What's new
By:
ClioSport.net

This is a sample guest message. 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.

Willy engine into a Valver

M

Matt16v

Car  300bhp MR2 Turbo


Is this a strait engine swap or would I need to swap the ecu, gearbox, manifold etc.

What kinda work is it and has any one had it done that can give me details of prices and work to do.

Is the 2.0ltr seriously better than the 1.8 - I know it revs less which is a shame.

Any help much appreciated
 


Yup, straight swap, all u need is the engine, ECU (or a chipped 16V one) and the willy exhaust manifold if your going to use it.

Its got alot more torque, some people like the engine, some people dont..........i dont.
 


Your proving to be a very helpful man Ben!

I havent even got money sorted yet, Im just planning my options while I try and sort out my finances.

Have the head work in mind or perhaps a Willy lump, I have a garage I could keep it in there, get it all mint then get some one to put it in for me.

Think those are the only two options within reasonable budget. Obviously Id like a turbo but cant afford the parts let alone the labour!!
 


yeah you just need the engine, a chipped ecu and a shoe horn to get the engine in. i wouldnt use the willliams manifold unless you want to buy a new down pipe and cat or decat. is the engine in your valver low mileage because if it is i would get the head work done on that , you will have the same power as a willy but you will have to drive abit harder. if it is high mileage then i would get a willy lump( if you can find one) and then start saving for head work on that.
 


103k miles at present, had it RRd @ 136.5 bhp so its running pretty well.

Thinking that head work will be time and labour consuming.

If a willy lump goes strait in I could prob do it with the help of a few of my mechanic mates!
 


Think the Williams route is starting to be more viable.

Being the head expert that you are ben - is it easy to change and then get the timing set back up again, as itll be out of the car it may be sensible to get it all done in one go.
 


Cheaper option that will save you forking out for the williams name;

Get a megane 2ltr bottom end and williams starter then bolt these to your 16v head using your own flywheel. Then get a 16-2ltr chip from hillpower and away you go! Same, if not more power/torque than a willy and a fair bit cheaper....
 


Will it still rev like a valver that way?

Be nice to have willy low down torque but valver high revs.
 


No as hillpower chip your ecu to the same rev limit etc as a 2ltr would need. Also its a 2ltr bottom end which aint designed to run as high revs so even if the chip could do it, your engine probably wouldnt last too long! You will actually have more torque if you keep the 16v manifold instead of getting a willy one during the conversion....

A few people on here have this....
 


Having gone from a 16V with a tuned F7P 1764cc to a totally standard Williams, Ive got a few thoughts about what theyre like in comparison.

The first thing was that my 16V was making over 150bhp (128 ATW) so if you take the basic pub-talk theory, my Williams shouldnt be any quicker. But it is. The first time I drove my Willy it felt only about the same as my old Valver in a straight line, although I put that down to the lack of noise (the Willy has no IK, s/s exhaust or de-cat) and the fact youre really changing about 1000rpm "early" compared to the 16V as standard.

In fact, the Willy is a lot quicker. Granted, if you floored it in say 3rd or 4th at motorway speeds, my 16V would have given my Willy a good chase (especially given that the Willy gearbox has a taller 5th gear). However, if you add some roundabouts, corners and T-junctions the Willy instantly makes a stronger case for itself - with about 85% torque at 2500rpm and 100% all the way from 4500rpm to the redline (dips at 5000rpm with the F7P 16V). It a very different car from A to B, with no major loss of progress if you drop off cam, unlike a 16V.

I can see why some would argue that the F7R 2.0 is a "tractor engine" or lacks a bit of character compared to the 16V, but Im not convinced that having had the use of both engines over a long period theyd still choose the Valver lump except for extensive tuning and racing. As a day to day B-road car, Im more than chuffed with the 2.0 and would recommend either a complete Williams car or the F7R bottom end to most moderately enthusiastic drivers.
 


my hill power chip has the rev limit set the same as a valver but thats because i have had cams fitted and it is a stage 2 chip. peak power is at 7151 rpm which worries me abit so iam going to get the car set up on the rolling road with a uni chip to try and bring the power abit lower down the rev range.
 


Your cams will be dictating where the power is made, and no amount of fiddling with ignition timing and injection will bring it down, itl peak at teh same place, but you might be able to pickup a few ft/lbs lower down.

The megane block conversion is what most people do simply because breakers ask silly amounts for a tractor engine. Sure it makes more torque, but thats because its processing more air per rpm.
 


The only way id move over to a 2ltr lump for this particular engine is if i had the use of a steel crank. THe williams crack costs less than the 1800 unit, i just dont like the oversquare nature of it.......ive always been and always will be a patron of the rpm camp.
 


Quote: Originally posted by Matt16v on 08 January 2004


Will it still rev like a valver that way?

Be nice to have willy low down torque but valver high revs.
Click to expand...
True, but the williams engine was never designed to take high revs!
 


not that it wasnt designed to, it cant.......its a part bin special.

THe crank aint the strongest, the piston speeds too high and it jsut cant rev. If Ren could of built it within cost then they would of, but such a short run number its not worth desining and building a batch of strong cranks. If it could rev, it would.

THe 172 doent have a problem
 


sorry if im a bit dumb. But i thought the megane 2.0 (phase 1) was the same engine as the williams. If so do people go the megane block route because these are easy to get hold off were if you wanted a williams you would have to go for the whole engine.
 


hmmmm, il stick my 2pence worth in here. ive gone from a modded 1.8 to a modded 2litre williams lump. id have the 2litre lump anyday of the week.

ive found the 2litre engine to be the best revver out of the two. sure it cnt rev to 8k, but it gets thru the rev range quicker than the 1.8 - gota the extra torque to spin it up quicker. and its got amazing grunt. 70mph in 5th gear, pulls like a train.

on the subject of weak cranks, i had the pleasure of chatting to nick hill and seeing one of his 172 cranks on his desk. i aksed him wat the differencen was between the f4r and f7r crank. according to him they are identical apart from the oil chain drive on the end. same bearing journal size, same material, same weight etc. im still not sure as to how a 172 with r sport ecu can handle 8k revs without exploding. or is the willy lump not as un-revvble as ppl make out?

jimbo
 


proberley down to marterials. the williams special crank was robbed out of another renault engine the rods are 16v items only pistons were one off.
 


Same material maybe but is it treated the same. It could be drop forged etc then cold worked. It may be annealed or loads of other methods to strenghten it.

It may also be better ballenced.

EDD
 


Its very likely that its been treated differently given there about 10years apart in production terms.

However if they are virtually idential couldnt we go looking at swapping a 172 crank into a williams and then rev its nuts off if needs be? Just a thought... :oops:
 


My 172 ran a peak rpm of 8 thou all day long, not neccesarily needed for power reasons but you can hold a gear long through a corner without swapping cogs.
 


Willy crank is out of a diesel Clio if memory serves me correctly??

Bit larger than the Valver item and therefore doesnt like higher revs?

I read this in a book - not making out like im a mechanic or anything!

One of my mates has an engine crane and volunteered to swap them over for me, now to sort out money and then find an engine!!
 


yeah, the williams crank is lifted straight out the f8q diesel engine. listed as a Kangoo diesel crank on the renault parts database. ive seen williams in europe whivh have been chipped run upto 8k revs without internal mods, and they seem to handle it fine.

as for the engine conversion, if using the megane bottom end route, ul need to chip ur current ecu in order for it to work as the megane cylinder head runs different ignition setup, ecu, manifolds etc. and ofcourse the williams engine is a straight swap into the car.

jimbo
 


I reckon for ease I will just get a willy lump, was looking at the prices of the whole cars - they seem to be going up again!!
 


I see what BenR means about revs being useful. Theres one particular set of corners on a screaming B-road near me that in my 16V you could exit in 2nd and change to 3rd at the red line once you were out of the corner - but in the Willy you have to change up just before the final corner, or youll hit the limiter or destabilise by changing a gear mid-corner.

However, the fact is that although my Willy revs less at this point, its actually going faster than the 16V used to at this point anyway. The other thing is that the Willy lump will happilly pull in 3rd during this final corner with as much grunt as the Valver did in 2nd - and once Im out of the corner, Im already in 3rd and come on cam quicker than the Valver could have. So all in all this is why for me the Willy is a quicker B-road car than my old Valver was.
 


we are doing this for smokey this week so will let you know... he has a standard one of each engine....



Andy

GDI
 


Id be very interested how this goes, especially after seeing your very brightly coloured engine pics the other day!
 


will have some pics of smokies job soon as well... its not as pretty (yet)--- he has plans for later in yr but it is neat and tidy....



Andy

GDI
 


An interesting discussion this. For me it simply comes down to price. I saw a Williams engine come up for sale recently with 100K on the clock and they wanted £1200 for it. Sorry, but no way. I would much rather tune the 1.8 head as far as possible then put a 2.0 Megane bottom end in. Then you are (almost) getting the best of both worlds. (Price vs. Performance)

One other thing I would like to know. Can somebody tell me why a complete Megane 2.0 engine can’t be fitted into a Clio? I was sure this had been done before. Also for these same reasons can it not be fitted to a 19 16v?

Cheers
 


£1,200 is a ridiculous price - Im sure I read a message from Nick Hill on here that he had one for £900 and would supply and fit it for £1,100.

Buy a private engine and it should be quite cheap, saw one on Ebay for about £600.
 


Quote: Originally posted by Matt16v on 13 January 2004


£1,200 is a ridiculous price - Im sure I read a message from Nick Hill on here that he had one for £900 and would supply and fit it for £1,100.

Buy a private engine and it should be quite cheap, saw one on Ebay for about £600.





He sure did - and guess who bought it and had it fiited? ;)
Click to expand...
 
 


On the diesel aspect. I heard very recently, elsewhere on tinterweb, that the whole Willy bottom end is actually from the 1.9 diesel. If this is the case, then surely these would be even cheaper again than a Meganes wouldnt they?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Struggler
Headwork
Replies
1
Views
832
Struggler
Struggler
P
Clio RS200 - Serious lack of power (VVT Wiring Fault)
Replies
8
Views
2K
Patrick200
P
T
vibrations and tremors at idle clio 182
Replies
17
Views
723
ex-Chinese Dave
ex-Chinese Dave
A
clio MK 2 d4f 728/ 784 frankenstein
Replies
1
Views
250
Martin_172
Martin_172
M
Clio II 1.2 D4F-722 (2005) - Engine noise - Mechanics given up.
Replies
2
Views
1K
mj019
M
Back
Top