oilyhands Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Over the last 6 months or so I have been involved with Simon Thornley in specifying and building a 1900K for his sprint car. The brief was to produce an engine with good peak power but not too much mid range torque due to the restricted grip offerred by the tyres allowed in the class in which he competes at Curburough. Simon is an ex Rover engineer who has held the championship and course record at Curborough for a couple of years. After much joint deliberation Simon decided to go for more aggressive cams than the current favourites (1444s) in order to bring down the low end torque and bring up the peak power. The head work was discussed and I undertook some experimental port work together with some fairly large valves (specially made for me and now available as a stock REC part) with larger inserts in the VHPD head. The induction is the stock VHPD/Exige PTP type DTH bodies with some modifications to suit the port work. The exhaust is a 4-2-1, the ECU is of course, an Emerald M3DK. The engine was run up and mapped on Emeralds RR today, Dave Walker said it was slightly dissapointing that it didnt quite make 264BHP. The result was 263.7BHP at 8850 with 171.7lb/ft at 6920. The power was still climbing at this point but the collective bottle ran out and a 9000RPM run was decided against. Needless to say Simon was pretty pleased with the results but has embarrassing amount of torque which we may need to curb by backing off the timing a little here and there. It looks as if we chose too much cam since the engine hadnt yet peaked at 8850.. still I dont suppose Simon will mind. What a cracking engine the K is... and congratulations to Simon on such a brilliant result. Oily Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruff seven Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Well done Dave, great figures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinwhitcher Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 My GOD 😳 Well the record is truly back in the DVA camp....... Where's the cheque book 😬 Well done Martin MW 51 CAT Superlight No.171 now known as:Superlight DVA 207 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frying Pan Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Amazing Congratulations Guy See some pictures of the build here. 9000 miles completed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozz Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Fantastic result. Well done Dave *thumbup* Bozz My Chocolate Orange here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgrigsby Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Amazingly result Dave, it's really impressive to see the K stretched further and further. Rob G www.SpeedySeven.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Durrant Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Congratulations Dave Mark D Comp Sec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmandsd Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Blimey ! Home of BDR700 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ward Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Great result V7 HPD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMMO Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Very impressive! Well done AMMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Plato Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 Well done Dave - Great result any chance of seeing the graph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILL FLY Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 Well Done Dave and Simon. It's nice to see words of encouragement and congratulations from the likes of Ammo, Rob Grigsby and Dave Edmands, at the end of the day a well tuned engine is a credit to the engine builder no matter whether it's a K, Duratec, BDR or Bike engine. I think what certain people have achieved in this community with engine development given the relatively modest budgets compared to race teams is really amazing. 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...
I.Mupferit Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 What I find remarkable is that considering the basis of all these engines were originally just ordinary mass production units, they are now producing outputs/litre not dissimilar to the original Cosworth DFV Formula 1 engines which were obviously designed from the outset as pure racing engines ❗ A good result. Brent 2.3 DURATEC SV Reassuringly Expensive R 417.39 😬 Edited by - Brent Chiswick on 26 Apr 2006 07:53:39 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinwhitcher Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 Dave (oily), In your honest opinion, what it the max power that the engine will produce? Surley the head can't flow much more air, can it Martin MW 51 CAT Superlight No.171 now known as:Superlight DVA 207 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tight fart Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 But Cosworth were getting a lot higher BHP per litre from modified car engines over 40 years ago www.tightfart.com A7 RDP pics here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.Mupferit Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 What, higher than this 1.9 K 🤔 *confused* Brent 2.3 DURATEC SV Reassuringly Expensive R 417.39 😬 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Carmichael Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 Cosworth were getting a lot higher BHP/litre To an extent, you have been fobbed off with the words "bhp/litre" without explanation. bhp doesn't come from litres, it comes from valve area. If you start with a long stroke and then shorten it, you will get very similar peak power outputs because the valve area is the same. This is the way to get high bhp/litre numbers, but also adds moves the point of likely failure more into the valvetrain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tight fart Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 bhp doesn't come from litres, it comes from valve area I would have thought it comes from the amount of energy you can release from the fuel. www.tightfart.com A7 RDP pics here Edited by - Tight fart on 26 Apr 2006 09:10:41 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmar Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 but not too much mid range torque due to the restricted grip offerred by the tyres allowed in the class in which he competes am assuming we are talking list 1 a tyres here, in whick case yikes 264 BHP on list 1a tyres rob My MSN Space and Blog - Syndicate Using RSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oilyhands Posted April 26, 2006 Author Share Posted April 26, 2006 I believe it will be possible to crack 270BHP from a 1900, but it will take some more development. The real limitation is as Peter says, the available valve area per litre. Cosworth's developments were mostly on oversquare engines which by dint of their larger bores had larger combustion chambers and therefore room for much larger valves and thererfore increased horsepower potential. The bore/stroke equation has a dramatic affect on the power potential of an engine and the K in 1800 and 1900 forms is significantly undersquare giving it a poor bore/stroke ratio. Simons output is around 137-138BHP per litre which I think is quite good considering its valve area. Oily Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernBanana Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 Oily Firstly, congratulations on an outstanding engine! Out of interest, what sort of rebuild schedule would you envisage for an engine with this sort of power output? Or would you expect longevity as per any other tuned K series? Thanks, Fergus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.Mupferit Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 That was pretty much my point oily, that the DFV was designed from the outset as a racing engine using the then 'state of the art' technology which I think makes it all the more remarkable that an essentially production engine, albeit with many trick mods, but nevertheless compromised by its original design can make these sort of outputs. It is clearly not optimised for maximum power output unlike the DFV, given the limitations of the knowledge and materials available at that time. So congrats on a great result was really all I was trying to say. Brent 2.3 DURATEC SV Reassuringly Expensive R 417.39 😬 Edited by - Brent Chiswick on 26 Apr 2006 10:09:51 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oilyhands Posted April 26, 2006 Author Share Posted April 26, 2006 Hi Brent, My posting was in response to Tight Fart's posting, thanks for the kind words, I am more and more amazed at the K's capabilities as each barrier seems to be knocked down. Southern Banana, Engines with this mode of usage will be routinely refreshed after every season so the opportunity to assess longevity is limited. The valve train in particular takes quite a hammering with the lift generated by those cams. oily Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old captain slow Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 So is the future of the K engine secure do you think? C7 CDW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tight fart Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 Sorry if you thought I was knocking you, it was a great result from a K. www.tightfart.com A7 RDP pics here Edited by - Tight fart on 26 Apr 2006 11:22:55 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