Post deleted by Admin5

The Oily Bits S1 Specific Topics
181

And Johnboy, well, I would expect him to say that, after all he does the Honda conversion.

If by that you mean “Johnboy did a honda job on his old shed 2 years ago” then you are correct, if you are trying to imply I have anything to do with other honda conversion then you are wrong.

Nothing against KingK(ong) but there are far too many factual inaccuracies in everything I have read so far (including the document) that I think the onus is on him to prove the case with a real world engine running at 220+

183

Collectively we shall await a single treasured dyno graph from just one of these wonder engines with ever so extremely slightly bated breath…

But no way am I holding it !!!

184

“I have to make an appology in that the S2000 engine is not a IVTEC. I was misquoted on that and I have no practical experience of the engine myself. The guys at Honda Mugan of course chuck away all the variable valve bits and consequently pay little attention to them, but I appologize for that mistake”

Sorry but that is just mince - they are fully aware of the spec of the engines they are running. You were not the one misquoted - you were the one doing the misquoting or were missinformed, or perhaps this mysterious unnamed “head engineer”. . . .

Perhaps the same “head engineer” that told you the FC20 runs “With a 75 mm stroke” (as per your “report”)?

Also you point at the K20 needing upgrading to run in race conditions (amazing, who would have thought it)

"12mm lift, more than 300 degrees (secret) cams and double springs.
Standard valves and rockersarms, full port and TBs.
Steel crank, flywheel, rods, forged pistons.
Uprated liners.
Blueprinted engine.

  • Sound familiar, very similar to a K if you’re expecting the highest level of performance."

Well for a start sounds very little like the stuff you are advocating for the k series to be frank and also you seem to neglect to mention that the level of performance produced is far in excess of that avaliable to the k series (as evidenced in the touring cars running the K20).

And like race teams care that the engines they run have limited lifespans! 200 mile between rebuilds anyone?

We know there are some good k series engines out there but how many of these are built the your exact recipie? Were are these 220 bhp ones built to this method and running for say 20000 miles? (I thought they started off being 240 bhp)

I am sure just being a bit impatient and there is a queue of owners brandishing emerald graphs just about to post.

186

Hi Simon

What bits on a 220 BHP don’t you have to throw away or modify then ? It’ll be quite a short list methinks.

By the way I didn’t remove the dualmass viscous damper in my flywheel. I was thinking about it but didn’t go ahead. It’s not there for torsional damping reasons but to reduce harshness and snatch in the driveline. The torsional damper is at the other end. The flywheel alone weighs 14 kgs so something will have to be done about it though !

For your information I am a great believer in the importance of correct balancing of the whole rotating and reciprocating assembly. Steve Smith has done several K engines for me and they are a delight to drive as they rev effortlessly.

Bernard

187

Read it again !!!

please, enough of the exclamation marks already.

I have to ask - read what again? Which bit?

Happy to read it and take on board whatever I have missed.

In return I have to ask you to answer the issues about K20 inaccurancies.

188

It’s curious about how defenseive people are getting… Johnboy, he made a “clerical error” RE: the K20, so… I’m sure you’ve misquoted facts about engine you simply know of? The only reason you know as much about the K20 is 'cos you’ve got one… So Simon (Erland) know as much about K… Why, 'cos he’s got one.

I agree, it’s a good engine, I’m quite fond of mine now and never would have thought it! Just search on SELOC for my love of Jap engines and the bag of nails that is the Rover K

Bernard’s on to something, giving a very viable turbo’d option, keep the rev’s low, get more torque than you can shake a particulary large torque wrench at and you’re laughing

As Phil said earlier, this information isn’t new (I don’t think principally there’s been any real conceptual development of engines since the 1900’s! Just machineing and engineering’s got better! The concept of a Turbo Charger has been around since the dawn of engines but no one could make something that could spin at 30,000 rpm!)… It’s just in one place and will hopefully get more people to build engines properly and therefore enjoy them more and worry less

I do worry about my VHPD (not as much as my front clam ATM LOL!), especially on long journeys… But if I knew it had been built like that I’d be more than happy

But my point is, stop b1tching at one another like pussy f**king girls and have a sensible discussion! Next you’ll all be talking at once with someone crying for no apparent reason, worry about chipped nails and being distrought that someone has the same “outfit” as you LOL!

191

Simon - plenty of people posting here know quite a fair bit about blueprinting engines and the importance of balancing. I know that Steve Smith is bloody good at balancing and knows a few tricks that most people don’t, sounds like he has worked on engines for a few of us so his techniques are not new here. The point I’m getting to is, firstly you are talking to all of us like children who don’t know sh*t about engines and, secondly, you are disputing people who are recognised experts and have got clear proof of what the K engine can and can’t do.

I’m more than happy to believe that, with careful parts selection and blueprinting/balancing, the VHPD K can be improved by some margin and offer increased reliability. This has got to be appealing to lots of people and when slotted in a lightweight car it makes for a nice package. Please stop making out that the K-series is this wonder engine though as it clearly isn’t and never will be. It is obviously a topic close to your heart and you have put time and effort into your research, this is bound to make you feel defensive but don’t disregard people who have had extensive experience of some of the K’s shortcomings.

192

Mark, stop worring on long journeys, just came back from a 3000 miles scotland trip with me beast (DVA head and all that…) and it was no problem at all. I notice that most of the bitching is coming from people using rised up engines
still, this is one of the best threads for ages …
laters,
B

193

Randy, true My comments apply to everyone getting on the defensive… I think this is how wars start

Bruno, well, won’t be worriing for a while I’m sure the Citreon Diesel will be pretty capable LOL! But seriously, I know it’s sound really, 1400 hard miles through Europe and not a hiccup Standard 190, Emerald + Verniers.

194

Today position:

Yes, the comments I have made about the Honda engine have been said to make a point, but also to help those with Honda engines… The S2000 engine and the K20A have only been in Gavin’s hands for two years, long after the article was originally written. The information about the S2000 stroke actually came from an autocar article, but the point is, which is why you should read it again, is that that information was not technically important in itself - there was no technical discussion of any Honda engine - but rather to illustrate a point about Big Bore type engines. Is that difficult to understand or do I have to explain even more carefully?

Simons “report” position “The limitation of any normally aspirated engin\e, that is an engine that is using engine speed to pull the fuel mix into the cylinders and hence produce power, is piston speed. Piston speed is a function of both engine speed and stroke. To put the K�s ability into perspective the Honda S2000�s 2.0 litre engine the one that the Lotus people on the one make series aspired to, revs to 9000 rpm as a production engine. With a 75 mm stroke this achieves a piston speed of 4966 ft/min, with its longer stroke the K achieves this at 8500 rpm, something the standard K bottom end is perfectly capable of, with the sole modification of forged pistons. The R500 engine achieves a piston speed of 5390 ft/min at 9200 rpm, a figure that the Honda engine would only match were it to be revved to 10,000 rpm. The point is that big bore short stroke engines are conceived to make high engine speeds possible, the penalty is poor torque, the Honda 2.0 litre S2000 producing just 151 lb/ft @ 7500 rpm, a figure easily eclipsed by the 1.8 litre K equipped with Piper�s 1227 cams which will give a very similar power output to the Honda engine. So, the Honda is not such a special engine. It does have a very strong and stiff block, being a copy of the K Series� design, but suffers from its enormous weight of 158 kg in standard form fully dressed (figures from the Vemac Car Co.) more than 60 kg heavier than the standard K. The only really attractive part of the Honda�s design are the roller cams which do reduce friction in the valve train but in every other respect the K is a more efficient and effective design than the Honda”

Basically you claim the K is a more efficient and effective design based on totally spurious info. Sadly the K is not more efficient nor is it more effective.

Your basic premiss that the K is the best (in this copmany) engine platfom to start with is simply flawed. The K is a great lightweight engine that just about everyone agrees on but you are trying to claim it something its is simply not. Sorry, your figures are just plain wrong.

And still we are waiting for some real pricing and real proof (i.e. a built and tested one) on your method for K series modification.

If you feel you are being unfairly treated well so far I see supercilious rubbish (yes thanks I do know about blueprinting an engine, and I believe I know about the foolhardyness of bolting bits onto an engine and expecting it to hold together) without the benefit of accurate facts and being unwilling to come up with the proof.

So were are the cars?

196

Come on guys, this is looking more and more like a destructive match than what it was supposed to be, a positive contribution.

John, regarding where are the engines. Some guys (above) have posted.
They don’t seem to frequent this or other bbs’s. One of them was 190BHP on a very hot day, so probably 200BHP. Some do trackdays, some don’t.

Just let it be. My engine is going to be soon the one to see, and of course, power charts of before (I’ve got them already) and after, as well as pax laps are going to be available. But then I’m not out there for max power.
If I get > 200 BHP reliably and more torque all across it’s achieved its objective. It’s an 1800cc engine FFS!

I’ve had my years on 0-62 in 2.5 sec, done 180MPH, hundreds of times, lap after lap (Monza). And you know what? I realized power was overrated. The important bit is the ability to put it down.
So power delivery and handling is more important to me. Otherwise just go and get a TVR. See them being lapped at flat tracks like Croft by Elises/Exiges.

And then you have to factor in that Simon is not doing this for commercial interest, so he’s here just to prove a point, not to sell anything.

So, chill out folks, we don’t want the friendliest Lotus site to become a … bbs?

Ah, another thing, Simon seems to be online for a short time, as he really doesn’t live in cyber-space, and his computer is going to move soon. So no more slanging matches

For the record, Simon didn’t say that the K is MORE efficient, and MORE effective. It’s efficient and effective when put together right.
If he reckons you can get 240BHP out of it, he also reckons you can get about 280BHP out of the Honda, with about the same reliability (not so good in both cases I would say). So, there you go, the Honda is better.
But I’m not about to pay �10K for one. Ever. On concept alone.

So I’ll pass later the results and prices I incurred into, OK?

198

Simon

I don’t see that it’s particularly relevant but I’ve had 3 items balanced by Steve. He did one complete assembly for my own engine about 2 years ago (one of first K’s he did I think) then a bit later a crank only. He also did another complete assembly for one of my customers in December last year. I took the 14 kg Audi flywheel over to Steve to look at lightening it but removing the dualmass garbage did not look simple so I left it alone. I may fit a Helix or Fidanza one sometime.

Don’t know what the Audi engine weighs but I have to admit it’s a lot heavier than the K. The box is 49 kg and has a magnesium casing. The whole installation is about 50 kg heavier than a K engined car.

Bernard

199

For the record, Simon didn’t say that the K is MORE efficient, and MORE effective. It’s efficient and effective when put together right.

Direct quote from simon “The only really attractive part of the Honda�s design are the roller cams which do reduce friction in the valve train but in every other respect the K is a more efficient and effective design than the Honda”

Pardon Uldis?

200

Oh, I take that back then

But you see my point, well, and the fact that he likes the K, wich I’m ok with.

And you’re not