TeamSwift

I had that same problem, but with 14 PSI. After 2 blown gaskets I O-Ringed the head. One year has passed and no more blown gaskets. I have some photos of the head, but I need a hosting site where I can upload them to. I have a yahoo album, but the links just die after a couple of minutes.

_________________
Wilfredo

Upload them into your gallery on here...

http://www.teamswift.net/album_personal.php?user_id=5

just click upload photo or similar on that page

_________________
Suzuki swift GTi|107 HP atf|Cat back zorst KnN Element

i know jess/jardamuth has recommended replaceing the headbolts with proper studs, i'm not sure where he gets his, but i think adam/bigbearzuke w/ the webstore may have a line on custom ARP studs for the gti (dohc) engine.
it may not be as good as an all out o-ringing job, but it would be an improvement .. of course you could do both.

You should upgrade the teenie weenie rad and try some head studs and an oil cooler for daily driver. You have to think that as soon as the coolant goes from agitation to boiling around the cylinder liner it turns to a layer of 'air' around your cylinder walls which is followed quickly by a dramatic increase in temps of the liner as it no longer has full supply of coolant around it. (I made longer post about this a while ago). Regardless, to fail at 9psi, you probably had a tuning issue that caused your head gasket to fail. Besides my car, I've made and tuned another locally that ran at the track in the summer and serves as a daily car around 9psi with no major problems I've heard about yet. As for mine, I've run 12-13psi (and a little more), and did dozens of dyno runs on completely stock motor with no incident to the head gasket.... so my personal opinion is the o-ring is a bit of a band-aid fix... although there is no arguing how well it works if you do spend the money to do it. I know of a few guys who have had nothing but troubles with head gaskets after all and if you can't get it right, you should go that route... even on 10psi.

Jardamuth is running larger rad, lower compression, ported head, oil cooler as well and is another knowledgeable person I trust and he has also had no problems on his motor beyond 15psi.

When the motor is apart, I reccomend spending the money to port the exhaust side of the head as your exhaust valves will thank you later in their life and you will make a gob more power.

Do the fueling with piggy-back and std. ECU and turn timing back some. There is no need for fancy, expensive to set up stand-alones for 10psi. The money is better spent elsewhere as I mentioned in first line.

My car baselined at 85-86fwhp, and made a best of 193whp on a dynojet inertia dyno. I'm using piggy-back for fueling and trust me... my air/fuel curve is ok.

Sometimes, you're just lucky and get a 'good' motor with a near perfect shape head gasket. Just like any other component of the car, the heasdgasket wear and get weaker as times goes. It has to withstand thousands of cold starts, high revving and overheating over a long period of time and sometime it will just blow because it was mean to be, no matter if your car is a n/a or turbocharged one.
As whatteeee say, it's most likely bad tuning and overheat that destroyed it as the turbocharger does not really increase static compression...or so little.
Detonation and pinging on the other hand are convinced serial killers and will toast the headgasket (if you're lucky) or the pistons (if you're not) faster than Lucky Luke can shoot.

You should have your complete motor disassembled and everything decked for the best possible sealing. Don't worry about removing .010"-.012" off of the block/head as it has praticaly no impact on the compression ratio. I use myself high-strenght studs (grade 12) that are threaded all the way, so I just need to cut them the desired lenght. Beside you must be carefull not to overtorque them as the block might warp and distord, making matter worse. I believe that 95lbs/in of torque on the head is about the max you can go.
Be aware that having studs installed require the head to be machined around the cam journals area in order to allow you to insert a deep hexagonal socket to grip and torque the bigger nut.

_________________

I'm already running an oil cooler.

Perhaps I'm gonna use a metal headgasket (a guy in the NL offerd me one, don't know the costs yet).

But what kind of 'proper studs' do you guys mean? Are the original bolts not strong enough?

For grinding off some of the pistons (aprom. 0.5 to 1 mm's) it's also possible to replace the bearings etc. Or shouldn't I worry about that and should I spent my money on better plans?

I don't especially like metal headgasket, i've heard they're just as weak as the stock gasket when it come to fighting detonation.

Grinding 0.5-1.0mm off of the pistons won't change a lot on the compression ratio but it will make the piston weaker. It's possible to mill 1.6 SOHC 16v pistons or even the 3cyl turbo pistons just like Baldurg did but these pistons are different in shape. Believe me, milling the stock gt pistons is not worth the risk of making a nice hole in the middle due to heat and detonation. Leave them as they are and work on your fuelling & timing issues instead.
Also, don't lose your time changing the low end bearing unless they are totally worn out. Suzuki put high quality components there and it's not worth replacing them with cheap quality aftermarket ones.

As for the head bolts, keep in mind that at the same torque, a nut will put as much as %30 more pressure than a bolt. Installing studs allow you to torque the head with nuts instead of bolts, thus increasing pressure on the headgasket.

_________________

at what point does that extra pressure start to deform/warp the head ? wouldn't that extra 30% pressure be the same as overtorquing the head bolts by 30% ?

"As for the head bolts, keep in mind that at the same torque, a nut will put as much as %30 more pressure than a bolt. Installing studs allow you to torque the head with nuts instead of bolts, thus increasing pressure on the headgasket."

i've never seen jardamuth post one thing that wasn't absolutely correct. nitro, the reason that a nut on a stud will allow more torque is due to the geometry used in manufacturing the threads. standard design allows for 70% contact between the threads off a bolt and nut pair while automotive designs often allow for expansion of the boss metal so a bolt installed cold fits more loosely (damn! it's been over 30 years since i did my machinist's apprenticeship and all that info is still lurking in my mind!)

trust jard, the man knows of what he speaks.

best regards, richard

_________________
1991 Blue Geo Metro Convertible highly modified 1.0L Turbo3 5 spd. - 1991 Red Geo Metro Convertible customized with a Twincam 5 spd.

My Turbo3 Project
My Cardomain Page -Ol' Blue
My YouTube Channel
My Photo Gallery
SAAB Sonett II

That's because you haven't been a member long enought


The head is a big, sturdy block of aluminum, it's very unlikely that it will warp unless the torque sequence was made in a horrible way. It's more the repeated heating/cooling process that the engine has to endure that lead the deck surface to become inequal.
The block on the other hand, being a open deck design, is made of thin walls that can easily warp or bend under pressure.
Overtorquing the bolts by as much as 30% could be worthwile if and only if the bolts were strong enought. Even in that case, the thread of the block would give out due to the intense twisting force, something they does not have to endure when you install a stud.
In my guestimate, 90-95lbs/in is about the max you can go with studs and nuts without facing serious block warping issues. If you lube everything carefully before tightening, the clamping force would be comparable to that of torquing the stock headbolts to 130lb/in (assuming it's possible, which is not)
75lbs/in is the max you can torque the stock headbolts without having them to break, elongate of shear the threads.

_________________

see that's why i ask these questions when jess posts
thanks for the schooling

Copper head gaskets = bad

MLS metal gaskets = good if the machine work is then lapped. Can be pain-staking to do properly though... even the tiniest scratch provides a microscopic weakness.

http://www.supras.com/~riemer/HKS/hksgaskets.html

At 50,000kms, I'd leave the bearings alone. The highest mileage GTi engine I took apart was 290,000kms and this is the rod bearings which was similar to mains and all rods (thrust do take a beating though).



Spend the money where it will make 'most' benefit. Porting exhaust side will help save exhaust valves. Proper pistons may prevent future head-aches.

And Jess, I hope you weren't implying that my motor had one of those perfect head gaskets... cuz' I know of a few others.

Hey thanks for link. It's a bit off-topic, but I'm changing the head gasket in my brother's Supra and that's a lot of handy info.

_________________

Just to throw you into confusion ,and i am not diagreeing that head studs are a good thing,just I think they are a bit overkill on low boost setup,I ran a std suzuki head gasket on my 1.2 engine with new std head bolts tourqed up to std recommended tourqe only.the block is o ringed.This engine has been together for a year running max of 25psi boost,normally 18psi.I pulled it apart and everything was fine.looking at the headgasket there was no sign of leakage,the o rings had biten into the flame ring nicely and it all was good.
I would say you have other issues with your engine or most likely tuning,if a std head gasket can withstand 25psi boost and uses std gti bolts then there is no reason why another engine cant do the same.Even my 1.4 engine producing well over 300hp still uses std head bolts and although the gasket is custom made it is of the same type as a std gti gasket,this engine was pulled down after my last drag race and everything was perfect.
So if you want to go overkill,then fit head studs but in my opinion they are not needed.Same goes with the headgasket,use a genuine suzuki one ,they work fine.
If you can, get the block o ringed,also check your block and head faces arnt distorted,but most importantly get the engine dyno tuned correctly.
Cheers Dave

I'll go with dave on this one. As he is not all thoery but he has living proof.
http://www.rdihost.com/zuboo/11.43DMWdave.mpg

I'm also running standart gasket and bolts with an o-ringed head. with a standalone EMS, holds up well.

I also think that a properly tuned car and some combustion chamber and head work, won't cause detonation witch causes head gasket problems most of the time. But if low budjet is your thing than go with the studs cause it's most likely to hold down the head gasket in your state of tune.

Thanx for brainstorming with me

I'll probably do this planing:

use standard headgasket, when there is no further damage (so I can drive SAFE and easy for now). This summer disassemble the engine and let it bore to 75 mm for 1.6 pistons.

Reconstruct the manifold for a little better flow. (Asked some info about the delivery time and costs for the flange but did not hear a thing yet:( )

I saw that the G16B gasket has 1,2 mm thickness but I can't find any measuremnents 'bout the GTi one Does anyone know?

They're the same material, same thickness.

_________________

Here are two photos of my BandAid, ehrr I mean O-rings
Right now using, stock 1.6L Vitara Head gasket, stock bolts, a piggyback SAFC, and ... nothing else. Almost a year at 12 PSI, daily driven no problems. Next week will upgrade to a MSD 6BTM with Blaster Coil.

_________________
Wilfredo

I made 10-12 psi+ for over a year without o-ringing the block. I think the money on o-ringing would be well spent and neccessary for the high boost levels like Dave runs. For 10-15psi, it is a band-aid. The ideal spot to o-ring would be on the block as the heat cycles of a daily driver will have a less detrimental effect on the iron/steel sleeves than the soft aluminum head. The grooves in the aluminum head would be more likely to wear on higher thermal loads/cycles. For truly huge boost levels like Dave, I'd go with the block. On the other hand, o-ringing the head would be easier for tooling on the machinist and perhaps even cheaper.

Your exhaust valves will look like crap if you leave the exhuast side of the head un-ported on any 10+psi boosted motor. The stock head sucks at getting heat away from the valves even though EGTs are not high in the downpipe. I would put the money towards porting the head and depending on your goals of boost levels, driving conditions, cost, what's available to you, etc... go from there. If you're not going to run crazy boost pressures, and don't have access to a machinist you can trust in your area, you may want another option which also works well.

(I'm a friend of Dimi so we both are seeking for a reliable solution)

The gasket was blown by a cylinder which was running too lean (because of better flow at cyl. 3 in the exhaust header). We want to remedy this, so we need a better solution for fueling and ignition.

I was looking at two options. The PRS4 standalone computer from perfect power (780 euros) or the SMT6 piggyback computer (300 euros).

What I'm worried about, is the standard ECU when we use the piggyback computer. Jardamuth said (and I experienced it), that the standard ECU don't like boost below 4000rpm (hessitations, holding back, etc). Will this be solved with a piggyback computer (personally, I don't think so). If yes, why, because the engine is already running rich, and still hessitates. So, aperently the ECU is confused (reading too much air at too low rpm). Why wouldn't it be confused with a piggyback computer? Would the SMT6 be the solution for our 'problems'? And is it reliable?

The other solution (my preference) is to use a standalone computer (PRS4). But how long does it general take to completely map the ECU to our engine with turbo (including closed loop, acceleration enrichment, etc)? Three hours? A day? And does the engine run (very) smooth from idle to redline when properly set up? Is the PRS4 a 'good' ECU (the specs are very nice)?

Also, we want to prevent further blown headgaskets , so what is the maximum boost the engine can take with RON98 fuel and standard compression (and retarded ignition at boost)? I read different things on the board. Our goal is 150 to 170 crank hp. This would be equal to 6 a 7 (maybe psi, right? Is this possible with the standard internals? I would say yes, based on the posts/experiences on this forum. But we want to know for sure, before we buy a piggyback or standalone ECU and map our engine.

So please be so kind to help us with this. We want a reliable car with 150 to 170 chp. Money is an issue If someone has experiences with piggyback computers, please share them with us (because piggyback is a lot cheaper). One thing is very important to me, and that's drivebility from idle to redline (even when boost is present at 2000rpm). Thanx in advance!

I don't understand how your a/f mixture can be rich under boost below 4000rpm. All the Gt's I've turbocharged where completely starved in fuel at 2500rpm/8PSI, runing a fuel mixture as lean as 20:1. Of course, the engine will do nothing but stall with such weak combustion. I think you should start to question your monitoring system as it may not be acurate at all.

_________________

I use a LINK AFM-Intercept which is true 3d and I prefer to SAFCs. Given that you have to buy a controller and such, it's getting too pricey for what it is. I would try something like a Split Second controller as it also will allow true 3d as opposed to simulated like SAFC.

150-170 crank horsepower should be no problem on 7-8psi. My motor was 100% unmodified running around on 11-12psi after much tuning. Stock ECU, and only piggy-back fuel controller. The only reason I don't reccomend that high of boost, is, again, because the exhaust side of the head does not allow heat to get away from the valves and the exhuast valves will suffer an unacceptable level of abuse IMHO. They'll still work for surprisingly long time, but they will eventually leak a lot more than they would if you had done a proper port job to run higher boost.

Kevs turbo I did was about as small as they come and makes at least 8psi down low, and he was actually too rich down low. Gas mileage went down hill because it was always boosting and always rich.

I run my car without o2 sensor, Kevs car at the time was without o2 sensor. It's almost possible ECU failsafe will not allow you to go rich before 4000rpms with that o2 still attached... or it's possible Kevs ECU is somehow 'special', but either way I don't experience any weird hesistations with jsut a piggy-back. If you simply turn back base timing and have proper fueling the motor should survive a very very long time. Kev didn't have any hesitation problems until the thermometer dropped for winter weather... all it needs is some fine-tuning to fix that (part of the down side of not having o2).

First dyno is Kevs to show fuel curve down low. His car was too rich, but we didn't have enough time to fine-tune further. Next one is mine, fuel curve I would have preferred a flatter 12.5:1 or so. The 85fwhp on that chart is my same GTi stock-ish with no piggy-back. You can see how lean it was running in low rpms stock.

I have a few more old runs up here

http://www.angelfire.com/de/ksj/myswiftdyno.html

never had a problem being able to richen it up where I need so far.

Well, now you mention it, the afr goes sometimes to lean, but only very fast, and goes again very fast to stoich or rich. I do run a lot of fuel pressure (don't know exactly how much). At cruising, the ECU goes closed-loop, and the mixture is 14.7:1 (as indicated by my afr-gauge).

But, if it really goes lean as you said, is it possible to just only use a piggyback computer and adjust it for enough fuel (or does the ECU still get confused)? If so, do you think a piggyback computer is all we need to solve fueling and ignition (if so, it will be a lot cheaper ).