Dont waste time developing all other engines - this is the one to have !!

[Jason Plato]

Went to gurston Down Hillclimb yesterday and found a stand displaying what I consider to be the ultimate engine for a Caterham .

 

Spec :

1997cc , 4 cylinder , 40 valve , quad cam , V8 , Bore 75.5mm , stroke 55.75mm , 302 bhp @ 10000rpm (std carbs& airboxes) , torque 167ft/lb @ 8500rpm , 108ft/lb @ 2000 rpm , 73 Kg , Dimensions - 460mm long , 540mm wide , 430mm high .

 

Described as - "4 cylinder , 40 valve , quad cam , V8 configuration. incorperating the Cyclone power Ltd patented cam drive system . featuring internal crankshaft driven , idler system , driving contra rotating camshafts , via drive chain and tensioner system . producing a compact , strong , 6 bearing engine unit , and maintaining accurate , high speed camshaft timing under all conditions .

The Cyclone V8's wide spread of power , and exceptional low end torque , provides a perfect blend of , superb driveability at low rpm , combined with outstanding smooth power , which all adds up to a stunning power delivery , right up to its awsome 302bhp maximum ."

 

You have just gotta take a look at this little beaston the cyclone power site

 

The engine was installed in a Quantum extreme car ( we can forgive them this error ) talking to the company owner ( who was a real nice straight bloke , with a great , nah - mad speed freak attitude ) on the stand he was saying that the engine is made up from 2 Thunderace engines mated to their own bottom end - which was a fantastic piece of machne work .

 

302bhp was made using the standard carbs and very restrictive Thunderace airboxes . The show car was running 2 ITG 120mm filters . Cyclone expected the engine to make around 315 - 320 bhp in this format , as they had to add 7% more feul with the ITG filters . The engine was only run up to 10000 rpm . It now runs to 11500 rpm .

 

When I asked for the engine to be heard running , he simply flicked the switch and the engine started on second rotation and settled to an incredible 1100rpm idle . Once warmed he blipped the throttle - the sound was awsome , I have never ever heard such a fantastic noise . It was like a cross between a TVR Speed six light idle rumble , Aston martin howl and VW VR6 induction .

When I touched the heads , I would say the engine was as smooth as the VR6 -you know the party trick where you stand a £1 coin on the cam cover at idle ......

 

The company are presently working on a fuel injected version with mild tweeks to the heads - porting, cams etc , which should provide more than 340 bhp !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

The engine comes with dry sump system , Motec management , manifolds , all water and oil plumbing and mates up to a close ratio Quaife 6 speed box using a bespoke 4" bellhousing .

 

Estimated price - "you should budget around £14,000"

 

Can you imagine this engine in a Caterham ???!!!!

 

I have no connection with this company , other than being blown away by the standard of engineering and instalation . And of course falling in love with the noise and concept of this in my car .

 

Absolutly fan****ingtastic !!!! 😬

 

I WANT ONE !!!!!!

 

Dave

[Peter Carmichael]

Why does an engine need to be smooth?

[stevefoster]

0.005% of hp goes in vibration

 

My racing pics, 7 DIY, race prep. Updated often here

Photo's of the year here

Hants (North) and Berkshire Area club site here

 

[TorAtle]

I'm with Dave, drool drool drool. More than VX power and half the weight. Check out that torque spread. 6-speed looks OTT..

 

However with a V8 you have twice of everything, so the cost is not surprising.

 

The only 'Cyclone' I can think of is the Buell motorcycle, but it can't be that engine 😬 Where is it from?

[Peter Carmichael]

be aware that the graph on the website fails the first test on bull****ometer. bhp and torque (lbft) curves do not cross at 5252 rpm therefore this is a bogus made up graph.

 

Edited by - Peter Carmichael on 26 May 2003 14:04:18

[dino ferrana]

Please explain Peter for those of us who are not au fait with everything to do with engines.

[Peter Carmichael]

The engine is a fantastic piece of kit, evidently.

 

The graph is dodgy. There is a simple mathematical relationship between horsepower, torque and rpm. This determines the crossing point of the torque and bhp curves if plotted on the same axes. When the torque is measured in lbft, the equation is:

 

horsepower=lbft*rpm/5252

 

From this you can see that if rpm=5252 then the horspower figure will equal the lbft figure. This is the first sensecheck to apply to any tuners claims and these guys have fallen at the first hurdle. It doesn't mean that the engine is bad or any less than DJ has intimated, but it does mean that you can't trust the graph.

[Graham Perry]

Peter is as usual correct, I always use this to confirm the accuracy of a graph. You would be amazed at the number of large manufacturers whose graphs in the sales brochures do not cross in the correct place. I have in front of me a Ford Mondeo brochure from Dec 2001 where the 1.8 engine shows them crossing at 4500. Beware diesel plots as well though from manufacturers, as they often tweak the scales to make the graphs cross when in reality they won't cross until 5252, theoretically though, because many diesels struggle to reach these revs

 

 

 

Edited by - Graham Perry on 28 May 2003 07:13:32

[edmandsd]

Theoretically it sounds fabulous but i'm a little sceptical about a couple of things.

 

Peter's already mentioned that the power and torque curves don't cross where they're meant to. Maybe this is why the peak torque seems too low compared to the peak power which is only at 10,000 rpm. A 2lt BD will show around 200 ft lb's at 7,500 rpm in order to result in around 300 bhp at 9,500 rpm. I'm also intrigued by the weight considering it's got twice the usual number of rods and pistons....and that's without considering the number of valves ! The lightest fully dressed all alloy BD i've seen weighed 85kgs.

 

I'd be delighted to be proved wrong though - all in the interests of pushing the performance envelope of course ! In the circumstabnces my advice would be - let others be the guinea pigs as there's bound to be teething problems, and get independant evidence of the engine's output and weight - if that's possible.

 

Oh..I think it's bloody cheap aswell considering a new Richardson's BD costs over £30k incl Vat. I'm sure there's a few VX's, and even K's with getting on for that kind of sum invested in them aswell !

 

Home of BDR700

 

Edited by - edmandsd on 26 May 2003 18:13:26

[Joe 90]

I think I could find better ways of spending £14,000 There have been a few of these bike derived V8s offered over the years, and if your going to compete in a 2L formula, it would be hard to beat.

 

Upgradeitis ward, awaiting open wallet surgery. 100,016 miles

[Paul Ranson]

I'm a little bit dubious about the way the power curve continues to climb.

 

I have a 29xBHP 2 litre Vauxhall, I think it's about 180lbft. I'd be surprised if there was any more available on petrol regardless of configuration.

 

To be interesting a V8 2 litre needs to be making 370BHP, but I think 8 is too may cylinders for that capacity.

 

I'm surprised they've chosen such a crap demo platform, 220BHP in a 'Superlight' gives you similar power/weight (I ignored the driver for no particular good reason), anyway that's easy enough from a K with no emissions worries.

 

500-600BHP/100kg/structural for less than £20000 gets interesting. £20000ish gets you on the 3.5L Judd V8 ladder, which is actually pretty good value compared to the options...

 

Paul

[DaveK]

I too saw the v8 @ gurston.

 

It was very well engineered.

 

14k will buy you a lot of engine these days if you know who to go too.

 

The std top ends will be proven by yamaha when built so i don't think you would have a problem there it really remains to be seen how there version of the crank case holds together.

 

The reason all these tuners use the yamaha top ends is because they are one of the only bike engines with the cam drive in the centre of the heads.

 

I hope they succeed although what purpose you could use it for remains to be seen

 

Personnaly i would fit the opel kv V6 as they have a sound that all of their own.

 

Dave

[edmandsd]

Paul - Steve Broughton reckons he's seeing 170 ft lb's out of his 1600 Vauxhall (I think power's now quoted in the 260-270 bhp range at 9,500 rpm). If my estimations of BD torque are a little optimistic (for pump fuel) how the h#ll are SBD getting that kind of efficiency with only 1600 cc's and pump fuel ?

 

There's no doubting that the SBD engine must be very powerful looking at the times/speeds it ran at Brighton last year (10.87/129) - I understand that it clocked 111mph across the line at Curborough aswell.

 

I know a fast car when I see one but this one really surprised me - It's actually quicker than their old all singing and dancing 2lt Jade in a straight line.

[EFA]

Remember Dave, SBD's corrective figures have been seen to be optimistic before......

 

Fat Arn

Visit the K2 RUM website

See the Lotus Seven Club 4 Counties Area Website here

 

[Blatman]

I understand that it clocked 111mph across the line at Curborough aswell.

You understand correctly. I was there when it did it, with SB at the wheel. I believe it took FTD that day with a 31.** sec single lap run. It's damn fast, as you say. I can't remember if that day was 2002, or 2001, but doubtless the engine has undergone further developement in the quest for more speed......

[TorAtle]

Even though the power graph is a little out, can we at least assume that it will make over 300bhp?! And even though some doubts its claimed weight of 73kg, can we again assume that it will be lighter than a K?

 

More to the point, it's been a long time - too long - since PC made 253bhp with his K, so it seems that engine is pushed about as far as it will go. Not forgetting edmandsd super engine, but I think it would be very interesting if someone would try something new. Something like the cyclone. Or maybe a super duper Duratech. Something that doesn't weigh more than the K, puts out more power in N/A form and doesn't cost a fortune to buy or install.

 

If not the cyclone, what is the most promising package available?

[dino ferrana]

How about the V8 Powertec (Radical) engine promised at Autosport? A common crank Hayabusa V8.

[Paul Ranson]

If my estimations of BD torque are a little optimistic (for pump fuel) how the h#ll are SBD getting that kind of efficiency with only 1600 cc's and pump fuel ?

The numbers I hear for a 2 litre are about 180lbft on petrol and 200lbft on Methanol. The Methanol engine won't have an equivalently greater headline power figure because it cannot sustain the torque to max rpm. This is for Vauxhall derivatives running to 9000-9500. The numbers seem plausible to me.

 

I've no idea about the SBD 1600, or whether the numbers I hear and have been told are sensible, although I suspect they are. I would suspect your BD figures would be roughly similar, although I think they can handle higher revs, which would imply a lower 'max' torque for a max power of about 300.

 

Paul

[Bare]

It IS an interesting Notion.. But historically British Engines, and especially "one offs' have had "optimistic " power claims.

Two 120 hp engines glued together does not aotuomatically generate the additive power.

Besides There have Been Turbo Caterhams that far outclass this engine.. remember Fredy Kunshicks 330 hp Turbo VHX's ?? with 300 30 ft lbs of Torque.. Tq is Acceleration ..Hp is Top speed, roughly speaking ;-)

IF one wanted to get lotsa power, take a look at old F1 engines of the late 80's, BMW (oem Block even) 1500cc @ 1000hp, Honda at 860, Renault at @ 850.

Gluing a couple of Obsolete Honda Bike engines together is an accomplishment.. but in the overall scope of things... B.F.D.

 

[TorAtle]

"Tq is Acceleration ..Hp is Top speed"

 

Someone will be here in a mo talking about gearing

[kandyman]

here is another one, already running in a Seven.

 

 

[Peter Carmichael]

If i read that correctly...

 

276bhp @ 9820 (203kW)

160lbft @ 8000 (217Nm)

 

There is a primary drive step down that drops the rpm for the power to 7178rpm and the torque is geared up to 218.52lbft @ 5850rpm.

[Peter Carmichael]

I should point out that the correct crossing point for a kW/Nm plot is at 9549rpm, so the graphs on this link are correct by that measure.

 

I don't understand the point that Graham Perry was making earlier about diesels. As far as I can tell his notion that the graphs will cross twice with diesels is incorrect.

[edmandsd]

Now that weight looks more realistic.

 

Running methanol will give you around 7.5% more peak power and around 10% more peak torque on a 12 to 1 compression 4 cylinder race engine such as a vx or bd (I've seen a bd like this go from 275 - 295 bhp and 175ft lb to 195 ft lb - not mine I might add or an HTR engine for that matter !). Significatly higher performance gains are achievable over gasoline considering methanol allows one to run compression ratios of up to 17 to 1.

 

Arnie - I don't doubt SBD's power claim having seen the car perform in the flesh.

 

Home of BDR700

 

 

 

Edited by - edmandsd on 27 May 2003 20:08:53

[andy couchman]

We're working on a new type of engine here in Gloucestershire. It is based on a single cylinder Porsche engine - 1500cc - but the real deal is that it uses trick electronics to interfere with electronic timing gear.

 

We're hoping for a sub 8 sec Brighton run; 132mph at Curborough and over 500bhp on our special rollers (currently situated on the village green).

 

Yours for less than £15K. Oh, and you can still use an Ital axle without losing drive shafts.

 

Only downside is that the electronics are so powerful that the car 'appears' to be going really slowly. Something to do with the Doppler effect apparently.

 

Please send a cheque to...