Thanks for your recent posts, Simon. Whilst I may not agree with some of your views, I for one, appreciate the tone of your recent responses
Well having considered that the K20 doesn’t give you too much extra over a 190 K I can now say I was well and truely wrong.
During a Walshy day on Friday a back-to-back test proved (in my hands) one is 10% faster around his small handling circuit. I loved it! I’m almost ashamed to say it but it just seems more suited to the car.
Ian
Ian
…but the 190 is generally about 185bhp and 138/140lbft
best std na honda I have seen is 220bhp 154 lbft… so there you go
but… as yet published my mild [much milder than VHPD] cam hydraulic cam engine 221bhp 158lbft…do I make my point?and the mech cam 1.8s are a big step up on that…
simon
Well if the best you have seen for a NASP honda is 220/154 then here is a nice bench dyno of 249/171 for you:
Thats a UK engine with standard cams - rollers/exhaust and maping produce the power - the dry sump is pretty neutral.
hey guys… iam on holiday so haven�t gone quiet permanently but just taking in the sun and fairer sex (sort of thing)… i see its all kicked off on this post, great stuff!
still got loads of questions to ask when i get back end of Aug�.
oh yeah and thx Quo for the replies.
happy holidays
Ian
…but the 190 is generally about 185bhp and 138/140lbft
best std na honda I have seen is 220bhp 154 lbft… so there you go
but… as yet published my mild [much milder than VHPD] cam hydraulic cam engine 221bhp 158lbft…do I make my point?and the mech cam 1.8s are a big step up on that…
simon
Well if the best you have seen for a NASP honda is 220/154 then here is a nice bench dyno of 249/171 for you:
Thats a UK engine with standard cams - rollers/exhaust and maping produce the power - the dry sump is pretty neutral.
If you read my post I said std na honda, ie without roller barrels and dry sump
but you make my point because if my cheapest most basic spec Ks beat your hondas for power and torque plus are 70kg odd lighter, it is very cheap to put in a mech cam - 200 odd quid for new tappets, 50 for shims and a little more for stiffer valve springs and you get horses and torque to shade your roller, dry sumped honda for a lot less money than roller barrels and a dry sump - what are they togeather 2/3 grand???!!!?
You could of course keep on going and tune your honda, but I’ll tell you now the 2L Ks will shade any of the sc hondas around now and at half the engine weight…you can’t get away from it
simon [/quote]
Thats just a difference of opinion on what counts as “std” Simon - a 220 k series has all sorts of goodies in it so comparing it it to a K20 with rollers and a decent exhaust (remember the sump is power neutral at best - its there for packaging reasons) is far from unreasonable. The package without dry sump is significantly lighter as well as the rollers, as well as being pretty are very light and come with a lightwieght altenator/mounting kit.
Your most basic builds - Uldis and “MarchHare”, I have yet to see a credible 220+ graph on them (ie one from emerald), for the record, here is one from emerald for a std (even on your rather one sided definition) showing 228/161
http://www.dyno-plot.co.uk/dyno/dynoplot/id%3D314%26but_sea%3Dqs/Lotus-Elise-Link-Up.htm
This one has 40lb/ft more early on in the curve than the only half decent plot of uldis car I have. Happy to compare a better curve if you have one as I am sure this one is out of date.
Add the far superior gearbox to that mix, and its bye bye. you can’t get away from the fact that the cascade curves give the game away for the old PG1 hanging around the neck of a basoc k series tweak. And of course the honda gearbox is “std” so . . . .
I am also happy to post up a comparision of one of your engines compared to the 250bhp K20 on standard internals. Then we can judge the shade - its all open and above board.
I honestly can’t quite swollow that you have a 2l nasp K thats going to be knocking out 350+bhp and weighing 85kg?
(have a go at finding the rev-limiter eh Ian ).
Well if you are going to have a light flywheel and those Edwards boys are going to mount the shift-lights at slightly the wrong angle, what’d you expect…soooorry
I must say it did feel rather planted, especially at the back end, which I put down to some extra weight. Still, the power plant hid it, great drive. I’d love to try a similar performing K though.
Next time somebody has a Honda conversion at Donny please put it on the weigh station (turn left through the gates right at the end of the pitlane). My relatively std S1 with A/c is 780kgs.
Ian
All ready done that Ian, heres the weights from the Elise variants for last years Tuner GP.
Steve’s S1 657Kg (18L)
Craig’s S1 757Kg (17L)
Randy’s Exige 800Kg (25L)
Tony’s S1 815Kg (~6l)
Christian’s SC Exige 825Kg (30L)
Niels SC S2 840Kg (28L)
Christian
All ready done that Ian, heres the weights from the Elise variants for last years Tuner GP.
Steve’s S1 657Kg (18L)
Craig’s S1 757Kg (17L)
Randy’s Exige 800Kg (25L)
Tony’s S1 815Kg (~6l)
Christian’s SC Exige 825Kg (30L)
Niels SC S2 840Kg (28L)Christian
Steve Butts 650kg S1 - always makes me smile when I see that figure, brilliant work.
Do you all use the K Pro??? and what other options do you have e.g fuel pump, alloy rad, oil cooler etc. Been thinking about the Honda + S/C.
I used to use a MoTec ECU, now on an EFI - mainly using the EFI as it now gives me access to a bunch of race and series winning maps without the hassle of conversion/testing. The MoteC was a truely loverly thing though but not cheap.
You can use the KPro, the AEM, the Omex/Gems, EFi, MoTeC and one other, tip of my tounge, begins with “D”, argghhg driving me mad.
The KPro wil have the advanges of keeping loom changes to a minimum IMO, MoTec for mapping and reliability, EFI for development, OMEX is not very much money IIRC.
You will need to sort out the fueling for any decent honda install especially a SC one. I just bunged a decent bosch pump in line.
Well if the best you have seen for a NASP honda is 220/154 then here is a nice bench dyno of 249/171 for you:
Thats a UK engine with standard cams - rollers/exhaust and maping produce the power - the dry sump is pretty neutral.
If you read my post I said std na honda, ie without roller barrels and dry sump
but you make my point because if my cheapest most basic spec Ks beat your hondas for power and torque plus are 70kg odd lighter, it is very cheap to put in a mech cam - 200 odd quid for new tappets, 50 for shims and a little more for stiffer valve springs and you get horses and torque to shade your roller, dry sumped honda for a lot less money than roller barrels and a dry sump - what are they togeather 2/3 grand???!!!?
You could of course keep on going and tune your honda, but I’ll tell you now the 2L Ks will shade any of the sc hondas around now and at half the engine weight…you can’t get away from it
simon
Thats just a difference of opinion on what counts as “std” Simon - a 220 k series has all sorts of goodies in it so comparing it it to a K20 with rollers and a decent exhaust (remember the sump is power neutral at best - its there for packaging reasons) is far from unreasonable. The package without dry sump is significantly lighter as well as the rollers, as well as being pretty are very light and come with a lightwieght altenator/mounting kit.
Your most basic builds - Uldis and “MarchHare”, I have yet to see a credible 220+ graph on them (ie one from emerald), for the record, here is one from emerald for a std (even on your rather one sided definition) showing 228/161
http://www.dyno-plot.co.uk/dyno/dynoplot/id%3D314%26but_sea%3Dqs/Lotus-Elise-Link-Up.htm >
This one has 40lb/ft more early on in the curve than the only half decent plot of uldis car I have. Happy to compare a better curve if you have one as I am sure this one is out of date.
Add the far superior gearbox to that mix, and its bye bye. you can’t get away from the fact that the cascade curves give the game away for the old PG1 hanging around the neck of a basoc k series tweak. And of course the honda gearbox is “std” so . . . .
I am also happy to post up a comparision of one of your engines compared to the 250bhp K20 on standard internals. Then we can judge the shade - its all open and above board.
I honestly can’t quite swollow that you have a 2l nasp K thats going to be knocking out 350+bhp and weighing 85kg?
The least of my engines for your interest is a 200bhp, 145lbft engine. The engine was done to make a point and uses entirely standard Rover parts bar 285 cams , springs, caps and forged pistons. ie it uses a std k16 head small valves, std liners rods etc, std fuelling, no trick windage or scraper plates etc. I expext a 1.4L gravel engine also with a std K16 head, but the advantage of better fuelling etc etc to beat this humble engine on the rollers shortly.
I say this to make the point that even this the cheapest, most basic std 1,8 engine is only 15lbft of torque behind your best std k20 at any point in the curve, not 40 lbft!
I have no idea where Uldis’s engine is right now because he has trouble mapping…but others with his spec are well ahead of both your honda graphs, std and roller engine. You will see graphs in due course.
The 2L engines weigh 69kg, 73 with the new dry sump.
the best sc honda I have seen is 310bhp?
so where is the 350?
a properly built 2L sc engine should easily make 400bhp, but you would need to strengthen pistons and lower the compression ratio to avoid the risk of piston failure and the need to knock back the ignition on an engine with the 11;1 CR of the honda, not doing so isa a nonsense.
simon [/quote]
Evosal is currently running 360bhp SC with a fairly stock K20 - so were is the std 2l K thats going to trouble that?
The krazy yankees are already running 400+ charged and on the k20 gear box. Love to see 400+ running through a PG1
If you are going to find your results then I am afraid that we have to go on whats actually been admitted to. Sadly for you thats Uldis’ engine showing as much as 40ft/lb down - one of the huge advantages with the K20 is the iVTEC, its a pain in many respects but it enables you to keep a big fat area under the curve that you are always going to struggle to match. Add that to the gearbox you are lumbered with and its game over.
For the record - here are the dyno-plots of the KingK engines, compared to a coupl eof nasp hondas. As I have said more than happy to put up more, if you don’t want to share results then thats up to you but ultimately we know its because the results are just not there.
All ready done that Ian, heres the weights from the Elise variants for last years Tuner GP.
Steve’s S1 657Kg (18L)
Craig’s S1 757Kg (17L)
Randy’s Exige 800Kg (25L)
Tony’s S1 815Kg (~6l)
Christian’s SC Exige 825Kg (30L)
Niels SC S2 840Kg (28L)Christian
Steve Butts 650kg S1 - always makes me smile when I see that figure, brilliant work.
It’s nearer 620 kg now. He’s now aiming for under 600 !
Bernard
Beating 360 with a na 2L will not happen in the next two months, beating 310 will, beyond two months…there are plans well underway.
This is a bit ambiguous (to me anyway) Are you saying that you will have a 2L K that will make more than 310 BHP on the rollers in the next 2 months ?
And when is this test day for the cars planned for ? I wouldn’t mind coming along.
Bernard
All ready done that Ian, heres the weights from the Elise variants for last years Tuner GP.
Steve’s S1 657Kg (18L)
Craig’s S1 757Kg (17L)
Randy’s Exige 800Kg (25L)
Tony’s S1 815Kg (~6l)
Christian’s SC Exige 825Kg (30L)
Niels SC S2 840Kg (28L)Christian
Just to add one, mine (Duratec '98 S1) weighed in at Oulton at 764kg with an indicated 26litres on board.
Beating 360 with a na 2L will not happen in the next two months, beating 310 will, beyond two months…there are plans well underway.
This is a bit ambiguous (to me anyway) Are you saying that you will have a 2L K that will make more than 310 BHP on the rollers in the next 2 months ?
And when is this test day for the cars planned for ? I wouldn’t mind coming along.
Bernard
I have been promised the cam blanks this week, now all I have to do is send them to France to be ground and the 2ls can go togeather. All that remains to do after that is to sort an over the gearbox exhaust.
So almost there…
You do realise you are heading for a major disappointment don’t you ? The K simply does not have the valve area or a suitable bore/stroke ratio to make that sort of power. Not on pump fuel, in fact probably not on any fuel.
But we shall see, or at least you will…
Bernard
Just a couple of questions for evosal and Bernard:
-
How many miles has evosal’s 360hp car gone? I think someone mentioned that the TTS civic type R has covered 10k+ miles with no problems at the same power?
-
Bernard, has your new 1.9L engine been on the rollers yet? How did it go?
Many thanks.