars owners were, they always kept a low profile, not club members, 1/4 milers etc. If I had a proper reliable turbo I would be out caning it everywhere and racking up the 13 second timing slips. OK I know not everyone wants to do that sort of thing, but come on, you dont do a turbo conversion on a 16v and then garage it do you? Thats a big step to turbo your existing car rather than just sell it and buy a faster one.