TeamSwift

Home of the Suzuki mini-compacts ! Your Home for all things Suzuki Swift, Geo Metro, Holden Barina, Chevy Sprint, Pontiac Firefly, and Suzuki Cultus. TeamSwift is a technical performance oriented community!
It is currently Mon Oct 23, 2017 2:44 pm

Underbody braces, turbos and more!

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 95 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2004 8:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 10:10 pm
Posts: 416
Location: Spruce Grove Alberta
Interesting discussion, its been awhile for me here, but I tried and have been running some 16 valve 1.3 SOHC pistons to lower compression. newer swift part#

I have not raised the boost to much yet since my other events with the engine. But is has run very well so far. I will be tuning this spring and coming by whattheeee shop. Plan to bring it up as much as the T25 can handle.

This is #
12100-63880-0B0

rings etc.

I measured an extra 9 cc volume to lower compression

I am hoping this will help, you.

This shows GT standard unit comparison


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2004 2:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:40 am
Posts: 38
Location: Brabant
VERY interesting!

Those are from the 1.3 16V with engine code G13BB, the latest engine in the Swift/Baleno?

Do you have an indication 'bout the price of those parts? (The local dealer doesn't like it when you call all the time and order nothing...) Rings for the GTi are 32 euro ex VAT here in the NL. Pistons 42 ex VAT, G16B pistons 50 ex VAT and rings 42 ex :shock: Then bore your block (175 euro) and it all starts getting expensive :cry:

Perhaps these pistons are great! Thanx


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2004 3:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:39 am
Posts: 114
Location: The Netherlands
Wow! That should be great :D! Is it the exact diameter as the standard GTi piston (74mm)? Is it possible to use the standard rings on my piston (change them from mine to the new piston)? Or is it better to use new one (but new one are expensive!)? Can we order the standard rings (part# the same) with this piston?

Btw: Does the 'new' piston fit directly on the connecting rod? And what kind of compression do we get with this 'new' piston do you think? 8.9:1?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Low compression pistons
PostPosted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 12:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 10:10 pm
Posts: 416
Location: Spruce Grove Alberta
These pistons are from a 1.3 SOHC 16 valve engine. same bore pin etc. concave piston head with indentation for 4 valves partly shown.

Part# 12100-63880-0A0 st 1 or standard size there are .025" and .050" also

12100-63880-0B0 st 2

ring set are #12140-63E50

You must use them as they are not the same, will not fit . I tried them

this is from 98-01 engines in standard swifts

Price here is about $75.00 can. each for pistons/come with wrist pins
rings are about $60.00 can. each

I did not weigh them before for comparison? But I don't plan on running to 8000 RPM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Another piston question
PostPosted: Wed Feb 11, 2004 12:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2003 11:31 pm
Posts: 2457
Location: New York State
Can the older (MK1) turbo 3 pistons be used in a 1992 SOHC 1.3 without any piston or engine mods? The valvetrain looks very similar, making me think the valve reliefs would be the same.

_________________
1994 Metro - MPH project (getting a DOHC G13B)
1994 Metro - MPG project (getting an XFi G10)
1992 Swift - Parts car (gone)
1991 Swift - Parts car (gone)
1990 Swift - Parts car
1997 Metro - Parts car (gone)
1993 Metro - Parts car
1989 Swift GTi - Parts car
1998 Metro - Parts car


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 4:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:39 am
Posts: 114
Location: The Netherlands
wgotzman wrote:
These pistons are from a 1.3 SOHC 16 valve engine. same bore pin etc. concave piston head with indentation for 4 valves partly shown.

Part# 12100-63880-0A0 st 1 or standard size there are .025" and .050" also

12100-63880-0B0 st 2

ring set are #12140-63E50

You must use them as they are not the same, will not fit . I tried them

this is from 98-01 engines in standard swifts

Price here is about $75.00 can. each for pistons/come with wrist pins
rings are about $60.00 can. each

I did not weigh them before for comparison? But I don't plan on running to 8000 RPM


Thank you.. But still a few questions:
- Could you weight them? I'm currious if they are lighter of heavier;
- Would would be the compression do you think? 8.8:1 or more like 9.5:1? Maybe someone else who knows that (9cc more volume)?

Because we are a bit 'scared' to blow the engine with standard compression and 8.5psi, we maybe want to lower the compression. With these pistons, it would be a lot cheaper then use 1.6 pistons and bore out the block.

Does someone know the part# for the turbo3 pistons and rings? Thanks!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: 1.3 SOHC piston
PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 11:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 10:10 pm
Posts: 416
Location: Spruce Grove Alberta
As far as these piston are concerns I wish I had weighed them, but I did not. They are installed now. I have been running them all winter and car is running fine. They are likely to be lighter as the casting is almost identical to the stock GTI pistons. My compression was 150 PSI with them, but they had not been run in yet.

I can not tell any difference. while running. 5-6 PSI smooth up to 6500 RPM.

I did run my engine completely stock for the first summer. Added fuel and played around with the timing. I did run up to 12 PSI a few times with octan booster and it ran very strong and OK.

I got alittle agreesive with timing amoung other things and well replaced a couple of piston two times (2) each time. That was it for me, this was what I have tried.

Tuning is the key, if I had taken the time it would have been OK I believe, Like whathee's car, it has to be tuned right and if you don't take the time or money to do this, you learn in other ways.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 23, 2004 5:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:40 am
Posts: 38
Location: Brabant
As shown in one of my posts, the third cylinder is damaged. Still have to find out what exactly happend.
We've found 2 hard little steel parts on (more IN) the piston. Looks like a pistonring, but we could not say for sure now. Through the hole in the piston we don't see a damaged ring.

BUT: in my engine there are pistons in it with the 'code' B1 on it (1st, 2nd and 4th) en the third wrecked one has B2 on the top. Does anyone know differences between these two pistons, in quality, productionyear or something?! Why would there be 2 different coded pistons in the block??? And is it possible that it has something to do with the similarity on the damaged cylinder?

Strange, coincidence or explicable?

btw, is perhaps the design of the header part of the damage? We've built a logstyle manifold, but the turbo is connected exactly in front of the third cylinder. This is done because this is the perfect place for our setup, still possible to change the oilfilter even when it's on a oilcooler adapter mounted.
But the third one can spool without any restriction into the turbo, the others have more resistance. Our thought is that there is so much backpressure that it makes a slight difference, not any danger.

Perhaps we should change the outlet to the turbo more to the centre.
But if you look at for example the Vauxhall Calibra turbomanifold, there is also the outlet to turbo in front of the 3th cylinder. And these cars are doing 200 BHP in a 2.000 cc engine.

Image
Image
Image

Our manifold:

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 24, 2004 10:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 4:14 pm
Posts: 796
Location: Reykjavik
OMG, are the turbo housing and the exhaust manifold the one and the same thing? Weird.
I've seen weird exhaust housings before but nothing close to being this weird.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 24, 2004 10:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 9:50 am
Posts: 545
Location: Cracow, Poland
baldurg wrote:
OMG, are the turbo housing and the exhaust manifold the one and the same thing? Weird.
I've seen weird exhaust housings before but nothing close to being this weird.


Yup:) Lots of tdi engines has similar turbo setup.
That one from calibra is known as one of the best stock designed and made exhaust manifolds!

_________________
Mk3 GTi Saudi Arabia edition.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 24, 2004 11:06 am 
the manifold makes my eyes bleed... :shock:

i am sure you tired your best but i can see why you've blown many gaskets. i don't want to make that sound too harsh. i know for a fact i personally couldn't make a better one.

eventually trial and error will come up with a design that works.

gypsy


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 25, 2004 2:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:40 am
Posts: 38
Location: Brabant
Please, only argumentations. I've did not blow many headgaskets. Only my car is broken (heavaly damaged, still don't know exactly what), my friends with same setup is still ok (but he is doing a little more easy know untill we have tuned the car on the dyno).

Then there is still the question, is this manifold completly wron? And why if so? As I mentioned, there is a lot of back-pressure in the whole manifold, but perpahps we are wrong.

The only differance with this one is the outlet, it's centred and not just right in front of the 3th cylinder:
Image
Image
Perhaps I should start a new topic.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 25, 2004 1:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:40 am
Posts: 38
Location: Brabant
Found another crappy-to-see drawing of a turbo-manifold:

Image

If this is even OEM why would our manifold be bad? You should expect that the first cylinder has also more flow (and would run more lean than the others if you inject the same amount of fuel, wich is very regular, called batch mode like in our Swifts).

Please, some expertise wanted :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 25, 2004 1:53 pm 
Offline
Senior Swift Guru

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2001 11:55 am
Posts: 2595
Location: Calgary, Alberta
The pistons are marked 1 and 2 because they are slightly different diameters like .002" difference or something to that effect. Your block should have "1222", or "2122", or "2111" or whatever stamped on it from the factory corresponding with those piston numbers. It's normal, suzuki did it, and will not have caused your problem.

Your exhuast manifold will at work create extra heat, and increase reversion into the cylinder. Exhaust valve life will not be as good with this higher back-pressure. However, your manifold is just fine, it did not cause your problems. The 3 cylinder turbo sprint manifold looks 5 times worse than yours, and various factory turbo cars have succesfully managed long life engines with a crappy 'log-style' manifold. I ran one on my car at one point, Kevs turbo Swift that I built runs one as well (still made 144whp on a tiny tiny turbo). Kev drives much harder than I do and his car has remained together.

I'm not sure what you guys are having problems with, other than tuning, stuff left in your intake pipes, or using the WRONG spark plug which is falling apart under boost. I've blown up a few low boost motors in the learning stages and I never had damage like I've been seeing on here lately. The only thing that happened is the piston cracked around the ring lands under both 'lean' conditions.... I think you might just need to check out if you have some super oxygenated fuel causing you grief with the stock compression, or other tuning aspects. The manifold, like I say, is just fine.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 26, 2004 5:40 pm 
Offline
The mad quebecer
The mad quebecer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2002 10:06 pm
Posts: 4569
Location: Chicoutimi, Québec
Well,

My input on that issue is that the manifold is a part of the problem. As Whatteeee pointed out, you are likely having fuel and tuning issues. Beside, having that kind of manifold doesn't help at all. The design itself is not efficient to say the least. You can't compare your manifold to the Vauxall one, they're totally different. Look closely, you will see that the vauxall have no rought edges. It also feature a nice, rounded curve where the runner meet the plenum, thus leading the exhaust pulses where they must go. Unlike your own design where the expeled gases are just thrown out and 'BAM!!' colide with the main tube. Even the black manifold above is a bit better in design since it give more room for the gases to escape in the runner/plenum joint.
Look at any factory manifold and you will see that even the 'crapy' turbo3 manifold flow much better because it has little or no squared edge at the joints.

Basically, you are making lot of restriction on the exhaust side, thus making it to operate at much higher temperatures. More heat = increased detonation. To fight the increased heat you will have to increase richness and retard timing even more, wich result in poor performance.

To have a good idea of how much ponys this manifold is robbing you, just picture yourself a N/A swift featuring a log style manifold vs another n/a swift with a genie headers. It's fairly easy to imagine wich one will have the best quarter mile times. Keep in mind that a turbocharged motor is no different than a N/A engine. The more you're restricting the exhaust gases, the less power you got. The turbocharger is a big restriction itself but it's not an excuse to make any kind of manifold design and say that it will work just as fine. There is no point of giving the expelled gases even more troubles to reach the impeller. Ah yes..... some ppl will say that it's not only the flow, but also the heat that make the turbo to spool. Well, it may be true, but come a point where the heat do nothing good at all. You have to find the best balance between heat loss and flow efficiency.

_________________
Image


Last edited by Jardamuth on Tue Aug 24, 2004 11:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 27, 2004 12:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:40 am
Posts: 38
Location: Brabant
Hmm, thanx for the answers.

We're gonna be for sure and redesign our headers. But that is not easy, the turbo must stay in it's position, 'cause ist is too much work to reroute oilreturn, piping to turbo and from turbo to IC, place for the oilcooleradapter with filter etc.

If we have an idea how we will show you :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 27, 2004 12:50 pm 
Offline
Senior Swift Guru

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2001 11:55 am
Posts: 2595
Location: Calgary, Alberta
It still shouldn't blow the motor. We ported Kevs crappy manifold along the way, but I don't think it would be the difference between his car holding together and this car falling apart. I still think it's tuning, and that should be resolved. :-P

I will say that if it were me, I'd be cringing every-time I hit boost just thinking about the manifold for reasons Jar mentioned (kind of like I do in Kevs car). :) Even my rusty hunk of metal does a better job.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 27, 2004 5:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:40 am
Posts: 38
Location: Brabant
we are going for safe, redesigning the header and we also planned tuning on a dyno with piggyback (still not decided which one :roll: )

OK, my mate designed the next option based on the current position of our turbo....

Image
Image
Image
Image

now:
Image[/img]

this should flow well! :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 10:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:39 am
Posts: 114
Location: The Netherlands
wgotzman wrote:
Interesting discussion, its been awhile for me here, but I tried and have been running some 16 valve 1.3 SOHC pistons to lower compression. newer swift part#

I have not raised the boost to much yet since my other events with the engine. But is has run very well so far. I will be tuning this spring and coming by whattheeee shop. Plan to bring it up as much as the T25 can handle.

This is #
12100-63880-0B0

rings etc.

I measured an extra 9 cc volume to lower compression

I am hoping this will help, you.

This shows GT standard unit comparison


Well, after some calculations, these pistons would be great on a turbocharged GTi. But is the G13BB piston bottom (??? lack of a better word) thinner, thicker or does it has the same thickness as the G13B pistons?

Let me show why I think these pistons are great:
The GTi has a compression of 10:1. The stroke is 75.5mm and the bore is 74mm. So, one cylinder has a volume of:
-> pi * (7.4cm/2)^2 * 7.55cm = 324.7cc ..... or
-> 1298/4 = 324.5cc

The volume of the compression chamber (com_chamber_vol) can now be calculated:
-> (stroke_volume + com_chamber_vol) / com_chanber_vol = 10
-> (324.7 + com_chamber_vol) / com_chamber_vol = 10
-> 324.7 / com_chamber_vol + 1 = 10
-> 324.7 / com_chamber_vol = 9
-> com_chamber_vol = 324.7 / 9 = 36.07cc

So, normally the G13B compression chamber volume is 36.07cc. The G13BB piston add 9cc extra. So the new volumes are:
-> com_chamber_vol = 36.07 + 9 = 45.07cc
-> Stroke_volume = 324.7 + 9 = 333.7cc

The new compression of the G13B engine will be:
-> (stroke_volume + com_chamber_vol) / com_chanber_vol = new_compression
-> (333.7 + 45.07) / 45.07 = new_compression
-> new_compression = 8.4

With the G13BB pistons, the new compression of the engine will be 8.4:1

I think these pistons are ideal when the piston bottom is at least as thick as the original 13B pistons.

What do you guys think?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 10:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2003 7:13 am
Posts: 54
Location: Reading, UK
HI, Ice this sounds good. I was at my machinest today who happens to be a dick, anyway, he didnt recommend machining the crown on the std gti piston due to the thickness of the piston. He said to get the compression ratio to the same as those that the 1600cc pistons would give he would have to take 3.5mm of the top of each piston. Basically this is an untried route and not recommended, also i tried explaining to the grandad at the shop you can machine a cup into the piston as the flat tops will reduce the squish area(i know DMW has mentioned this is not an issue).

How has he measured the extra 9cc per piston? I am gonna try and get a hold of some of these pistons and compare weights.

ttyl


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Suzuki Pistons
PostPosted: Thu Apr 08, 2004 2:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 10:10 pm
Posts: 416
Location: Spruce Grove Alberta
For your information these are what the pistons look like.

There is alittle less material on the wristpin area, but that is all.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Suzuki Pistons
PostPosted: Thu Apr 08, 2004 2:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:39 am
Posts: 114
Location: The Netherlands
wgotzman wrote:
For your information these are what the pistons look like.

There is alittle less material on the wristpin area, but that is all.


Thanx! Is there any weight difference between the G13B and G13BB pistons? And would the G13BB piston be less strong then the G13B at the wristpin area?

I.e., would the G13BB be a good piston for turbocharged G13B engines?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Low compression Pistons
PostPosted: Fri Apr 09, 2004 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 10:10 pm
Posts: 416
Location: Spruce Grove Alberta
The one ting I did not do was weigh them, I wish I had, but I have been running them for over 8 months now inmy G13B.

I don't know if anyone else has tried these but it works great in my opion. The bottom of he wrist pin is the only area that has less material, this is not the area where stress would be felt.

The top above the wrist pin is the same.

It all depends on what kind of boost you want to run. I am planning to run at aleast 12 PSI. but Bolvar had spoken about simalar pistons that people had run up to 20 PSI.

While doing compression tests these pistons it droped by 25 PSI, depends on starting point.

While I am not an expert I did not want to go with forged pistons these are a reasonible option for a good daily driver when tuned right.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2004 11:58 am 
Offline
The mad quebecer
The mad quebecer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2002 10:06 pm
Posts: 4569
Location: Chicoutimi, Québec
Wzgotman,

I think the piston research and testing you made is extremely worthwile. It's a great idea you've got noneteless. Actually I plan to do the same thing and run them in one of the GTs I have around here. The only change I will probable make is to shave 0.020" off of the top to lower compression a bit more, than I coud so measures and see how much is the compression ratio. I'll aslo try to remember to weight them before puting them in the block :wink:

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 08, 2004 1:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 3:34 am
Posts: 51
Location: Vilnius, Lithuania, Europe, Earth
-iCe- wrote:
-> Stroke_volume = 324.7 + 9 = 333.7cc
What do you guys think?

I think there is an error. Stroke volume doesn't change.

And the calculation goes like this:
-> (stroke_volume + com_chamber_vol) / com_chanber_vol = new_compression
-> (324.7 + 45.07) / 45.07 = new_compression
-> new_compression = 8.2

_________________
'92 Swift GTi


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 95 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group