Rob Walker Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 I am pleased to report that I have today sucessfully SVA`d a 2.3 Duratec producing 280bhp/210 lbs Ft torque at the Taunton VOSA test center. We had no problems with emissions or noise despite the engine running 280 degree cams with 11.30mm lift and four port throttle bodies with an 8 injector setup. This should be wellcome news to anyone building/contemplating a powerfull duratec engine for their seven. Rob Edited by - Rob Walker on 23 Jan 2006 14:10:18 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannylt Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 Do you have a dyno graph? And surely throttle bodies and 8 injectors make it easier! :-). Isn't the SVA test at quite low revs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul jacobs Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 Congratulations Rob, you must be feeling very pleased now. Sorry I couldn't get down in time, I would've been most interested to see the car and hear the motor 😬 Paul J. Hard work never killed anyone ........ but why take the chance! [Except building up my new CSR kit] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgrigsby Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 Congratulations Rob sounds like a monster engine, Dave Walker commented that mine with 270cams would easily pass SVA emissions regs even without a cat. Rob G www.SpeedySeven.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Walker Posted January 23, 2006 Author Share Posted January 23, 2006 Yes the 8 injector set up helps with emissions as only the tiny stock injectors are used on light throttle this helps with fine control. atomization and fuel drop out. The emission test at SVA is for HC,CO and lambda at 2500 rpm sampled over a 30 second period and natural idle test 450/1500 rpm HC and CO only. The amazing thing about the Duratec engine is that you can trim the fuelling right down until its running on vertually fresh air and yet the engine will tick over smoothly, obviously the CO and lambda values would be way off with the engine running so weak but it indicates that the engine can be trimmed on fuel to easly meet the emission test despite running such hot cams. I tried similar tests on my K`s and the engine was impossible to keep stable. Sorry I have no scanner to post the Power plots. Paul, The tester " Ian "was extremely thorough we had lots of problems with internal and external projections espectially the exhaust system and tillet style seats. The overall test was a much more detailed test than that done on my last car two years ago. Scarey 😳 Edited by - Rob Walker on 23 Jan 2006 22:39:23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannylt Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 Any chance you could read off torque from 3000 upwards at 500rpm intervals? I'm curious on how the shape changes vs. my 270 degree cams. My old Radical went for SVA with most stick out bits missing, like rear wing, splitters etc., and huge amounts of rubber stick on bits to cover up fastenings. Looks very naked and silly like that! Then they had to redrill the side indicators to move them 3 inches to make the tester happy. Took them several tries to get it through, though the 250bhp motorbike engine was no problem?! Cheers! Danny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILL FLY Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 Rob, I thought that the MOT emissions test also checked Lambda at the measuring points to ensure you weren't running lean. Great result though. I'd like to see your actual results for the emissions if you have them Roy. See willfly.net for more info. If you don't spin you ain't trying Happiness is knowing you have just a tad too much power Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Walker Posted January 24, 2006 Author Share Posted January 24, 2006 Danny, starting from 3000rpm = 158 160 145 185 192 205 204 209 peak torque 209.7 @6559rpm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Walker Posted January 24, 2006 Author Share Posted January 24, 2006 Lambda is tested at 2500rpm 2787 rpm CO 0.10%vol limit 0.30 HC 32ppm vol limit 200 Lambda 1.004 limit 0.970-1.030 at idle 872 rpm CO 0.19 5 %vol limit 0.50 % vol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgrigsby Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 Hmm interesting here's the numbers from my 2.3 with 270cams for torque starting at 3000rpm, I'm reading these of the graph so they may not be exaclty right but they are pretty close. 3000 - 152 3500 - 154 4000 - 161 4500 - 186 5000 - 189 5500 - 200 6000 - 199 6500 - 196 7000 - 190 7500 - 178 Peak torque on mine was 201lb/ft at 5400rpm TBH it looks very similar it just seems to go a little higher a little later in the rev range although the drop between 4 and 4.5K is a bit more noticeable on the 280cams Rob G www.SpeedySeven.com Edited by - rgrigsby on 24 Jan 2006 14:33:26 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannylt Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 Rob - missing 7000 & 7500? Mine are Peak 193lbft/5737, 251bhp/7765, so very similar shape - a dip at 4000 rising strongly to 4500. Difference of less than 10lbft which I guess is well under the rolling road error. Looks like 280 cams are the way to go :) 3000 - 160 3500 - 160 4000 - 155 4500 - 182 5000 - 186 5500 - 191 6000 - 192 6500 - 190 7000 - 182 7500 - 173 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dobuy Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 So Rob, I guess you are a TOTAL Duratec convert know and all thoughts of K-series are ancient history?? Duratec SV, built in Dubai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Walker Posted January 24, 2006 Author Share Posted January 24, 2006 I must confess to being smitten with the brute torque that these engines chuck out especially around 4000rpm. I am also becoming confident that these engines will hold together and be durable. Now onto the K being ancient History well my own car still has a home brewed all steel K with a scholar block and a tasty self ported VVC head running 1227 cams and big valves. Its a nice engine very light, responsive and the the car handles well but you do have to buzz it more than the big Duratec to make it go so its harder to drive and not as nice to drive on the road. No I can`t consider it as ancient history not yet, doesn`t stop me wanting a duratec though. I am currently building another 2.3 duratec complete car for a club member who will remain anonamous and this engine will have the potential to produce more power so could 300 bhp be on the cards? 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Walker Posted January 24, 2006 Author Share Posted January 24, 2006 7000rpm = 204 7500rpm = 196 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgrigsby Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 The first 300+bhp Duratec must be appearing soon I'm sure 😬 As for durability I'd say the 4000+ miles my car covered in "fast road" conditions ranging from 2 - 38 degrees C in the USA last year has pretty much confirmed they are tough engines, admitedly that isn't racing/hard track use but we weren't hanging around. Dannylt uses his on track quite a bit I believe and hasn't had any problems either. The K is still a lovely engine in terms of the lightness and the power it can make but I'm completly converted now. Rob G www.SpeedySeven.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannylt Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Several thousand fantastic track miles with only a few minor hiccups, but the engine itself was fine. Quite a few people have driven it on track and loved the engine. Unfortunately the clutch broke in the morning of my last day at Spa... I was upset until I realised it was perfectly fine to drive clutchless (dog box) - just needed a strong push on the uphill pitlane to get into first . I now have a heavier duty clutch. 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