Zt 190 vs ZT 160 Turbo performance? - Page 4

gazcaz · 7th January 2018, 15:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by tommy15

we bought a lovely pbt 190. however, she didn't really like it so i ended up driving it for a year and then the big end failed. no worries, back into my rover! i had had it remapped by kmaps with a ss exhaust. problem! missed the v6 so much i went out and bought another 190!

Big Ends How did that happen !!!

Mgaz · 7th January 2018, 18:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by gazcaz

Big Ends How did that happen !!!

Well, first there was Jennifer lopez then Kim kardashion and then Nicki Minaj.

But how did the engine brake? :s

Yella Fella · 7th January 2018, 18:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by rrobson

Are they still mapping without afr trace? Quite a few issues of the turbos running too lean at the higher end of the rev range. Mines been ok so far but I wouldn't get mine mapped by them again unless I've got an afr gauge in the car

I don't have a lot of knowledge on afr however I remember speaking to Mark (Kmaps) and he said the K Series Turbos have loads to give as standard and can cope with 200 bhp as standard. The 1.8 turbos power was deliberately held back so not to compete with the 190 ZT.

Mgaz · 7th January 2018, 19:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yella Fella

I don't have a lot of knowledge on afr however I remember speaking to Mark (Kmaps) and he said the K Series Turbos have loads to give as standard and can cope with 200 bhp as standard. The 1.8 turbos power was deliberately held back so not to compete with the 190 ZT.

Makes sense..
Shame they never turned the discoverys 5 cylinder diesel into a petrol turbo motor and fitted THAT to the Zt.

Mind you its a shame the 5pot never made it into the ZT diesel as it was.

Love 5 pots! Love my quattro

I missed out on a nice looking 1.8t the other day.

And I'm currently interested in Kelvo's 190 on the forum, but no reply from him yet.

Got the itch

CivilSteve · 7th January 2018, 19:27

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.

Sheraton · 7th January 2018, 23:14

Quote:

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.

I want to come visit

I have a few things to sort before a remap - but i'm swaying towards you guys over a k-maps tune i think

Paul.

jonc3725 · 8th January 2018, 08:35

If mapping a turbo I would advocate not only monitoring afr when mapping which is spot on but also fitting an afr gauge in the car. Not sure where one would fit on a R75 ZT dashboard mind.

Its definately a project for the future. What boost pressure could stock turbos take?

TBennet · 8th January 2018, 09:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by rrobson

Needs a little DIY fettling but brand new

https://www.dmgrs.co.uk/collections/...mbly-lkb108021

Thanks. I came accross that myself a while back.

I can manage routine servicing and straight swaps for accessible parts, but the description of the required modifications put me off. Not sure my local garage would be keen to take it on either.

I assume there must be specialists out there who would do it for the right price.

Cheers.

alanaslan · 8th January 2018, 20:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by FLYING BANANA

The Flying Banana has been re-mapped to 205bhp, the head has now been ported. And, yes she has had a few HGF's along the way. But her current mileage is 196,300. Pretty good for the 'K' series so I've been told.

On a good run she will return 40mpg plus. But will leave many a Audi or Beemer in her dust.

Never owned a V6 so cannot comment on the performance but I have owned 2 V8's.

The first one, no.155, had all the toys but was in basic form engine wise. Now sold.

However the current MG ZTT 400, no.457, has a Kenne Bell supercharger fitted and goes like stink. Poverty spec car with no toys. Less weight and less to go wrong. (However she is currently off of the road with a ECU fault). 26mpg is possible on a good run, but I have managed to get that down to 8mpg and had to change the rear tyres after only 4,000 miles.

If I'm going to be truthful, then give me the 1.8t anytime.

Regarding the K series engine, there is a little man down near Silverstone who works on LOTUS cars, and the Cars the build in the 00s. He has three ranges of internals for the 1800 lump,
The standard pistons and cams, bits and bobs, then there is the sports range, then there is his own range, parts he has had made just for him, with much love and care.
I know of a couple of the little car owners have had his top of the range repair with head gasket and full porting and his own engine internals then his own clutch and remap. This leaves the engine lump putting out 238BHP and your pocket several grand lighter.
The two little cars tour Europe every year with the occasional stop at various track days along the way both cars had the treatment, about ten or so years ago. Water in the oil was the reason for them both going in to the nursing home and they were both about 65k when they needed nursed back to health. Both cars have now covered more than 200k. Are driven every day as Road cars and sixteen to twenty times a year as track cars, where they are driven to the limit of their rubbers adhesion, and beyond.
So it has to be said that the 1.8 turbo can be reliable and have the guts driven out it every other week. The only thing I will say is the two owners have deep pockets and don’t mind reaching in to them to buy rubber every other week and have the reaction to drive their light weight carbon fibre and plastic at close to 180mph,
That is a mile every twenty seconds.
So it has to be said that the 1.8 lump can be a very reliable and responsive engine and I suppose Lotus knew that when they put it in there little mid engined cars.
Personally I feel there is a point beyond where you don’t need to go beyond and I would say the flying banana is about the right place to be. I wonder how the Lotus boys engines would put up with the extra tonne of car. Whilst you can get five big people in the Rover you are limited to two medium people a two man tent and a couple of stuff sacks in the Lotus.
Besides I can get into a Lotus when it has no lid on it but need a Crane to extract me from it once in. The Rover and the MG no crane required and it will pull the Caravan.
Alan

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Mgaz · 10th January 2018, 01:06

Quote:

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.

Well it's looking like i am getting a zt 190.
How much is a remap on one of those ? And what is the total hp likely to be?

I know I don't expect it to be much.. Being a non turbo engine.

I have heard of people fitting 190 exhaust cams to the inlet side? Or is it the other way around?

8th January 2018, 08:35	#37
jonc3725 Posted a thing or two MG ZT 190 + and MKIV Supra Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Plymouth Posts: 1,551 Thanks: 224 Thanked 493 Times in 359 Posts	If mapping a turbo I would advocate not only monitoring afr when mapping which is spot on but also fitting an afr gauge in the car. Not sure where one would fit on a R75 ZT dashboard mind. Its definately a project for the future. What boost pressure could stock turbos take? __________________ Jon C Living the dream MK IV VVTI Tiptronic TT Toyota Supra MG ZT 190+ BornTuesday, 10th July 2001 @ 09:01:10 259th ZT to run off the production line, out of 18,894 252nd ZT 190 + to be made out of 4,023 101st ZT in Solar Red (code: CEU) to be made out of 1,888

7th January 2018, 19:27	#35
CivilSteve Avid contributor MG ZT Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: Manchester Posts: 237 Thanks: 20 Thanked 108 Times in 56 Posts	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.