Out of the box power figs

[Red SLR]

Caterham advertise that the 1600 SS is 133Bhp.

 

Does any one know what a STD ROVER K 1600 is?

 

There have been a few thoughts batting about on the 7s list and I want to know how Caterham come up with these figures.

 

I think the 1800 in std form from rover is 110bhp. So how can a set of cams and a new air filter take it to 133 on the 1600cc??? The thougts were that the R500 is usualy about 220 bhp not 230bhp as advertised.

 

Also the topic of RR accuracy has come up. Do Caterham have a dyno bench?

 

Any ideas?

 

Simon.

 

X777CAT

[murph7355]

I've seen anywhere between 105 and 115 quoted for the std. K (power doesn't seem affected by cc, the torque is though).

 

Don't forget also that the SS has a remapped (though still not remappable) ECU. Cams, filter and ECU should be enough for this power boost I would have thought, if only because you get more revs (IIRC there's a 5-600rpm increase, maybe more between peaks).

 

Don't know if Caterham have a dyno but would have thought it unlikely. Most of their high spec. engine work (incl. development) is farmed out to Minister so I'd expect them to rely on theirs.

 

As for R500 power, I'd think it highly unlikely that Minister would be unable to produce dyno plots showing at least the quoted figure (238bhp), even if they don't show that on some RRs. One I think showed 243bhp on Dave Walker's rolling road, but I know some believe this may give flattering figures. But then...

 

The talk on accuracy of RR's previously was spot on and they should only really be used for comparative testing at the same RR (for the same or diff. cars) rather than general quoting of figures universally.

 

 

[Dave H]

The Caterham figures on all the engines they supply are over those quoted by the manufacturer - and has been for many years. This is largely due to the changes made to give vast improvements in the breathing. Both inlet and exhaust sides give a much better flow than the strangled setup on the tin boxes the engines come out of, where the main aim seems to be economy and low down torque, not performance and free revving.

 

Dave H

[Mike Bees]

Caterham don't have a dyno, although they have a close relationship with Minister who do. The 1.4 and 1.6 K Supersport engines were mapped at & by Rover on their dynos.

 

Mike

[oilyhands]

The ratings for all the current factory K power units are on PTP's website, have a read and see.

 

Dave H, have you seen the Caterham short 4->1 manifold?, if that's built for performance and high revving I'm a lime jelly. Even the 'orrible 4-2-1 on the stock 1.8 as installed in the shopping basket home of the 1.8 is better. The induction on the K is little different between the Caterham and Rover installations, the main diff being an optional K&N filter.

 

Oily

[Mike Bees]

The 'orrible short 4-1 manifold was built with fitting a catalyst into the system in mind. Needless to say before SVA mandated the catalyst most folks opted for the long catless 4-1.

 

Mike

[Peter Carmichael]

The 1.6 and 1.8 share the same head and the same bore. Very similar power will come out of each, but at higher revs and a bit peakier in the 1.6.

 

You could stick an R500 head on a 1.6 and if the valves stayed clear of the pistons, and it could rev to 10,000 you would get precious close to that 230bhp figure.

 

The head decides the power (within limits).

[Red SLR]

So the figs used at Rovers.

 

I did not know that the Head was that importaint.

 

X777CAT

[CHRIS CLARK]

Simon.

 

Shame on you! See Dave Andrews site for info. His head porting mods make one h..l of a difference!!!!!!

[Red SLR]

Chris.

 

I meant I did not know if you put an R500 head on a 1600k you will get sort of R500 power figs.

 

I have read DAs site about 50 times now, I know exactly what I want to do with it, but it took me 2 weeks to do a job everyone said would take a day or 2. (DTHTBS)

 

So I can see it taking a month or so to get the head work sorted, this is why I want to wait till winter is upon us once more... then the car will be left to someone else to mod.

 

Simon.

 

X777CAT

[Tony Martyr]

Caterham do not, so far as I know and I get to hear of most dyno cells in the UK, have an engine dyno. The SS and VHPD engines were developed, or at least tested in what used to be called the 'Racing Cell' at (Rover) Longbridge. What you get out of a development engine is often a bit different to what the production version may produce because of the need to obtain homologation to emission specs. That will probably have been carried out in the cells at Gaydon (don't we have a pre-BMW Rover man on the list?)Rover were keen to get 3rs party engine sales from the higher rated engines and it suceeded later with Lotus. They did a lot of real R&D to produce the VVC for the (then) new MGF so as to give it a more forgiving power band than the tuned 1600k and those I saw at Gaydon.

I think, like most published figures the caterham figures will err on the high side. Anyway all the warm weather is reducing the power at the flywheel so better concentrate on sticky tyres now

[Slipper man]

I don't know how Caterham get the power figures for most of the cars, but the VHPD and R500 engines are all built by Minister, who then run them in and verify the power output on their Dyno. I've seen them do it (see next month's Low Flying), and they do their best to simulate the actual installation in the car, by using the same exhaust system and inlet as in the car. They guarantee that all their engines will be within 2 bhp of what is claimed, and they are then sealed. If they are short of power on the Dyno, the engine is stripped until they find the fault.