engine transplant options

Road-race engines and ancillaries - general discussion
Post Reply
Farmer
Posts: 28
Joined: May 30th, 2010, 7:03 pm

engine transplant options

Post by Farmer »

Hello again

You may have read of my recent oil pressure woes . As yet I've not had a chance to investigate but I'm now thinking that bearing in mind my limited time and level of useful engine building knowledge ( I did Rebuild the engine but only to internally standard spec. ), plus the black art of setting up DCOE carbs in a digital age . It may be as well to consider an engine swap . I'd like to retain the Fiat 131 gearbox so my thoughts are with possibilities from either the Marea or Bravo or perhaps the Alfa 156 .

I understand the 5cyl unit from the Marea /Bravo / Coupe will bolt on but there are issues with the starter that need a bit of fettling. People tell me this is a heavy engine as it is based on the Diesel block is this just the extra length and piston etc or is it fundamentally a hefty lump? my car weighs around 650 kg and though the engine sits well back in the chassis it goes against the principals of this type of car (Lotus 7 style ) to use a boat anchor
The Tipo 2.0 16v would be good but rare and it would be a shame to spoil a potential classic by ripping it's heart out and the same goes for the Coupe .

The TS units from the Alfa 156 are plentiful and powerful but will they bolt up ?

I understand there are other issues like engine mounts and ecu's to consider so please feel free to point out any potential pitfalls . I don't mind a challenge but I don't want to re-invent the wheel.

Regards
Ian
Guy Croft
Site Admin
Posts: 5039
Joined: June 18th, 2006, 9:31 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: engine transplant options

Post by Guy Croft »

Before you get too 'set' on an engine 'swap' you might like to consider the harsh reality of buying engines that I always tell folk:

1.Never buy a built engine unless you can physically drive and inspect it running or it is fresh built with papers (ie: provenance)
2.If you cannot assure the engine by that means never buy unless it is fully stripped for inspection.

The world of 'good-used' - 'second-hand' engines is full of cheats who will happily take your cash and sell you worthless junk and walk off larfing at you.

GC
TomLouwrier
Posts: 333
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 3:09 pm
Location: Leiden, The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: engine transplant options

Post by TomLouwrier »

hi Ian

The 5-pot is not very heavy by design or because it is also used for the diesel version, it is just plain big. That is why I did not buy it in my Coupe, but went for the 1,8 16v instead. No need for an extra 100kg in the nose, especially this being a FWD car. And the length of it makes for a very cramped engine bay, so maintenance is troublesome (meaning most garages cut corners here) and expensive.

If you know for a fact that your 131 gearbox will mate up to the 5-cylinder block, then any engine from about '97 on will do, including the 1,8 Fiat and the 2.0 Alfa. These are all from the same modular 182/183 engine range.
Can't tell you anything useful about the engine mounts.

I'd think hard about rebuilding the unit you already have. You know it fits, you will know what's going on inside and most importantly: the fun and satisfaction of it.
Good luck either way.

regards
Tom
GC_29
Guy Croft
Site Admin
Posts: 5039
Joined: June 18th, 2006, 9:31 am
Location: Bedford, UK
Contact:

Re: engine transplant options

Post by Guy Croft »

OE parts (gaskets, seals, and many other vital things) for Coupe 16v and 20v almost unobtainable now...

20v crankcase massive & head too. Coupe & alia 16v blocks are a monster with unsuitable sump & oil pump for rwd.

Basic stuff - you did say 'swap'!

G
Farmer
Posts: 28
Joined: May 30th, 2010, 7:03 pm

Re: engine transplant options

Post by Farmer »

Thanks one and all for your comments ,

Can you expand on the Alfa TS sump situation ? I know cars extensively rather than intensively and the minutiae of oil pump pick ups are not in my field of knowledge

Ian
WhizzMan
Posts: 459
Joined: August 13th, 2010, 8:05 pm
Location: Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Re: engine transplant options

Post by WhizzMan »

To my knowledge:

Alfa V6, Coupe 20VT use a C503 and/or C530 gear box.
Alfa 16V TS, Uno Turbo, Barchetta 1.8 use a C510 gear box.

The 503 and 510 gear boxes are not easily interchangeable, so I'd look really carefully at which bell housing will fit, or you'll be faced with getting a custom bell housing made.

The 5 pot Fiat engine, to my knowledge, is based on the same design as the Alfa 16V TS and the Barchetta 1.8 engine internally. It will have another bell housing mount, because of the extra torque the 5 pot can deliver, especially when a turbo is belted to it.

The barchetta/Alfa engine isn't that heavy, if you avoid the 2.0. That has a lot more weight added due to the balance shafts and the much heavier crank. The total difference I believe is over 10 kg for the bare engine, a bit more if you add the extra weight in the bigger mounts for the intermediate drive shaft, generator and steering pump.

Mounting any transverse engine longitudinal will give you a lot of rerouting, fitting and fabrication to do. It's not just the sump that will need work, but coolant, inlet plenums, exhaust manifolds, mounts for a generator and all other things that usually go under the hood will need custom solutions. You will need to either adapt the injection/ignition system, or find a new solution for mounting carbs to the engine and still get some form of ignition without the factory ECU. It's a hornets nest. Once you start building, you can't run away from it anymore and you'll get stung over and over until you're done.

I'd get a "fresh" engine of the type you have now or just rebuild yours. Good second hand engines can be had, but it's a gamble with a big chance of disappointment, even when you're buying from a reputable seller.
Book #348
Farmer
Posts: 28
Joined: May 30th, 2010, 7:03 pm

Re: engine transplant options

Post by Farmer »

WhizzMan wrote:To my knowledge:

Alfa V6, Coupe 20VT use a C503 and/or C530 gear box.
Alfa 16V TS, Uno Turbo, Barchetta 1.8 use a C510 gear box.

The 503 and 510 gear boxes are not easily interchangeable, so I'd look really carefully at which bell housing will fit, or you'll be faced with getting a custom bell housing made.

The 5 pot Fiat engine, to my knowledge, is based on the same design as the Alfa 16V TS and the Barchetta 1.8 engine internally. It will have another bell housing mount, because of the extra torque the 5 pot can deliver, especially when a turbo is belted to it.

The barchetta/Alfa engine isn't that heavy, if you avoid the 2.0. That has a lot more weight added due to the balance shafts and the much heavier crank. The total difference I believe is over 10 kg for the bare engine, a bit more if you add the extra weight in the bigger mounts for the intermediate drive shaft, generator and steering pump.

Mounting any transverse engine longitudinal will give you a lot of rerouting, fitting and fabrication to do. It's not just the sump that will need work, but coolant, inlet plenums, exhaust manifolds, mounts for a generator and all other things that usually go under the hood will need custom solutions. You will need to either adapt the injection/ignition system, or find a new solution for mounting carbs to the engine and still get some form of ignition without the factory ECU. It's a hornets nest. Once you start building, you can't run away from it anymore and you'll get stung over and over until you're done.

I'd get a "fresh" engine of the type you have now or just rebuild yours. Good second hand engines can be had, but it's a gamble with a big chance of disappointment, even when you're buying from a reputable seller.
Thanks for a comprehensive reply . Firstly the Alfa 16vTS I'm thinking of is the 1.8 from the 156 is that the one you are referring to?
It was sugested to me as a fairly self contained unit with an "onboard" ecu that has good power output as standard, revs well etc etc . If I bought one it would be as a complete car so that I could scavenge everything needed and also make sure it was running correctly with good compression etc and if possible a good service history.

Fabrication and problem solving is not too daunting as that is part and parcel of my daily life as well as my experience fabricating the whole car in the first instance .

I've not given up on the original lump just yet as there is a lot of my soul in it , but I'm just looking at my options .

I would ask again what specific issues there are with a fwd sump and pump?

Thanks

Ian
WhizzMan
Posts: 459
Joined: August 13th, 2010, 8:05 pm
Location: Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Re: engine transplant options

Post by WhizzMan »

There are three (actually four) major revisions in the 16V Twin Spark engines.

The first revision used the M2.10.3 or M2.10.4 computer, had an aluminum top and an aluminum plenum. The M2.10.3 was only used briefly and the engine had EGR. This was only the 2.0 Engine, later first revisions used M2.10.4 and were available in 1.4,1.6,1.8 and 2.0 capacity. Though technically these were two revisions, it's generally related to as the "phase 1" engine. The Loom for the ECU is almost completely insulated from the rest of the car, only a tiny bit of loom containing the anti-theft system and one extra box for that, need to be transplanted from the donor. Only the 2.0 came with balance shafts and an extra belt.

The second revision used the M1.5.5 computer, located on top of the throttle valve, had a plastic top and apart from the 1.4 (and maybe the 1.6) had a plastic plenum. The 1.8 and 2.0 had a variable length runner intake system inside the plenum. The loom is similar to the phase 1, with just a bit of car loom and the code box required for a transplant. The plastic plenum with built in variable length system will make this revision less suitable for transplants in longitudinal configuration, unless you can accommodate the plenum under your hood. It can be programmed out of the ECU, but only few tuners can do that. The M1.5.5 is miniaturized to such a scale that only OBD programming is possible. There is simply no code in the ECU that will allow you to read out the current programming, so everything a tuner does to your ECU, will remain a secret to anyone but the tuner. Copying someone else is not an option. Be prepared to deal with the plenum, or pay a premium to a renown tuner to get it "removed". Most parts are interchangeable with the phase1, apart from injectors, some sensors, exhaust cam wheel (different slots for phase sensor) and the oil pump. There was one exemption from this, the 1st generation Selespeed 2.0 cars used a phase2 engine, but used a different ECU with electronically regulated throttle.

Phase 3 was only available in 1.6, 1.6-eco and 2.0 designations. Several computers were used, all with electronic throttle valves, no manual control anymore. The 1.6 eco had no inlet cam variator and more economically ground profiles on the cams. Dimensions and weight of the con rods, pistons, crank shaft and fly wheel changed, even though bore and stroke remained the same. A different head gasket and probably a few more mechanical changes were done. This engine is considered the hardest to transplant into other cars due to the anti-theft system (new system, key exchange with car body computer, CAN BUS system, hard to separate both) and the electronic throttle valve configuration. These also suffer from excessive oil consumption (the earlier phases are already infamous, but these are way worse) due to a change in piston ring configuration and piston design.

All 3 phases had different ignition coils. Phase1 and phase2 only differed in plug shape, phase3 used a different setup, not waste spark, and only sparked the cylinder that needed ignition. Therefor, phase3 coils can not be used on other phases. The other way around also applies.

If you were to choose this engine, my advice would be to put a phase 1 engine in, or convert a phase2 engine to phase 1 electronics and injectors. That way, you would be free in your design of inlet plenum and programming the ECU would be easier and/or cheaper. 140 BHP stock for the 1.8, several options for "fast road" cams and plenty of engines available for little money. When starting with a proper fresh engine, swapping cams, putting the right inlet and exhaust on and getting it mapped by a professional, 170 BHP is certainly within reach, without lifting the head. Not taking the engine apart and at least putting in new piston rings, giving the cylinder walls a flex-hone, putting in new bearings and seals, and checking/repairing the head is a risk you will have to decide on for yourself. Be aware that the factory recommendation for these is to put a new distribution on every 3 years or 40.000 miles. They don't do that for no reason, damage due to a broken belt is a well known problem for these engines. Oil consumption is something to either accept, or you'll have to redo the piston rings and hone to Guy's specifications.

This all being said, I still think you should get a TC in. There's not that much of a power difference and it will make life easier. Unless you want to get your joy out of making the new engine fit, I'd try to get your car running in spring, so you can enjoy driving it. Putting in a different type of engine will make it less likely you will be finished before the first nice spring day.
Book #348
TomLouwrier
Posts: 333
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 3:09 pm
Location: Leiden, The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: engine transplant options

Post by TomLouwrier »

Whatever engine you come up with, you will still have to fabricate a sumps that is suitable for RWD, as all of the potential donor cars were FWD. Do some internet searching on Fiat 124 sump and Alfa 156 sump and you'll see what I mean.
Maybe you could go dry sump and get away with that, but the expression 'engine swap' becomes very remote now.

Also, the later engines were all built for a completely different way of fitting them into the chassis, so be prepared to design and make your own engine mounts as well keeping in mind the centres of gravity of your old and new engine and the position in the chassis (which will be dictated by the existing gearbox anyway).

Rebuild your current block if you want to drive your car next spring...

regards
Tom
GC_29
Farmer
Posts: 28
Joined: May 30th, 2010, 7:03 pm

Re: engine transplant options

Post by Farmer »

WhizzMan wrote:There are three (actually four) major revisions in the 16V Twin Spark engines.

The first revision used the M2.10.3 or M2.10.4 computer, had an aluminum top and an aluminum plenum. The M2.10.3 was only used briefly and the engine had EGR. This was only the 2.0 Engine, later first revisions used M2.10.4 and were available in 1.4,1.6,1.8 and 2.0 capacity. Though technically these were two revisions, it's generally related to as the "phase 1" engine. The Loom for the ECU is almost completely insulated from the rest of the car, only a tiny bit of loom containing the anti-theft system and one extra box for that, need to be transplanted from the donor. Only the 2.0 came with balance shafts and an extra belt.

The second revision used the M1.5.5 computer, located on top of the throttle valve, had a plastic top and apart from the 1.4 (and maybe the 1.6) had a plastic plenum. The 1.8 and 2.0 had a variable length runner intake system inside the plenum. The loom is similar to the phase 1, with just a bit of car loom and the code box required for a transplant. The plastic plenum with built in variable length system will make this revision less suitable for transplants in longitudinal configuration, unless you can accommodate the plenum under your hood. It can be programmed out of the ECU, but only few tuners can do that. The M1.5.5 is miniaturized to such a scale that only OBD programming is possible. There is simply no code in the ECU that will allow you to read out the current programming, so everything a tuner does to your ECU, will remain a secret to anyone but the tuner. Copying someone else is not an option. Be prepared to deal with the plenum, or pay a premium to a renown tuner to get it "removed". Most parts are interchangeable with the phase1, apart from injectors, some sensors, exhaust cam wheel (different slots for phase sensor) and the oil pump. There was one exemption from this, the 1st generation Selespeed 2.0 cars used a phase2 engine, but used a different ECU with electronically regulated throttle.

Phase 3 was only available in 1.6, 1.6-eco and 2.0 designations. Several computers were used, all with electronic throttle valves, no manual control anymore. The 1.6 eco had no inlet cam variator and more economically ground profiles on the cams. Dimensions and weight of the con rods, pistons, crank shaft and fly wheel changed, even though bore and stroke remained the same. A different head gasket and probably a few more mechanical changes were done. This engine is considered the hardest to transplant into other cars due to the anti-theft system (new system, key exchange with car body computer, CAN BUS system, hard to separate both) and the electronic throttle valve configuration. These also suffer from excessive oil consumption (the earlier phases are already infamous, but these are way worse) due to a change in piston ring configuration and piston design.

All 3 phases had different ignition coils. Phase1 and phase2 only differed in plug shape, phase3 used a different setup, not waste spark, and only sparked the cylinder that needed ignition. Therefor, phase3 coils can not be used on other phases. The other way around also applies.

If you were to choose this engine, my advice would be to put a phase 1 engine in, or convert a phase2 engine to phase 1 electronics and injectors. That way, you would be free in your design of inlet plenum and programming the ECU would be easier and/or cheaper. 140 BHP stock for the 1.8, several options for "fast road" cams and plenty of engines available for little money. When starting with a proper fresh engine, swapping cams, putting the right inlet and exhaust on and getting it mapped by a professional, 170 BHP is certainly within reach, without lifting the head. Not taking the engine apart and at least putting in new piston rings, giving the cylinder walls a flex-hone, putting in new bearings and seals, and checking/repairing the head is a risk you will have to decide on for yourself. Be aware that the factory recommendation for these is to put a new distribution on every 3 years or 40.000 miles. They don't do that for no reason, damage due to a broken belt is a well known problem for these engines. Oil consumption is something to either accept, or you'll have to redo the piston rings and hone to Guy's specifications.

This all being said, I still think you should get a TC in. There's not that much of a power difference and it will make life easier. Unless you want to get your joy out of making the new engine fit, I'd try to get your car running in spring, so you can enjoy driving it. Putting in a different type of engine will make it less likely you will be finished before the first nice spring day.
It never ceases to amaze me the depth of knowledge that people accumulate , or their commitment to imparting wisdom on others . Thank you very much for your time.

Following a good "gander" over my engine yesterday I've come to the same conclusion that it's better the devil you know and that a rebuild using the experience gleaned since the original build some 15 years ago (though it was only struck up just over 3 years ago) will be the best option : again looking over the engine I realised how many elegant solutions I found to literally build the car around the engine and then fit ancillaries and attendant secondary items around it . Though I say so myself the installation is a work of art despite limited funds thrown at the project or previous experience , and the moment that engine struck up for the first time was one of the best of my life . I may decide to massage the specification a bit with certainly a few baffles in the sump and perhaps some slightly meatier cams to make better use of the Webbers . But on the whole stick to the principal of a budget engine of real class.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests