philwaters Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Looking for some info on this conversion for a friend (who is busy doing sums). What is needed to go from a K car to Duratec? We have an Emerald ECU already, but other than that I think most of the engine stuff needs replacing? Can we re-use anything (alternator, etc)? Trying to do this on a tight budget in order to get the car back on the road after a 3(+) year lay off ☹️ What are the various engine specs we should look at - want an ultra reliable engine with a min of 185hp. Should we look at 2lt or 2.3lt? Is there any cost difference between them now or for later upgrades? Phil Waters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petrolhead Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Also concider the insurance aspect. When I went from the R500 to the CSR200 the insurance (Footman James) went up. Their reason was A) Vehicle value over £30K B) Engine size over 2ltr So if I was building a Duratec I would go 2ltr,. Of course not JUST because of the insurance but it would be a factor. ----- My site----- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Whitley Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 I would have thought the engine was the least of the problems with Strangely's car Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterg Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Don't forget the exhaust is on the opposite side to a 'K' so you'll have a hole to cover or a reskin to do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philwaters Posted August 18, 2009 Author Share Posted August 18, 2009 Tony - it is, but a trip to Arch and TSK is in the plan... I'm just trying to learn about Duratec conversions as fast as I can... Peter - Yep, accounted for - that's one reason we are thinking Duratec, we'll have a freshly skinned car to start with and the K may need a re-fresh or taking to 1900cc (rude not to), so want to see how the costs compare. Phil Waters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manxseven Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Phil, As you state want an ultra reliable engine with a min of 185hp is it worthwhile costing out a swap to a Zetec as well Simon Caterham BEC here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philwaters Posted August 18, 2009 Author Share Posted August 18, 2009 Valid question but a) it doesn't leave a much scope for future upgrades (over 200hp starts costing lots - I've got one). b) ideally we (royal we - i.e. Jason, the owner) wants a current engine. c) a Duratec is lighter and so the car should handle in a similar way to the k car. Anyone have a list of parts that are needed? Phil Waters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k80rum Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 I've just done one Phil. Parts your friend should be able to re-use are (assuming EU2 K series which mine was); Emerald Injection loom Tps & loom Air temp sensor and loom Water temp sensor and loom Gearbox Radiator Bits he'll need to swap; Bellhousing Clutch assembly Starter Alternator Exhaust Engine mounts Induction system Possibly an uprated fuel pump depending on power hike Fuel rail & regulator Possibly injectors He'll need to decide on a water-rail solution too (there are a few choices, including off-the-shelf) Hope that helps Darren E K80 RUM Website and Emerald maps library Home of the long-term, supercharged Duratec project Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pendennis Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Phil, I've done it as well. Car is 25kg lighter with Duratec install over R400 spec. Duratec 2L @ 270bhp is not a stressed plant so it's the way to go Want to rent an 18th century Farmhouse in Rural Somerset? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigmamark Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Am I missing something here? Is the Duratec unit really that much lighter than a K series and is the difference between the 2.0 and the 2.3 anything other than just the swept volume? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pendennis Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Mark the K lump is supposed to be lighter than the 2L Duratec. But all the K ancillaries of my R400 engine tilt the scales, at a guess I reckon the K R400 complete engine with bellhousing is somewhere between 10 - 15kg heavier than my complete 2L Duratec. 2.3L is slightly taller (13mm) than the 2L version, so yes swept volume Although the crank is different I believe Want to rent an 18th century Farmhouse in Rural Somerset? Edited by - Pendennis on 18 Aug 2009 21:34:57 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigmamark Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Pendennis - Thanks for the info. Having just got my refreshed and rebuilt 240 bhp K series back in the car, I still have a nagging doubt over its long term reliability, so it sounds like a winter project to get a replacement Duratec under way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philwaters Posted August 19, 2009 Author Share Posted August 19, 2009 Thanks guys, useful info. Just need to know if it is 2lt or 2.3lt? Does one cost significantly more than the other? Would rather have a buzzy, revvy engine. I'm asuming a 2lt would give that more than a 2.3? Phil Waters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raw Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Just done the same K-Series to Duratec swap using one of Ammo's 2 litre base spec engines but with certain bits upgraded to faciltate an easier power hike later. Very pleased with the engine and car. No idea on cost difference but after selling all the K-Series parts, the cost of the conversion was only slightly more than actual cost of the new engine. Cheers Andrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pendennis Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Both the 2L or 2.3L can be buzzy or not so buzzy To get big power from a 2L means buzzy. To get similar power from 2.3L means not so buzzy, but to get big power from 2.3L means buzzy Want to rent an 18th century Farmhouse in Rural Somerset? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racing Snake Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 2.3 on throttle bodies and a Good Fabrications exhaust and 5 hours on the rolling road with Steve Greenauld = 256 bhp Easy to drive on the torque or go over 4500 rpm and light the blue touch paper Does life get any better 😬 Upgrade to 54mm throttle bodies coming up Just fitted the c/r BGH gearbox with ally case and lid Diplomatic Liason Officer For Penn 7's Mad Hatter Racing - Feel The Duralight R Torque 😬 Carl Van Baars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 The Duratec is a heavier engine. A K series without any anciliaries is 74.8 kgs from memory. I think like for like the duratec is around 10kgs heavier fully dressed with flywheel. The bare engine is between 3-6kg's heavier depending on whether 2.0 or 2.3 and the flywheel is pretty heavy at 15kgs which explains why the differential increases when the ancilliaries are fitted. Edited by - Carl on 18 Sep 2009 17:19:08 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rj Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I find the K-series cars more nimble than any Duratec car I've ever driven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racing Snake Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Duratec is the future Diplomatic Liason Officer For Penn 7's Mad Hatter Racing - Feel The Duralight R Torque 😬 Carl Van Baars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pendennis Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 RJ; how can a K Caterham be more nimble than a D Caterham Want to rent an 18th century Farmhouse in Rural Somerset? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rj Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Pendennis, Firstly most Duratec cars are heavier than K-cars. Secondly there could be a weight distribution issue. Mad Hatter, I - unfortunately - agree. The K-series is dead. But IMO it was THE engine for a Caterham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pendennis Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 RJ, but if a D Caterham is lighter than a K Caterham (like mine) then the D Caterham should be more nimble. However, there are other reasons why 'A' car is more nimble than 'B' car, it's not just about the weight Weight distribution can, in many cases be determined by spring rates. If I remember correctly, my K Caterham had a 51%/49% front to rear compared with same Caterham and same spring rates but with the Duratec it had 52.5%/47.5% front to rear. Now my D Caterham is stiffer and has 54%/46% split and is definetly more nimble Want to rent an 18th century Farmhouse in Rural Somerset? Edited by - Pendennis on 21 Aug 2009 08:59:23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMMO Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 I've built at least a dozen Duratec engines that have ended up in Lotus Elises. I've been told that the installation ends up around 4 kilos lighter than the original Rover engine. This is due more to the ancillary components that are chosen for the conversion itself rather than the choice of engine. I don't think can get a Duratec engine to be as light as a K. I have been thinking for some time of putting a Duratec engine on a diet and milling off all the lugs and bits and pieces that don't do anything, looking at every single component to see where weight can be removed. Manufacturing lighter parts where neccessary, replacing some fasteners with aluminium or titanium, etc. Realistically the most you would get off is a couple of kilos. If you were racing it would be a worthwhile excercise. For the road it is probably not worth the effort or expense. So on the plus side with the K you have a light engine that can be taken to 1900 cc, perhaps 2 litres. The downside is that it is under square and has limited valves sizes that will ultimately limit the power. With the Duratec you can have an engine that can be taken up to 2.5 litres if you fancy a torque monster, that has a cylinder head that with larger valves can give you approaching or in excess of 300 bhp in capacities as low as 2 litres. It is a strong engine. With strength comes weight. On the downside you may have a 10 / 15 kilo weight penalty over the K but for me the Duratec is still the better choice. The Duratec is now coming ip to 9 years old. I keep my eyes skinned at work to see if anything comes in that might be a good replacement. So far nothing. Just my completely biased view. Edited to say that when my car was a Crossflow and I first weighed it it was 590 kilos. Weighed again not so long ago after 9 years of nibbling away at various bits all over the car and it was 518 kilos with clams, screen with spare wheel, tools and hood removed for trackday use. Heavier again now as I have added an LSD, S-type seats and have stuck the heater back in. So don't look at just the engine when you want to save weight. That's probably why some Duartec cars are lighter than K cars. The owners have gone to town and stuck ali gearbox casings etc. whilst they were doing the conversion. Ammo Raceco.com Edited by - AMMO on 21 Aug 2009 09:32:12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Totally agree with Ammo. The weight saving comes about from reducing the weight of the anciliaries and not the engine itself. The weight distribution changes as a result of spring rates would only come about as a result of changes in relative ride hights front to back. This would naturally change if the springs rates change relative to each other. If you don't change the platforms the end that has increased further in terms of relative stiffness will be higher and therefore lighter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pendennis Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Agree Carl, but doing it with the correct length spring at the right rate to achieve the design ride height is better than pre-loading a spring, thus altering its rate Want to rent an 18th century Farmhouse in Rural Somerset? 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