Udlis, too true, fast B road at best
<-------- Me at the 'ring
And practising it on the XBOX (Project Gotham 2) did help a little, just to know ehere left and rights are… But you’ll realise playing the game that even after a while there’ll be plenty of corners that just catch you out
I have got from FastDrive:
http://www.m-theory.co.uk/Exige/ring_sexige_lotus_exige.wmv
If you can do this then well done LOL!
I still think we need some sort of direct comparison of the various engine packages. Who is up for going to a track somewhere and doing a proper test??
would that give true comparisons of the engine or the driver though?
Drew
GT4 on teh PS2 is due mid-Dec, so you’ll then be able to practice the Ring. Sounds like a good plan to me!
Ian
Yeah and GT4 is network capable so get yourself equipped with a PS2 network adaptor and we can have an exiges.com shootout at the ring on-line
Apparently:
No online mode for Gran Turismo 4
In news that will both thrill and infuriate fans Sony and second party developer Polyphony Digital have announced that Gran Turismo 4 will be out in Japan on 3rd December and the US and Europe on 14th December.
However, in order to make it out before Christmas the online mode has been dumped. Which is a bit of shock considering Sony previously described the online mode as featuring �a robust system for players to race with up to six other players and interact and chat with others to form an automotive community.�
Polyphony have indicated they will be releasing a new Gran Turismo game next year, presumably still on the PS2, that will feature an online mode but it�s still all very odd. The obvious conclusion to come to is that Sony were adamant the game, which has already suffered a number of delays, must come out at Christmas and the only way to ensure that was to stop work on the online mode.
It also gives an indication of Sony�s try feelings towards online gaming: which seems to be that they still don�t care very much about it. But then considering that only 3 million people out of a possibly 72 million that own PS2s have ever played a game online (more people have bought EyeToy than play consoles online) you can kind of see their logic. Not that makes this rather bitter pill any easier to swallow.
Source: GameSpot
Thanks Steve. Sounds great. I can’t wait to drive it again when this is all done!
You have mail also.
Firstly I would like to make it clear I do not have any relationship with Engine Development Limited or any organisation involved with automotive engineering, cars or motorsport.
I have followed the Exige/340r/Elise, Caterham, MGF� engine options for a few years. In terms of reliability and performance the K series did not appear compare favourably to the Honda B20, K20 or Ford Duratec engines.
Until recently the only possible exception appeared to be The BBR turbo K Series engine used in the Elise of Adrian Newey of Williams and McLaren F1 fame. It was certainly reported to very powerful, 320bhp, and expensive, but there was no information on reliability.
http://www.bbrgti.com/RoverK300T.php
http://www.bbrgti.com/RoverK_photos.php
http://www.sandsmuseum.com/cars/elise/information/press/magazine/magazine2001/cccukn.html
It was with surprise and interest that I heard that John Judd�s Engine developments Limited were planning to build 2.0litre K Series. John Judd has a long association with race engine design and development including F1 and Le Mans engines.
It appears that John Judd�s EDL have succeeded in building a reliable engine which conforms to BTCC regulations and which has so far proven reliable. The engine has also delivered the performance required to win against Honda, Vauxhall, Seat, BMW (works engine in Germany). I am sure that the engine is expensive but according to the report in Racecar engineering it has not required the complete redesign I had come to expect. The BTCC regulations require that the engine is based on a production engine, I understand they limit the revs to 8500rpm, single 60mm throttle restrictor, valve lift to 12mm, compression to 12:1, prohibits the use of titanium, variable valve timing, forced induction. The engines also run a wet sump and are thought to produce close to 290bhp.
It appears that the K2000 has the performance and reliability to match the other production engines is achievable. According to the article in the August 2004 edition of Racecar engineering, www.racecar-engineering.com the technology is relatively straight forward and uses many production components.
The case appears to be proven that a K2000 can deliver the performance of a Honda or Ford Duratec.
How much would it cost to rebuild an Exige VHPD as K2000 for road/track use using lessons learnt from EDL to deliver reliability and performance of an equivalent Honda, Duratec or turbo Audi conversion? How would the costs compare? Anyone any idea on the parts and machining costs?
It is also interesting to note that PTP/Minister are both selling a version of a 2.0 litre K. The PTP K2.0 EVO. �Each engine is supplied with a Pre-tuned EFI ECU and connector lead to engine harness, cost of is unit is �10,500.00 GBP + Vat and shipping where applicable.�
Information on K2000 from the EDL web site.
The K2000 engine has now successfully completed a season in the 2004 British Touring Car Championship, and powered West Surrey Racing’s Anthony Reid to 3rd place in the series in his MG ZS. This is an amazing achievement in its first year of competition, even more so given that the go ahead for the program was only received in February, 6 weeks before the season began.
The engine has also successfully run in The British Rallycross Championship in the hands of Des Wheatley in his Metro, and in the European Endurance Racing Championship in an MG Sport & Racing MG ZR driven by Fiona Leggat and Anthony Reid. During the course of the season the engine won 4 BTCC rounds and confounded many people who believed it was impossible to successfully produce a 2 litre version of the K series engine. In this form the engine produces over 270bhp, making it the most powerful naturally aspirated K series engine available.
Other companies have tried to follow the lead we took in 2003 and have since produced 2 litre K Series, but none of these have the competition experience that K2000 has gained throughout 2004.
Excerts from Racecar engineering article on K2000.
�When the �K2000� engine project was announced the industry sceptics wanted to pounce, but Engine Developments was confident and, with limited testing and a tight budget, WSR (West Surrey Racing) as able to push the previously pace-setting Astra at a circuit where the ZS had never previously excelled. But what�s the story behind this very special version of an engine often derided for it fragility.�
Even with full SVA emissions approval, power outputs of over 100bhp per litre are not uncommon, and allied to a lightweight 78kgs for a fully race prepared unit (including 7kgs of fluids) makes for a promising looking racecar engine. However, it�s fair to say that, at the top echelons of motor racing, the K-series engine just hasn�t caught the imagination in the way some other powerplants have. To understand this shortcoming better it�s worthwhile looking at some of the inherent limitations of the K-series motor, which will also give a better undertanding of how Engine Developments approached re-designing the motor as a 2.0-litre power unit.
Shortcoming
Cracked cylinder liners are a common failure on the engine. Bespoke cylinder liners from companies such as Chromo Duro or similar are often used to avoid this while in addition head gasket and crankshaft failures are not unheard of either. Some place the blame for these major reliability issues at the door of the K-series block citing alack of torsional rigidity as the cause. It�s not uncommon to see some engine builders weld additional strengthening into the engine block to attempt to increase rigidity of the unit, or alternatively using thicker through blots with a higher clamping load.
Adding to the list of negatives is a less than ideal bore/stroke ratio for the motor which, in 1.8-litre format, is noticeably under square at 80mm/89.3mm respectively. Whilst providing excellent torque characteristics for road applications, this is unfavourable for motorsport use on a number of counts: primarily mitigating against very high crankshaft speeds due to potentially excessively high piston speeds. Also the comparatively narrow valve centres limit valve size in comparison to a 2.0-litre GM XE engine or a Cosworth BDA for example. Limit the valve size and you limit the breathing capability of the engine which, combined with the long stroke, make the final power potential for the K-series seem comparatively limited, at least on paper.
Ultimately though, size is the biggest problem. Simply put, a 1.8-litre engine doesn�t fit readily into most race and rally series class limits so, aside from 1.6-lire variant competing in the JWRC and the British Rally Championship, opportunities for the K-series engine within high-level motorsport appeared to be limited. In addition, rival powerplants (notably Ford�s 2.0-litre Duractec engine and Honda�s I-VTEC) were exceeding the K-series in BHP per litre, as well as having the additional capacity to fit into international racing categories with ease.
So the problems facing the K-series engine were two fold - firstly a perception that the unit is highly stressed and unreliable and secondly , combined with a lack of capacity, it�s hindered by the physical architecture of a unit that�s less than ideal for motorsport use.
Turning the tide
Bearing all this in mind, it�s hardly surprising that Engine Developments� 2003 announcement of a 2.0-litre version of the K-series was greeted with cynicism from the industry, which only served to spur the company on. According to General Manager Stan Hall: �That�s the main reason John Judd did it, to prove people wrong. When people say it�s impossible, John likes that, as that�s the challenge!�
It seams that the K-series pessimists could now be eating a serving of humble pie though, as Engine Developments� program has not only given the engine a new lease of life in motorsport, it�s opened up new avenues for four-cylinder engine that were previously beyond reach.
��
The project began in December 2002, with the goal of developing a 2.0-litre powerplant from the off-the-shelf production version of the 1.8-litre engine. To achieve the increase in capacity to 2.0-liters Engine Developments has increased both the bore and stroke of the engine, which required a new crankshaft, piston and liner set-up. Fitting the new liners - Hall wouldn�t reveal the specification or source - involves boring the K-series block, which is then finish bored to gain the extra capacity. �Essentially though it�s the same damp liner set-up of the standard engine and, aside from machining additional clearance for the con rods, that�s all we do to the block.�
�…
Interestingly, Engine Developments retained the standard through bolts on the K2000, even though these are often replaced on other highly tuned versions of the standard K-Series engine. Hall explains: �We haven�t redesigned the bolts at all, Increasing the clamping load distorts the bottom of the engine, which isn�t advisable, so we�ve left them alone.
The cylinder head follows the same theme, as it is in essence a reworked VVC specification head. AS is the standard K-Series tuning practice the VVC mechanism is blanked off. In BTCC specification the K2000 head runs 34.5mm inlet valves combined with 28.5mm exhaust items. All this is fairly conventional stuff, but that�s partly due to the constraint of the valve centre spacing on the K-Series engine, which precludes the installation of �dinner plate� valves. These are about the biggest that we can fit, as we haven�t offset machined the valve guides to fit any larger, � Hall confirms.
�.
Amazingly though, the Thruxton BTCC race was effectively the debut if the final homologated BTCC engine. That was the first time the complete BTCC specification engine ran in the car and Anthony Read recorded sixth, fourth and second place finishes,� says Hall. Tellingly, he feels a better result would have been on the cards, barring a technical problem in the feature race. �We could have been challenging Muller for the win in race three, but the fabricated header tank sprang a leak and the engine ran very, very hot. In fact it finished the race with virtually o water in it. The mechanics at WSR couldn�t believe that it has lasted the race. They�ve christened the engine the HLB, standing for hard little b***tard!�
The event not only highlighted the durability of the power unit, it also showed it produced competitive horsepower.
�
As for the doom-mongers predicting that the project would be an expensive failure, Hall is circumspect, but speaks from his experiences so far with the programme. � We�re monitoring the situation, but anticipating 2-2500km between rebuilds for the BTCC unit, because we�ve not had any problems with the head, block or head gasket. Okay, we�re relatively new to the K-series engine, but we�ve just not experienced the problems many people had predicted. To be honest, I think the engine has received bad press because people are doing a bad job on it and building in the problems
Pete
Thanks for the posting… long tho’…
I was going to post and ask who Pete is, but looking at the profile it says Peter Goodman.
Now if this is the Peter Goodman I use to work with (Hi, Ian Goodall here) then I can confirm he can talk long and hard (proved by the posting length perhaps! ) about all things Elise. If I remember the story correctly he ended up with a S1 190 because he tried very hard to buy the first Exige and gave in when Lotus swore they’d never build it.
(If it’s you,) good to hear from you Pete. See you again in Pret some time?
Ian
Hmm Some interesting parallels between what Pete’s posted there and Simon’s original article…
Well, there’s certain place (first empty line I believe) from where he’s just posting a copy of the contents of the EDL website, that’s why it’s so long.
Sorry for the long post. Uldis is correct, the post is mostly a quote from the Engine Development Limited’s web site and Excerts from Racecar engineering article on K2000.
I have assumed that not that many people have read the racecar article and seen the quotes from Stan Hall. Which given the success of the K2000 and the reputation of EDL, I think they make interesting reading.
Ian, no doubt will catch up for lunch or beer before xmas.
Guys, some progress can be seen here
Just labeled the pics that were in Bookatrack and it probably makes more sense now.
The engine at this point is in place but I’m wiring and hosing (?) it.
Sloooowww! Will take more pics today (but place them in Bookatrack some other day)
Is that the right link Uldis?
Nope, you’re right, it was the editing link (when I was adding the names)
Incidentally, what did the previous link take you to?
Incidentally, what did the previous link take you to?
Some dodgy Mexican website, extolling the virtues of having your sombrero “toleranced”
Wouldn’t need to.
Was built to the highest specs, never had a HGF or loss of power…
Look out for an affordable 300+ bhp 2.0L K weighing just 73Kg next year!
I will be looking out for that in between looking for all those flying pigs.
Simon, I’m so happy you found all the niggles with my engine.
A very thorough job you did there. And I can see the attention to detail from the outside, and can only imagine the detailing inside.
The whole assembly is going slow but well, hope to start it tomorrow night. Can’t wait to hear her first steps!.
To note that I can see now how the final failure (head rattle and blown oil seals) happened.
Check out the last pictures, the plugged oil lines to the cams with goo! The journals were running dry!
Prove of the argument of sloppy tuners giving a bad name to the K.
Another thing that was not mentioned, is that the gearbox went to be (preventively) serviced, and they found 2 synchro mesh rings worn and one cracked bushing. Normal, but then they also said that the gearbox had been running very hot (low on oil). And yes, I had topped the level a couple of times.
I remember the gearbox being always wet with oil on the outside, and after complaining to Lotus (since new) we finally found that the oil was coming from the mechanical speedo assembly!
Our cars have a wheel speed sensor so obviously this was never used, but the oil was oozing out of the little hole on the top, helped by the little rotating thingie inside! (how clever is that?).
Solution: take out the rotating thingie, cut the tube and plug it with silicon grease (there is still another breather btw).
Anyway, taking into account all the other things I did to the car, it should be like new (Ok, needs Nitrons now)