engine mods
- Thread starter benjy133
- Start date
Help Support Twingo Forum:
sam666
Well-known member
Check out singlespeeds work projects-progress-threads/renaultsport-gordini-159-t1816.html
With a catback exhaust and induction kit/panel filter and remap you'll most likely be around 130-140 range as the actual base figure for an RS twingo varies between 123-135 bhp.
With the above and a manifold + sports cat you'll be in the region of 140-150 bhp
Again with the above, stage 1 cams from K-tec + some light porting you'll be around the 155-165 bhp.
Stage 2 cams have seen up to 172 bhp but it needs a standalone ECU to be able to make the most out of them.
I believe that's about everything you can do atm
With the above and a manifold + sports cat you'll be in the region of 140-150 bhp
Again with the above, stage 1 cams from K-tec + some light porting you'll be around the 155-165 bhp.
Stage 2 cams have seen up to 172 bhp but it needs a standalone ECU to be able to make the most out of them.
I believe that's about everything you can do atm
waitey
Well-known member
If you have enough money anything.
150bhp will cost ~£1000 easily.
163bhp ~£2000
Many people don't understand you don't buy an N/A car to tune for easy power, if you want easy power sell the 133 and get a turbo car or 197 as that has more power and they barely cost anything now a days.
150bhp will cost ~£1000 easily.
163bhp ~£2000
Many people don't understand you don't buy an N/A car to tune for easy power, if you want easy power sell the 133 and get a turbo car or 197 as that has more power and they barely cost anything now a days.
waitey
Well-known member
benmc":yf1he62c said:
I thought he did actually get 172bhp or whatever it was but it wouldn't run smooth without an aftermarket ECU and was without his car too long to wait even more and spend even more so they had to compromise with less power to run better.
Nothing wrong with Ktecs result...
singlespeed
Well-known member
RR figures asside, its certainly not going to be cheap for any meaningfull increase. Sorry to disapoint you benjy 
Comparing different RR's on different days will only end up in tears. From originaly seeing 175, the cam timing was altered to reduce the valve overlap to a point that would get it idling which lost a couple of hp top end to 172... It was then driven about 500 miles, in which time the ECU may have adapted a bit and it was on a different tank of fuel and it was then run on a completely different RR by a differnet operator and made 165Hp. It still felt and sounded prety much the same which is realy rather good, so I'm not bothered by which figgures are the most correct as the only real way to know would be to rip the engine out and put it in a dyno cell
Yes, a standalone ECU is realy needed as live mapping would be so much easier than working around the Sagem ECU. It's still on the cards allong with ITB's which will remove the plenum chamber inlet which is causing half the problem
Comparing different RR's on different days will only end up in tears. From originaly seeing 175, the cam timing was altered to reduce the valve overlap to a point that would get it idling which lost a couple of hp top end to 172... It was then driven about 500 miles, in which time the ECU may have adapted a bit and it was on a different tank of fuel and it was then run on a completely different RR by a differnet operator and made 165Hp. It still felt and sounded prety much the same which is realy rather good, so I'm not bothered by which figgures are the most correct as the only real way to know would be to rip the engine out and put it in a dyno cell
Yes, a standalone ECU is realy needed as live mapping would be so much easier than working around the Sagem ECU. It's still on the cards allong with ITB's which will remove the plenum chamber inlet which is causing half the problem
singlespeed
Well-known member
I haven't and won't be knackering the clutch etc trying :?robc1985":20fec6qx said:
waitey
Well-known member
robc1985":3mdvpt9i said:
133s aren't exactly a 0-62 car but there have been reports of standard cars hitting 62 in 8 seconds anyway.
I'd be more insterested in seeing singlespeeds car on the drag strip at FCS against a standard 133 to see how different it actually is and then against the bigger brother 197.
singlespeed
Well-known member
If a standard 133 caught me napping with the revs at 3k, I'd stand no chance :lol:waitey":21tv9zvt said:
singlespeed
Well-known member
oh no, here we go again :roll:
MovingShadow
Well-known member
About that, how much bhp can the the RS clutch take?singlespeed":2mzxpmhz said:
singlespeed
Well-known member
At least 165-175 :? I guess someone will find the limit where is starts to slip. Although, theres not as much torque with N/A compared to remapped turbo motors so unless your giving it a hard time it will probably be reasonably reliable.MovingShadow":15qu76po said:
waitey
Well-known member
MovingShadow":2p3yy7ju said:
BHP doesn't kill clutches, Torque does
.