Alfa Romeo Forum banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Hello from ice-cold-freezing-russia! I've got 156 sportwagon '05 with 1.8 TS euro 3 engine (AR32205).

Problem: i've got weird situation with engine pistons. I found out that previous owner put pistons (dia 82.5 and height 45 mm) from some russian car that has fiat roots (Lada Priora).

I want to overbore cylinder to 83.0 mm and I'm looking for pistons to fit in.

Will 2.0 TS standart pistons fit in? I can't find any information on stock piston height for AR 32205.
According to FederalMogul catalogue AR 32201 (1.8 euro 2) and AR 32205 (1.8 euro 3) has the same height of 60 mm (partnumber for Nural STD piston is 87-118000-00). Is it true?

Also the same FederalMogul catalogue:
— AR 32301 (2.0 euro 2) piston height 56.00 mm (partnumber 87-110900-00)
— AR 32310 (2.0 euro 3) piston height 51.30 mm (partnumber 87-145300-00)


1) Is piston height plays any role?
2) What pistons should I take to bolton fit my overbored 1.8 TS to 83.00 mm?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,808 Posts
Use standard 2.0 pistons for AR32201. The later Euro 3 AR32210 engine had a different piston (deck) height (different from total height) to suit the later type multi layer gasket. The pistons are matched to the head gasket. Also, later Euro 3 engines had thinner oil control rings so the earlier pistons and rings are superior in this respect. You shouldn't have oil control problems anyway as the block won't have Fiat's rubbish factory bore finish.

Make sure the con rods haven't been changed or modified.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #3 (Edited)
Use standard 2.0 pistons for AR32201. The later Euro 3 AR32210 engine had a different piston (deck) height (different from total height) to suit the later type multi layer gasket.
AR32201 is 1.8 CF2 engine. You are mistaking it for AR32301 - 2.0 CF2
I've made a research on this topic.
1.8 CF3 engine block is shorterer because it is 1.6 engine block. It has the same markings — М654 15
So pistons from AR32301 won't fit this block because of the piston \ engine block height.
Please, check this table I've made — https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zvqPAuHR0he-ftZX-lkCdIch6U6hkzExYfQbvAW5_dU/edit?usp=sharing
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
1.6 engine probaly must use a shoter conrod or the piston must have less compression height over the pin
Bravo HGT uses same bore and stroke, just has 5 cylinder, not 4

but the 5cylinder Fiat Coupe 20vT engine uses 145mm long conrods
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
AR32201 is 1.8 CF2 engine. You are mistaking it for AR32301 - 2.0 CF2
I've made a research on this topic.
1.8 CF3 engine block is shorterer because it is 1.6 engine block. It has the same markings — М654 15
So pistons from AR32301 won't fit this block because of the piston \ engine block height.
Please, check this table I've made — https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zvqPAuHR0he-ftZX-lkCdIch6U6hkzExYfQbvAW5_dU/edit?usp=sharing
hm...theoretically it is possible to get a "stroker" 1.8 litre engine from a 1.6?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #6

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
but, if the block is the same height (265mm) as the standard 1.6 too, and i put the 1.8's crank and 1.8 piston and the same 145mm conrod as is the 1.6litre in it, then it must work....right?
Can we keep this discussion going? Also, I want to fit 2.0 CF2 pistons into 1.8 CF2 block. Are there any issues?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,808 Posts
Can we keep this discussion going? Also, I want to fit 2.0 CF2 pistons into 1.8 CF2 block. Are there any issues?
Yes, major issues. The 2.0 has shorter pistons which isn't a concern but the 5.3mm loss of compression height is which would drop the compression ratio. It would be quite a bit of money for less performance unless you want to go out and buy some bespoke pistons which will be more money than swapping in a 2.0 from a breakers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
Could the head not be skimmed to compensate?

Yes, major issues. The 2.0 has shorter pistons which isn't a concern but the 5.3mm loss of compression height is which would drop the compression ratio. It would be quite a bit of money for less performance unless you want to go out and buy some bespoke pistons which will be more money than swapping in a 2.0 from a breakers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,808 Posts
No. 5mm would mean the valves are situated in the cylinder, the skimming would likely go into the coolant jacket and the timing belt needs to be different.

There doesn't appear to be a cheap solution to this. Similarly making a 1.8 from a 1.6. I think crank and rods could be changed but it's still likely more work than just changing it for a larger engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
This is interesting. I remember talking to TS Cup racers who told me that they favour using the 1.8 block and boring it for 2.0 pistons? That is why I was preparing for that route. If it is complicated, maybe I can use the 2.0 I have and remove the balance shaft?

No. 5mm would mean the valves are situated in the cylinder, the skimming would likely go into the coolant jacket and the timing belt needs to be different.

There doesn't appear to be a cheap solution to this. Similarly making a 1.8 from a 1.6. I think crank and rods could be changed but it's still likely more work than just changing it for a larger engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
This is interesting. I remember talking to TS Cup racers who told me that they favour using the 1.8 block and boring it for 2.0 pistons? That is why I was preparing for that route. If it is complicated, maybe I can use the 2.0 I have and remove the balance shaft?
What about a thicker head gasket?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
What about a thicker head gasket?
"Thicker" head gasket can make only about ~1 mm higher.

Anyway, I've got an idea in fitting 2.0 CF2 pistons onto 1.6 CF2 conrod, crank and block and put on a 1.8 CF2 head.
Attaching table with pistons parameters. The difference is about ~0.9mm in compression height wich can be resolved by installing a thinner head gasket.
What do you think about this kind of monster?
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
"Thicker" head gasket can make only about ~1 mm higher.

Anyway, I've got an idea in fitting 2.0 CF2 pistons onto 1.6 CF2 conrod, crank and block and put on a 1.8 CF2 head.
Attaching table with pistons parameters. The difference is about ~0.9mm in compression height wich can be resolved by installing a thinner head gasket.
What do you think about this kind of monster?
You can't use the 1.8 head , the combustion chamber is smaller, you need to bore the 1.6 block to 83mm , which will make the wall thinner and weaker , using the same connecting rods and only swapping the piston will give you less performance without swapping the head and using different gasket , can't use 2.0 crank either on the 1.6 block , the biggest difference in 1.8 and 2.0 is the rod length and the lack of counter balance shaft which makes the engine lighter and more responsive. plus you'll have valve clearance issues since 2.0 cams and 1.8 cams are different and on the 1.6 rods you might hit the piston head if using valve timing solenoid :titanic:

For the 2000 Cup racing mainly used is the 1.8 block with different pistons and rods ( as well as an upgraded oil pump and much more)

I'v built an engine using the 1.6 block ECO version, using 120 HP CF3 pistons with grooves for the valves, skimmed the head 3 times and the block as well, using original metal gasket, slightly different rings, King bearings, port and polished head of the ECO version ( without the Valve timing) , using the 2.0 inlet manifold with a switch to control the runner length, fabricated exhaust ,different spark plugs and using 98 ron fuel to compensate for the higher compression .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #17 (Edited)
You can't use the 1.8 head , the combustion chamber is smaller
AFAIK combustion chamber volume in camshaft's head is the same for 1.6, 1.8 and 2.0 Twin Spark engine (AR67601, AR32102, AR32103, AR32104, AR67106, AR32201, AR32205, AR32301, AR32310) = 38.79 cm3

Compression ratio is regulated by head gasket height, piston\crank stroke and combustion chamber displacement in piston.

I've actually placed 1.8 head on 1.6 block - it runs with much more fun!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
If you have all the parts why not just go with it?

You can use the composite head gasket which is much thicker , or use the metal one it will give you more compression ratio, just dont fall less than 10.2.1, if you go naturally aspirated fuel should be higher grade octane for that matter.
Let us know how it runs , since i have some 2.0 head and some pistons around to play with as well ?

Running 1.6 block with different inlet valve angles,pistons,port and polished head, intake and TB from 2.0 using electronic switch for the manifold and exhaust.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
So, if i got this right, the 1.8 cf2 engine block is the same from the 2.0 16v, but different from the cf3 1.8 twin spark which is based on the 1.6l block....
I ask this because i want to ditch the balance shafts but i have a 2.0L cf3 engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
So, if i got this right, the 1.8 cf2 engine block is the same from the 2.0 16v, but different from the cf3 1.8 twin spark which is based on the 1.6l block....
Nope, you get it wrong.
1.4, 1.6 eco block is M659 14 - approx 230 mm height
1.6 cf2, 1.8 cf3 block is М654 15 - approx 250 mm height
1.8 cf3 is М646 17 - approx 265 mm height
2.0 cf2, 2.0 cf3 is M647 19 - approx 290 mm height

Check this table for reference - Alfa Romeo 16V Twin Spark
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top