In view of the shortage of Goetze liners and the uncertainty over AE liners I am about to procure supplies of quality spun cast liners to OE spec. These will be made to my dimensions (basically correct OE dimensions) and will be finish honed to OE spec. to make them a drop in solution.
Until OE liners are available these should make worthy replacements. Because of the quantities involved the unit price will be higher than the OE or AE liners.
I will be able to confirm pricing and delivery dates soon.
Let’s try not to turn this thread into another episode of the Muppet Show…
The liners have a proven track record and I am very happy for them to be made to OE spec.
I have regularly had hardness tests conducted on cylinder heads which were suspect, I now have a much more local means to do so.
If you have comments to do with other threads, then please post them there, that way threads do not become overburdened and impenetrable with irrelevant information.
Interesting stuff guys, but may I just express a (maybe silly) query I have?
Well, what is all this story regarding the liners? Is it so difficult to match the liners to the rest of the engine? I remember a few years ago, we�ve build a 1600 cc Peugeot 8V Group N engine revving up to 8100 rpm. Used it for 2 years, with no problem (the car died before the engine�). Before this, we�ve build a Peugeot 1300 Group A engine, revving up to 8600 rpm and producing 141 BHP (one of the most powerfull in Europe). Both engines where working fine for many full time rallying years with no issues at all. Especially the 1300 cc engine (which actually still works on a friends 106 rallye) had done around 30 rallies (3 years), around 1800 km each (we were allowed to practice with the rally car then) before we rebuild it changing just a few bits, like cambelt, bearings, piston rings etc ( but no pistons/valves/valve springs or other rather complicated parts). I know it is just about 110BHP/lit but we are talking about a 1300cc 8V engine. The only thing we did to the liners was to polish them in a local engine builder machinery shop (I hope I used the right word for this job!)
We never measured head hardness or did any other “special” measurements. And never had a HGF, (or any engine problem at all)!
And no, we definitely weren�t slow!
Is there something wrong with the design of the K-Series, which makes the power improvement so difficult and complicated job? For example, a 2000cc Honda engine can rev at 9k rpm all day, producing 240 BHP and pass the MOT at the same time with no problem. And we are talking about a factory build engine (with all the mass production imperfections), with no throttle bodies and “high performance” cams and ECU. In the mean time, it sounds like a rocket science to build a 2lit Rover K-series which can produce around 270BHP, without knowing if this time it will break or not.
P.S. I am not trying to say anything, and please don�t take me wrong; I am just trying to clear a few things I have in my mind regarding the development and maintenance of a high performance K-Series engine.
Interesting stuff guys, but may I just express a (maybe silly) query I have?
Well, what is all this story regarding the liners? Is it so difficult to match the liners to the rest of the engine? I remember a few years ago, we�ve build a 1600 cc Peugeot 8V Group N engine revving up to 8100 rpm. Used it for 2 years, with no problem (the car died before the engine�). Before this, we�ve build a Peugeot 1300 Group A engine, revving up to 8600 rpm and producing 141 BHP (one of the most powerfull in Europe). Both engines where working fine for many full time rallying years with no issues at all. Especially the 1300 cc engine (which actually still works on a friends 106 rallye) had done around 30 rallies (3 years), around 1800 km each (we were allowed to practice with the rally car then) before we rebuild it changing just a few bits, like cambelt, bearings, piston rings etc ( but no pistons/valves/valve springs or other rather complicated parts). I know it is just about 110BHP/lit but we are talking about a 1300cc 8V engine. The only thing we did to the liners was to polish them in a local engine builder machinery shop (I hope I used the right word for this job!)
We never measured head hardness or did any other “special” measurements. And never had a HGF, (or any engine problem at all)!
And no, we definitely weren�t slow!
Is there something wrong with the design of the K-Series, which makes the power improvement so difficult and complicated job? For example, a 2000cc Honda engine can rev at 9k rpm all day, producing 240 BHP and pass the MOT at the same time with no problem. And we are talking about a factory build engine (with all the mass production imperfections), with no throttle bodies and “high performance” cams and ECU. In the mean time, it sounds like a rocket science to build a 2lit Rover K-series which can produce around 270BHP, without knowing if this time it will break or not.
P.S. I am not trying to say anything, and please don�t take me wrong; I am just trying to clear a few things I have in my mind regarding the development and maintenance of a high performance K-Series engine.
No George, it’s not hard to build a good K, all you need to do is observe good engine building practice and use quality - OE or better parts, niether of which happens with the K with the exception of Judd’s BTCC efforts in recent years. You also need to understand the design of the K because it is so very different from other mass produced engines, and this is again where so many fail.
As far as the honda k20 is concerned look at it’s performance relative to Judd’s 2L K. the Judd produces 275bhp the honda 288bhp, having had a lot more money thrown at it’s development. The WSR Ks are the very same engines they started racing 3 years ago, whereas Dynamics build complete new engines every season. So far in 4 seasons racing the honda has failed 17 times - mostly broken valves and timing chains. The K has failed just twice. The judd BTCC engine costs 14 grand the honda 25 grand.
Incedently in the US where the honda is frequently tuned it has a reputation for spinning bearings above 8500 rpm.
simon
If its so easy why did poor old Angelo have to use a mates car to race in SELOC Forums - hasn’t he been waiting for you to build his 2L K for about 3 years now?
No George, it’s not hard to build a good K, all you need to do is observe good engine building practice and use quality - OE or better parts, niether of which happens with the K with the exception of Judd’s BTCC efforts in recent years. You also need to understand the design of the K because it is so very different from other mass produced engines, and this is again where so many fail.
Thanks Simon. That�s better! This is actually what I would expect to hear, as it really sounds reasonable.
What liners do Judd use in that 3rd place turkington car?
Chromoduros, but they are Judd’s own design. Chromoduros are made soley for those that supply a design, so you do that and pay for tooling and you have your own proprietry liner. They are made of steel rather than iron, so have 3 times the hoop strength, and don’t distort like iron liners, especially gravity cast liners, are made to exceptionally tight dimensions, and have a very hard, durable low friction coating that means they last multiple the life of standard production liners - ie Kseries Goetze, honda k20 or audi.
simon
Errrr, Audi’s don’t have liners They have a nice boat anchor of a block.
Cast iron is an excellent material for bores and with a regular ring doesn’t need any coating. The hoop strength of an iron-block bore will be far superior to any free-standing liner
Millions of engines have uncoated iron bores and manage extremely well with them.
Many iron bored engines last with minmal wear for over 100,000 miles and the friction reductions are minimal at best with the sort of engine speeds acheived on road going engines.
An iron block will certainly be more stable in a forced induction engine, have a look at the turbo-F1 engines, they were iron blocked.
The extra weight is easily compensated for by some simple suspension adjustments and the extra torque.
maybe it’s not broke, but it is prehistoric, inefficient and clumsy - the very antithesis of the K series ethos!
You forgot reliable, inexpensive and very powerful out of the box.
The main reason for coating a block is to do away with the need for liners, lower friction is simply a by-product.
BMW and a number of other manufacturers have fallen foul of coated bores in the past, I have seen them come and go, all cast as the answer to a maidens prayer until they fail, Nicasil, Sulf-BT amongst others.
F1 Liners dont really have to last that long do they…
Anything can be improved, even an F1 liner, however it comes down to economics and perceived benefit for the cost.
I expect Audi and Ford have produced a lot more reliable engines than you ever will despite your protests that they are behind the times.
It’s pretty simple really with an ally block, you either coat the block (hardly new technology, nicasil and plasma coating have been around a long time) or fit a liner. Rover didnt use a coated liner in the K did they?
Anyway, back on topic, I should be receiving some sample direct replacement liners in the next few days for those who are interested.
If these check out OK then I will be procuring a supply.
It’s just your usual blinkered intepretation. Using a coating on an ally bore does away with the need for liners. I didnt say that it was the only reason for a coating, it only requires a couple of brain cells to see the meaning, perhaps you can ask someone else to help.
I have seen plenty of coated liners and coated bores, probably before you have seen any at all.
Anyway I see thread degeneration again, I have given all the information needed to this thread about liner availability that I need to. I will post again for the benefit of interested parties when I have more news. Until then no more posts from me.