So what you are actually saying Simon is that your views are right and everyone else including the likes of DVA, Auto-Teknix, Scholar, Minister, PTP and many many others are wrong or do not have the full facts or can’t build engines properly.
Yet why dont we see Simon Erland engines being advertised and raved on about ? - I’m sure with a bit or a lot of cash injection you could put the rest out of business and completly take over the market in building K Series race engines!
Simon
You have mail from me… can i please have a copy of your article…
This thread is great…
I don’t get why you think the Rover has so much more torque than the Honda. If you look at the results below from a group test of loads of Elises with different engines you will see that the Hondas produce more torque than the Rovers happily (obviously Bernards car kicks everyones arse comprehensively). They are also in a different league in terms of drivability which counts more than torque and horsepower out of the bends. Worth much more than the extra 10kg the Honda gives you. All this variable cam stuff really works and gives great results.
D:\tat_w98\l11lse.r01
L11LSE PTP 165
156.4 BHP / 6441 1/min (102 mph) 131.2 lbft / 5946 1/min
D:\tat_w98\m111crm.r01
std s1 elise
117.1 BHP / 5567 1/min (94 mph) 121.7 lbft / 4258 1/min
D:\tat_w98\p524nln.r01
Elise jdm spec honda conversion, remapped,
212.4 BHP / 8165 1/min (122 mph) 154.6 lbft / 5590 1/min
D:\tat_w98\p663new.r01
P663NEW LAD head
137.4 BHP / 6602 1/min (104 mph) 125.2 lbft / 4979 1/min
D:\tat_w98\p881uav.r01
135 hd, 270 cams, jenvey’s, std manifold and cat, emerald
158.5 BHP / 7023 1/min (119 mph) 126.1 lbft / 5429 1/min
D:\tat_w98\r190hdv.r01
bernard’s elise
243.7 BHP / 6082 1/min (136 mph) 257.5 lbft / 3148 1/min
D:\tat_w98\r190hdv2.r01
bernard’s elise, 2nd run, different map, more boost
245.7 BHP / 6120 1/min (137 mph) 253.6 lbft / 3137 1/min
D:\tat_w98\s11tdl.r01
Elise QED engine 1st run, lfted off early
184.6 BHP / 7195 1/min (113 mph) 142.9 lbft / 6395 1/min
D:\tat_w98\s11tdl2.r01
Elise QED engine 2nd run, 7900 red line
187.3 BHP / 7706 1/min (121 mph) 140.4 lbft / 6350 1/min
D:\tat_w98\s12ett.r01
s1 on emerald
154.0 BHP / 6423 1/min (108 mph) 138.2 lbft / 4851 1/min
D:\tat_w98\s33loc.r01
s33loc 1.8i, 633 cams, 4-2-1 ebd, hurricanr filter, 160 TB
142.3 BHP / 6859 1/min (108 mph) 132.9 lbft / 4295 1/min
D:\tat_w98\Elise
S425ACD PTP140, ITG, Blue flame ex
136.2 BHP / 6643 1/min (112 mph) 126.0 lbft / 5138 1/min
D:\tat_w98\s971ekn.r01
Elise vhpd head, jenveys, 740 cams
170.5 BHP / 7497 1/min (118 mph) 127.6 lbft / 6619 1/min
D:\tat_w98\s971ekn2.r01
Elise vhpd head, jenveys, 740 cams, fuel - 6
169.1 BHP / 7386 1/min (117 mph) 128.2 lbft / 6613 1/min
D:\tat_w98\t16gur.r01
T16GUR VVC, 4-2-1, Sports airfilter
166.3 BHP / 7230 1/min (114 mph) 133.9 lbft / 4926 1/min
D:\tat_w98\t348jcl.r01
111s elise, dva head, itg filter, janspeed exhaust
162.7 BHP / 7154 1/min (114 mph) 126.5 lbft / 6402 1/min
D:\tat_w98\t822chy.r01
std vvc s1 elise
141.0 BHP / 6988 1/min (111 mph) 121.0 lbft / 4793 1/min
D:\tat_w98\th03ney.r01
vx220T, AMD chip and charge cooler
229.0 BHP / 5530 1/min (112 mph) 238.7 lbft / 4639 1/min
D:\tat_w98\typeR3.r01
std civic typeR, no air filter
195.2 BHP / 7961 1/min (122 mph) 137.4 lbft / 6820 1/min
D:\tat_w98\w258jnb.r01
340r honda conversion
204.4 BHP / 7601 1/min (120 mph) 143.9 lbft / 7388 1/min
D:\tat_w98\w258jnb2.r01
340r honda conversion, 2nd run, increased fuel pressure
201.3 BHP / 7824 1/min (124 mph) 141.2 lbft / 7297 1/min
D:\tat_w98\w978rbu.r01
sport 160 on emrald
154.1 BHP / 7269 1/min (123 mph) 126.4 lbft / 4861 1/min
D:\tat_w98\w978rbu2.r01
sport 160 on emrald, 2nd run, adjusted throttle
154.4 BHP / 6988 1/min (118 mph) 126.0 lbft / 4915 1/min
D:\tat_w98\y878rfh.r01
s2 elise, 276 cams, hurricane
140.7 BHP / 6638 1/min (111 mph) 130.1 lbft / 4668 1/min
“K is not a hugely stressed engine @ 200bhp or even 240bhp if it’s built right”
Dream on.
Bernard
I guess what he means that the spread of torque.
A longer stroke engine would have the benefit of greater low and mid range torque. And if built properly, make some good top en power too.
Limited only by the piston velocities, but that should be ok up to about 8500 rpm, which is good enough for me.
In this case you wouldn’t need to keep constantly shifting gears to keep the engine on the sweet spot, because the sweet spot would be massive.
It’s not all about peak HP, but delivery. I would go as far as integrating the area below the torque curve. The more it approaches a square (and the higher the square is) the more power available to put on the road.
In fact, when Russ (who I consider a good driver) gave me some pax laps on his Honda Exige, I noticed how much he needed to shift gears to keep it on the boil.
And although his straight line acceleration was greater, I was able to keep up with my VHPD car.
I would say, if you need to use an engine that requires that sort of shifting action, you need to go sequential, otherwise the time you lose shifting can’t be compensated with power.
This is, apart from the power quality. This is why Ducatis win more than any 4 cyl bike. Not only torque spread, but what it does to the feeling coming out of a turn. (erm, sorry for the analogy, but I used to race bikes)
I’m just trying to help, however I have built 4 engines for friends, none of which have missed a beat and would love to see everyone doing that.
Which is why my bet is on Simon.
Mine should be the 5th then
Sounds like a good plan.
I agree the Hondas, like most Jap engines, are all revs and the long stroke of the K should give a good spread of torque. You are getting into F1 piston speeds though at 8500 rpm. I can see why you opted for low friction liners. Aren’t they mega expensive though ?
Simon, have you got some power curves for the engines you’ve built ? Be interesting to see them.
Bernard
This is, apart from the power quality. This is why Ducatis win more than any 4 cyl bike. Not only torque spread, but what it does to the feeling coming out of a turn. (erm, sorry for the analogy, but I used to race bikes)
The other thing with the dukes and suzuki have developed something similar with a 4 cyl is the power is always slightly interuppted so the dukes effectivly have inbuilt traction control (especially when there’s 250bhp going through a square inch of rubber )… But Suzuki have made a 4 cyl which fires 2 pistons at the same time so is like a double Duke V-Twin.
Well, ok, right.
But you get my drift… feeling.
I really think it is time that a few of us got together and had a group test. It would be bloody good fun and very very informative for anyone considering mods or and engine swap. LETS GO TO BRUNTINGTHORPE!!
Hmmm, did I see this post before?
Where is Bruntingthorpe? OTOH, I’ll check on multimap.
But you’ll have to wait until I blueprint my engine, the Simon way.
Should be in time for Cadwell on the 23rd Sept. Maybe see you there?
LETS GO TO BRUNTINGTHORPE!!
Come on then Randy, what’s the cost? How many of us needed to make it cost effective? What else can we do there? Etc
Ian
It’s �50 + VAT per hour per car but I have got them to do deals before.
That’s not bad at all… So I’ll come as the VHPD with finger sized gaps between the pistons and liners then
This sounds like it could be great fun! Gotta be worth a go peoples
The good thing about bruntingthorpe is we can do what we want, we would have the track, runway, 4*4 course and all that space at our disposal.
Well not too sure about 4x4 course… I’ll bring my camo’s and black out face paint tho’
I took my folks Shogun around the 4*4 course a few years ago and it was brilliant fun. Thought I was going to drown it at one point as one of the water splashes was more like a lake and I ended up with water up to the windscreen!! Great fun.