Good stuff man love it, makes me wanna take mine to a dyno to see what my nugget makes with a 4-1, full 2 inch and and intake. I’d expect you to see 130-145 with a good intake, full exhaust, cams and a solid tune, with some higher flow injectors, especially if you raise the rev limit to 7-7.2k Shame it’s hard to find a better intake mani for the CGA3.
Yeah man go get him on! And yeah it’d be crazy to hit that, I was only expecting to reach around 110 with everything done. So the fact we’re starting with 101 is crazy haha.
Had to scrap mine, too. Rusted break lines. Not a feasible fix on a car that cost £500. But I loved it. If you type UKPrimeraGT in google and 2nd link down is primera owners club and you can see it there. The wheels don't look good in that pic though!@@teme5529
I have a feeling my CG10DE coilpack just about gets its 60BHP and 60ldft torque. I'm not going to concentrate on upping the performance given it's an automatic with the CVT transmission (though I do have a larger N15 Almera airbox to install). However, I'm concentrating on areas that I can easily change using OEM parts. For example, at the rear, I have the eyelets that will allow me to fit the rear anti rollbar. I have the bar (took a while to source one, yours, being a CGA3DE, may already have one unless it was originally a CGA10DE) and the drop links, as well as the mounts and bushes to go onto the rear beam. Another easy modification is to install front vented discs. You need a pair of calipers, caliper carriers and discs from an N15 Almera 1.6 . The carriers bolt straight onto the K11s struts and the discs should mount straight up onto the hubs given they have the same offset and hub centre bore.
Yes mine was originally CG10, we swapped the CGA3 in a couple of months ago. I think I may do the brake upgrade eventually, but not too urgent for me at the minute as I don’t drive it crazy. Also providing they fit under 13s haha.
@@TheCruise94 That's a good point! I have some SE+ spec 14 inch alloys on mine so they should fit without issue, but like you....I don't go mad, it's nowhere near quick enough to be able to do that :)!!. Following your project with interest, it's looking good thus far.
As the revs are wrong on the dyno, I'm pretty sure that your peak bhp figure is also going to be wrong, given that bhp is calculated by the dyno as (torque x revs)/5252. Over-reported revs is going to mean over-reported bhp. Edit: I was incorrect above - the dyno not knowing the correct engine revs won't affect the bhp reading. If the dyno believes that the engine revs are higher than they actually are, then this will increase the engine-to-dyno-roller reduction ratio calculated by the dyno, with the decreased calculated engine torque cancelling out the incorrect over-reading of engine rpm.
are you going by the peak rpm for peak torque or peak power on your equation because the standard 1348 makes 80bhp at 6k and 89lbft at 4krpm and the result is going to be the power at the crank not the wheels where it matters. it's basically a OEM spec but it will have more transmission losses using the limited potential of the smaller engine matched gear ratios and the other factor in obscuring the true power is the difference between the original rolling circumference of the tyres and the ones you have now. So many variables can give a different result even tyre pressures can add a couple of ponies in the pocket
@bevbiltbmw I wouldn't say it was my equation: torque x revs / 5252 is the way horsepower is calculated. "Are you going by the peak rpm for peak torque or peak power on your equation?". The answer is neither, by itself - horsepower is measured not by peak torque alone or by revs alone, but by the result of the multiplication of torque and rpm together. The reason that horsepower often continues to climb as rpm continues up the rev range, even though the engine's peak torque has already been passed, is because torque falls after the peak at a slower rate than the rate at which revs increase. For example, if an engine produces 100 lb-ft of torque at 3,000 rpm and only 90 lb-ft of torque at 4,000 rpm, it will still produce more horsepower at 4,000 because: 4,000 x 90 / 5,252 = 68 bhp 3,000 x 100 / 5,252 = 47 bhp In this example, torque fell by 10%, but revs increased by 25%, so bhp increased. Engine manufacturers state their bhp claims at the crank, which is the only accurate way to measure it. Rolling road dynos measure only torque at the wheels and dyno roller speed (because the wheels-to-dyno-roller interface is the only torque-measuring point that the dyno has with the car) and from these they calculate bhp at the wheels. To estimate engine horsepower, the dyno measures how fast the rollers decelerate on the rundown from peak revs with the clutch in. This gives the drag produced by the drivetrain, which, in turn, gives the amount of bhp taken to spin the drivetrain. This power figure is then added to the power measured on the dyno power run to give an estimate of engine bhp. Tyre and wheel size have no effect on the bhp measurement taken by a dyno because roller speed is one of the measurements taken by the dyno. If a car, for example, had tyres on it with a 10 inch total diameter, that would be a circumference of 10 x 3.14 = 31.4 inches. If the tyres are then replaced for ones with a 20 inch diameter, the circumference would be 20 x 3.14 = 62.8 inches. The 20" tyre would thus drive the dyno roller at double the speed of the 10" tyre at a given engine rpm, but because the diameter of the larger tyre is doubled, we have also halved the torque applied to the dyno roller. The net effect of the tyre size change is therefore zero: the two-times-greater speed at the edge of the of the larger tyre is cancelled out by the halving of the torque. Rolling road dynos do vary in their ability to both measure torque accurately at the wheels and to estimate accurate engine bhp figures, so no rolling road dyno should ever be relied on to give a totally accurate bhp figure.
Are you thinking about putting the crankshaft pulley and flywheel from the 1.0? (was the flywheel replaced when you changed the gearbox?) They are quite lighter, should make the engine rev easier.
1.0 Flywheel and clutch are already in, we couldn’t get the pulleys off so it’s still on the 1.4 pulley. Probably won’t change the pulley now that it’s in the car. But it revs quick just with the box and clutch!
Scream turbo! My 1300cc has 110hp / 150nm with 0.35bar compression. for the next project (k10 1.3) I will compress to 0.5bar and I assume that the power would be 130hp and 180nm.
That sounds about right,that is aproximately what i am making at .5,going to turn it op to 1 bar as i just installed water meth injection to keep it nice and cool. Hoping to get about 180 hp😮
Got to be a new mid section next, right? Then unlock the power thats there with a speeduino? I have throttle bodies to put on my CGA3 but i just cant find the time!
@@TheCruise94 personally I'd go stand alone. There are so many cheap options these days. Mega squirt could be another good one. I was also thinking you'll have de-catted the CGA3 by adding the tubular manifold which will give an extra couple of hp.
@@TheCruise94 fair enough. there's only one minor problem with the DET 3 in my eyes and its that you cant raise the rev limit (6500 rpm stock). i don't think its a problem if your gonna go boosted. but N/A higher RPM is where you might find more power if you put spiceier cams in. other than that the DET 3 is a brilliant choice.
100 at the motors impressive, and you got the meme number at the wheels, perfect XD will be really cool to see where it goes in the future
Yeah I’m really happy with the figures, it’s not far from my power target and we haven’t even modded it yet haha
Good stuff man love it, makes me wanna take mine to a dyno to see what my nugget makes with a 4-1, full 2 inch and and intake.
I’d expect you to see 130-145 with a good intake, full exhaust, cams and a solid tune, with some higher flow injectors, especially if you raise the rev limit to 7-7.2k
Shame it’s hard to find a better intake mani for the CGA3.
Yeah man go get him on!
And yeah it’d be crazy to hit that, I was only expecting to reach around 110 with everything done. So the fact we’re starting with 101 is crazy haha.
I had both a K11, and a Primera GT. I'd love to combine the two! (SR20DE swap)
Primera GT is my childhood in a nutshell. It was our family car. It's now scrapped...
Had to scrap mine, too. Rusted break lines. Not a feasible fix on a car that cost £500. But I loved it. If you type UKPrimeraGT in google and 2nd link down is primera owners club and you can see it there. The wheels don't look good in that pic though!@@teme5529
I have a feeling my CG10DE coilpack just about gets its 60BHP and 60ldft torque. I'm not going to concentrate on upping the performance given it's an automatic with the CVT transmission (though I do have a larger N15 Almera airbox to install). However, I'm concentrating on areas that I can easily change using OEM parts. For example, at the rear, I have the eyelets that will allow me to fit the rear anti rollbar. I have the bar (took a while to source one, yours, being a CGA3DE, may already have one unless it was originally a CGA10DE) and the drop links, as well as the mounts and bushes to go onto the rear beam. Another easy modification is to install front vented discs. You need a pair of calipers, caliper carriers and discs from an N15 Almera 1.6 . The carriers bolt straight onto the K11s struts and the discs should mount straight up onto the hubs given they have the same offset and hub centre bore.
Yes mine was originally CG10, we swapped the CGA3 in a couple of months ago. I think I may do the brake upgrade eventually, but not too urgent for me at the minute as I don’t drive it crazy.
Also providing they fit under 13s haha.
@@TheCruise94 That's a good point! I have some SE+ spec 14 inch alloys on mine so they should fit without issue, but like you....I don't go mad, it's nowhere near quick enough to be able to do that :)!!. Following your project with interest, it's looking good thus far.
Nicely done, car's looking good mate, sounds nice too.
Thanks dude!
Hi is micra on standard springs and shocks, and what's the wheels size is there any rubbing, do you recommend the wheels, thanks.
As the revs are wrong on the dyno, I'm pretty sure that your peak bhp figure is also going to be wrong, given that bhp is calculated by the dyno as (torque x revs)/5252. Over-reported revs is going to mean over-reported bhp.
Edit: I was incorrect above - the dyno not knowing the correct engine revs won't affect the bhp reading. If the dyno believes that the engine revs are higher than they actually are, then this will increase the engine-to-dyno-roller reduction ratio calculated by the dyno, with the decreased calculated engine torque cancelling out the incorrect over-reading of engine rpm.
are you going by the peak rpm for peak torque or peak power on your equation because the standard 1348 makes 80bhp at 6k and 89lbft at 4krpm and the result is going to be the power at the crank not the wheels where it matters. it's basically a OEM spec but it will have more transmission losses using the limited potential of the smaller engine matched gear ratios and the other factor in obscuring the true power is the difference between the original rolling circumference of the tyres and the ones you have now. So many variables can give a different result even tyre pressures can add a couple of ponies in the pocket
@bevbiltbmw I wouldn't say it was my equation: torque x revs / 5252 is the way horsepower is calculated.
"Are you going by the peak rpm for peak torque or peak power on your equation?". The answer is neither, by itself - horsepower is measured not by peak torque alone or by revs alone, but by the result of the multiplication of torque and rpm together.
The reason that horsepower often continues to climb as rpm continues up the rev range, even though the engine's peak torque has already been passed, is because torque falls after the peak at a slower rate than the rate at which revs increase. For example, if an engine produces 100 lb-ft of torque at 3,000 rpm and only 90 lb-ft of torque at 4,000 rpm, it will still produce more horsepower at 4,000 because:
4,000 x 90 / 5,252 = 68 bhp
3,000 x 100 / 5,252 = 47 bhp
In this example, torque fell by 10%, but revs increased by 25%, so bhp increased.
Engine manufacturers state their bhp claims at the crank, which is the only accurate way to measure it.
Rolling road dynos measure only torque at the wheels and dyno roller speed (because the wheels-to-dyno-roller interface is the only torque-measuring point that the dyno has with the car) and from these they calculate bhp at the wheels. To estimate engine horsepower, the dyno measures how fast the rollers decelerate on the rundown from peak revs with the clutch in. This gives the drag produced by the drivetrain, which, in turn, gives the amount of bhp taken to spin the drivetrain. This power figure is then added to the power measured on the dyno power run to give an estimate of engine bhp.
Tyre and wheel size have no effect on the bhp measurement taken by a dyno because roller speed is one of the measurements taken by the dyno. If a car, for example, had tyres on it with a 10 inch total diameter, that would be a circumference of 10 x 3.14 = 31.4 inches. If the tyres are then replaced for ones with a 20 inch diameter, the circumference would be 20 x 3.14 = 62.8 inches. The 20" tyre would thus drive the dyno roller at double the speed of the 10" tyre at a given engine rpm, but because the diameter of the larger tyre is doubled, we have also halved the torque applied to the dyno roller. The net effect of the tyre size change is therefore zero: the two-times-greater speed at the edge of the of the larger tyre is cancelled out by the halving of the torque.
Rolling road dynos do vary in their ability to both measure torque accurately at the wheels and to estimate accurate engine bhp figures, so no rolling road dyno should ever be relied on to give a totally accurate bhp figure.
Put a supercharger on it!
Are you thinking about putting the crankshaft pulley and flywheel from the 1.0? (was the flywheel replaced when you changed the gearbox?)
They are quite lighter, should make the engine rev easier.
1.0 Flywheel and clutch are already in, we couldn’t get the pulleys off so it’s still on the 1.4 pulley. Probably won’t change the pulley now that it’s in the car. But it revs quick just with the box and clutch!
You should definitely put some gizfab bits on
Gizfab intake going on soon.
Scream turbo! My 1300cc has 110hp / 150nm with 0.35bar compression. for the next project (k10 1.3) I will compress to 0.5bar and I assume that the power would be 130hp and 180nm.
That sounds about right,that is aproximately what i am making at .5,going to turn it op to 1 bar as i just installed water meth injection to keep it nice and cool. Hoping to get about 180 hp😮
Got to be a new mid section next, right? Then unlock the power thats there with a speeduino? I have throttle bodies to put on my CGA3 but i just cant find the time!
Definitely need a new, less-restrictive mid section. I’ve not heard of that one, I was gonna go with DET3 as they’re popular on these
@@TheCruise94 personally I'd go stand alone. There are so many cheap options these days. Mega squirt could be another good one. I was also thinking you'll have de-catted the CGA3 by adding the tubular manifold which will give an extra couple of hp.
Wow
how come it loses so much power (in terms of % of BHP) to the wheels? I thought FF cars lose less?
I’m sure somebody knows the science behind that but I’m not your guy haha
How many inches is the tire?
13
8340rpms? Did you change the camshaft for hi rpms?
RPM is inaccurate. As the car doesn’t have a rev gauge the technician had to guess the starting RPM.
🚘👍
tornado systems ECU next maybe?
Tornado Systems is too expensive in my opinion. I’m going with DET 3, popular choice on these Micras
@@TheCruise94 fair enough. there's only one minor problem with the DET 3 in my eyes and its that you cant raise the rev limit (6500 rpm stock). i don't think its a problem if your gonna go boosted. but N/A higher RPM is where you might find more power if you put spiceier cams in. other than that the DET 3 is a brilliant choice.
I wasn’t aware of that. Not sure it’ll bother me too much to be honest when it’s mainly road use anyway. But I appreciate the advice
Spoiler from the 1.3 super please
you should clear your tails
Not for me! I think the red on red looks awesome with the cabs
Very very good , you have Instagram?
Yessir. @K11_Cruise