1.6 R series to 1.3 or diesel

[elj737]

hello all, Can someone tell me if engines are interchangable with each other? I have a 1983 1.6 r series HLS which is on its second engine and would like to fit either a 1.3 or a diesel. If I change all the engine mounts etc, will the engine swap be feasable? Will the driveshafts be the same, has anybody done this swap before? I keep blowing headgaskets / valves on the r - series and would rather swap the engine than get rid of the car. All help appreciated,
Cheers,
Martin, Coventry

[E_T_V]

Yes the swap is feasible. The (turbo) diesel swap would require the most work with a change of tank and another fuel line added but it is possible.

On your list of possibles you seem to have missed out the 1.6 S-series engine which would be the most direct swap.

1.3 engines are available brand new still for about 100 quid I think, or at least they were a year ago. If you do a forum search for A-series engines and probably warwick too you will probably find the details of where to get one.

The 1.3 and 1.6 share the same gearbox (VW made) so the swap for these is very straightforward with only the engine mounts needing swapping. The 2.0 petrol and diesels use a honda designed gearbox which has different driveshafts.

[SimonR]

Hi there Martin,

The petrol engines (in manual guise) all have the same driveshafts. All you'd have to do is swap the engine and box over. The S and R-Series units share gearboxes, the 1.3 is different.

Bear in mind that there are electrical differences, especially for the later S-Series engine.

Of all of them I reckon an R-Series again is probably the best way to go in terms of lack of hassle. Just stick in a low mileage unit, replace the head gasket if you want and bob is you uncle.

Of the other two I'd say that the S-Series is probably the better bet, I mean A-Series is good, don't get me wrong, but the S is more refined and pulls better.

If you want to go down the S route then I know of a brand new engine/gearbox/loom/alternator/oil breather system/... basically the whole kit for sale in Cambridgeshire.

PM me if you want details!

Good luck.

Simon R

[E_T_V]

Is the gearbox actually different between the 1.3 and 1.6 or are they just different ratios? (They always looked identical to me from the outside)

[SimonR]

Is the gearbox actually different between the 1.3 and 1.6 or are they just different ratios? (They always looked identical to me from the outside)

Sorry, should have made this clear. The gearboxes are the same except for the ratios. Theoretically a 1.3 box would fit a 1.6 and vica versa. Probably wouldn't give the best driving experience, however!

[Ricky]

Is the five speed box I have in the LX not the same as the five speed box found in the HLS and Vanden Plas, and as I have now in the MG? They do seem pretty long, but I thought the ratios for the 5 speed Volkswagen boxes were the same unless you had an MG1600 5 speeder, where the ratios are considerably closer, as Haynes informs me that the fourth cog on a four speed box is the same as the fifth cog on an MG1600 5 speed.....

Ricky.

[B18 GPC]

hello all, Can someone tell me if engines are interchangable with each other? I have a 1983 1.6 r series HLS which is on its second engine and would like to fit either a 1.3 or a diesel. If I change all the engine mounts etc, will the engine swap be feasable? Will the driveshafts be the same, has anybody done this swap before? I keep blowing headgaskets / valves on the r - series and would rather swap the engine than get rid of the car. All help appreciated,
Cheers,
Martin, Coventry


BIGGER BREAKS NEED TO GO ONNN!!!!

[E_T_V]

BIGGER BREAKS NEED TO GO ONNN!!!!
What the heck are you on about? The brakes are the same on them all TD, 1.6 and 1.3 (assuming you haven't got an MG which I'd guess would have vented discs of exactly the same size!).

[Beaker]

BIGGER BREAKS NEED TO GO ONNN!!!!

What do brakes have to do with an engine swap? You been taking something you shouldn't :nonono:

[SimonR]

Is the five speed box I have in the LX not the same as the five speed box found in the HLS and Vanden Plas, and as I have now in the MG? They do seem pretty long, but I thought the ratios for the 5 speed Volkswagen boxes were the same unless you had an MG1600 5 speeder, where the ratios are considerably closer, as Haynes informs me that the fourth cog on a four speed box is the same as the fifth cog on an MG1600 5 speed.....


Hi Ricky!

The 5 speed box of a 1.6 LX is indeed the same as any other 1.6 Maestie, either R or S-Series engined.

The only proviso is that I don't know if the MG1600 had a closer-ratio box - evidently the Haynes says it does!

The ratios on the VW boxes are different, well, certainly between 1.6 and 1.3.

Hmm does that make sense?!

Graham: Don't worry, the brakes will be fine as they are!

[E_T_V]

There are different final drive ratios on 1.3's too as I can testify, (I've got the lowest available which is used on police cars and 1.3 vans)

[Ricky]

F153, sorry, should have made that clear, I have a 1.3 LX, it's just that in the briefing for the dealers book I have up in the bathroom (along with the Haynes, all the best ideas are born there!), it tells me that the 5 speed 1.6 R series will only be turning over at 2857rpm at 70mph in top, which is a figure roughly similar to my 1.3, as at 70 the tachometer is reading a shade under 3000 rpm, of course assuming the tacho to be accurate (which I have no reason to assume it isn't). I had assumed these boxes to be the one and same, final drive and all, due to this, but I stand to be corrected.....!
Oh, and yes, while i'm banging on about it, the MG1600 does have notably shorter ratios than the other 5 speeders, IIRC the 5th gear on the MG box is also the same as 4th on the standard 1.6 5 speed box, but I think the MG box has a different final drive, as the same literature mentioned above tells me the MG1600 pulls 19.2mph per 1000rpm in top (I am quoting this from memory!)
Unfortunately it doesnt have any details on 5 speeders for the 1.3, as it is a launch brochure/book and there weren't any 5 speeders on the 1.3 at launch, so I believe.....!

As I said, I stand to be corrected!

Ricky.

[BIGLAD]

hello all, Can someone tell me if engines are interchangable with each other? I have a 1983 1.6 r series HLS which is on its second engine and would like to fit either a 1.3 or a diesel. If I change all the engine mounts etc, will the engine swap be feasable? Will the driveshafts be the same, has anybody done this swap before? I keep blowing headgaskets / valves on the r - series and would rather swap the engine than get rid of the car. All help appreciated,
Cheers,
Martin, Coventry

Hi Martin,

I still have a R Series Head complete (Cam etc), if you or anyone else is interested at a very reasonable price.

[e692wtt]

According to the Guinness Book of Car Records (based on Autocar RoadTests):

R-series Maestro geared at 24.5mph/1000rpm in 5th (1983 test).

S-series Montego geared at 22.2mph/1000rpm in 5th (1984 test).

MG1600 geared at 19.9mph/1000rpm in 5th (1983 test). The same as the pre-89 Rover 216 Vitesse...

According to a MOTOR test from April 1984 the Maestro 1.3L was geared at 17.3mph/1000rpm in top (fourth) - in a 1984 Autocar test their VDP (R-series) was geared for 19.1mph/1000rpm in fourth.


If you want any more then I will have a root around. I'll get me coat... :laugh:

[Ricky]

I have got all the facts and figures in front of me, but in true dyslexic fashion, my brain has gone to sleep tryinmg to make sense of them! However I am almost convinced that the 5 speed I have in my 1.3LX is the same as that found in a 1.6 HLS or Vanden Plas, I see the Montego final drive is slightly different for the 1.6 (3.94:1 monty, 3.89:1 maestro), but the actual ratios are quoted as being the same through the cogs.

I would write more but I am having one of those moments where I have forgotten what the point was and am finding it hard to conclude what I am saying (it's been a long day!)

Ricky.

P.S. That Guinness book of car records - throw it out! If it is the same as the one I have, note how it gives wildly different economy figures for the Peugeot 309 1.3, with the two tested models being only one trim level in difference and only a year apart, sharing exactly the same running gear! I have actually owned both, and can say that the figure is not as wildly strange as it suggests, and is closer to the figure given for the GL. I have consequently given mine to my mate!

[B18 GPC]

Apoligies to all .

i wasn't to aware that all the maestro , and simular vichle shave the same breaking Systems .

i half thatught about chaning the breaks because i know that when u Put 2.0 Turbo in a nova , that you should change the driveshafts , and breaks etc . also if you change a car from diesle it will stop better because diesles generally have bigger breaks ... :idea: :worried: ?

Thinking if they have larger breaks in the first place , its an idea to do the opposite , put larger ones on ..

[D87 SMW]

:banghead:

[Beaker]

I am sorry but I have to do this as it is bugging me.

The word is brake, braking, etc when talking about BRAKES on a car.

The word break means you have broken something. Breaking means you have broken something up.

I will forgive the other spelling mistakes at present, but for the benefit of our foreign users can you please make an effort to write in comprehensible english, as I struggle to understand what you have written at the best of times

[B18 GPC]

:banghead:


I best stay out of this one then ... :worried:

[e692wtt]

...

P.S. That Guinness book of car records - throw it out! If it is the same as the one I have, note how it gives wildly different economy figures for the Peugeot 309 1.3, with the two tested models being only one trim level in difference and only a year apart, sharing exactly the same running gear! I have actually owned both, and can say that the figure is not as wildly strange as it suggests, and is closer to the figure given for the GL. I have consequently given mine to my mate!

It's ok, this book, but for example the 'mph/1000rpm in fifth' figure I give above for the MG1600 is actually for a model called 'Austin Maestro 1600' with 2 carburettors and 103bhp... a hunch says it is actually the MG1600. Also, I thought the mph/1000rpm for the Montego 1.6 was 23.5, so there's more doubt. I think 'with a pinch of salt' is how this book should be taken.

On road tests though, similar models can give wildly different figures. There was a test of a 205GLD vs various diesel rivals in Car around 1992, and it only gave around 40mpg and took 18 seconds for the 0-60 dash (usual figures around 50-55mpg and 14 secs). Then again, WhatCar? (in 1987?) tested the MG Maestro 2.0i against the 309SRI and Alfa 33 1.7IE and actually quoted performance figures for an earlier MG Maestro 2.0i test as they felt their test car on this latest occasion wasn't the best they had had! They quoted 8.6 seconds for the usual 0-60 (from the old test 'as we feel this reflects on what the Maestro is capable of' they said).

I'll see if I can dig out some tests of Montegos as well (magazines this time, but it won't be for a day or 2).

But yes you are dead right about the slightly different final drive figures. I forgot that bit... oops! :laugh:

[elj737]

Hi everyone, thanks for all your help and advice for the engine swap. I have decided to replace the head gasket on the current r-series and give it one more chance. If this goes again, I think I'll go for a 1.3 engine. I use the car for a different type of journey these days, and no longer need the extra power opf the 1.6. I thought a diesel would be a good swap due to the extra economy, but I dont really want to get involved with swapping the fuel tank. I am on my second r-series engine now, and have big problems with both of them. It seems to be harder to get hold of parts for this engine whereas the a-series is well catered for in terms of spare parts. I will swap the gasket and let you know what happens. It is currently doing 19mpg, with a new carb and a stepper motor that operates as it should. This is on a 15 mile journey to work, with only minor traffic. The spark plugs are all a good colour, so i guess the fuel is bypassing the cylinders via the head gasket?? Thanks for eveyones help, and also to Biglad for the info regarding the cyl head. I'll see what mine is like when i remove it.
Martin.

[MaestroMatt]

Hmm, that's pretty lousy fuel consumption. Have you measured this or is the trip computer telling you? If it is the latter then I suspect the transducer is working correctly i.e. wrongly.

The R series is a very reliable engine (I have had one for two years and it has been free from major troubles) and isn't more susceptible to head gasket failure than any other engine as far as I know. Obviously they are older engines so the gasket is more likely to go but if a correctly replaced new gasket blows then I would suspect that there is a problem elsewhere.

It probably isn't the oil breather system as it is uncomplicated (unlike the S Series) but replace the small plastic mushroom in case it isn't releasing pressure. It's only a few quid. It could also be too much pressure in your cooling system - the expansion tank cap is supposed to vent if the pressure builds up but an old and rusted one can fail.

A regular 15 mile journey should return 30mpg or slightly better, depending on your driving. The engine won't have got up to temp for the first 7 miles or so, especially in this weather. On a good long run, you should get 35mpg or thereabouts, unless you peg it along at over 3000rpm (not advisable in the R Series IMHO, especially if you haven;t got an unleaded conversion!).

You are right in saying that parts are harder to track down, but I have never found a part I couldn't get when I needed it (I know Rich has though!) with the possible exception of the non-essential fuel transducer).

[weasel2400]

BIGGER BREAKS NEED TO GO ONNN!!!!

:laugh: Amusing talking about brakes- easy mistake to make but very quickly corrected, glad R-series has been decided on but just for the record if a major engine change is done altough the brakes are the same surly the suspension springs need changing as they are different ie: if you put a 2.0TD in a 1.3 it will almost touch the ground and the tires will be verry.... (tired :banghead: ).

seriuosly good luck and hope this time it lasts for you.

[E_T_V]

I don't know if you've already done this or not but it may be worth getting the head skimmed when you replace the head gasket this time to ensure it is flat. If it isn't perfeclty flat when you put it together the gasket will blow again and again and again..

[elj737]

Hi All,
My 19 mpg is measured the usual way, as the trip computer tells me its doing 117mpg. (I wish). When I first had the car, it did over 40mpg on a run. This engine has been in for 9 months, and ran well when first installed, however it now overheats, the cooling system pressurises and its a pain to start in the morning, I assume due to poor compression. I will replace the gasket and check the flatness of the head first. This engine came out of a car that had only done 70k miles and only had two owners, so i thought it would be ok. My first engine did 120k before it failed. The potential of getting 30mpg has persuaded me to keep the car, I think they're greatly underated cars which are so much better than many of their rivals.

Will let you know what happens.
martin.

[E_T_V]

Good good. Yes I think your problems are indeed due to a head gasket failure.

I'd get the head skimmed anyway if you are unsure of its flatness as for the sake of £30 it may save you a lot of time and swearing!

Good luck and if you need any advice be sure to ask!