Turbo for K Series

Turbo on ebay

Seen this turbo on ebay which would perfectly compliment my girl in her engine bay!

The price is just getting a bit high now, anyone else know where i could the parts from to do this? Had a google but can't find anything, and there's no-one breaking any old MG's or 75's that i can find.

What is the maximum sort of price you'd pay for this sort of kit used?

BTW... before anyone mentions i know it would increase the risk of HGF again and may cause alsorts of mither but i don't care, i was a fast landy lol.

crewebiker said:

i was a fast landy lol.

Click to expand...

Says it all really....:doh:

They were about £5k new when Powertrain was up and running, she'll fit straight in,

You only get a 0.5 second gain on 0-60mph, on the standard k-series 160bhp thats a lot of money for shaving 0.5 off the time, around 6.4 seconds IIRC.


There is a guy from MG-Rover.org who has just fitted one,

Just a wee snippet from another site.....

"Associated with the turbo-charger installation are a number of important engineering changes. A special exhaust manifold in cast stainless steel can reliably withstand temperatures in the region of 1000 °C. Uprated pistons and connecting rods are fitted, with the piston configured to give a 9.2:1 compression ratio. An uprated oil pump provides a 12% higher oil flow rate to meet the turbine bearing lubrication requirements, while the modified main bearing ladder casting has an inlet for oil return from the turbo-charger.

The throttle body is of course sealed to retain turbo-charger boost pressure, with a suitably revised manifold pressure sensor, and the fuel system modified, with a returnless feed controlled by a pressure demand regulator, plus new fuel injectors with higher maximum flow rates. Modifications to meet the extra cooling airflow demands of the engine and intercooler include a revised undertray for the engine compartment. "

Sounds like a lot of work for something that'll "go straight in".

The standard 1.8 MPI engine was fitted to the Freelander, at around 115 bhp you might be better with either the 145 or 160bhp VVC engines but as this power is developed higher in the rev range, you will need to make use of full the rev range - redlined at 7200rpm. You will need the matching ECU and wiring loom as well.

Aye, if i was to get my hands on a turbo, the turbo pistons and rods, plus an MG or possibly Emerald ECU would be next on the shopping list.

I presume N.I. means by fitting straight in, the turbo would be good in a more or less standard K series that wasn't used for racing or rallying. Turbo pistons and rods would only really be needed if the car got a lot of stick on a race course, or i liked to put my foot down an awful lot (which i do tbh). Am i right in saying that some of the old 75 1.8's were the non VVC variety, but fitted with the turbo? I'm sure i've seen/read this somewhere. Also a lot of the part numbers are the same for pistons and rods and the 'turbo' pistons and rods so it seems after all MG might have fitted standard parts in some of their turbo'd MG's.

Don't really fancy going VVC, thought about getting the VVC head but keeping non vvc cams as the VVC head (VHPD) has larger valves.

My other options were upgrading to the 52mm throttle body (which i've been recommended to do by many people as a cheap as chips upgrade) or go the full mile and spend half a K on a direct to head throttle body setup.

I just thought it might be nice to have the dump valve noise in a freebie after coming side by side to a scooby at lights (my dream for my girl to be able to race a scooby haha).

I think the bottom line is: if i'm willing to spend a hell of a lot of time and money then experiment a bit with a turbo, but if i want straight forward power without hassle either of the throttle bodies.

Sparks said:

Just a wee snippet from another site.....

"Associated with the turbo-charger installation are a number of important engineering changes. A special exhaust manifold in cast stainless steel can reliably withstand temperatures in the region of 1000 °C. Uprated pistons and connecting rods are fitted, with the piston configured to give a 9.2:1 compression ratio. An uprated oil pump provides a 12% higher oil flow rate to meet the turbine bearing lubrication requirements, while the modified main bearing ladder casting has an inlet for oil return from the turbo-charger.

The throttle body is of course sealed to retain turbo-charger boost pressure, with a suitably revised manifold pressure sensor, and the fuel system modified, with a returnless feed controlled by a pressure demand regulator, plus new fuel injectors with higher maximum flow rates. Modifications to meet the extra cooling airflow demands of the engine and intercooler include a revised undertray for the engine compartment. "

Sounds like a lot of work for something that'll "go straight in".

Click to expand...

In the words of Harry Enfield....

Oiii NOOOOOOOOO!

I am specifically referring to the Turbo engine that came off the production line


The K-series turbo engine comes complete with the uprated parts, I have in front of me a brochure from the days of Powertrain.

It is not just a turbo bolted on to a normal 1.8

Mantamad said:

The standard 1.8 MPI engine was fitted to the Freelander, at around 115 bhp you might be better with either the 145 or 160bhp VVC engines but as this power is developed higher in the rev range, you will need to make use of full the rev range - redlined at 7200rpm. You will need the matching ECU and wiring loom as well.

Click to expand...

The older 1.8 has a few more horses 118 compared to the newer 1.8 2001 onwards 115, extra CAT in the downpipe

I had thought of doing the VVC option before, but screaming the nuts off the engine at 7.5k rpm is likely to mince it's way through VCU's and IRD's,

If you have revved a 1.8i out to the limiter in 1st and 2nd, you will know that ones eyeballs begin to shake in their sockets.

The VVC 160 has the MEMS 3, same as the 1.8 with the coil packs, MEMS 3 can be remapped, the others can't.

Surprised to hear you saying that the price is too high. As I write this it's sitting at £137.
Don't think you'll be able to do much on a lower budget if you're looking for more power.

Am I missing point....Why fook around with 1.8 when V6 puts out 177bhp in standard spec and with very little arsing around can easily give over 200????

Might be fairly cheap at the mo but it's at £137 with two days left. I can see it going for well over £400 possibly. It's a sought after item.

Some people might think 'what the hell?' but N.I. should be with me on this one... i've actually grown rather fond of my K series and it's a good engine for how lightweight and small it is, with fairly reasonable fuel consumption when i drive nicely.

I've thought of a few things over time such as MHM's suggestion of the 220 turbo but decided that would be ULTRA experimentation as i've not seen it done into a freebie before. I've done all the small time mods so far such as exhaust and conical filter etc, now i'm trying to weight up which would be the most easiest/cost effective and best way to go further.

doobreydog said:

Am I missing point....Why fook around with 1.8 when V6 puts out 177bhp in standard spec and with very little arsing around can easily give over 200????

Click to expand...

V6 is an auto, it's the only reason I never went for one.

Lotus took the 1.8i and tuned to 170, 190 at a cost.

As I've always said the k-series is an enthusiasts engine, feather weight but always comes out punching above its weight class

So it went for £230 final price, us Td4 guys spend that easily on our Synergy box & egr bypass. If I had the weedy 1.8 I think that's not too bad a final price at all assuming it's all in good nick would have snapped it up.

Northern Irelander said:

The older 1.8 has a few more horses 118 compared to the newer 1.8 2001 onwards 115, extra CAT in the downpipe

I had thought of doing the VVC option before, but screaming the nuts off the engine at 7.5k rpm is likely to mince it's way through VCU's and IRD's,

If you have revved a 1.8i out to the limiter in 1st and 2nd, you will know that ones eyeballs begin to shake in their sockets.

The VVC 160 has the MEMS 3, same as the 1.8 with the coil packs, MEMS 3 can be remapped, the others can't.

Click to expand...

I'd drive a VVC car first before you write it off as a screamer.. its not. It has a very very flat torque curve. Pulls well from very low down all the way to the red line (this is due to the VVC system, its the whole point of the system in fact!). But then I'd not mess about, just buy a range rover (V8 of course).

I do have a VVC, but it's in my 218 coupé

Stewart

Zaphod said:

I'd drive a VVC car first before you write it off as a screamer.. its not.

Click to expand...

You aint driving yours right then! Either that or it's dose!


I don't see a FL 1.8 petrol on your list of cars, you might be the one needing to test drive mate.

As for the MkII Midget and Frogeye Sprite, had them anorl!

Northern Irelander said:

You aint driving yours right then! Either that or it's dose!


I don't see a FL 1.8 petrol on your list of cars, you might be the one needing to test drive mate.

As for the MkII Midget and Frogeye Sprite, had them anorl!

Click to expand...

Nope, if you have driven a peaky 1.8 VVC engine it's broken, belive me. If its all working properly there is no need to thrash it, there is no peak that was the whole point of the VVC system and also why it is wrongly considered inferior to VTEC (in fact its a far better system) because there is no 'kick' with the VVC engine that you get with other varaible valve systems.

The 1.8 VVC develops 175NM @ 4500 rpm, and the MPi 164 @3000, but thats not looking at the whole torque curve.. the VVC is equalling the peak torque of the MPi at 2500... It also develops more power out of the box than the 1.8 turbo


Mk2 midget?? never had one of those

Stewart

Zaphod said:

Nope, if you have driven a peaky 1.8 VVC engine it's broken, belive me. If its all working properly there is no need to thrash it, there is no peak that was the whole point of the VVC system and also why it is wrongly considered inferior to VTEC (in fact its a far better system) because there is no 'kick' with the VVC engine that you get with other varaible valve systems.

The 1.8 VVC develops 175NM @ 4500 rpm, and the MPi 164 @3000, but thats not looking at the whole torque curve.. the VVC is equalling the peak torque of the MPi at 2500... It also develops more power out of the box than the 1.8 turbo


Mk2 midget?? never had one of those

Stewart

Click to expand...

No I wouldn't know anything about the k-series

As self-confessed k-series enthusiast and anorak, get yourself over to MG-Rover.org and we'll discuss it there.

Just for the record, it's peak torque at 2750rpm for the FL 1.8

Northern Irelander said:

No I wouldn't know anything about the k-series

As self-confessed k-series enthusiast and anorak, get yourself over to MG-Rover.org and we'll discuss it there.

Just for the record, it's peak torque at 2750rpm for the FL 1.8

Click to expand...

And he is the expert on the one Freelander fault - the window mechanism! :bolt:

crewebiker said:

I just thought it might be nice to have the dump valve noise in a freebie after coming side by side to a scooby at lights (my dream for my girl to be able to race a scooby haha).

Click to expand...

:wtf:

Northern Irelander said:

No I wouldn't know anything about the k-series

As self-confessed k-series enthusiast and anorak, get yourself over to MG-Rover.org and we'll discuss it there.

Just for the record, it's peak torque at 2750rpm for the FL 1.8

Click to expand...

Which figures are those? not according to Rover, or MG rover. As for .org, been there done that, bunch of max power readers as was rovertorque I'll stick to aronline. I still don't get why you think the VVC is a screamer, ok it redlines at 7200, but you don't have to use it at 7200 as the torque curve is amazingly flat (which would have been very good for a 4x4) and the power curve is near as a straight line as you can get, neither of which can be said for the MPi (which has two siginificant humps in the torque curve). The K turbo is a truly heath robinson affair and will be about as reliable as an 800 KV6. Although for scooby slaying I think a T-16 turbo would be a far better bet.. but I suspect the rest of the drivetrain would have objections!