The Dave and Simon Show, here 7 days a week.

I bet he wishes someone else, ANYONE else would take the mantle from there and produce these engines following his “recipe”.I don’t think his issue has ever been that he’s the only one who can build a good engine, only that it hasn’t been done to the exacting standards that he feels are required. As no-one has shown an interest, he seems to have been left to prove his point on his own…

errr and why do you think this is ?..

furthermore, the whole point about the K being made powerful and reliable has already been proven with the EDL Judd K2000…isn’t that proof enough for the non-believers? All this talk about impossible piston speeds etc etc has already been disproven by the mere existence, let alone the success of this engine, hasn’t it???

And how much of the original K series engine is used in the Judd ? Probably none. And what fuel does it run on ? not super unleaded that’s for sure. It’s a bit like saying the 1500 BHP BMW F1 turbo engine were based on the road engine and ran on Tesco’s best. Yeah, to the casual observer the block looked basically the same from the outside but that was about it.

Bernard

if Simon’s credibility is going to rest on him getting a large number of engines out there, then this will never happen. remember, that his initial objective was to share his opinions and knowldge of the K to demonstrate that it COULD be made pwerful and reliable. this has never been a commercial interest for him, but more a labour of love (or obsession), so he weill never get the numbers out there that other engine builders have. from my understanding of all this and from discussions with him, I bet he wishes someone else, ANYONE else would take the mantle from there and produce these engines following his “recipe”.I don’t think his issue has ever been that he’s the only one who can build a good engine, only that it hasn’t been done to the exacting standards that he feels are required. As no-one has shown an interest, he seems to have been left to prove his point on his own…Am I the only one who sees it this way???

furthermore, the whole point about the K being made powerful and reliable has already been proven with the EDL Judd K2000…isn’t that proof enough for the non-believers? All this talk about impossible piston speeds etc etc has already been disproven by the mere existence, let alone the success of this engine, hasn’t it???

again, maybe i should echo the remarks of others: since none of us that have commissioned Simon to produce these 2.0L engines has an issue with the time, maybe we should all just wait and see.

I’m absolutely with you there, but am concerned about something: when this all started >200 BHP was seen as very good. I remember Mike Lane’s 217 BHP was seen as awesome, and that was just a peak, wasn’t really a good power spread. Still, it was awesome.
With the advent of the SC Honda, Turbo Audi engines and now the SC Toyota, the BHP expectations have been raised enormously. A 220 BHP K, which can be achieved by just porting and slightly fettling a VHPD -but assembling it properly- is not that impressive anymore.
I get the impression a Honda engine conversion has also the attractive that for about �4K extra you can get monster numbers like 380 BHP!

Not that it would necessarily make it faster on every day driving or the track, but are certainly big numbers.

Now, I feel that development pushed Simon into now making a more powerful K, a 2.0L, and that gives Bernard a valid point: how much of the engine is left standard (I shouldn’t say that, because the VHPD is already a non standard K, let’s say shares the VHPD stock internals). Not much.

In that respect mine may be the only (and last) engine Simon built that can still be still considered a VHPD. And when rebuild time comes, will it make sense to just replace the std liners/rings/pistons with stock spec? (as now) or will it be about the same cost going for a 1.9? Is the same engine development killing the VHPD spec?

And in that respect we’ll end up with what Bernard mentions, a very powerful and good engine (comparable with Mellington and the likes) that only looks like the K externally, but it may not be a K anymore. Maybe a… KingK?

From what I have been told, my engine will be the same colour as a standard K.

That works for me. lol

Seriously though, some of the bits for my engine were sourced from Simons local scrap yard!!!

Seriously though, some of the bits for my engine were sourced from Simons local scrap yard!!!

Are there many scrapyards in Fulham? Being from Oop North, I’m not familiar with the Fulham area

Simon

Thanks for your frank and restrained reply.

Bernard - In fact all the BTCC teams use a TOCA regulated fuel, so no one can gain an advantage.

Hmmm, what racing teams are supposed to use and what they actually do use are often quite different. All I know is that when I was hanging around the cars in the pits at a few of the races the fumes coming out the back didn’t smell like they were running on pump fuel. It would be interesting to see a power curve for one.

However to come back to your obsession Bernard, with keeping engines OE, All production engines are cost based, so most in order to give good power - 200bhp + are heavy because they are also cheap. K is alone out there in being a truely optimised engine, but it shares the same manufacturing issue of needing to be cost competative, so because it’s light, things like pistons are not up to revving beyond the OE limit etc etc etc etc.

OK fair enough, it comes with using a cooking engine as a base. With a just change of turbo, the Audi engine can easily handle double the base horsepower without ANY internal changes and the only changes required for 375 BHP are the con rods.

…they also give as you will see in due course better power than people have managed before with the same cams, induction etc.

I look forward to seeing the results being released publicly.

Then a second course of using the std block, … in part… but with all new componants for the rest of the engine, whilst retaining the Ks optimised philosophy to give, ultra light weight, longevity…including being capable of 24hr endurance racing, maintaining and improving on the chassis balance… and record power outputs for a normally aspirated four cyinder engine.

You are going to have some work to do aren’t you ?

And if you can do that for the same money or less than the cost of an equivalent conversion, then surely the argument is won.

If you achieve that then I would agree. But don’t forget you haven’t got a suitable gearbox at a realistic price, not for the Elise anyway.

In any case you will see in due course, and then there’s the turbo engine too…

If it lasts for more than an hour at 300 BHP I will eat my conrods.

Bernard

If it lasts for more than an hour at 300 BHP I will eat my conrods.

Bernard

That will be painful!!!
how about you just lend me an audi to assess for my book?

simon

Why on earth should he do that?

Bernard has lots of satisfied customers who are happy to post their experiences, lots of RR sessions showing good results, plenty of track experience, results from the tunerGP (which you were invited to but bottled out). its all out their in the public domain like any good science should be.

you on the other hand have a couple of engines showing franky underwhelming results and far more talk than action.

Oh and finding some vanity publisher happy to take a mugs money does not make you an author. HTH.

Steady johnboy, Simon’s playing nice at the moment.

Steady johnboy, Simon’s playing nice at the moment.

Agreed, Bernard is perfectly capable of holding his own in this debate Don’t forget, this is not “that other” internet forum

uote:

I bet he wishes someone else, ANYONE else would take the mantle from there and produce these engines following his “recipe”.I don’t think his issue has ever been that he’s the only one who can build a good engine, only that it hasn’t been done to the exacting standards that he feels are required. As no-one has shown an interest, he seems to have been left to prove his point on his own…

\




errr and why do you think this is ?..
[/quote]
I’m basically echoing Simon’s early remarks on this forum…that’s probably why i think so.it also took a fair amount of persuading to get Simon to build an engine for me in the first place.

As an aside, the fact that the K has had many of its internals changed to achieve stupendous power results would really be a moot point…that would be tantamount to saying an S1 Exige without a K is not really an Exige wouldn’t it? what do those who have had engine conversions call their cars anyway, Honda Integras or Audi A3s? not trying to stir things up, but merely illustrating a so-far overlooked point.

I’ve come late to this debate.

I dont have any problem with what Simon is trying to do, I never have and have posted to that affect many times. I wish him luck with that…

I don’t have a problem with Simon’s opinion of me, everyone is entitled to an opinion, even if others dont share it.

I do have a problem with half-truths, unsubstantiated rhetoric and statements known to be untrue posted here in an attempt to discredit persons or businesses.

Many of Simon’s statements have been shown demonstrably to be untrue and/or flawed. Where these involve me or other companies or products (where they may have no right of reply) then I feel obligated to act.

As I have said so many times before, if he can stick to the facts he knows to be true and can be substantiated then this board would return to a peasant and orderly place. The latest rash of nonsense and conjecture has just muddied the waters once again, most of it is rubbish not because I say so, but because it is proven so.

I am happy to contribute in a restrained manner, but while postings are made which are either deliberately untrue or through ignorance are untrue and these affect my business then I will post accordingly.

Dave