J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

My mum has a Rover 214, sort of base spec green one, my bro has an older 214 which is a lot quicker, apparently they are both 16 valve but one is 8 ish bhp and the other is about 104, therefore my dad want to know how the two aree so different, they look the same under the bonnet and are both multi point injected so is it just a chip change to get the extra 20 bhp or is it down to different cams, exhausts and that kind of thing ?



NACRO, please be nice.

NWMark

In the latest shape 200, rover specced 3 1.4 litre engines.

a 1.4 8v that was about 84bhp
a 1.4 16v that was i think also 84bhp
and then another 1.4 16v that was 103bhp

the only difference between the two 16v units is the throttle body and throttle cable, on the lower bhp one it uses a throttle body that doesnt open fully, you can replace this with one from a 103bhp car and youve got yourself a 103bhp car instead of a 84bhp car.

have a search on these forums about it, been discussed loads.

www.mg-rover.org

Mark

J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

Mark, many thanks for that, have just passed the info on to my dad, he was really pleased and will get onto it tommorow, he couldnt get his head around the fact it was so easy to do and that Rover sell the higher power version for 500 quid more, plus even though he doesnt drive the 25 much he reckoned it felt stifled so this must be the cause, a throttle set to not open properly.

Cheers.

God I love the net, posted the question at 20.55 and had an answer 14 minutes later, dont think a main dealer could come close to that.

NWMark

I think the reason they done it was so that they could get rid of the 8v version of the engine and probably save money, so they then only had to make one engine and just slightly change the throttle body depending on what version it was to be.

Although to the customer in the brochure they still had the choice of 2, and as you say one £500 dearer than the other!!!!

magnet

one was twin cam also

mgg

I was going to say, the K-Series 8 valve engine is crap. Rover slowly trying to get rid of it as they made a right **** up with it. A common problem with that engine is the head gaskett would go on them......alot.
Main reason it would go is because basically it wasnt strong enough, the 8valve engine runs pretty hot and can give quiete a bit of power for a 1.4, all this resulted in the gaskett going. Hence them bringing in the 16valve to try and cure this problem.......and any other problems that might have occured.

logiclee

As already said the two versions of the 16V engine are the same apart from the throttle body. Both are 48mm but the 84ps version has a plastic inner.

You can either change the throttle body or strip down the lower powered versions throttle body and remove the plastic insert.

If your changing the throttle body a popular upgrade is the 52mm throttle body from the MGZR 160. Costs around £130 but requires a throttle cable change on the 84ps version.
52mm throttle body

Cheers
Lee

mikelmr

I thought the lower power version was single point fuel injection and the higher powered ones were multipoint ... that is the case with early and late Metro Gti's anyway.

Carl2

all the Metro gti/a's had the 103bhp version didn't they?

IanWatson

My addled memory suggests you may be wrong there Carl - I used to thrash around in my mother's GTa 16v when they first came out and I was always a little gutted that the GTi 16v had another 10 or so bhp. Think the Gta 16v was around 104 and the GTi more like 112-5bhp.

Was one of the first 'quick' cars I drove and gave me my first rectum-tightening (driving!) moments in my life.
Booted it through a wide adverse camber right hand bend, HUGE power understeer hedge-approaching situation, I panic and lift-off, huge LOOS situation, panic, overcorrect/fishtail and gradually hold it together - heart pounding like a lump hammer!

Think we've all been there!
(slightly off topic - apologies )

Scoobybits

think i have the later 1.4 throttle body and a vvc one somewhere anyone wanna buy em? mail me if so...

mikelmr

no, early ones came as single point with the carb like injection setup on a manifold, easilly identifiable by the large scoop out of the cam cover for the air intake pipe. And the later ones (catalyst?) had full multi point injection with the injectors near the ports.

One has 90 somthing hp and the mpi has around 103 IIRC.

logiclee

In the 200/25 the 16v 1.4 K series is the same for both power varients apart from the throttle body.
When MGR killed off the 8v it was the easiest way to keep both power versions in the model line up for emmission and insurance reasons .

Lee

J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

I had the earlier Metro Turbo, 95 bhp I think, what a steaming pile of poo that was, the later ones did go to multi point injection but were just faster poo.

mn_angrybeats

Cannot really compare the two though the crude Metro Turbo was an A series engine with a turbo on....when the altered the hydragas set-up, fitted front dampers and changed to a K series engine it was a far better car....

I loved my H reg Metro Gti, great little car single point injection 95hp and I thrashed tht nuts off it all day...lots of fun