RED X19

The choice to go for the turbo engine can be because you like a challenge, like the sound of a turbo, or, you want more horse power than the 1500 can manage. A well prepared 1500 can give the same horse power as the standard 1400 turbo (110-120hp) for a lot less hassle and so you really want to be looking at 140hp+ to make it worth the effort if its performance you are after. The standard turbo runs out of puff around 130hp and the standard injectors can't really shift enough fuel above this and the standard engine management can't really cope (yes, I know people have reported big horse power from the standard set up, but it's mostly pub talk or the engine lasted about a week before the pistons melted).
I first used a Dastek piggy back ecu, a bigger turbo and injectors with reasonable results up to around 170hp, but above this the fuelling was getting a bit iffy. The biggest issue with the standard set up is that the air flow meters are soooo rare in working order. I spent a week tracking one down, and it came from Poland !? If yours fails then you are stuffed, unless you know a specialist in this field. That's why last year I went down the mappable ecu which gives much better control of fuelling and you can also get goodies like anti-lag, launch control and flat shift built in.
The intercooler is usually not that efficient in these set ups as the available locations are usually in the engine bay and also it doesn't flow that well when you start upping the engine output. That's why I went down the charge cooler route with a front mounted radiator. I also found that above 130hp the standard Uno turbo clutch couldn't cope and so have gone for a Helix paddle type clutch set up (needs to be from the1300 Mk1 Uno turbo to fit) which has given me no trouble, but is a little fierce for road use.
The picture is of the engine as per last year and so is still running the afm
 

Attachments

  • engine.jpg
    engine.jpg
    350.9 KB · Views: 176
5EE50172-6920-4EAD-90C5-E981AD113824.jpeg
42A0B05A-E192-4C03-817C-1838073213E2.jpeg
3179F08C-5F13-4224-80E8-B085499FAAB7.jpeg
1D077E31-1DEE-40DB-B143-5FCB18D5E1E2.jpeg
Hello friends!
Haven’t posted anything for a while.

So 1.6turbo is in the process.

Actuall question at the moment - is it possible to take out engine+gearbox through top? I’m a bit lazy to be laying on floor much.

Good news is that my heater can make 20 C degrees in garage by burning veneer, it doesn’t matter what when it’s for free :D

Just to know what lives inside of teddybear ( not sure do You have in English this expression) , took off head of UT engine that still inside car, cylinder walls are shiny/worned. Water pipe from turbo was clogged with rust. Camshaft looks very strange, a bit worned but in same time too different shapes of those saliences

And same time both UT engines 1985 and 1986 has different marks on camshafts. Are they stock or something another?
 
Sorry, that camshaft from 1985 engine, is heavily worned.

Bearings of third piston were bad

It’s interesting, at least for me, to see what differences have those three engines, and what has been done and not done to them by previous owners.

That engine from that Uno Turbo that I bought is actually the worst one. Or I should say that two others looks in very good condition.
 

Attachments

  • D8D9706A-E35E-4E1F-A51F-205A1CD0E9F3.jpeg
    D8D9706A-E35E-4E1F-A51F-205A1CD0E9F3.jpeg
    276.3 KB · Views: 120
Hmm, that engine looks high mileage and badly neglected :(

I recall being character-assassinated by a group of Uno Turbo owners in the Fiat Forum after I wrote that "sadly a lot of Uno Turbos get into in the hands of youngsters with lots of enthusiasm but little mechanical sympathy." This was in reply to an X1/9 owner who had complained he had bought an UT engine that turned out to be scrap through neglect and after I had just read how one UT owner had put his car on its roof, while another UT owner blamed another driver after he had run *his* UT into the back of the other car while hooning about :/

I don't think Fiat would bother stamping what appears to be the inlet/exhaust durations on factory camshafts, so the second photo may well be an aftermarket camshaft.
 
Would You suggest to use NA cam from 1.6 or that with those marks?

More I know about engines more I don’t trust them, and to sellers who says that engines are in great shape
 
Using an X1/9 cam in the turbo engine is known as a "cheap" upgrade for the Mk1 UT because it gives a more valve lift and duration than the stock UT cam. I have an idea that the 90 hp 1600 cam is the same as the X1/9 1500 cam (12/52/52/12 from memory).

Turbo cams differ from NA cams in that they generally have a shorter exhaust duration than inlet duration, so a NA cam will not be an ideal upgrade. For me, I would stick with the stock UT cam or buy a proper upgrade - if you don't know the identity of your camshafts and their specs, it is impossible to be sure if you have upgraded or not!

It's difficult to measure a cam lobe's duration without the right measuring equipment. However, you can fairly easily measure a camshaft's inlet and exhaust valve lifts, knowing these might help you to identify the camshaft's make/version by looking them up.
 
Using an X1/9 cam in the turbo engine is known as a "cheap" upgrade for the Mk1 UT
Rachael, I assume that you are referring to the Euro spec X1/9 cam for the "upgrade" in a UT, as I think the US spec X1/9 cam is more of a "downgrade". But I'm not as well versed on turbo requirements, so maybe a very weak, emissions friendly, low grade fuel spec, US cam is better? I've heard mixed (and contradictory) opinions on what a turbo cam should be.

Janis, if the old cams are rather worn (along with the rest of the engine), and you have to rebuild the engine as a result (which it sounds like you do), then you might be best to get a new cam of the desired specs for the upgrade you want. It would not make sense to put an unknown, worn-out cam into a fresh engine. But I also understand wanting to do it on a budget where you might decide to not rebuild the engine, in which case you could do the measurements (per Rachael's suggestion) to help decide which cam is best to use.
 
Cam, that has stapmed numbers on it, is in good condition.
That with T T T marks is good for bin only.
Punto cam is also good.

There is only one way to test which of them is better for more power, on dyno, most likely I won’t do it. :/

There are too much choices by mixing UT and Punto engines, only parts on them equal are conrods, body of cambox and few bolts’n’nuts.
 
Be careful with extractors.
At thys time it is repairable, but could be worse. If You have to use so much power that are afraid extractor bit could snap, can snap also part of head o_O
1AA632AD-0662-4DDF-A46B-9CABC3FE574B.jpeg
 
74CBE2A2-544F-422E-9829-066CABAE86DB.jpeg
879AAE6F-C9D3-407F-BC05-229A86EA3CB4.jpeg
DDE64378-26CB-4FA9-A518-16CD394C48AA.jpeg
13EF19E3-A6ED-4128-9B28-F888E1ABD8A3.jpeg
3E67603F-D484-4ADD-A587-6E8F257D09F0.jpeg
52E2C886-B985-4912-AD9A-922F662100DA.jpeg
3AF6D2D2-3F3E-46C2-AABD-3A2488EFBF49.jpeg
Actually those are very good extractors, didn’t get any damage on the thread. Made in Germany :cool:

Couldn’t find hexagon bit 11mm, actually it isn’t standard, except for oil pipe for oil filter. So just used some bolt 11mm as a bit

Really belt change on Punto engine needs removing crankshaft’s pulley? Why Fiat did that?

About waterpumps, whay Punto pupm doesn’t have that small hole?
 
I guess the extractor is a good quality, because I would guess it to break before the head.

Previously I asked about that hole in water pump (if it is the same hole I am thinking). But I was asking why the X had it in the first place. On the X's block, this area all connects to one large water passage. So really no reason for the divider making two sections on the pump....they both go to the same water passage in the block. I was told the hole helped to drain coolant from the block when the drain-valve (on the side of the engine) is used. Frankly I still don't get it, but hey its Fiat so what's to get?

Parts are looking good, all clean with fresh paint.
 
Punto clutch doesn’t fit on X19 gearbox’s splines. Also Punto flywheel is few mm smaller in diameter than X19 and Uno turbo. Although width of Punto flywheel’s teeth are same as X19, but UT has wider teeth. Punto has only one sensor on crankshaft pulley... why then it has pin to locate flywheel correctly, but UT has no pin, although it has sensor on flywheel. Makes no sense for me.
Punto starter has more rpm, at least sounded like that.
 
04301600-6B2C-458C-BF57-B89588AD09B8.jpeg
Does it matter where are exits of the oil thermostat housing? Un UT it looked to the right side. I rotated it so exits ar on top for better fitment of pipes to radiator.

Sūds [****] :D picture have been rotated.
 
AB21F2E8-9C8F-45A3-93C7-54EF2E63BE35.jpeg
6A39B515-479A-4352-AD01-D8E2661A2194.jpeg
D33A1FCF-63B1-4026-8591-85B0A421F223.jpeg
image.jpg
B8C593DF-8DA1-40C7-9221-F0F308CC59FC.jpeg
More interesting facts:
•UT mk1 has oil squirters for cylinder walls in conrods only
•1.6 NA 176A9000 have in conrods and also in block

•pulley un waterpump, part that went to powersteering touches snail mount, grinded a bit off of the pulley

Those holes in waterpumps could be for easier manufacturing, strange.

Very easy to place gearbox on engine is from top.


1.6 pressure plate has M6 bolts/UT and X19 M8
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jon
Looks good and some interesting information. The clutch I used on my X1/9 1400 Mk11 Turbo conversion was the 1300 Uno Turbo clutch set up. The 1400 Mk11 (and Punto GT?) won't fit and from memory a standard X1/9 won't fit due to spline differences - although a dodgy memory may have made that up o_O. I initially used to run an oil cooler, but the real difficulties of plumbing it into the restricted space , and locating the rad for it to have any decent effect meant I soon removed it (and so the sandwich plate as well) . If you were circuit racing I could see a point but otherwise just change your oil a bit more often. You'll get far more access the distributor etc with it left off
Be careful with the starter motor as the mix and match of the clutch components means that you need to get the right one, which I think is the Mk1 turbo. I stripped the teeth off a section of the flywheel as the starter (was it off an X1/9?) had the wrong number of teeth on the pinion and although it would engage and turn the engine the teeth were only just engaging and they eventually failed.
 
Regarding the positioning of the oil cooler fittings on the adapter plate. In terms of operation, I doubt it matters enough to worry about. Some might argue about the oil draining back after engine shut-down, or the like. There are similar views about the location/positioning of the oil cooler itself; vertical, horizontal, hoses at top or bottom, located above or below the adapter plate, etc.. As far as I know positioning the cooler horizontally with the hoses at the top is considered the best practice. And the arrangement of the hoses, in terms of how the components are plumbed for a remotely mounted filter and cooler, is recommended to be like the photo below shows. But I don't recall seeing anything about the positioning of the hoses on the adapter. Every vehicle is a little different here; some have the adapter plate located vertically and others horizontally on the block, some have additional components near by that require a different arrangement of the fittings (to clear things), etc.. Maybe someone can add more info on it.

circuit.gif



Regarding the holes in the block where the water pump housing mounts. That is what I was referring to earlier; no idea why the different designs with multiple chambers and multiple holes, all going into the same cavity in the block. As you say, likely just a manufacturing thing.

The water pump pulley on my AC equipped 1500 X also interfered with the snail mount casting. Although in a different way. The AC equipped pulley is different from the non-AC models (due to a different belt arrangement). And it is V-belt only, no multi-ribbed belt. The interference in my case was with the belt itself, not the pulley lip. When the belt is installed and properly adjusted, there is a very small gap between the back of the belt and the snail mount's casting. That could be o.k., however the gap is too small to allow the removal/installation of the belt onto the pulley without removing the water pump or at least the pulley from the pump (with the belt still in place). What a "suds" design (I like that word). In my case I decided to remove some material from the mount's casting along the edge next to the pulley. But it required quite a bit to be removed in order to allow enough room for the belt to pass by. Not sure which is better, removing from the pulley or the mount. But in my case that much material could not be removed from the pulley and have it still retain the belt securely.
 
928D42EA-177E-460B-B1B5-633CBE6A481B.jpeg
Jon,
Just daily car, that may be used in some youngtimer rallies :D, I just have to know how it is compared to others.

As I already have all for radiator- why not.. beside it will use non rotary distributor. I even don’t have one like in X19 engines. That’s why am keeping Punto’s pulley sistem, ECU that will be installed, have to have edis wheel.


Yup startet is from Punto, will check, does it engage and works. Uno Turbo starter has damaged 2 threads, ooh I just could drill them and run a bolt through. Thanks:)

Jeff, in Your sentence have to say “sūdīgs” :D, we conjugate 99.9% of words.
When I grinded it, remembered Your and other cars with AC, luck that I don’t have it, as it would be another dilemma-to bin or keep it
 
Back
Top