Big Brother Posted October 13, 2003 Share Posted October 13, 2003 and it still won't sound as good as a Crossflow 😬 😬 😬 Steve Se7en-Up! Magnolia - its the new BRG/Yellow! 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chumley-warner Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 😬 I run just north of 300bhp in 640kg and it is fine provided I use ACB10s. Anything less stick would be very scary. Rover V8 4.6 with a clever top half is fine. As Arn says though if you want more then this route is *very* expensive and I have also been quoted 15K to reach 400 bhp. The cossie route to 440bhp is much cheaper, although in my humble opinion it don't sound anywhere near as good. MORE POWER! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Plato Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 Isnt the Honda S200 engine too tall for the Caterham bonnet line / chassis height ?? dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris G Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 Arnie, none of those line items look that unreasonable but it's an awful lot of trouble to go to for an engine that is presumable going to be in a "fragile" state of tune. Do you have a particular emotional attachment to this engine type or is there another reason that you've gone that route? As Chumley-Warner has pointed the cosworth is cheap power with a high power ceiling. If I was doing things again I have no doubt in my mind I'd go for an LS6, 385BHP available as standard off the shelf for just a few thousand pounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Plato Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 The biggest problem with the Cossie turbo is the cooling and chargecooling . There simply isnt enough space for a large intercooler . This restricts the *real* power . I've met claimed 350bhp cossie caterhams on track and they simply dont have the power . As for Rover V8 engines , the weight is huge . So corners are a real challenge . Given the choice I would go either V8 bike ( once proven) or as dave said , F2 , 420R or as a long shot a small car engined V6 such as the Nissan . At a recent castle coombe action day there was a Honda V6 legend engine , 2700cc 4 cam nat asp , in a ruff Dutton on 1a wooden tyres that simply blew away a hard driven superlight R . With a claimed standard 215bhp and 260lb torque ( dunno if the figures are true ) Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 "fragile" state of tune"??? Its never had any failure other than a wrongly specced part (fault of supplier, whom was made to pay!) related to the state of tune of the engine. In fact the last rebuild of the top end showed no real faults after 25,000 miles. Sticking a Cosworth YB engine in a Caterham is a bad idea. Everything is bespoke and the whole setup is very dificult to maintain because there is so much crammed into such a small area. I also doubt there is enough frontal area in a non SV Caterham Seven to intercool for give 400bhp. I seem to remember this is why Steve Ritchie built his car to only have around 250bhp. A Rover V8 is cheap power for Land Rovers and other cars which do not handle. (Nasty Cobra replicas and TVR's ....) Fat Arn Visit the K2 RUM website See the Lotus Seven Club 4 Counties Area Website here Edited by - Fat Arnie on 14 Oct 2003 08:52:46 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Shurvinton Posted October 14, 2003 Author Share Posted October 14, 2003 Dave, If the charge cooler is a problem, do away with it. There is more than one way to cool an air charge. I know people running 28PSI boost with no intercooler and no problems. In fact the removal of the intercooler has improved spool and reduced air temperature at low boost conditions Arnie, where I am lost is the fact that you seem to have replaced all the already trick bits in your engine with new trick bits? This smacks of either a failure of the 'bullet proof' innards or you've stroked it. And your last rebuild was after 14K and a complete rebuild IIRC. Just before the bearing problems. At that point you claimed to have replaced everthing. You certainly haven't done 25000 miles since then. So is it 15K for 304HP or 15K for 34HP? Bill P.S. everything is bespoke . This is a feeble excuse for not doing something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chumley-warner Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 😬 😬 😬 😬 Mine handles just fine thanks....... As for weight and cornering.....please see above..... 😬 😬 😬 😬 MORE POWER! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmandsd Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 If you ran methanol you probably wouldn't even need an intercooler Home of BDR700 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris G Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 Cooling and Chargecooling is an issue, if not the biggest issue of putting a YB in a se7en. It's not insoluble though, you just need to spend some time getting it right. I'm running 330BHP and am currently seeing similar charge temperatures to the guys running huge RS500 intercoolers in the sierras. As far as Arnies assertion that everything is custom there is far less custom work involved than in his build. And even at 330BHP on a YB you're still running well within the design specs of the original engine. Unlike a tuned VX/K etc. As far as V8s go the weight is not an issue. They're all alloy remember, unlike the VX, zetec, pinto, duratec so they weigh little if anything more. Dave, I'm not sure what your argument is on one hand you seem to claim that V8s are too heavy then on the other that a crappy V6 dutton ran rings around a superlight R. Either there was a huge difference in driver ability or the V6 dutton was by far the better car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dino ferrana Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 V8's are too heavy this is shown on many circuits where powerful V8 westies etc. get pissed on by less powerful sevens or other LSIS. 330bhp would only have been for racing as the engineers only ever envisaged 300 bhp for the road until the warranty department said no! VX's were taken to 300+bhp by Swindon for the works vauxhall touring car team! I think Dave is saying that the V6 is a very light engine for its configuartion and power output. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Plato Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 What I was trying to say was , that the power potential of a V6 is there , but the weight of a V8 puts me off . The Dutton V6 had little or no grip from the 1a tyres and hardly any brakes , the driver was either very skilled or insane 😬 the dutton outdragged the SLR everywhere . Castle combe is a power circuit so the handling wasnt such a disadvantage . The Nissan V6 I am led to believe is around 100Kg , a rover V8 or pinto is far more . This weight will influence the handling - no question . Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris G Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 Dino, V8s aren't heavy themselves. What happens is they get mated up to heavyweight gearboxes and the weight distribution goes all over the place. The RV8 is about 30KG heavier than a K which is only significant when you consider that a tuned K could be running similar power levels. Lets ignore engine specifics for the moment and consider an example. What would you prefer, a peaky car with 180BHP and good weight distribution or a one that's 5-10% heavier, with slightly worse weight distribution but twice as much power and a far better torque curve? Easy choice IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dino ferrana Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 Not really. If it is a turbo car then issues like power delivery and throttle response leap to mind. Also why do you need so much torque? Most of the time this will just result in more wheelspin and as you can already get wheelspin in several gears in an R4/500 why bother? That extra weight would bother me as handling is a lot of the reason I purchased a Caterham in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Plato Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 Yes I agree crig1 , I would also go for the peaky 180bhp engine and good handling 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
normalbloke.29 Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 How the hell do you skim a head to lower compression? Answers on a postcard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterg Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 think he must mean skim the pistons 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris G Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 You're all mad. The handling of the heavier car is 95% as good as the lighter one and 10* better than a tintop. Are you scared of the power or something? Dino, why don't you go tell Arnie that he's wasting his time and money :) It sounds like there's quite a few of us in the 300+ club and I don't think any of us would want the power taken away from us. Yes, wheels can spin in a number of gears if you're careless but until you can spin the wheels in all gears you don't have enough power :) Do I need more power - No. Do I want more power - unquestionably yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris G Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 Or fit a thicker gasket. Lowcomp pistons are the ideal though. Anyhow haven't you all been argued quite conclusively that supercharged bike engines are the answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dino ferrana Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 I don't think 95% would be representative. I can enjoy good handling on the road all day long where as massive power would be more difficult without doing something seriously illegal and or dangerous. There were a few 300 bhp plus Caterhams built in Switzerland (by the swiss agent) using a turbo X XE block. I have heard that they were difficult to drive as the car kept the boost on after you lifted off just long enough to spin you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris G Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 That sounds like bad setup to me but could be a muppet driver. Turbos definately take more driving to get the best out but are excellent fun on the road once you get used to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris G Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 Oh and the handling isn't necessarily bad. The ex Caterham racer/instructor who has been out in my car was having difficulty stopping himself from dribbling and said that he'd prefer it to a Caterham any day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dino ferrana Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 "My cars better than a Caterham" (repeat and shout it until you really believe it) 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Shurvinton Posted October 14, 2003 Author Share Posted October 14, 2003 I agree with Chris that Dino and Dave seem to have decided that they have the wrong engine and should have invested in Hyabusa power, which is way lighter than the K route. But we are talking 300HP here, not 180. As to the turbo VX route. The fact that the swiss dealer was unable to specify the system correctly and thus provide the required driving experience doesn't mean all turbos are bad. It just means that there are a lot of bad mappers of turbos out there. No excuse with modern electronics. But here is a thought. I am only aware of one se7en with a sub 10 1/4 mile to its name. That had a carb'd Rover V8 and a 3 speed auto. I don't know if that makes it 'the fastest' se7en in the UK, or just a curiousity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dino ferrana Posted October 14, 2003 Share Posted October 14, 2003 Swiss Turbo cars were early 90's so technology has improved a lot. No I have a very nice engine in my car thank you. Bike engines seem to be the ultimate in terms of chuckability and handling. Turbo cars have monster power but lack some of the delicate nature and finesse of a lighter less sledge hammer car. My current car is in the middle driveable, quick, great handling and about to be replaced with something with a bit more power (135 vs 160+). I imagine the car with the Rover V8 is lovely for drag racing but ****e at circuits and on the road. 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