Putting a bike engine in a Peugeot 206
Putting a bike engine in a Peugeot 206
Author
Discussion

Adiebee

Original Poster:

6 posts

141 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
Right, I have just acquired a Peugeot 206 with a stuffed engine (cam belt snapped). In my garage I have a Honda cbr1000 engine.

Thinking of putting the bike engine in the car, now with the obvious making it all fit, what are the other pro's and con's?




Mr Obertshaw

2,187 posts

260 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
Con- It will still be a Peugeot 206...

Adiebee

Original Poster:

6 posts

141 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
agreed, it will always be a Peugeot, and again, yes the lighter the car the better., but is there a pro?

Mr Obertshaw

2,187 posts

260 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
No

sebhaque

6,535 posts

211 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
Welcome to PH, we're not all s! rolleyes

The question you should be asking yourself is why not. It won't be an easy job; changing from, for example, a 1.4 to a 1.8 engine in a 206 isn't difficult as the mounts, electrics, gauges and driving gear are all sourceable from Peugeot. A bike engine will need bespoke versions of all of those - while there are kits to do so on certain cars, there's a whole host of issues including using the starter as a reverse gear (bike gearboxes obviously don't have a reverse and you might struggle with a 3 point turn otherwise!).

Since you have the engine and car already my first port of call would just be to do some research as to bike engines in cars in general. Smart cars and Minis are typical candidates, maybe even go on a Mini forum and ask for advice from guys who've stuck Hayabusas in their Minis. It's doable and I am confused as to why supposed petrolheads on here are lambasting you for wanting to stick a bike engine in a car and go balls out.

Best of luck!

Adiebee

Original Poster:

6 posts

141 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
Okay, so the lighter, higher revving and more bhp engine will not have any pro's over the standard one?

castex

5,186 posts

303 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
They tend to look silly because the engine is so light the front aims up. Sort the springs and it might look right; it'll never sound stock but it should be funny.

LaurasOtherHalf

21,429 posts

226 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
How much torque does the bike engine make? Will it be enough?

TREMAiNE

4,164 posts

179 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
If you're going to go through all that hassle, why not make it mid engined, rear wheel drive?

TheFinners

544 posts

157 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
Could be a hilarious project!

sebhaque

6,535 posts

211 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
Adiebee said:
Okay, so the lighter, higher revving and more bhp engine will not have any pro's over the standard one?
Well for one it'll be lighter so there's less weight in the car, it's higher revving so arguably you'll be in a bigger power band for longer, and it's got more bhp so you'll be seeing increased performance. The standard 206 engines are pretty dismal and designed to cater for people who think an MOT is a service. A beefy bike engine, while somewhat strained with the extra weight it's lugging around (might want to look into oil cooling to displace the additional load), will still perform so much better than a boggo 206.

And I agree, it'll be extremely funny watching a 206 leave Focus STs for dead at the lights. I had a VTEC Mini that was much the same, there's no reason to do so but more importantly no reason to not do so.

GavinPearson

5,715 posts

281 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
It is a very bad idea.

The duty cycle of a bike engine moving a rider and bike along at 80 mph is very low compared to moving a Pug 206 at the same speed. The engine will likely fail due to fatigue.

I would fix it and sell it.

Adiebee

Original Poster:

6 posts

141 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
Thanks Sebhaque,

I understand the fitting of the engine will be a little tricky to say the least, and the reverse is something I have been pondering without having to revert to flintstone style and I think I know a way round all that.

As the Peugeot is fwd, the obvious diff to use is the one in the Peugeot gearbox, so dump the bell housing, make a clever attachment to join the bike engine and peugeot gearbox, which will effectively give you 30 gears and 6 reverse gears.

I know you won't be able to use all the gears, and reading and looking at kit cars with bike engines, most have high revving engines doing lower than wanted speeds, I.e 7500 rpm at 80mph( not nice) you can get round most of that. The issue is, you will lose power driving a second drive train.

This is where I think to myself, you have the low range for accelerating and fun, then whack it in high for economy. Will this work?

VonSenger

2,465 posts

219 months

Thursday 8th January 2015
quotequote all
GavinPearson said:
It is a very bad idea.

The duty cycle of a bike engine moving a rider and bike along at 80 mph is very low compared to moving a Pug 206 at the same speed. The engine will likely fail due to fatigue.

I would fix it and sell it.
+1 it'll go pop in a week.

PhillipM

6,564 posts

219 months

Friday 9th January 2015
quotequote all
If you can do the fabrication, great. But unless I was stripping it out and midmounting it, I wouldn't bother, just pop the 180bhp gti engine in...

Adiebee

Original Poster:

6 posts

141 months

Friday 9th January 2015
quotequote all
I accept your comments about the durability of the engine, but was not thinking of doing this for top end, the reason for two gearboxes was to use the gearing without stressing the engine.

I know I might have to change gear about 5 times before touching 30 mph, that is just a matter of working out ratios and with the gearboxes that is quite a simple task.

Hmmm.

A lot to ponder.

Greengecko

594 posts

177 months

Friday 9th January 2015
quotequote all
sebhaque said:
Well for one it'll be lighter so there's less weight in the car, it's higher revving so arguably you'll be in a bigger power band for longer, and it's got more bhp so you'll be seeing increased performance. The standard 206 engines are pretty dismal and designed to cater for people who think an MOT is a service. A beefy bike engine, while somewhat strained with the extra weight it's lugging around (might want to look into oil cooling to displace the additional load), will still perform so much better than a boggo 206.

And I agree, it'll be extremely funny watching a 206 leave Focus STs for dead at the lights. I had a VTEC Mini that was much the same, there's no reason to do so but more importantly no reason to not do so.
I reckon even a standard 998cc mini would leave us standing. 0-30 in an ST is pretty poor, along with the chocolate drive shafts and power/torque limits in 1st/2nd.

gazza285

11,218 posts

238 months

Friday 9th January 2015
quotequote all
Space framed, plastic windows, mid engined and lightweight double wishbones, etc, etc... Yes.

As it is, driving the gearbox input shaft? No.

anonymous-user

84 months

Friday 9th January 2015
quotequote all
It's the clutch that's going to let the side down!


Either you try to find a car "rated" clutch that'll be fine spinning round at 12krpm without going bang, or you stick with the bike clutch, which will go bang the 3rd time you try to pull out of a tight uphill junction....

Just get a cheap 2.0 16v XUJ engine and stick that in

Lugy

830 posts

213 months

Friday 9th January 2015
quotequote all
Have a look at class 7 Autograss cars for inspiration, though if you intend on doing anything the 206 would need to go on a serious diet! I'm thinking a very low space framed silhouette type car would be the order of the day. Not sure how much 206 you'd actually have left at the end though!