Finding torque

[ad_car_08]

Having had a drive in my cousins Puma (1.7 Ltd Edition Yamaha tuned engine apparently?) its really obvious that my mr2 lacks torque and any form of zip in comparison to his puma which has snappy acceleration.

I'm really surprised by the performance difference, as the MR2 has 100cc more than the Puma and is a damn sight lighter - granted he has a chav universal exhaust but i didnt think that'd make much difference to peformance?!

I've gutted my precats, regularly whip my MAF sensor out and give it a clean (twice a month) and have a markiii pipe and TRD filter. What would I need to buy to get more torque and oomph through the revs? I know the MR2 isn't a fast car, but at the moment, the engine screams up to high revs but Im not really pushed into my seat at all and im feeling a sense of disappointment since driving the puma.

[Anonymous]

Having had a drive in my cousins Puma (1.7 Ltd Edition Yamaha tuned engine apparently?) its really obvious that my mr2 lacks torque and any form of zip in comparison to his puma which has snappy acceleration.

I'm really surprised by the performance difference, as the MR2 has 100cc more than the Puma and is a damn sight lighter - granted he has a chav universal exhaust but i didnt think that'd make much difference to peformance?!

I've gutted my precats, regularly whip my MAF sensor out and give it a clean (twice a month) and have a markiii pipe and TRD filter. What would I need to buy to get more torque and oomph through the revs? I know the MR2 isn't a fast car, but at the moment, the engine screams up to high revs but Im not really pushed into my seat at all and Im feeling a sense of disappointment since driving the puma.

You first need some cash, then you need to have a look at all the threads in the "performance" section, you will find ways to increase your torque, or finally as a last resort, sell the car and get a Puma.  s:wink: :wink: s:wink:

[ad_car_08]

Your telling me a Ford Puma is statistically quicker than an MR2 Roadster?

FGRob, I acknowledge there are various routes of engine modification described in the performance section, I was asking which ones are best for gaining torque

[widermuller]

The racing Puma (blue one with tacky sparco seats, and look at me Essex interior) is actually .1 of a second slower, than a standard mr2 roadster. Puma naff, mr2 proper sportscar, period.

[ad_car_08]

The racing Puma (blue one with tacky sparco seats, and look at me Essex interior) is actually .1 of a second slower, than a standard mr2 roadster. Puma naff, mr2 proper sportscar, period.

Oh goodness no, the puma in question is the regular, non racing puma type



I'd understand if it was the racing puma, but its not, which is what made me think "eh? thats not right!!"

[Anonymous]

Your telling me a Ford Puma is statistically quicker than an MR2 Roadster?

FGRob, I acknowledge there are various routes of engine modification described in the performance section, I was asking which ones are best for gaining torque

No I'm not telling you that, you said it yourself.

So how much cash have you got, £4 - £5K will get you a decent Turbo, £2.5K will get you a decent N/A set up, so how much do you want to spend.

Also you don't just stop at engine mods, you have to look at suspension, bracing (older cars) brakes etc etc.

Your question is too broad you need to really think about what you want and can afford.

[Liz]

A simple one off mod for more torque would be a unichip rolling road tuned, not adding so much to the car that you would require loads of extra stuff for bracing etc, but just gives that little bit more mid range, Just my 2p worth.

[ad_car_08]

Your telling me a Ford Puma is statistically quicker than an MR2 Roadster?

FGRob, I acknowledge there are various routes of engine modification described in the performance section, I was asking which ones are best for gaining torque

No I'm not telling you that, you said it yourself.

So how much cash have you got, £4 - £5K will get you a decent Turbo, £2.5K will get you a decent N/A set up, so how much do you want to spend.

Also you don't just stop at engine mods, you have to look at suspension, bracing (older cars) brakes etc etc.

Your question is too broad you need to really think about what you want and can afford.

Ah, that explains your first post   s:wink: :wink: s:wink:  

I've just blown a load of money doing my house up, so I was mainly investigating how puritanical I need to be with saving money and what gains I would get for around £500 (£500 not being a limit). Compared to what some members have spent on their cars, I acknowledge that my budget is fairly small (no way I could afford to go turbo or spend £2.5k in one go on a setup), which is why I wanted to find out whether it was really worth spending the money if I wouldn't get much of a return/difference in the car.

My MR2 is my only car, therefore used everyday, which I love because it looks great, performs brilliantly and is like nothing I've ever driven/owned before. I dont have any intentions of taking it to track days, but im 24 now and planning to keep it for years to come, eventually in a garage (when I move next) so I can roll it out on sunny days and use an average car for commuting to work and picking up supplies from B&Q at the weekend!   s:lol: :lol: s:lol:  

In this particular topic, Im asking how would be the most cost efficient method of achieving an increase in torque. The "big picture" entails making tweaks to get the most out of the setup, i.e. increasing air flow with an aftermarket exhaust, or stiffen suspension geometry. I could make general assumptions that strapping on a back box, strut brace, lower the suspension and chuck on a KnN induction kit (all pretty cheap mods) would be the way to go, but I'm aware the existing factory setup is already pretty bob on, which is why I'm being diligent with planning modifications to make sure I only make improvements.

[widermuller]

Is your standard set up sound? By that, I mean have you new airfilter, desent plugs, throttle body opening correctly (sticking), blocked/obscured air intake for engine, ott bodykit that weight's a ton?


                          So far I have modified my car with the following mix of supposed performance/body parts, TTE exhaust (marginal gains, looks sounds nice), Che manifold (marginal gains, but a good way of de-catting, and it looks like the real TRD one!), Apexi induction kit (induction roar addictive, no gains! So soon to be dumped! sorry! Sell), TTE side mesh intakes ( look nicer than standard ones, I remember the first time I ever saw a roadster in a dealers in 2000 I thought nice car shame about the intakes! Cheap!! )



                         TRD quickshift, ( not sure about any performance claims to this! But it reduces the throw by about a third, gives a more mechanical feel to the change, which I like, really just improves driverbility in my opinion, oh! and the TRD gear knob supplied with it is so much better on the hand, better grip), Finally, some nippon denso iridium plugs standard ones, I can recommend these as they seemed to take the lumpiness out of the initial start up, prior to that I had bosch super 4's not good!


                               If you just want a "performance" increase the chip looks good value!


                        I do all my own work , so makes it more viable, but even with the mods above (which are nothing) just to buy those bits cost approx 850 quid less any labour put on! After picking up the uk toyota side skirts in my hand and feeling the weight, I decided not to go there! Sold on.....

[ad_car_08]

Hi widermuller

Thanks for the advice on checking plugs, TB, air intake. No havent checked those, but will do. Hopefully the search button will be my friend on this one.

Not got a bodykit, wing or anything like that, just running standard bodywork. Im not a fan of the stick on bodywork, unlike my cousin  s:lol: :lol: s:lol:

[firepower]

the standard 1.7 puma has less power and less torque than the roadster and is a second slower to 60 mph and 4 seconds slower to 100 mph according to evo .
this has come up before and i think the reason that the roadster seems to have less power and torque than other vehicles is down to the fact the engine is behind the driver . under acceleration the weight of the engine shifts towards the rear of the car and it is this weight transfer that is felt by the driver that gives the impression of strong performance and acceleration as the vehicle  squats and dives as the weight moves backwards and forwards , weight transfer gives the feeling acceleration , as the roadsters engine is already behind the driver there is less weight transfer to the rear .

[ad_car_08]

so there would be less sensation of being pushed into your seat under acceleration?

I dont want this to become a "how do i make my car faster than 'so and so's car", things just became apparent to me after test driving the puma.

the standard 1.7 puma has less power and less torque than the roadster and is a second slower to 60 mph and 4 seconds slower to 100 mph according to evo

interesting stats those, the puma sounds quite abit slower than the mr2 then!

[widermuller]

Thanks for the reply....

                       As a point of interest the tte exhaust although no real performance gains, weights less than the stock item. Take this a little further..... to save weight take out the spare ( and carry the stuff you spray in the tyre ) take out the bucket that holds the spare, relocating the alarm on a fabricated bracket, take off the cover that surrounds the wheel bucket, take out rear bins behind seats, I'm sure you could dream up a few more things to take off trim related!


                                  All that would save some weight, thus the standard engine has less to lug around, its a route you could take as a 'cheapo' way of trying to improve performance.


Personally I would'nt take the bits off,for what gain you might get??? bar perhaps the spare, and I certainly would'nt bin those items in case you sell on.


                              Just a thought though! Final though on the racing puma, good way of shifting another 500 of the things or whatever the run was! Nice colour, blown arches and lowering helped looks over standard model, moved it away from its jacked up 4x4 looks. Liked the multi spoked oz wheels. Thats it me done!

[WillsSayers]

I thought taking the spare tyre out of the front was a bad idea, as the front has next to no weight in it as it is, as you're removing even more; you'll just unbalance the car.

[widermuller]

Good point!

                     I should have remembered from my classic car days how people made Hillman imps handle, put a bag of cement in the front  s:D s:D   Mind you engine is even further back in those!

[markiii]

Thanks for the reply....

                       As a point of interest the tte exhaust although no real performance gains, weights less than the stock item. Take this a little further..... to save weight take out the spare ( and carry the stuff you spray in the tyre ) take out the bucket that holds the spare, relocating the alarm on a fabricated bracket, take off the cover that surrounds the wheel bucket, take out rear bins behind seats, I'm sure you could dream up a few more things to take off trim related!


                                  All that would save some weight, thus the standard engine has less to lug around, its a route you could take as a 'cheapo' way of trying to improve performance.


Personally I would'nt take the bits off,for what gain you might get??? bar perhaps the spare, and I certainly would'nt bin those items in case you sell on.


                              Just a thought though! Final though on the racing puma, good way of shifting another 500 of the things or whatever the run was! Nice colour, blown arches and lowering helped looks over standard model, moved it away from its jacked up 4x4 looks. Liked the multi spoked oz wheels. Thats it me done!

I think you will find teh TTE ways 2lbs more

[fstsven]

First let's get the Puma out of the way. These are figures I posted some time ago that are taken from EVO magazine and are independently recorded (2 people in the car and a full tank of fuel):

FORD Racing Puma : power 153 bhp/7000 rpm
torque 119 lb ft/4500 rpm
weight 1174 kg
p-t-w 132 bhp/ton
0-60 mph -> 7.8 sec
0-100 mph -> 23.2 sec

TOYOTA MR2 : power 138 bhp/6400 rpm
torque 125 lb ft/4400 rpm
weight 975 kg
p-t-w 141 bhp/ton
0-60 mph -> 7.2 sec
0-100 mph -> 21.2 sec
Mind you, these figures are for the RACING Puma, the regular one is quite a bit slower!

Now, if you want to improve power without breaking the bank, first get a performance exhaust (back box) as the stock item is very heavy and very restrictive to gas flow. Unless you really want dual tips forget TTE and Remus: they give very small, if any, power gains and are even heavier than stock. BlueFlame and Che are good single exit exhaust that free up some power/torque. I personally have a BlueFlame, which weighs  a fair few kilos less than stock. There is a dyno print on here somewhere (if I'm not mistaken of ChrisGB's car) which compares stock to Che exhaust to Che + PPE header + PPE race cat on an otherwise stock car. IIRC the figures where stock 138bhp/170Nm  Che 145bhp/178Nm  Che + PPE 159bhp/178Nm. Please Chris feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Do a search for the dyno plot and see for yourself. Quite decent gains for relatively little outlay. Oh, and as a bonus, your car will sound like sports car now.   s:wink: :wink: s:wink:   If you desire so, this can be combined with a better flowing air filter (K&N for example). Not sure about hp but certainly improves the breathing.

Next step: loose weight. Not necessarily you, though that may help, but the car. Ditch the spare: it saves 13 kgs and even though I take my car on track regularly I never had any understeer or other handling issues. Do put a can of tyre foam in there though. Exhaust as said above should save 3-4 kgs. Loose the rear storage doors and parcel shelf: they are not needed and weigh roughly 5 kgs together. You can always put them back in if you want to sell the car in its original state. The front plastic luggage cover can also easily be missed ( -1kg). Who needs sun visors? Every bit helps. Do you have aircon? Its a convertible; loose it (-10-15kgs)...

[Thudd]

Which is quicker?


I miss the shove in the back from my old 200bhp Leon 2.0 TFSI FR and 170bhp MINI CooperS, but that's not what this car is about.
It's about being able to put the power back down before the apex, the handling, and the grip.

And being a helluva lot more fun.

[ad_car_08]

Which is quicker?



I miss the shove in the back from my old 200bhp Leon 2.0 TFSI FR and 170bhp MINI CooperS, but that's not what this car is about.
It's about being able to put the power back down before the apex, the handling, and the grip.

And being a helluva lot more fun.

I agree!

My friend has the 170PS TDI Leon FR which is staggering for a Seat and really pins you into your..er..seat (no pun intended!). Needless to say he has to buy more front tyres (£150 a corner) than I have hot dinners though!


Thank you to all for your 2p's worth. Sounds like the avenue I should be going down is exhaust, check standard setup is working as efficiently as it was when it came out the factory, brace it up (Corkey underbelly brace perhaps?) then chip and tune the engine. Thats enough to keep me going for a while!   s:lol: :lol: s:lol:  

Thanks again all   s:D s:D

[ChrisGB]

The graphs:



The Che single exit exhaust fell apart inside after a year, so am now running a Blueflame single exit. This seems to have freed up the top end a little more, but the Che had broken up inside, so may not have been giving its best whe changed.

The Bluefalme will be up for sale shortly. With the PPE manifold, there is a really bad boom around 70mph (the PPE manifold is known for this), so I am having a go at doing a custom exhaust with carbon fibre cans. It may take the boom out.

Going forward, the car will have a pair of Crower Stage 1 cams, PPE decat pipe and a Unichip Q in the coming few weeks if I get time to have it all fitted and fettled.

And don't underestimate the Puma. Even in stock form, you can cover ground at an obscene pace in one when the road is twisty.

Added power is not the best thing I have done though. Bracing is probably my favourite, closely followed by a set of coilovers.

Chris

[Dyn-Evo]

The racing Puma (blue one with tacky sparco seats, and look at me Essex interior) is actually .1 of a second slower, than a standard mr2 roadster. Puma naff, mr2 proper sportscar, period.

Oh goodness no, the puma in question is the regular, non racing puma type



I'd understand if it was the racing puma, but its not, which is what made me think "eh? thats not right!!"

Come on...thats no ordinary Puma...!

Its got the MSDesigns bodykit on it: worth at LEAST 30hp...!
  s:D s:D  

My missus had a 1.7 Puma with the same kit: sold it last year.......not the quickest car on the planet, but because the bodypanels are wafer thin, it feels lighter than it should be.

It felt a lot zippier than her current Mini Cooper, though..!

Neither were any match for a Mk1 NA, though, so the Mk3 should trounce it in every quarter (except storage space!)

[widermuller]

I was getting worried...... puma's better than mr2's.  What next? Probe's better than Celicas?

[spit]

From a totally non-techy standpoint   s:flame: :flame: s:flame:  , I've been in a number of small FWD hatches that give the impression of being very spirited even if they're not. They just lurch around a lot more when you nail them, whereas the '2 just squats down and gets on with it!

[DannyN]

just squats down and gets on with it!

QOTM