Cheap small car, performance boost question...

C

ChrisThomas

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Messages
960
Reaction score
330
Location
Midrand
Hey Guys,

Ok so this is a purely hypothetical situation and would like some different views on the topic.

Let's say for arguments sake the car in question is a cheap Ford Ka, all stock. 1.3 Kent engine.

What would you do, or what would you suggest to up the power output.

I'm not talking crazy super / turbo chargers. I'm talking real world, cost effective ways to make the car a bit more nippy.

In my mind I'm thinking air flow, exhaust, possible a remap of sorts...

Wanted others to chime in as to what they would do.

Cheers.
 
ChrisThomas said:
Hey Guys,

Ok so this is a purely hypothetical situation and would like some different views on the topic.

Let's say for arguments sake the car in question is a cheap Ford Ka, all stock. 1.3 Kent engine.

What would you do, or what would you suggest to up the power output.

I'm not talking crazy super / turbo chargers. I'm talking real world, cost effective ways to make the car a bit more nippy.

In my mind I'm thinking air flow, exhaust, possible a remap of sorts...

Wanted others to chime in as to what they would do.

Cheers.
Click to expand...
You know what they say about car mods - cheap, reliable and fast... pick 2.
 
You might gain a kw or 2 with those mods but the cost will completely outweigh the benefit.

Low boost turbocharger would make a noticeable difference but I can't see that engine lasting too long under the additional strain (even at low boost).
 
Don't build what you can buy.

Rather just buy a more powerful car.
 
In the 90's we had the Corolla RSI with an impressive 115 kW from a normally aspirated 1.6 litre engine which was reliable, I don't understand why we can't have similar engines today, these days it seems to be turbocharged engines or nothing, I do understand the fuel consumption benefit the turbo's have to offer, but that 4A-GE engines were not too bad on consumption and they offered a reliability factor that can't be found on turbocharged engines.
 
Masataka said:
You might gain a kw or 2 with those mods but the cost will completely outweigh the benefit.

Low boost turbocharger would make a noticeable difference but I can't see that engine lasting too long under the additional strain (even at low boost).
Click to expand...

Can the same be said about the 900cc Renault engines found on the Clio?
 
Take the extra money that you would spend on mods, sell your car, and buy a better car. You'll save more in the long term...
 
Thanks for all the input, I'm not buying this car or anything, was merely a hypothetical scenario....
 
thechamp said:
Can the same be said about the 900cc Renault engines found on the Clio?
Click to expand...

Nope, those were built with the intention of turbocharging, and would be strengthened appropriately. There would be some leeway to increase the boost over stock but the threshold would be fairly low as it's not a performance engine.
 
thechamp said:
Can the same be said about the 900cc Renault engines found on the Clio?
Click to expand...
Those engines were designed that way through millions spent on R&D and testing. Brakpanning your car in some oke's workshop isn't going to have the same effect...
 
Masataka said:
Nope, those were built with the intention of turbocharging, and would be strengthened appropriately. There would be some leeway to increase the boost over stock but the threshold would be fairly low as it's not a performance engine.
Click to expand...

Mike Hoxbig said:
Those engines were designed that way through millions spent on R&D and testing. Brakpanning your car in some oke's workshop isn't going to have the same effect...
Click to expand...

Thanks for the replies, Anyone care to weigh in on that 115kW 1.6 NA Corolla RSI engine? Why does it seem impossible to replicate that or improve on it?
 
thechamp said:
Thanks for the replies, care to weigh in on that 115kW 1.6 NA Corolla RSI engine? Why does it seem impossible to replicate that or improve on it?
Click to expand...
People don't want an engine you have to rev the tits off to get performance out of. The emphasis nowadays is on drivability and economy.
 
Sinbad said:
People don't want an engine you have to rev the tits off to get performance out of. The emphasis nowadays is on drivability and economy.
Click to expand...
I do, but I'm probably a different target market.

The world is also moving away from manual transmission, and in the case of automatics, having your power and torque available lower down matters...
 
Better air intake is cheap to do and maybe a performance chip.
 
ChrisThomas said:
I'm not talking crazy super / turbo chargers. I'm talking real world, cost effective ways to make the car a bit more nippy.
Click to expand...


Newton's second law:
Acceleration = Force applied/mass.

Increasing the force is one way(engine power)
Decreasing the mass is another.

In order of difficulty:
Take out all the rubbish you keep in your car
Drive in your underwear
Loose body fat.
Take remove sound system.
Remove interior finishes
Remove seats
Remove aircon
Sand off body paint

A Ford ka weight about 870kg.
From this video:
[video=youtube;ZyZTzYHwnvw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyZTzYHwnvw[/video]
the 0-100 km/h acceleration is about 20 seconds, which equates to 1.39 m/s^2.
This means the engine exerted an average force of 1209 N.

Now if the above modifications yield about 150kg, the new mass will be 720kg. Using the same engine, your car would then accelerate at 1.68 m/s^2. Working back to a 0-100km/h measurement, you would do it in 17 seconds as opposed to 20 seconds. That is a 15% improvement.

That is a bit more nippy IMO.


:D
 
Last edited:
ChrisThomas said:
Hey Guys,

Ok so this is a purely hypothetical situation and would like some different views on the topic.

Let's say for arguments sake the car in question is a cheap Ford Ka, all stock. 1.3 Kent engine.

What would you do, or what would you suggest to up the power output.

I'm not talking crazy super / turbo chargers. I'm talking real world, cost effective ways to make the car a bit more nippy.

In my mind I'm thinking air flow, exhaust, possible a remap of sorts...

Wanted others to chime in as to what they would do.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

There are no significant gains to be had that are really cost effective.

Even aftermarket air filters there days cost way more than their worth over OEM stuff.

You'll spend a few grand on filters, exhaust and maps and not even see a 5% increase in power and then at the potential expense of reliability.

It's a Ford KA, it will never be fast.

Sell it and buy something faster...that's the cost effective solution.
 
konfab said:
Newton's second law:
Acceleration = Force applied/mass.

Increasing the force is one way(engine power)
Decreasing the mass is another.

In order of difficulty:
Take out all the rubbish you keep in your car
Drive in your underwear
Loose body fat.
Take remove sound system.
Remove interior finishes
Remove seats
Remove aircon
Sand off body paint

A Ford ka weight about 870kg.
From this video:
[video=youtube;ZyZTzYHwnvw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyZTzYHwnvw[/video]
the 0-100 km/h acceleration is about 20 seconds, which equates to 1.39 m/s^2.
This means the engine exerted an average force of 1209 N.

Now if the above modifications yield about 150kg, the new mass will be 720kg. Using the same engine, your car would then accelerate at 1.68 m/s^2. Working back to a 0-100km/h measurement, you would do it in 17 seconds as opposed to 20 seconds. That is a 15% improvement.

That is a bit more nippy IMO.


:D
Click to expand...
lol Im impressed that u included the math.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X