This is the Forum for all your Peugeot Technical Questions, Problems or Advice.

Moderator: RichardW

Posts: 6
Joined: 11 Jun 2004, 17:37


Post by faigolfgti » 12 Jun 2004, 13:00

I am wondering which car better fun?Better roadholding?Better performance?Thank You.

bad driver
Posts: 207
Joined: 27 Jun 2003, 01:03

Post by bad driver » 12 Jun 2004, 13:49

1.9 205 is much more fun and has better handling but stick the MI16 engine in and its about as fun as fun can get!!!

Posts: 6
Joined: 11 Jun 2004, 17:37

Post by faigolfgti » 13 Jun 2004, 08:56

Hi!What is the parts needed for 205gti to do Mi-16 conversion?

Posts: 12
Joined: 27 Apr 2004, 07:25

Post by MartinR » 15 Jun 2004, 01:08 ... lting.html
Have a read of those. The XU10 engine in the Citroen ZX is not as simple to put straight into the 205 as it has the Citroen ACAV system on it. You can of course remove all of this and replace it with a Pug inlet manifold.
The peugeot exhaust manifold is far superior to the citroen one being an 8-4-1 configuration compared to the 4-2-1 of the citroen. The citroen ZX engine is the cast iron block one which will take much more of a hammering and can be made into a 2.2 litre engine using a crank from a diesel and having custom con rods made. Also the added weight of the cast iron block may help in getting the grip down.

Posts: 1256
Joined: 01 May 2004, 19:49

Post by PowerLee » 15 Jun 2004, 01:42

Which 16 valve engine you putting in for a start?
Theres the early 1905cc XU9J4 engine with 160 BHP all alloy, or the later 1998cc XU10J4 with 155 BHP cast iron lump, or the even later one out the 306 GTI6 with 167 BHP?
Citroen BX 16V, ZX 16V & Peugeot 405 MI16 & 306 S16 had these in.
1.9s are good, but the 2.0s are nicer to drive every day.
Peugeot & Citroen are the same company so it doesnt really matter what car you get the lump out as long as it all fits in!
Its a squeeze but they do drop in.
I would go for a 2.0, bit more weight over the wheels, If you can get it in & get it to fit, go for the GTI6s 167BHP engine.

Posts: 829
Joined: 27 Sep 2002, 21:39

Post by VisaGTi16v » 15 Jun 2004, 03:01

weight over the front wheels may help with traction but it will also make the front wash out far more ie understeer.
Ive got a xu9 in my visa tuned to 175bhp and that has no trouble putting the power down. Far less torque steer or wheel spin issues than my zx 16v with its 150bhp spec 2 litre (they were 150 for 1993) and its way, way lighter at the front than the zx

Posts: 829
Joined: 27 Sep 2002, 21:39

Post by VisaGTi16v » 15 Jun 2004, 03:04

i disagree with the 205 having better handling that the zx 16v, about on a par i reckon. the 205 is slightly more nimble slow speed due to its size and weight but I would much rather put a zx into a corner at 100 than a 205 and the zx is far more progressive when you have to lift and it gives you a chance to put the foot back in or left foot brake before placing you in the nearest hedge like a 205 will although it can still bite if youre not careful :)

Posts: 420
Joined: 16 Mar 2001, 21:18

Post by rossd » 15 Jun 2004, 12:32

I woudln't have though that the 2.0 engine is that much heavier, at the most it would be like carrying another passenger. Absoulute rubbish about it understeering more too, you *only* notice this if you are on a track, even then its hardly noticable.

Posts: 829
Joined: 27 Sep 2002, 21:39

Post by VisaGTi16v » 15 Jun 2004, 14:33

the 1.9 is all alluminium, the 2.0 is cast iron, quite a difference and yes you may only notice it when really pushing it but fact is the extra weight will make it understeer more.
The 2.0 zx 16v is 100kg heavier than the 1.9 volcane (ally 8v 1.9), there are a few other subtle changes but a lot of that difference is due to the engine and is the reason its barely any quicker than the 8v except for top end when bhp is all that counts. In a lighter car like a 205 the extra weight will be more noticable. You only have to monitor all the 205 mi16s that come up for sale to see that 95% of them will be with the 1.9 ally and only the odd one has the 2.0 for this exact reason.