M13A to a 1.6L internal conversion?

I have been looking at the Wiki page for the Suzuki M Engine, and from what I can read the 1.3, 1.5, 1.6 and 1.8 engines all use the same block. The engine details are:

	M13A	M15A	M16A	M18A
Power	62.5kW	74.5kW	76.0kW	92.0kW
Torque	110Nm	133Nm	165Nm	170Nm
Bore/Stoke	78.0mm/69.5mm	78.0mm/78.0mm	78.0mm/83.0mm	83.0mm/83.0mm
Compression	9.5:1	9.5:1	11.1:1	9.6:1
Valve Clearance	Same		Same

There are a couple variations of engines which produce slightly different power figures, so the above is just a general overview. All the engines have dual overhead cams, 16 valves and are MPFI.

As can be seen, the bore is the same size, and the valve clearance seems to be the same, so my question is, would replacing the crankshaft, rods and piston out of the M15A or M16A and fitting it to the M13A work?

This option should be cheaper than buying a new engine for replacement and save hassles regarding increased insurance costs (should you not wish to tell them), engineering certificate and notifying RTA (in Aus) of an engine swap. If this is all thats required for a 20% increase in performance, seems quite a reasonable and practical modification. Team it with a full exhaust and you should have plenty of power to play with.

If this would work, then boring out the block to accomodate the 1.8 should also work to get a 50% increase in power.

What are your thoughts? Or has anyone tried this even?

Interesting idea! Definitely worth some experimenting!

Another option is to replace the ECU with something like MegaSquirt. I'm confident that with a bit of tuning (dumping more fuel in!), a 10 or 20% increase in Power / Torque is achievable. Additionally, you can tune the power and torque curves to suit the change points in the gearbox making it smoother to drive.

I have done this previously on a 3.5V8 which was connected to a ZF Auto-box out of a 3.9. The box was expecting a very different power curve and it was real nasty to drive. A couple of days with MegaSquirt and it was fantastic!

I'm planning the same on a 1.3G engine which is connected to a 1.6 Vitara Auto box for the same reason.

Si

Looks like a good idea, i would check the conrods and pistons are the same size, but if it is just the crankshaft you might be onto a winner. it's a mod i'd be interested in doing.

presumably we'd need the ecu for the m16a?

Si, are you suggesting that if this conversion did physically work, the box would cause this to be a negative impact on power? If so, I guess a remap would fix that issue? Tho given the different components a remap would probably be essential anyways, or replacing it with the relevant ecu upgrade.

I'd say that the rods and pistons would be different between all engines. From my understanding the 1.5 would be different to accomodate the longer stroke as it has the same compression as the 1.3. The 1.6 however might be the same.

I'm not too sure on the need for the ecu, as I think I've read somewhere here that people have done a full conversion but kept the old ecu, as long as the engine was a VVT to VVT and not a VVT to non, or vice versa

Sandez wrote: Si, are you suggesting that if this conversion did physically work, the box would cause this to be a negative impact on power?

No, not exactly, just that the gear ratios are chosen carefully so that the engine is producing decent torque at the speed you are likely to be going in that gear and so that when you run out of torque in one gear, the next one up or down puts you in to the middle of the high torque band.

On the engine swap I referred to, it just could not drive at 50mph - it was above the torque band peak in 4th and below it in 5th - and you just couldn't break through 50mph unless you were going down hill. If you got it up to 60, it would cruise happily at 70 all day until you slowed down. Similar issues with other gears. Minor tweak of the fuel map and it was great to drive!

Often people don't notice this as the engine they are putting in has more torque or a wider torque band - which covers up the problem. Still, by tweaking it, you can achieve better acceleration and economy.

In my case then and now, I'm using a smaller engine than the box was made for - which exaggerates the problem.

Si

Why not tweak the stock ECU? its a lot more powerful than an MS.

How do you qualify 'more powerful'?

It's certainly not as easy to program or as well supported. You can use MS on anything from a chainsaw to a V12, program and tune it yourself using open source, free software. It's fully documented, can control the injection and the ignition, supports user switchable dual maps so you can implement your own 'sport mode' and 'economy mode'. People have even used it to drive common rail diesels and gas injection. I'd like to see you persuade a Jimny ECU do half as much!

I think people view what they have the most experience of as the 'best'. At the weekend I had a conversation with an Omex 'guru' who thought MS was rubbish - but had never actually used it. He certainly had more tuning experience than me - but couldn't really argue on cost or ease of programming and free software.

I'm sure each has it's advantages - so it just comes down to what you're used to.

Si

The stock ECU has a dual core processor with the primary timing functions handled by a timing processor unit that runs autonomously. It means that it runs much tighter control loops ie better fuelling and timing. The code on the MS is based on the old 80s GM ECUs and is considerably less efficient, it also doesn't have any of the back up algorithms or default settings of the stock ECU.
MS is also lacking in I/O compared to a stock system which makes it difficult to pass emissions on a modern vehicle. One example is that the Jimny uses a unipolar stepper motor for the EGR but MS only supports a single bipolar stepper motor.
The advantage of the MS system is its ease of tuning but the stock system does contain a bootloader which allows simple code changes. There are a number of free programmes that can be used to modify the mapping