Zt 190 vs ZT 160 Turbo performance?

[Dansrockin]

Originally Posted by Mgaz

Is that a custom/live map? Or an off the shelf one?

Do you still get the kick above 3k?

Just wondering if the remap affects the operation of the vis valves?

I'm sure I remember someone saying there chipped 190 gave more power but delivery was different. As if there was no 3k kick anymore?

Its a custom map. The power delivery is a lot smoother than it was before the map, but you still get the kick from the vis motors. It's much nicer to drive, more usable torque all through the rev range.
He's not an active member on this forum, but if you contact him on Facebook he'll get back to you pretty quickly. https://www.facebook.com/tom55247

[charlie 22]

Originally Posted by BigBen

The ECU (in standard form anyway) can't be remapped - internal components need to be changed.

When I had my 190 tuned and mapped we used an SMT6 piggy-back ECU.

As I found out after I bought all the bits, there's really no point in touching the cams in the 190. We did end up fitting the Piper 270 cams and pulleys - but it's not something I would do again, think they might make maybe 2hp difference if that on the 190 engine. Don't think they're available anymore, anyway.

One of the most important thing to get power gains on the V6 is getting it to breathe better, too. Less restrictive exhaust manifolds, better air intake system and proper port polishing etc.

Then add on some Bosch EV14 or EV6 750cc injectors (make sure they're 12ohm!) to give you more fuel to go with the better air flow... bigger bang=more power

But on the KV6 it all costs... big.

In total, having the engine rebuilt, new exhaust manifolds, SMT ECU. cams, mapping, injectors, porting/polishing cost me nearly 3k - and the bottom line afterwards? 219bhp.

If you spend that on a 1.8t you'll easily see 270+ maybe even 300bhp.

Oh, and did I mention fuel "economy"? The V6 has never been super economical, but after all the tweaks even driving on a long journey now at steady speed I'm getting around 26-28mpg. Before the tuning it was 32-35 on a comparative journey.

It does sound £%*&ing lovely at full chat when the exhaust flaps open up, though

I am in the same boat with my v6. Now older and wiser I would not do it again with this engine. The best bit I have done is the full stainless steel exhaust from the manifold at a cost of £1,800 . I went to a respected race car company to get some heads worked on and they even said that a MILD head work is all that is possible and for day to day road driving the cost is not worth it.

[chris75]

Just for reference , in standard trim the 0-60 figures are :
ZT160 turbo = 8.2 secs
ZT190 v6 = 7.7 secs
http://www.performance-car-guide.co..../mg/mg-zt.html

[Mgaz]

Originally Posted by CivilSteve

The KV6 EMS 2000 ECU can be remapped. It's just not a particularly friendly ECU to work with/learn which is why I guess most tuning places never bothered to learn how to do it.

Quick question :

Have you or anybody else ever attempted a live remap on a KV6 fitted with a gutted inlet manifold?

And if so, what were the results?

Just wondering if it could be possible to 'program out' some of the lack luster performance below the 3k mark?

I'm sure it wouldn't be perfect, but maybe part of the reason for such lack of power low down, is maybe partially because the standard map on the ECU 'expects' the VIS in the inlet to be present and functioning in a very paticular way? And as such, the ECU isn't compensating when it's removed.

If this hasn't been tried before, I would be willing to offer my future ZT for an experiment/trial of a VISless re map..?

[CivilSteve]

Originally Posted by Mgaz

Quick question :

Have you or anybody else ever attempted a live remap on a KV6 fitted with a gutted inlet manifold?

And if so, what were the results?

Just wondering if it could be possible to 'program out' some of the lack luster performance below the 3k mark?

I'm sure it wouldn't be perfect, but maybe part of the reason for such lack of power low down, is maybe partially because the standard map on the ECU 'expects' the VIS in the inlet to be present and functioning in a very paticular way? And as such, the ECU isn't compensating when it's removed.

If this hasn't been tried before, I would be willing to offer my future ZT for an experiment/trial of a VISless re map..?

I haven't and can't honestly say if anyone else has.

While you can add some extra lower end torque through remapping the problem lies in the physical aspects of the intake/exhaust process which even the best remapper in the world cannot get around. Mainly as mapping a N/A petrol only allows you to make the most of what's already there to a certain degree.

I could talk for days about inlet pulse timing and volumetric efficiency but I don't half struggle to find the right way to type it out in a way that's readable.

Perhaps the easiest way of describing is that with VIS you get the option to physically switch between different configurations so as to use the best of each one to make up for areas where the others are weaker whereas a VISless system has to only the pros (and cons) of one.

Below is a torque curve from I think an earlier KV6 used in the 800 which shows the pros & cons on the different configurations and how by switching between you get more power across the range

If you're heading to POL this year I'd be happy to discuss this in more detail as I'm better speaking it than typing

[Mgaz]

Thanks again for the reply.

That graph is useful in expressing the affects of the vis function.

I guess there is no easy way around it..

Although I did see a guy on YouTube with a DIY home made ITB setup on an NA 5 cylinder coupe quattro .

He had managed to fit 5 individual motor bike carbs on to the side of his engine.


Wonder what the result of 6 bike carbs fitted to a kv6 would be?

Im guessing fuel economy would really go out of the window . Bet it would sound amazing though! If you could ever get it running right.



Another option, maybe a low pressure turbo?


Im guessing the VIS system isn't present on the few super charged kv6 engines that were knocking around.

[Robson Rover Repair]

Originally Posted by CivilSteve

1.8 Turbo has alot more potential in it whereas the KV6 becomes very expensive to get more out of.

I'd say for big power go for the 1.8T for a decent output with the added bonus of smoother running the KV6


The 1.8T has alot of scope for extra power even as standard, but being turbo it's very picky on AFR under full load. Even if it was running 160 and the AFR was out you'll still do damage.

This is why I dislike remapping them unless the AFR can be monitored. Our dyno has recently been upgraded so it can display the results along side the power/torque so you can be sure it's okay.

Agreed and DAM they can run lean on load as standard never mind mapped. You need to be super careful with fueling!