306 engine transplants

E

Exodus

Full member
Points
51
Car
pug 306 xl 1.4 :(
i've been looking round for good engine transplants for the 306 does anyone know of anything powerful and will fit in nicely apart from the 3ltr v6 mod
 
ive got a mecanic onside, im just looking for possibles, vts vtr etc. even the v6 mod would only cost me 500
 
That's OK. I'd be disappointed if you didn't pick me up on the error of my ways :) ;)

I do really think that a 306 which is a good bit lighter than my 406 would be fun with 330lbft from a remapped 2.2 diesel. It would be in Boxster territory in 3rd gear.
 
The 2.2 Petrol can be tuned as well as a V6 plus it is lighter so that would be the engine of choice. The V6 does sound awesome though both as a concept for an engine swap and when it is running.
 
The 2.2 HDi (2179cc) diesel unit will flatten the 2.2 petrol engine. I've been quite gentle in my diesel favourite ways for a while but Waynne has re-awakened my awareness.

Remapped especially you'll find it disturbingly good to drive and genuinely quick. Not as in quick 'for a diesel'.
 
HDi fun said:
The 2.2 HDi (2179cc) diesel unit will flatten the 2.2 petrol engine. I've been quite gentle in my diesel favourite ways for a while but Waynne has re-awakened my awareness.

Remapped especially you'll find it disturbingly good to drive and genuinely quick. Not as in quick 'for a diesel'.
Click to expand...

Petrol. Stop talkin crazy....:blink:;):lol::lol::lol:
 
im sorry guys but there is no way a diesel could ever beat a turbo'd petrol. Thanks for all the advice tho, people know too much about the gti-6 so its pricy but i have an incling that the 2.0 16v from the 406 is much akin to the gti with a port and polish tune etc. what are your feelings
 
The 2.0i 16v from the 406 won't get near the 2.2 HDi 16 valve, especially if you remap it.

Turbocharge the 2.0 petrol and things will even up a bit but I'd still put money on the diesel with confidence. This, however, is a very expenisve modification.

You'll need a well set up V6 petrol to comfortably stay with a remapped 2.2 HDi.

Q: What sort of performance profile are you seeking?
 
Last edited:
i think im going for the 406 2.0 engine, tuboing, port and polish remap tune polish pimp it out. then just for lafs im leaving the outside standard. im racing against some friends in a years time and theres some tuff stuff to compete with so im gonna hope that i can cash in with handling!
p.s. you know that the v6 weighs almost 1.5 times the 406 2.0 and at BEST will give 210 whereas the 406 can be tuned to 157 and with a few other mod that will actually lighten the car you can get it up to 200.....then add a turbo :)
what the hell does the hdi produce??
 
looking up the stats i'll take your bet when i get the transplant done!
 
Exodus said:
i think im going for the 406 2.0 engine, tuboing, port and polish remap tune polish pimp it out. then just for lafs im leaving the outside standard. im racing against some friends in a years time and theres some tuff stuff to compete with so im gonna hope that i can cash in with handling!
p.s. you know that the v6 weighs almost 1.5 times the 406 2.0 and at BEST will give 210 whereas the 406 can be tuned to 157 and with a few other mod that will actually lighten the car you can get it up to 200.....then add a turbo :)
what the hell does the hdi produce??
Click to expand...

Firstly, making the car lighter does not increase engine power or torque output.

My remapped HDi rercently recorded 204 PS on a calibrated dyno (and that's with 124,000 on the clock so it's surviving well, having been mapped since 55,000 - I've owned it since 33,000.

That is, of course with a custom remap, BUT, everything else is standard!

PS is not BHP so it's somewhere over 190 bhp but less than 200.

What this doesn't demonstrate is the sheer muscle available everywhere else.

320+ lbft is in the league of 4 litre petrol V8 engines - and the general driving feel is much the same, ie effortless.

It is quick, 0-62mph is not a diesel car's party trick but it is easily achieved in 8 seconds. If you really want to shred the clutch and tyres then I think you'd manage it in 7.

Moreover, try the 30-60mph in 3rd gear test - well under 5 seconds.

This trait continues up the box, with immense thrust in fourth and fifth.

Truly, don't ignore diesel engines these days. Most are cautiously under-tuned from the factory in order to keep a market for the manufacturers' petrol models.

I used to HATE diesels passionately. Because they were simply horrid. Painfully slow, and rough and noisy and dirty and smelly and slow and slow and bloody slow. Something of a revelation has taken place.

My previous car (had that new in 1997 and kepy 'til 2005) was a petrol Primera 2.0 with the SR20DE 16 valve engine with 150 bhp. It was truly lively. And they still are. But my remapped 2.2 406 diesel will flatten it on the road.

I still don't prescribe diesel above all else. If cash was no object then possibly I'd go for a large capacity V8 petrol but cash isn't limitless so I haven't. But I might be tempted by a VW Phaeton V10 TDi.
 
Have to say that is Very impressive, sorry to sound pessemistic its only that i have never seen a quick diesel, but if your car has the power you say it has its gotta be quick!
 
Exodus said:
Have to say that is Very impressive, sorry to sound pessemistic its only that i have never seen a quick diesel, but if your car has the power you say it has its gotta be quick!
Click to expand...

It is quick. I'm no stranger to 'proper' performance cars, and I'm old enough (39) to have had the chance to have driven a few or more. And I have driven quite a few. My humble 406 2.2 diesel (which is VERY differnt to the 2.0 engines anyway) has midrange grunt that wouldn't shame a Boxster E (yes, I have driven one, before you ask).

I know that BHP is a benchmark. It's a sensible and known one. I also know that 0-62mph is often highly regarded.

Both are good for that purpose. In the old days diesel drivers (and I wasn't one, because I HATED diesels for years) hammered on about torque.

What they were on about was that it would struggle uphill in fifth gear at 32 mph.

THAT is NOT torque. That is just low gears designed to disguise how gutless the cars were. And they were. Some still are.

Torque is what flings my car down the road. It's means I can commit to overtaking manoeuvres on single carriageway A roads in gaps that would make your eyes water.

It does make for a truly entertaining and very swift, safe drive.

I'm not dismissing petrol, and there's more you can do with a petrol engine in terms of custom performance mods, but you'll have to start with a big pool of cash to make a big impact.

I repeat, if cash were no object I'd possibly go for a large petrol V8 (auto, of course).

What I wouldn't suggest is that anyone buys a diesel for economy alone. That old adage has died. (ask Gordon!!!).

But if you like the effortless shove that a remapped diesel offers (even over a savagely tuned petrol car) then go for it. I think you might just like it.

Again, I was set against diesel cars for years. Even when the OKish VWs appeared in the late 1990s
 
Whilst I mostly agree, I wouldn't suggest that anyone buys a diesel for performance alone either lol. One of the biggest drawbacks is the relatively low rpms your average diesel is capable of. Take the V-tecs for example, they use cams and a high rpm to compete with more powerful cars in the acceleration stakes. By the time you've changed into fourth to get to 60 (exaggeration I know), whatever petrol you were racing has gone ;)
 
MasterAuron said:
Whilst I mostly agree, I wouldn't suggest that anyone buys a diesel for performance alone either lol. One of the biggest drawbacks is the relatively low rpms your average diesel is capable of. Take the V-tecs for example, they use cams and a high rpm to compete with more powerful cars in the acceleration stakes. By the time you've changed into fourth to get to 60 (exaggeration I know), whatever petrol you were racing has gone ;)
Click to expand...

Fair point. Diesels don't rev as high as petrols. Mine has a 5300 red line. very high. It's also pointless using it. It's a limit, not a prescriptive target.

I am going to take issue with your point, and I quote 'whatever petrol you were racing has gone'..

Firstly, I do not prescribe racing on the road.

Secondly, your statement, and I quote, "whatever petrol you were racing has gone" is bereft of clarity. You are implying that any petrol car will always be quicker than any diesel car. Are you content that this is the case?

Rgds,

P.
 
HDi fun said:
Firstly, making the car lighter does not increase engine power or torque output.

My remapped HDi rercently recorded 204 PS on a calibrated dyno (and that's with 124,000 on the clock so it's surviving well, having been mapped since 55,000 - I've owned it since 33,000.

That is, of course with a custom remap, BUT, everything else is standard!

PS is not BHP so it's somewhere over 190 bhp but less than 200.

What this doesn't demonstrate is the sheer muscle available everywhere else.

320+ lbft is in the league of 4 litre petrol V8 engines - and the general driving feel is much the same, ie effortless.

It is quick, 0-62mph is not a diesel car's party trick but it is easily achieved in 8 seconds. If you really want to shred the clutch and tyres then I think you'd manage it in 7.

Moreover, try the 30-60mph in 3rd gear test - well under 5 seconds.

This trait continues up the box, with immense thrust in fourth and fifth.

Truly, don't ignore diesel engines these days. Most are cautiously under-tuned from the factory in order to keep a market for the manufacturers' petrol models.

I used to HATE diesels passionately. Because they were simply horrid. Painfully slow, and rough and noisy and dirty and smelly and slow and slow and bloody slow. Something of a revelation has taken place.

My previous car (had that new in 1997 and kepy 'til 2005) was a petrol Primera 2.0 with the SR20DE 16 valve engine with 150 bhp. It was truly lively. And they still are. But my remapped 2.2 406 diesel will flatten it on the road.

I still don't prescribe diesel above all else. If cash was no object then possibly I'd go for a large capacity V8 petrol but cash isn't limitless so I haven't. But I might be tempted by a VW Phaeton V10 TDi.
Click to expand...

Was your Primera a Gt Hdi?
If not it was 130bhp from the factory.
 
Originally Posted by MasterAuron
Whilst I mostly agree, I wouldn't suggest that anyone buys a diesel for performance alone either lol. One of the biggest drawbacks is the relatively low rpms your average diesel is capable of. Take the V-tecs for example, they use cams and a high rpm to compete with more powerful cars in the acceleration stakes. By the time you've changed into fourth to get to 60 (exaggeration I know), whatever petrol you were racing has gone
Click to expand...
Have you ever driven the accord vtec????!!!! it would destroy MOST cars even the 1.8 a few mods and it will EASLIY do 60 in 1st!!! and progress to 110 in 3rd!!!! Dont get me Wrong but seriouly you think you can compete against that...
 
I've driven the Prelude 2.2 VTEC, which, from memory is a 184bhp engine. This was in about 1999. They are very quick and the massive rev range does, as you say, allow you to get very high speeds in each gear. Which does, indeed, make for strong acceleration.

But they are bloody noisy.

It's a different drive to a diesel, that's not in question. But not necessarily quicker.

I'll ask you a question. Have you driven an XK8?
 
Exodus said:
Have you ever driven the accord vtec????!!!! it would destroy MOST cars even the 1.8 a few mods and it will EASLIY do 60 in 1st!!! and progress to 110 in 3rd!!!! Dont get me Wrong but seriouly you think you can compete against that...
Click to expand...

sorry 60 in 1st ? think someones fitted a custom very long gear
my 2.0 prelude would only manage 35 in 1st (redline at 7200 non vtec) and my civic would do 30.
110 in 3rd (on a private road or track ) i belive without any issues
have driven the 2.0 vtec accord and didnt like it found it gutless.
 
I think 60 in first is probably ambitious as well. I do seem to recall the 99 Prelude 2.2 VTEC managing over 40 though. But, the f...in. racket- is it worth it?

I think the red line was 8300 or something thereabouts but equally silly
 
HDi fun said:
Fair point. Diesels don't rev as high as petrols. Mine has a 5300 red line. very high. It's also pointless using it. It's a limit, not a prescriptive target.

I am going to take issue with your point, and I quote 'whatever petrol you were racing has gone'..

Firstly, I do not prescribe racing on the road.

Secondly, your statement, and I quote, "whatever petrol you were racing has gone" is bereft of clarity. You are implying that any petrol car will always be quicker than any diesel car. Are you content that this is the case?

Rgds,

P.
Click to expand...

I did mean to say on the track or strip, but seem to have forgotten :mrgreen: I was making a generalisation and obvious (I thought) exageration to illustrate a point. In my mind only N/A diesels and N/A petrols OR turbo diesels and turbo petrols are really fairly comparable in the performance stakes. Therefore, I guess I was referring to a turbo petrol car.

Don't get me wrong though, as I stated in the petrol vs. diesel thread I don't think you can beat a modern turbo diesel for an all-round performer. I'm after one for my next run-a-round...
 
For completeness then you should compare forced induction with forced induction. This, indeed gives a different set of results. I still don;t think that a similar sized petrol turbo will be quicker than a diesel one but the drive is different.

For track use then it has to be petrol simply because of the usable rev range and the need to apply as much driving force as possible when leaving a corner without changing up halfway round it.

I suppose you could argue that the diesel develops more torque lower down so the low comparatively low revs at which you change up are countered by the fact that a diesel engine will produce copious amounts of acceleration from well below 2000rpm whereas a peaky turbo petrol will need to be singing above 4000rpm all the time.

What really bugs me is that some people seem to think that any petrol, regardless of how low powered will always beat any diesel, not matter how high powered it is, even though the diesel has perhaps four times the bhp and five times the torque.
 
HDi fun said:
I suppose you could argue that the diesel develops more torque lower down so the low comparatively low revs at which you change up are countered by the fact that a diesel engine will produce copious amounts of acceleration from well below 2000rpm whereas a peaky turbo petrol will need to be singing above 4000rpm all the time.
Wrong. I'm sorry but I totally disagree. My Ti spools up at around 2500rpm and goes straight for 8psi of boost which is standard on these. Then further up the revs it boosts again to 11psi and then at nearly the top of the range it settles back at 8psi. So my car is no slow coach off the line. Infact these Ti's produce so much torque in first gear that they tend to blow gearbox's up. I'd put my Ti up against any 2 litre Turbo diesel. And i'd even have a go at Hdi's as well. Track time I think when the Ti is up and running.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
turbonutter69 said:
HDi fun said:
I suppose you could argue that the diesel develops more torque lower down so the low comparatively low revs at which you change up are countered by the fact that a diesel engine will produce copious amounts of acceleration from well below 2000rpm whereas a peaky turbo petrol will need to be singing above 4000rpm all the time.
Wrong. I'm sorry but I totally disagree. My Ti spools up at around 2500rpm and goes straight for 8psi of boost which is standard on these. Then further up the revs it boosts again to 11psi and then at nearly the top of the range it settles back at 8psi. So my car is no slow coach off the line. Infact these Ti's produce so much torque in first gear that they tend to blow gearbox's up. I'd put my Ti up against any 2 litre Turbo diesel. And i'd even have a go at Hdi's as well. Track time I think when the Ti is up and running.
Click to expand...

OK, invitation ackonwledged and accepted.

When?

TN - you do need to moderate your approach within TCars. Much as you like petrol cars and detest diesel ones you are leaving yourself open to some ridicule. Simply by way of your self righteous and unforgiving demeanour.

If you want to play diplomat then you're failing miserably.

I have never addressed you in such a prescriptive and derogatory manner.

Understand this, TN69, if it's a battle of wits (to which it seems you are subscribing) then I will take you to pieces very swiftly, very formally and finally.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
HDi fun said:
turbonutter69 said:
HDi fun said:
I suppose you could argue that the diesel develops more torque lower down so the low comparatively low revs at which you change up are countered by the fact that a diesel engine will produce copious amounts of acceleration from well below 2000rpm whereas a peaky turbo petrol will need to be singing above 4000rpm all the time.

OK, invitation ackonwledged and accepted.

When?

TN - you do need to moderate your approach within TCars. Much as you like petrol cars and detest diesel ones you are leaving yourself open to some ridicule. Simply by way of your self righteous and unforgiving demeanour.

If you want to play diplomat then you're failing miserably.

I have never addressed you in such a prescriptive and derogatory manner.

Understand this, TN69, if it's a battle of wits (to which it seems you are subscribing) then I will take you to pieces very swiftly, very formally and finally.
Click to expand...

Mate I think you misunderstand me. I'm not playing at a single thing. I was purely putting my point across. Also as said before I don't hate diesels at all. My point was that my Rover spools up it's turbo very quickly which means it pulls very very strong all the way through the rev range.
And I can assure you i'm not playing any games with anyone.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
OK, I just sometimes think that you're a bit over zealous in the way you communicate your point, or maybe in the way that you tell others that they are wrong.

I don't have a problem with you not being especially fond of diesel cars. I'm not here to convert anybody. I'm not a convert either.

I'm sorry for my slightly agressive post as it makes me appear somewhat undiplomatic.
 
HDi fun said:
OK, I just sometimes think that you're a bit over zealous in the way you communicate your point, or maybe in the way that you tell others that they are wrong.

I don't have a problem with you not being especially fond of diesel cars. I'm not here to convert anybody. I'm not a convert either.

I'm sorry for my slightly agressive post as it makes me appear somewhat undiplomatic.
Click to expand...

It's ok buddy. I may come across a bit funny but I mean no harm.
 
2.2hdi is an expensive engine else I would have one on my 306 by now but yeah it would be a mint car...I would recommend an LSD with it though if you plan to use the power to it's max
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Similar threads
Thread starter Title Forum Replies Date
R Peugeot 308 N14 engine Super knock, Hesitation, Weird running., misfire, rough idle and stalls 306/307/308/309 forums 6
M 307 1.4 petrol engine oil leak ? head gasket 306/307/308/309 forums 2
L wots my engine 306/307/308/309 forums 4
C Serious engine mods for a 306 d turbo...help? 306/307/308/309 forums 30

Similar threads


Please watch this on my YouTube channel & Subscribe.


Back
Top