[Harrie]

What difference would it make to have a swift head on the esteem?

[pawan]

Originally Posted by v1p3r

I'm not buying into this rod/stroke ratio thing.

why is that. (really curious)



also what is the rod length of the baleno.

[v1p3r]

Originally Posted by Harrie

What difference would it make to have a swift head on the esteem?

Pretty much none. And you will need to change ECU and wiring as well.

Originally Posted by pawan

why is that. (really curious)

Because it's one of those 'things' that fans of high-revving engines think of to say that long-stroke engines can't produce power, or that they can't rev high. I've seen enough to disprove that.

[Ford Rocam]

Originally Posted by v1p3r

I'm not buying into this rod/stroke ratio thing.

Originally Posted by v1p3r

Because it's one of those 'things' that fans of high-revving engines think of to say that long-stroke engines can't produce power, or that they can't rev high. I've seen enough to disprove that.

Akshay,
Long stroke & Rod to stroke ratio are two different terms. Long stroke engine can produce power but the rod to stroke ratio decides how the torque curve will be, take an example of dyno graph of stock baleno taken from K.S motorsports website,its got long stroke but has shorter rod to stroke ratio, see where the peak torque occurs. Yes you can rev high till the setup can hold peak torque. but a lower Rod to stroke ratio will put a lot of stress on cylinder wall & take its toll on cylinder wall, piston rings sooner, too bad for an open deck block.

I hope it helps us to understand Engine Geometry better & not much of a personal opinion as there are other members too who will be reading this thread.

[v1p3r]

See, no one referred to open vs closed decks so far, and I was not referring to longevity of engines. I simply meant that rod/stroke ratio, and long stroke engines, all else being stock or equal, are not necessarily an indicator of an engine that is bad to turbo.

To give you an example, the D16 shares an identical bore and stroke to a Baleno, and the connecting rods are also the same length. Those engines are known to hold 20 psi on stock internals, with only pistons and rings changed. And cranks go well in excess of 400 whp often. It boils down to the quality of parts used, where Honda reigns supreme.

Originally Posted by Ford Rocam

I hope it helps us to understand Engine Geometry better & not much of a personal opinion as there are other members too who will be reading this thread.

Jitu, any inputs you give are valuable as you have had a lot of personal and hands-on experience in building your own car, and we all know what it is capable of. Please do continue when you deem necessary.

I STILL can't believe the Baleno and Swift have a 5.125 final drive.

[crazydiablo]

From driving experience I did not think that the gear ratios of Baleno and Swift was similar. Just to state an example i found the 2nd gear in baleno to be longer than that of the swift.

Now coming to the long stroke issues. 1.3 motor is a dream for high revving builds. baleno cannot reliably take the revvs that a 1.3 motor can take. There is another weak link in the baleno motor which is its rods!

[mclaren1885]

Ooopsie. My bad. Looks like I have posted the wrong figures for the baleno gear ratios by mistake. Last I remember, I had pasted the right figures. Must have blundered somewhere. Let me see if I can get the right figures. Sorry for the blunder guys.

[mclaren1885]

Sorry, goofed up with the swift figures while copying them. Here are the actual figures:

1st - 3.545
2nd - 1.904
3rd - 1.280
4th - 0.966
5th - 0.757
FD - 4.105

Alternate ratios from teamswift for the G16B gearbox.
1st - 3.250
2nd - 1.772
3rd - 1.233
4th - 0.911
5th - 0.769
Final Drive - 3.700.

Had all the ratios for the baleno from the factory spec pdf files. Since my earlier HDD crashed I am unable to look them up.

Akshay, do you remember what speeds the baleno does in 5th @ 3000 rpm?

[v1p3r]

Originally Posted by mclaren1885

Akshay, do you remember what speeds the baleno does in 5th @ 3000 rpm?

Should be doing around 110 kmph.

[bhp]

Originally Posted by mclaren1885

Akshay, do you remember what speeds the baleno does in 5th @ 3000 rpm?

An euro III does around 105 kmph

[iceman91]

All The balenos have the same gear box bhp. No difference.
Akshay said around 110kmph.

[mclaren1885]

Originally Posted by v1p3r

Should be doing around 110 kmph.

Hhhmm, then the baleno ratios I posted recently are the correct ones. According to these figures the speeds @ 3000 rpm should be 111.x kmph.

[v1p3r]

Yup, the Baleno has a 3.7 or so final drive. Esteem is 3.6 i think.

[cyneverdie]

M16A , now how much for that engine?

Damn the engine need the car.
Love the swift sports for a FWD.

How else do you know it's JWRC homologated? It's got variable high cams (I need to find out the specs), 4-1 extractor, polished intake manifold, shot-peened! + FORGED! pistons, piston oil coolers!, 11.1 compression ratio and 200mm clutch (standard is 190mm)..


JWRC specs are at 218 ps.
Maybe in a year or so ??!? in India.... HA!

[v1p3r]

Don't get too excited, you sound like ported!

JWRC homologation is for something that is very likely similar to a turbo B16 in spec. The M16 with VVT and 11.x:1 compression manages about 125 bhp.