ClioSport.net

Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.

my mini b16 now running a dc2 type r lump



  e91 330d/type r mini
well after i built my b16 mini which turned out to be the fastest na b16 mini in the uk at 13.3@104mph i craved that bit more so i bought a integra dc2 type r engine which i have fitted high compression pistons to along with polish and ported head and a nice 4-1 manifold.
then to finish it off i aquired a nice set of 48mm jenvey throttle bodies.
today i managed to get it running so over the next week or so i want to run it in then down to rs tuning for mapping which id like to hope will make 200+ bhp :)
heres how it sat at the end of play today :)
4088deac.jpg

985248b2.jpg

52bdb31c.jpg

bcfd2696.jpg

now lets see if i can break into the 12s :)
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
Very cool car :)

I reckon with a radiator on just the drivers side you could fairly easily fit the same turbo manifold I have for my mk1 clio with one of these engines:

425f9d3f.jpg


That said though, in something that light, you probably dont need anymore power realistically anyway!
 
  53 Clio's & counting
Fantastic as always mateyi bet that flys, think you will break into the 12's? whats the rev limit? ! seriously need to pop up and have another one of your cuppa's lol
 
  FN2 Type R +MK6 Golf
I agree but i would turbo it.TDI north do a kit for it that you could probably fit yourself.

From what i can read they make sure it can take 500bhp then de-tune it to around 400bhp.Now that would be nippy.
 

_Tom

ClioSport Club Member
Turbo would be silly imo and not good silly. It's make it no fun to drive imo.

You've done it right. Hats off sir. Surely it'd break the 200bhp barrier with ease though?
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
I agree but i would turbo it.TDI north do a kit for it that you could probably fit yourself.

From what i can read they make sure it can take 500bhp then de-tune it to around 400bhp.Now that would be nippy.

Why on earth if you wanted 400bhp, would you fit a big enough turbo for 500bhp, test it at 500bhp, then turn it back down to 400bhp and still have all that extra lag for no reason?

I would say either they have no clue what they are doing, or you have misheard something TBH
 
  A3 2.0TFSI QUATTRO
Wow wish i had the skill and patience to build something like this .. hats off to you

It should easily see 200bhp but more pics needed please
 
  e91 330d/type r mini
cheers for the kind words,for the people who mentioned turbo's i did go out in a 400bhp b18 turbo and if im honest my previous itb'd b16 felt quicker as it actually gripped and went somewhere unlike the turbo'd one which when came on boost just broke traction then torque steered all over the place but in the turbo's defence it was a little damp when he took me out.

if i was to boost i would supercharge it as i think it would be a better application for what i want to use it for (trackdays) because of the more linea power delivery.

as requested a couple of pics of the rest of the car
_NOV8831.jpg

_NOV8830.jpg

b234f729.jpg

f462d44e.jpg

80fd1cac.jpg
 
  FN2 Type R +MK6 Golf
Why on earth if you wanted 400bhp, would you fit a big enough turbo for 500bhp, test it at 500bhp, then turn it back down to 400bhp and still have all that extra lag for no reason?

I would say either they have no clue what they are doing, or you have misheard something TBH

lol
 
  FN2 Type R +MK6 Golf
From what i can read the standard motor does 350-370bhp on the standard motor.Then forged internals are added and it gives just under 500.Thats pretty good for a 2.0 civic.Its also charge cooled which they say is better.
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
From what i can read the standard motor does 350-370bhp on the standard motor.Then forged internals are added and it gives just under 500.Thats pretty good for a 2.0 civic.Its also charge cooled which they say is better.

Charge coolers seem to be a trendy thing at the moment, I was talking to Mark Shead from MA Developments about them over a pint only monday funnily enough, they just never perform in the real world the way people think they will.

Ive got one on my nova at 500bhp or so, but its MASSIVE compared to all these trendy little PWR ones and any car I have mapped on them has suffered charge temp probs and sheady was saying the same thing.

Ive no idea why people think they are a good idea for a car with a front mounted engine, they just arent.
 
  FN2 Type R +MK6 Golf
Charge coolers seem to be a trendy thing at the moment, I was talking to Mark Shead from MA Developments about them over a pint only monday funnily enough, they just never perform in the real world the way people think they will.

Ive got one on my nova at 500bhp or so, but its MASSIVE compared to all these trendy little PWR ones and any car I have mapped on them has suffered charge temp probs and sheady was saying the same thing.

Ive no idea why people think they are a good idea for a car with a front mounted engine, they just arent.

I copied and pasted this from civinfo from tdi himself,just to add his take on it.

""We have made a radiator that fits under the crash bar with the pump under the battery.

Charge coolers are generally a lot more efficient than intercoolers plus you don't have all the boost pipes to fill which can give a "laggy" feel.
It really is straight out the turbo, one connector hose into the charge cooler than straight into the intake pipe which has the dump valve and intake sensor on it.

The charge cooler core, pump and radiator core are all supplied by Pace then we manufacture the end tanks to suit our needs.
It's a very similar setup as on the Focus RS.

The charge cooler core is also twice as thick as the one used in the JRSC setups to great effect and if you think a turbo is never going to reach the sort of intake temps you see with a supercharger this is going to be pretty efficient.
icon_smile.gif
""
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
The Focus RS setup he is comparing it too, when they go for big power they all bin it and use an intercooler instead, lol

Sums it up really.

A decent intercooler is far better, and thats coming from someone with the biggest charge cooler you are ever likely to meet, mine holds 19 litres of water in fact, lol
 

Cookson

ClioSport Club Member
  Mk1 Audi TT 3.2 V6
TYhey are more efficient at mooching about town, as they offer better cooling properties for short bursts with low air to surface movements. But once you get up into "BIG DAWG" power, and on long runs/high speed blasts, a decent FMIC is much more efficient.

Just a shame they look ugly as f**k, so I can see why some folk would prefer a chargecooler for aesthetics
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
TYhey are more efficient at mooching about town, as they offer better cooling properties for short bursts with low air to surface movements. But once you get up into "BIG DAWG" power, and on long runs/high speed blasts, a decent FMIC is much more efficient.

Just a shame they look ugly as f**k, so I can see why some folk would prefer a chargecooler for aesthetics

Agreed, the problem with them is that the radiators are never big enough to actually lose the amount of heat you need to in order to keep the water cooler, so they are great for a couple of pulls on the dyno but not great for a 15 mins track session.

Mine is a bit of an exception to that as unlike most people I have attempted to address it so these are the radiators for it shown when I was initially testing for space:
bike-radiators.jpg


and this is the charge cooler itself:
DSC_1826.jpg



But even still I would prefer to just have a decent sized intercooler instead!
 


Top