LOL!
Stock TB’s… Makes me wonder why so many change to Jenveys then
More power? higher compression, better/lighter pistons, rods, DRY SUMP, Bernard’s airbox and trumpets come to mind in 30 secs.
BTW, it took much more than 1K miles to bed in. It used to drink oil at the same rate as before, but when it got to about 4K it started drinking less and less.
Anyway, bye!
Uldis,
Many of the engines out there do not have the benefit of any of the items you suggest and the gains to be had , trumpets not withstanding are at best marginal. You are getting tied up on semantics, if the engine is not about power, why go bigger valved, why trade up to hotter cams and why port the head and go for a better exhaust?
The change to Jenvey TBs is entirely about drivability rather than any extra power. You are confusing your TBs with the swan-necked KV6 type where it is common for people to upgrade, I have only ever seen one instance where the TBs you have were traded for Jenveys and that is because they were rogered. Lighter rods and pistons do not increase power, they just reduce the loadings on the crank. Nor does the airbox increase power, by it’s clever design it manages to silence the induction without losing power. Steve B’s engine does not have a dry sump…
I dont understand the paragraph about driver skill, that is irrelevant here since we are discussing engines and their output. Given the same driver skill the engine with the larger area under the torque curve will make the car faster.
Dave
http://www.dyno-plot.co.uk/dyno/dynoplot/120_99/index.htm
amazing how much more “generous” the road is that you used compared to Emeralds
http://www.dyno-plot.co.uk/dyno/dynoplot/120_99/index.htm
amazing how much more “generous” the road is that you used compared to Emeralds
And in the “king of the Snake oil salesmen” King K comes off second i am afraid 9which is no bad thing I suppose!)
Oh deary deary me.
It may not have been built as a power engine (although that sounds like excuses) but regardless, it’s the same spec as Steves yet magnificently down on torque.
iirc, Steve didn’t have the dry sump fitted at the time his 1.8 run was recorded. Also, I believe that build just had VHPD rods.
Didn’t I hear somewhere you had bigger valves that Steve also ?
fwiw, on the reliability side, Steves engine did many 10’s of thousands of miles and only popped the HG once (which was his fault/my fault for reusing the bolts too many times)
So to get a reliable 220bhp from the k what is the best way forward?? - there seems to be a lot of diverse opinion on specification…
And before anyone suggests I don’t want to replace it with a Honda
I’m waiting for a reply from an email I sent DA asking the same thing
Personally I’d go for the 1.9 option. Bit more expensive as you have to fully strip the engine but it’s a lot easier to get ~220hp and you’ll have buckets of torque meaning less revving day to day and therefore it’ll last longer. 
Personally I’d go for the 1.9 option. Bit more expensive as you have to fully strip the engine but it’s a lot easier to get ~220hp and you’ll have buckets of torque meaning less revving day to day and therefore it’ll last longer. >
I’m with Bri on this one - 1.9 is the way to go.
http://www.dyno-plot.co.uk/dyno/dynoplot/101/Lotus-Elise-DVAPower-plus-SteveB-and-Bri-Drought.htm
And judging by its performance at tunergp it goes as good as the curve suggests it should.
I recon a 220+bhp version of this would go like stink, drive beautifully and last as well as anything else you could do.
Cheers Brian, the 1.9 route was what I was considering - as its going to be a complete strip down, rebuild, renewing worn bits, etc - I just want to be sure of what the best to spec is…
For a road car, I’d go for a 1.9 with big valve head etc the same as Steves BUT I’d go for a tamer cam. BP285 is a decent choice I reckon going on the result of the DVA engine @ Emerald recently.
Brian, are you saying that you would rather have a 1.9 k instead of your Duratec?
Nope, but if I was sticking with the K I’d go for a 1.9K with a tame cam
Just a quick note that today the record output at Emerald for a BP285H cammed 1800 was broken, 215BHP and 157lb/ft, this was on a fully ported VHPD head, and stock R300 induction/exhaust , E.G. TBs and 4-1 exhaust.
Dave
My engines in the plots above both happened to have a dry sump fitted.
However I did a power run shortly before and after fitting it, and it made no power difference and just added a load of weight so I’ve removed it and fitted a baffled wet sump instead.
I ran with the same VHPD block/head for about 50-60k and had one HGF as Bri mentioned, back from when I was removing the head on a fairly regular basis trying to chase why I couldn’t make more than 194bhp - this was way back before I knew Bri.
Other than that, the engine was fine and used to get thrashed, tracked, sprinted and hillclimbed regularly. As well as being used as a daily driver.
I eventually replaced it with the scholar bottomed 1.8 that is in the graphs above, but kept the DVAPower ported head and had no issues for 10k miles. And it still made the same power after that mileage.
It was stripped and the crank and rods and the block/pistons are now used in a mate’s Elise with a different crank and steel rods (all balanced for him by Vibration Free) and going well.
My VHPD rods and standard crank (heavy metal inserted by Vibration Free) are now in the 1.9 pictured above and that’s done ~3k trouble free miles and still making the power and not using oil like a VHPD does!!!
Thats some performance graph there Steve
Any chance of a complete spec for your engine?
Have any other mods been necessary to accommodate the power, cooling/gearbox/driveshafts,etc…
Thanks
The head is a big valve fully ported VHPD done by DVAPower, using 33.5mm and 28.3mm valves. The cams are the Piper 1444 grind. 1.9 (1886cc) Block and pistons are from Scholar. Rods are standard VHPD, crank is a standard K series crank but heavy metal inserted (with tungsten) by Vibration Free. I have an Auto-teknix airbox and 150mm trumpets, and an EBD exhaust manifold with 1.75" primaries and 2" secondaries and an Eliseparts silenced cat pipe and silencer. All conrolled by an Emerald ECU.
I’ve fitted a PRRT remote stat to keep the water temp as stable as possible. I used to run an oil cooler but have removed it to save weight since I mostly use the car for hillclimbing, and the oil doesn’t need any cooling. I use a decent synthetic oil (Silkolene Pro S) that will withstand 130ish degrees on track so when it does do track days I will just keep an eye on the oil temp and change the oil after the day. If the temp really is a problem, it runs ~10 deg cooler on the road with the undertray removed so can remove that at a track if needs be.
Driveshafts are standard and the gearbox is a Quaife 6 speed synchro. Only problem I’ve had with the box is it spitting out all the teeth on the 6th ratios when I revved it out in 5th (quite a high speed!) and changed into 6th. Not too sure why but after its rebuild it makes a whining in 6th - either they’ve fitted a straight cut 6th or something else is amiss inside there. When I can I’ll be taking the car to the place that rebuilt the box for them to have a listen.
I’ve got a Helix Autosport aluminium flywheel and 7.25" single plate clutch - weighs about 6.5kg (4 kg lighter than the VHPD flywheel/clutch) and good for 205lbft.
It put up a good performance against the opposition at http://www.tunergp.co.uk/ Despite not being able to take much speed through craners (because Steve Guglielmi didn’t have time to get the rear dampers setup properly) - when following the SC Honda Exige it only made any ground on my car through the craners…
Your car sounds awesome Steve. I look forward to seeing it one day and chatting with you in person!!!
http://www.dyno-plot.co.uk/dyno/dynoplot/120_99/index.htm
amazing how much more “generous” the road is that you used compared to Emeralds
It would be, if you’re suggesting it’s the same graph.
BTW, I’m relying on you to type in the correct numbers, as I have not input those graphs in that website, but you.
If you want to see all my graphs, including the Emerald one (which was discussed in here) go here
But I suggest better not bother typing in other people’s graphs. (then again, do what you please)
I’m with Bri on this one - 1.9 is the way to go.
Agree totally! I’ll go 1.9 when my engine wears out.