Finally Mapped

[welshpug 1,622]

rule of thumb is for every 10kg you loose you gain 0.1 of a second 0-60 i think so more power offsets this quite easily

 

 

damn, must remove the 50+kgs of tools from the car....

 

 

DOH!

[Alastairh 47]

Dr Sarty. I agree. I couldn't care less if my 30kg heavier lump lost me 0.3 seconds to 60. Id quiet settle for having more spare cash in my wallet and spend that money on better tyres/diff if need be.

 

End of the day, 8v's suck.

[Batfink 201]

End of the day, 8v's suck.

 

dont say that! Sean might cry

[Alastairh 47]

Lol. One way how not to be on his Christmas card list

[mos 1]

hi

 

i am going to send some photo copies of the graphs down to mattsav who has kindly offered to scan them and post them up as i have no scanner here

in the mean time i will post some figures up in the next few days or so ie. torque and bhp at certain points in the ev range 2,000 then 2,500 .......that sort of thing

just had no time this week been researching/refreshing my knowledge for a job interview i have got tomorrow!

 

thanks

 

mark

[smckeown 1]

End of the day, 8v's suck.

 

 

 

...better in mid range (just to finish the sentence off correctly)

 

[Mattsav 1]

At the end of the day it comes down to budget and use.

 

For the ultimate race engine the alloy block is lighter but will require a lot more cash.

 

These 2.1's wont be eligable for a lot of classes anyway.

 

But for fast road/trackday use they are ideal.

 

For the ultimate race engine an alloy block with GTi-6 head would be my current favorite.

The head flows better and the cam profiles are much more aggressive (plus the cams are cheaper which always helps!)

[petert 550]

I'm looking forward to seeing the dyno sheets of this engine, hopefully with power at the wheels, so I can compare it the one I'm just about to fire up. It's reasonably similar, but is 86.5x86, 11.8:1, similar cams with a big valve head. I don't expect it to match the 2.1L, but it will be good indication of head flow vrs. cubes.

[veloce200 3]

Dr Sarty. I agree. I couldn't care less if my 30kg heavier lump lost me 0.3 seconds to 60. Id quiet settle for having more spare cash in my wallet and spend that money on better tyres/diff if need be.

 

End of the day, 8v's suck.

 

end of the day on track a 1.6 8v in track and race car series destroyed all the more powerful 2.0 16v competition.... so from that one must logically conclude heavy iron block 16v's suck...

[VisaGTi16v 1]

Correct Matt and Alistair. I was just saying that for me competing, presuming the same bhp output, the lighter engine is preferable. I cannot take weight out of my car as its allready fully stripped out, perspex, doors cut out etc. You say 0.1 seconds to 60 lost by 20kg as an example. Well I won a sprint by 0.09 seconds and that was over a minute and a half so I wouldnt have won with the heavier engine.

 

Although the xuj104rs is much torquier than the old mi so it may make up for it that way as my Xsara vts pulls a lot harder at low revs than my mi16 equiped visa. As mentioned above though, 2.1 litre is of no use for Sprints and hillclimbs as you cannot run in a engine class above what the car was originally available in so I couldnt go in the 2 litre and above class and wouldnt want to anyway as its full of jap 4wd turbos heh. You would end up in the sports libre class in the SE full of 6r4's and such like For track days and road cars though a 2.1 iron block does sound great and far easier to find without having to pay silly money for a standard engine like with 1.9's these days

Edited February 1, 2007 by VisaGTi16v

[maxi 36 1 Cars]

For the ultimate race engine an alloy block with GTi-6 head would be my current favorite.

The head flows better and the cam profiles are much more aggressive (plus the cams are cheaper which always helps!)

 

 

Strangely enough im on the lookout for a GTi6 head and my head/manifold/cams might be up for sale very soon as a complete package!

 

And Alistair is right, 8vs are s*ite. Im sorry but they are. For anyone really in the know, in sucha light car, who the hell wants mid range torque? Why do you think Vtecs are so good? Rev Rev Rev...BHP BHP BHP.

 

For speed you need max BHP, for driveability (titing around in town) you need torque. My car is amonster to drive with its torque, but Id happily lose some of if it meant I had more peak BHP.

 

Maxi

[smckeown 1]

Strangely enough im on the lookout for a GTi6 head and my head/manifold/cams might be up for sale very soon as a complete package!

 

And Alistair is right, 8vs are s*ite. Im sorry but they are. For anyone really in the know, in sucha light car, who the hell wants mid range torque? Why do you think Vtecs are so good? Rev Rev Rev...BHP BHP BHP.

 

For speed you need max BHP, for driveability (titing around in town) you need torque. My car is amonster to drive with its torque, but Id happily lose some of if it meant I had more peak BHP.

 

Maxi

 

A wide spread of torque makes a car fast, peak bhp figures are for pub talk..fact! Sure top end power will give you a higher theoretical top speed, but cars spend most of their time at 5k revs and not 7k, so think about that quote about losing mid range for top end.

[Rippthrough 98]

A wide spread of torque makes a car fast, peak bhp figures are for pub talk..fact! Sure top end power will give you a higher theoretical top speed, but cars spend most of their time at 5k revs and not 7k, so think about that quote about losing mid range for top end.

 

 

To me 5k is top end. I would have said 3-5k is midrange!

[veloce200 3]

And Alistair is right, 8vs are s*ite. Im sorry but they are. For anyone really in the know, in sucha light car, who the hell wants mid range torque? Why do you think Vtecs are so good? Rev Rev Rev...BHP BHP BHP.

 

For speed you need max BHP, for driveability (titing around in town) you need torque. My car is amonster to drive with its torque, but Id happily lose some of if it meant I had more peak BHP.

 

Maxi

opinion and conjecture. until you see with your own eyes a little 1.6 8v beat 250hp 16v cars you will always believe 8v's are worse. speed on a circuit is CORNER SPEED before anything else - corner entry and corner exit - HP has NOTHING to do with this. A race winning engine will have a broad spread of torque before peak power every day. if you visit the Seloc forum you will see this done to death where most agree a K Series car with be quicker on circuit than the Toyota engine with more power.

[smckeown 1]

I suppose there's also the difference of application, I keep forgetting people still use 205s on the road.

 

For my purpose of twisty tracks and sprints, the 1.9 8v with massive mid range (and less compromsied top end like the last build) will be king over any of these iron blocks in my opinion.

[Rippthrough 98]

I suppose there's also the difference of application, I keep forgetting people still use 205s on the road.

 

For my purpose of twisty tracks and sprints, the 1.9 8v with massive mid range (and less compromsied top end like the last build) will be king over any of these iron blocks in my opinion.

 

 

I reckon any 16v built with a similar spec would paste it tbh, it's not like the 8v has a torque advantage even in stock form.

[Batfink 201]

I suppose there's also the difference of application, I keep forgetting people still use 205s on the road.

 

For my purpose of twisty tracks and sprints, the 1.9 8v with massive mid range (and less compromised top end like the last build) will be king over any of these iron blocks in my opinion.

i guess we will never know as every modded 205 is so different to be able to solely claim one did a slower lap time than the other due to the engine choice.

[veloce200 3]

we will know - i've seen it ! corner speed corner speed corner speed.....

[smckeown 1]

I reckon any 16v built with a similar spec would paste it tbh, it's not like the 8v has a torque advantage even in stock form.

 

Get the blinkers off and open yourr eyes. Did you not see the torque grahphs a I posted comparing a punma worked 8v BVH to all the 16vs. With the current build i'm expecting an improvement on all fronts

 

http://www.track-monkey.co.uk/images/2058v/Stats/Torque_comparison.gif]/img]

 

All accurate fact.

Edited February 1, 2007 by smckeown

[maxi 36 1 Cars]

With you lot its all track isnt it?

 

Maxi

[veloce200 3]

With you lot its all track isnt it?

 

Maxi

yup ! what else is there? (ps my track car is my daily driver - gotta appointment at the chiropractor n/w!)

[smckeown 1]

With you lot its all track isnt it?

 

Maxi

 

thats why i posted it's hourses for courses. We all have different agendas. Personally I dont want to see an early grave with a 200bhp tin can road car.

 

But still for a road car a wide spread of good torque will still make a faster car than one with a good top end.

[Rippthrough 98]

Get the blinkers off and open yourr eyes. Did you not see the torque grahphs a I posted comparing a punma worked 8v BVH to all the 16vs. With the current build i'm expecting an improvement on all fronts

 

http://www.track-monkey.co.uk/images/2058v/Stats/Torque_comparison.gif]/img]

 

All accurate fact.

 

Yes I did, i was the one who told you you'd muddled them up sean.

 

But comparing a reworked 8v to stock 16v engines, and one which is running on throttle bodies which are far, far too big for testing purposes, is hardly a decent comparison.

Edited February 1, 2007 by Rippthrough

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

This has become an 'icky' thread. It's just a "my dad's better than your dad" argument.

 

The technical value of reviewing RR results and graphs to appreciate what work has benefitted and what hasn't is totally valid IMO. But to argue that an 8v is 'better' than a 16v is purile bickering.

 

I'm not technically educated enough in this field to argue, only to read and learn from the more sensible comments. Educate me!

 

Rich

Edited February 1, 2007 by DrSarty

[smckeown 1]

But comparing a reworked 8v to stock 16v engines, and one which is running on throttle bodies which are far, far too big for testing purposes, is hardly a decent comparison.

 

Agreed. I was comparing it against the iron 200+ blocks that have come on the scene.

 

This has become an 'icky' thread. It's just a "my dad's better than your dad" argument.

 

The technical value of reviewing RR results and graphs to appreciate what work has benefitted and what hasn't is totally valid IMO. But to argue that an 8v is 'better' than a 16v is purile bickering.

 

I'm not technically educated enough in this field to argue, only to read and learn from the more sensible comments. Educate me!

 

Rich

 

We're not bickering, just trying to make people understand 'what' makes a car fast. My point is that the 8v (reworked of course) will always have a better mid range than a 16v IMO. So don't be so quick to discount it that's all. Other than that good luck to the high bhp seekers, i'm sure they are entertaining