Mark Durrant Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 My R500 is now 8 years old and having covered nearly 10,000 miles, the last 3,000 of which included a significant number of track day and sprint miles I decides it would be prudent to give it a refresh. A number of my rivals in the Speed Championship are of the opinion that the engine was fine and the refresh was just an excuse for a power upgrade . After investigating the options I decided to let Dave Andrews work his magic on the engine during the winter months. The engine capacity remains at 1800cc but I chose to have a Scholar conversion to add strength to the block and remove the problem of the liner sinkage that contributes to head gasket failure. I also gave Dave another MS2 head to port and fit with 32.5mm inlet valves and 28.3mm exhaust valves thus allowing me to retain the original head including cams and valves so I could at some point in the future I can return the engine to original R500 spec. The head was treated to a full port and fitted with Piper 1444 cams. The engine was also treated to full balance by Vibration Free plus new bearings, water pump, oil pump, cam belt, cambelt tensioner etc. After covering approximately 140 miles on the road it was clear this engine had more torque low down however, I did not take the revs over 5,000 as it was still running on the previous map. On Monday I took the car to Track’n’Road for the two Steve’s, Greenald and Pitcher to work their magic on the map. Steve G started by balancing the roller barrels and setting the idle before starting on the map working his way through the rev range. After 3 hours their work was done with Steve G commenting that he was impressed with the characteristics of the engine and how it delivered the power. It now produces 244 bhp at the flywheel at 8,600rpm and 165 lbft at 7,000rpm. I can certainly feel the increase in power and now have 210 bhp at the rear wheels to play with (an increase of 20 bhp over the last engine) 😬. So many thanks to Dave Andrews of DVA Power, Steve Greenald and Steve Pitcher of Track’n’Road *thumbup*. Mark D Comp Sec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Support Team Shaun_E Posted March 5, 2008 Support Team Share Posted March 5, 2008 Very nice! I guess that will just make me even slower in comparison ☹️. Yellow SL #32 - member of Drowned Rat Racing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Durrant Posted March 5, 2008 Author Share Posted March 5, 2008 Shaun I am sure with the success of your closed season diet 😳 and a bit more experience behind the wheel you will continue to improve your times. Remember I have a bit more experience than you (in sprinting/hill climbing this is important) and started with less power which in my opinion is easier than starting with over 200 bhp . Mark D Comp Sec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil.cavanagh Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 good news Mark!! 😬 😬 and when we ban those silly flappy-paddle gearboxes from class 5 you'll be cleaning up I'm sure! 😬 😬 😬 Do you have the power-run plots that you can share with us? I'd be interested to see how linear/peaky the power is. Seeing as The Thame Manipulator is moving into class 4 maybe I'll need to move up to 5 or 6 to avoid being embarassed too much by him! 😬 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Durrant Posted March 5, 2008 Author Share Posted March 5, 2008 Neil I have the power run plots but these are at home. What is the name of the website that these can be posted on and if I post mine will you post yours Mark D Comp Sec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Support Team Shaun_E Posted March 5, 2008 Support Team Share Posted March 5, 2008 Web site is http://www.dyno-plot.co.uk/dyno/about.htm. My plot is here. It overstates things very slightly as DW got the temp correction wrong. Actual peak power is 227bhp. Still it's a nice flat torque curve and the power goes up very linearly. I could get a bit more by extending the revs past 8000 but ideally should have steel rods for that. Diet not doing much now but I have lost a bit! I'm looking to better last seasons times and not leave such a huge gap between mine and the faster drivers. Yellow SL #32 - member of Drowned Rat Racing Edited by - Shaun_E on 5 Mar 2008 10:54:38 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil.cavanagh Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 proper job! I'll post my power run up tomorrow when I'm back in civilisation... Out of interest, were peoples runs done: 1) with bonnet on? 2) with air filter on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irrelevant Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Just put my powercurve up for anyone who's interested. . . . Rear wheel figures remember so apply a 25% correction to mine for a very approximate crank output. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Durrant Posted March 5, 2008 Author Share Posted March 5, 2008 Neil My power run was with the standard air filter on but with the bonnet /nosecone removed Mark D Comp Sec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Day Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 ....nice one Mark! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Carmichael Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Rear wheel figures remember so apply a 25% correction to mine for a very approximate crank output. "very approximate" 😔 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Perry Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Sounds good Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Durrant Posted March 5, 2008 Author Share Posted March 5, 2008 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rear wheel figures remember so apply a 25% correction to mine for a very approximate crank output. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "very approximate" 😔 Those BEC certainly have inefficient transmissions when compared to Mark's R500 which only lost approximately 15% of its power.....no wonder Adam fitted a turbo 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irrelevant Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 "very approximate" 😔 Peter: 25% comes from a BEC turbo Busa radical that I know was dyno'd . .. it had the same engine as me (well, actually it was a lower spec) but the same turbo and injection setup. It showed 298rwhp - identical to mine. It's crank bhp was 372bhp. I was just pointing out that if anyone is interested in comparing my curve to their's, that they should apply a 25% 'correction' for an approximate crank figure. This 25% factor is calculated using the actual losses from the radical, it's not just plucked out of the air. Muppet: I think BECs are pretty bad on transmission losses now you mention it. Stock 252bhp 1500 Radicals usually dyno at about 175rwhp where I had my car dyno'd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon.Rogers1 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Refresh 😔 🙆🏻 Oh Cavanagh. Now you'll have to pedal faster! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Carmichael Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Adam, I see that today is the day for jumping up and down on someone's hot button for sh1ts and giggles. I reckon we should preempt the inevitable by deciding that onward discussion should be over a beer and not drag Mark's thread down the toilet. My best outcome would be for you to say: "I didn't understand what Peter was going on about but now I do." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regroo Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Mark, Great results and another solid recommendation for the skill of DVA. I think this is a similar spec to what I am going to go for and hadn't looked at the Scholar so it was an interestign read on their website As for the kerfuffle, I like fish and eleventy million 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Peter and Adam you could both argue over what percentages wheel/transmission losses are and yes every dynoe is different! But the fact is that Mark uses the same dynoe and his figures are a TRUE relation to the work he has had done, therfore it is a real basis to compare like to like. This is what you should equate your figures to be as the rolling road set up is unchanged from his last re-map. Being able to compare before and after gives a very true way of seeing what his engine 'refresh' has achieved. 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgrigsby Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Looks like a good result Mark, just for reference I'm pretty sure this is my engine with effectively 0 miles on the clock. It hadn't run before it went to Emerald and I've not been back since 😬 It's also had a "refresh" over winter following the oil pump being removed by an Opel Corsa in spain, purely a precaution rather than required although there was some slight bearing damage due to oil starvation as it turned out. It's not back in the car so I don't have an up to date figure Cheers Rob G Rob G www.SpeedySeven.com Edited by - rgrigsby on 5 Mar 2008 21:09:32 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irrelevant Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 PeterT: Argue....me....surely not. And certainly not with Mr Carmichael. How can one argue with someone who uses phrases like, "today is the day for jumping up and down on someone's hot button for sh1ts and giggles" anyway? I simply don't have a clue what he's on about 😳 Anyway, I'm glad Mark's happy with his refresh and I'll look forward to seeing both the shape of his power curve, and how well the car actually goes. Mark: You say you now have 20 more rwhp than before, but didn't you have 242bhp before the refresh, or was that someone else What was your torque pre-refresh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Neither me Adam??? Clearly his new developed engine has a much better linear curve that makes the torque more usable throughout the rev range rather than coming in all at once. 😬 Argue...................... you................you are kidding me. *nono* *nono* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Durrant Posted March 5, 2008 Author Share Posted March 5, 2008 Power Plot - click here Adam You have a good memory. Back in March 2006 I had the engine mapped and it made 242 bhp at the flywheel but only 190 bhp at the wheels so my transmission losses were greater then and I have since changed the differential, tyres and had the gearbox refreshed which may account for the difference. Peter Did you get my email Mark D Comp Sec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Durrant Posted March 5, 2008 Author Share Posted March 5, 2008 Peter I'll call you in the morning Mark D Comp Sec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now