Engine swap

Mic · #1 03-19-2006, 05:24 PM

Two questions
1. How would a 1.5 dual carb compare to a 1.6vtec, im guessing alot slower?

2.1.6Vtec into a 1.5 dual carb CRX, how muhc work would it be?

downey · #2 03-19-2006, 08:38 PM

1. 1.5x Dead slow compaired to a 1.6 vtec

2. 1.6 in to a 1.5 = lots of work, money and time! not worth it! cheaper to buy a vtec unless your a handy mechanic that want a project!

crx92ie · #3 03-20-2006, 10:12 AM

1. Agree with above. I've owned a 1.5X and currently own a 16V and a VTEC. There's no comparison to the 1.5 for either, although I enjoyed the car while I had it (kept it over five years!).

2. Agree with above, there's a huge difference between the engines = a lot of work converting.

Cyclonium · #4 03-20-2006, 12:12 PM

Hope we are talking about the b16a vtec and not the d16 sohc version

crx92ie · #5 03-21-2006, 11:25 AM

One thing, though, the 1.5X chassis is the lightest MKII chassis of the lot, so if you were after a serious track car.....

mcoffey · #6 03-21-2006, 11:39 AM

The problem with a 1.5x is that a swap is a lot of work. I'd bet that most of the weight saving is in the engine anyway.

this is in the buy and sell though...

Honda CRX 1.6VTI '91. Leinster Laois €3000.00
Full leather interior, Scorpion exhaust system, short shifter, 1.6 on log book, all elec, €3,000 ono. 086-1644934 [save ad]

it is an Irish car, but for 3K you can't go wrong if the body is OK

Cyclonium · #7 03-21-2006, 12:07 PM

I really hate it when people say the 1.5 shell is the lightest, theyre always at it over on crx uk.

The shell is the same as any other shell, its the bits that are bolted on which make it lighter. Its not like Honda welded a big lump of useless metal to the other shells for the hell of it just so the 1.5 would be lighter.

As mark says it the engine plus rear drums, smaller front discs etc.

Id stay away from a 1.5 unless you will be completly rebuilding the suspension and brakes to your own spec. Afaik there is no rear arb on 1.5s either therefore the mounting points arent there for it to be added from a vt/16v.

Mic · #8 03-21-2006, 04:08 PM

Nah your right, too much work.
The VTI for 3k sounds a little too good to be true really. Id have it except for the "1.6 on the log book" if I could change this so it was correct and not illegal id take it.

Cyclonium · #9 03-21-2006, 04:26 PM

The log book can be change very easily, besides it is a 1.6.

you'll tax it as a 1.6 no diff
you'll insure it as a 1.6 vt

No probs

Mcandmar · #10 03-21-2006, 05:00 PM

Dont think that would work, The most obvious problem is the lack of fuel injection on the 1.5x, i think the elecy fuel pumps inside the fuel tank? For the same work you might as well cram a 2 litre in there and go all out as its not a plug and play conversion. Buy a vtec if you want one, probobly cheaper in the long run.

As for 1.5x vs VT, bit of a no brainer that one. Having said that around traffic upto 4000rpms the 1.5x has the best low end in my opinion, and way better throttle response than the FI engines.

All depends on what you want, for outright speed the vtec, for a fast road / rally car i'd take the ZC, and for handling fun a sorted 1.5x