Not so sure about that. I think it’s probably much better for a blueprint/balance.
With those figures Uldis, I’m feeling better for the manner in which you smoked me at Croft.
Ian
But if you read the thread on SELOC, not wanting to start a flame war (as these FACTS seems to do) but the manifold “mostly” shifted the already available torque up the rev range, which will result in a higher BHP (BHP = Torque / 5252 IIRC)…
…So, while the headline BHP is higher IIRC it didn’t release any more torque so the arguements as to weather it’ll be faster are all speculation
Now with all this FIRE of BHP, you’d get 10 bhp from a nice frosty morning and on a day like today I think we’d all be down a good 10bhp in the afternoons heat! Anyone who’s done a summer trackday must have notice the big speed differential at the end of long straights between the morning and the afternoon, so personally I can’t be bothered to claw for 10 - 15 bhp, I’d rather sort the suspension, brakes and driver ability long before…
And if I wanted / needed more power then I’d look at getting a BIG increase! An engine transplant seems the only logical solution to me, I’d rather have a factory engine with more power “from the box” so to speak…
All very much IMHO!
I’d rather have a factory engine with more power “from the box” so to speak…
bingo!
The only graph I saw Uldis was on Seloc which showed a small improvement at the top end. Now anyone can design a manifold to give it’s best at a specific rpm band. What we were lead to believe was that this new design would produce an improvement right across the range. I haven’t got the blinkers on - if the new new version does what it says on the tin then more power to Jim. But I get sick of hearing year in year out claims being made by various people who come up with excuse after excuse before fading away… It would be great if this wasn’t one of them.
And that Mark, is why I don’t visit Seloc anymore. Anything that one does gets slagged.
I am trying to do things to improve in general, and pass on the info I get.
Now, you all have to bear in mind that these were tests, and at the end of the experiments we’ll end up with a slightly higher torque curve everywhere (from the 210 curve) and better top end. I will not stop until this is achieved.
And reliebly.
I for one don’t need or want 50 ft/lbs of torque more. The car is plenty fast as it is. And I certainly prefer lineaity to a wall of torque.
So that is the target, with about 230 BHP.
Now, if I run 230 BHP for a year or so (staying at 1.8), and many trackdays, would everyone else still slag the K?
You know what? I still think so.
It’s nature. Some British like to look elsewhere, where I chose to live here, and I wanted a british car. I could have got an MG or something else, but I chose the Exige. And will keep its engine.
Personally, I believe that any car engine creating > 120 BHP/L and subjected not only to looong track sessions but lots of B-road driving and general driving is a good one.
And if there is a way to refine it, I will.
And will pass on the recipy for those who want to do it.
And Ian, at Croft I had installed the CAT, because the silencer had almost no packing, it was too loud. At 210 BHP it revved pretty well to 8.5K, with the CAT I needed to shift about 7.4K, so your guess on power is as good as mine. 205?
Ian, this is not a business, and there is nothing to be gained from releasing claims. I’m not selling anything. Jim is doing some experiments, and we will get some results. We’re posting the results of our experiments as they happen, and I would still like to keep them that way.
I’m just another enthusiast, just as you, and [censored] happens.
Now, I went through some bad times a while ago, crashed the car and lost the job. My car is the guinea pig.
Give us some slack.
Uldis, if you (and hopefully a few others) run a year with 230hp, I doubt many if any will be slagging you off. That is called producing results. This as you know has been the core of the argument. People have asked time and time again to see the theory put into practice. The Honda and Audi conversions have not been around as long as Simon E’s theories. Yet you will find them hammering around a track every weekend.
Uldis, you can’t just combine power/torque curves. Any change will effect the entire engine. Its like aero on cars, a wing change at the front will effect how the rear wing works. Also I can’t see a CAT making any difference, my car runs a CAT and I have driven identical engines without and there is nothing in it.
Ok, so you guys will ge us some slack?
My car should be back for the end of the month, and then we can retake the experiments.
What I need to do next is:
-install more powerful fuel pump
-install longer trumpets
-install second version of Jim’s exhaust. Try third as well (constructed already)
-map and test on Dastek RR
-repeat
There is everything to be gained by releasing figures. Humans are a suspicious bunch. The world is flooded with products that claim xyz. What on earth is there to lose by not releasing figures if the product performs as claimed? For one it stops all the bullsh*t and arguments. Not to mention the commercial opportunities.
Wouldn’t it be wise to just follow what SteveB has done? Doesn’t seem much point in going through the development process if somebody has already done it and is willing to share.
Uldis, you can’t just combine power/torque curves. Any change will effect the entire engine. Its like aero on cars, a wing change at the front will effect how the rear wing works. Also I can’t see a CAT making any difference, my car runs a CAT and I have driven identical engines without and there is nothing in it.
Precisely, changes don’t produce the same results in every case. I was surprised too!
In my case, with this (home made CAT) there was no point on revving it past 7.4K
That is just what happened.
I think this CAT has some very sharp angles on the expansion, but that was the effect
Ian, you suspicious human. AFAIK thre are no release of figures, but results of experiments.
Not got the results we ant to achieve yet. Wait.
Randy, if people repeated what others did there would be no evolution.
I happened to find other people that think like me.
Allow us to go on. Applaud us for our efforts if you can (a little encourgement helps). Especially because we’re not a business, just enthusiasts.
Uldis, I have never attacked the idea of producing something new or different and I support your efforts. What winds me up are the paper claims, which are never backed up with anything solid. I have no objection to Jim or anyone else discussing their idea’s, but not when accompanied by lots of hype and paper claims. There’s just no need - better to keep your mouth shut and deliver the goods. Hell I’ve come up with my own share of hare brained ideas - water cooled MMC discs anyone
Allow us to go on. Applaud us for our efforts if you can (a little encourgement helps). Especially because we’re not a business, just enthusiasts.
You are a proper enthusiast Uldis and it�s great that you are trying new directions with your car. I’m looking forward to the next Exiges day when we can see the next steps in your cars evolution.
Unfortunately some of your associates are les palatable and you get caught in the cross fire .
i 4 one am really interested in what u r doing. I love the idea of keeping the original engine dont know why? its not logical but… thats how i feel
any chance of a breakdown of what u have done and approx cost?
I know u r using your car as a test bed so costs are hard to state but a good guess at what u might think it would cost at retail compared to a honda or audi conversion
It was around �3K, and the list of what was done is published in this site somewhere, but I couldn’t find it.
But basically was (from memory): new liners (std), rings, bolts, porting, 1mm oversize valves, EBD manifold, Piper 1444 cams, same rods, pistons and rest.
I had already done the Emerald myslef and engine removal/reinstall I did myself.
Look in the previous posts, if you don’t find the information you want (there’s lots of it) PM me and I’ll take you through the process.
Is 3K the cost to anyone Uldis or did you get a discount for being the first?
Well, he passed on several things at cost to me, or I paid them directly and had them shipped to him.
The thing is that he doesn’t run a business doing it, he does it only because he loves the K. And he’s passing on the recipie for everyone to use.
Now, if it did become a business, maybe it would be more expensive, or if you wanted a higher spec than mine (like 1.9 or 2.0L) because of the bespoke crank.
Since I plan to keep my car forever, I guess that in a few years time I will have the engine redone as a 2.0L but that would be only until I’ve done plenty hard miles on the current one.
I would like this engine to reach 50K.
It would be interesting to know what Simon would charge, on a proper commercial basis, for a roll-in roll-out conversion, Like you get with the Honda/Audi/Durex. The K rebuilds keep getting compared with the Honda/Audi/Durex, which is fine, but without that figure it�s impossible to compare them on an even footing. Running costs would be interesting to work out too.