Crosswords0 min ago
Beefing a Citroen Saxo VTS
Has anyone tuned up or had tuned a Saxo VTS ? (W-reg, 2000). The performance is sparkling above 4000rpm but it could do with more oomph lower down. A while back I read of a couple of small firms who would do 160bhp or even 220bhp conversions. Any experiences ? I am not interested in higher max speed, too scary, just acceleration up to about 80.
(By the way, what is 2 star euro-ncap ?)
Answers
1 to 6 of 6
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mfewell. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
2 star euro-ncap is a very good reason for why 220bhp in a citroen saxo is not a good idea! It refers to a crash safety rating given to cars by testing, on a scale of one to five stars. The saxo is a very old design, the sister to the peugeot 106, and as such is not rated as being particularly safe to crash in, hence it only gets 2 stars.
As for tuning it, As you want better acceleration and midrange, rather than top speed, (a wise decision, IMO), you should be looking for increased torque rather than BHP. The standard output for your engine is 120BHP, so getting 220 BHP from a 1.6 would require major work, involving an increase in capacity, new cams etc, and would cost a lot of money, better to just get a bigger engined car in the first place, I would think. 160 is more realistic, perhaps with a turbo or supercharger?
A decent performance exhaust manifold/system, plus airfilter, added to a more performance oriented management chip would be a reasonable place to start, and would not break the bank. Remember, all of this stuff will increase your insurance.
Thanks Impret-Sir, I enjoyed that, like I enjoyed your Tyrrell F1 reply. I am not planning on crashing ! I have a full protected no-claims bonus, and I drive with sensibility I hope. By the way, if you look at this thread again, can you give me an idea of what 160bhp would do for the 0-60 ? It's about 7.5 at the moment I think, but depends how slick you are at 1st-2nd shifting. How much might it bring it down by ?
Actually I am thinking seriously of part-exchanging it for an Elise, as long as it's at least a 160bhp model.
mfewell, now I know you are a clever guy from other answers you have given. And the fact you kinds fought my corner on a few subjects. For your info the speed limit is 70 MPH, not 80.
Don't worry about the Saxo and get your Elise dear boy. I would have had one but am simply too big. Very high side skirts for anybody over about 5'11. I opted for an S2000. Please consider one of those. Still quite rare even though you can pick up a good import for about 12.5K. I think the group 20 insurance puts folk off though.
If you opt for the Elise pay for a decent proof roof. The wet comes in quite easily.
Mfewell, 0-6s are basically meaningless. How often do you actually ever do that particular thing? Of much more relevance is in gear acceleration times, 30-50mph, 50-70mph etc, that actually measure reral world driving conditions. In any case, the 0-60 times you see quoted in magazines etc are almost impossible to replicate, they are produced by experienced test drivers on perfect flat test tracks who have no regard for clutches or tyres, and so treat them like hell to get the lowest possible time. As I said in my original answer, to increase your acceleration, (and therefore decrease your 0-60 time, you need to increase torque, not BHP, so I cant really say how much faster 160BHP would be than 120. Currently your car has a torque peak of 107lbft, not bad for a 1.6, and I doubt that increasing your BHP by that amount would make much difference to your 0-60 time, for example, the Renaultsport Clio 172 produces 172BHP, and has a 0-60 time of 7.2 seconds, barely any quicker than yours.
The original Elise had 118 BHP, which most people thought was plenty, the later design increased that to 120, which by your yardstick wont be enough, but it is, trust me, absolute power isnt everything! power to weight ratio counts more (I once drove a Chieften tank with over 1000 BHP, it could just about manage 35MPH!), and an Elise weighs as much as a paper tissue, so it doesnt need big horses. Also, handling finesse is more significant too, again a top fuel dragster can go from 0-100MPH in .5 seconds, but only in a straight line, power is nothing without control as they say, again, score one for the Elise, (and the Impreza by the way).
As a final word, no one "plans" on crashing, but they still do!
Oh, and Ward-Minter, why didnt you get a Boxter? everything the S2000 is, plus class and style too!
Impret-Sir I thought with your handle you would praise the Japanese marque.
Why I didn't get a Boxster. Where do I start.
1) I only had 20k to spend so it was a little out of my reach. I certainly didn't want a left hooker.
2) It is true a Boxster is purchased by folk who cannot afford a 911.
3) They are so common. I must see at least 5 everday i go to work
4) The S2000 is no doubt more reliable mechanically. A V-tec engine has never blown up EVER. Granted the build quality of a Porsche is better, but its a sports car not a GT or my family car so who cares?
5) My roof is quicker by about 6 seconds so good at traffic lights.
6) S2000 exhaust note is much sweeter (esp after 5000rpm)
7) Mine revs to 9000rpm
8) Bikers give me respect
9) I can just fit my golf clubs in the boot (dont know about the Boxster)
10 Regarding style, I honestly think the S2000 has the best front of any car from your rear view mirror.
1 to 6 of 6
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.