Finally Mapped

[Rippthrough 98]

e.g road going MI, Iron block, all trim, no cage, 220hp

stripped lightweight track prepared 1.6 8v - 160hp

the former would cost a lot more to make, be eligible for very few events and would probably not get close to the latter on circuit.

 

Or 160/170bhp 16v, stripped, cost less than both, only problem is with events you run it in, for a occasional road/ mainly track car it's not a problem though really.

 

Part of the problem you now have sean is you're trying to keep the top end from dropping off again, even with redoing the build from scratch it's going to compromise that midrange you were after on the 8v, as it's got to flow more air, with thinking that being the restriction, and drop the gas speed again.

Edited February 1, 2007 by Rippthrough

[smckeown 1]

Or 160/170bhp 16v, stripped, cost less than both, only problem is with events you run it in, for a occasional road/ mainly track car it's not a problem though really.

 

Bit unfair to compare costs really, can't see any relevance there, unless you want to make a specific point

 

 

Part of the problem you now have sean is you're trying to keep the top end from dropping off again, even with redoing the build from scratch it's going to compromise that midrange you were after on the 8v, as it's got to flow more air, with thinking that being the restriction, and drop the gas speed again.

 

Well we'll just have to see. I'm gambling on the fact i'll have just as good (if not better) mid range as PR's effort combined with a better top end (it's costiong more so don't get upset dave). Let's say if it doesnt do that it may not cost me a lot

Edited February 1, 2007 by smckeown

[Rippthrough 98]

Bit unfair to compare costs really, can't see any relevance there, unless you want to make a specific point

Well we'll just have to see. I'm gambling on the fact i'll have just as good (if not better) mid range as PR's effort combined with a better top end (it's costiong more so don't get upset dave). Let's say if it doesnt do that it may not cost me a lot

 

 

You going back to the other cam profile you started with then, and detail changes to try to pick the top end up? Or sticking with the wilder cam and trying to pick the torque back up with high compression and inlet/exhaust work?

Edited February 1, 2007 by Rippthrough

[smckeown 1]

You going back to the other cam profile you started with then, and detail changes to try to pick the top end up? Or sticking with the wilder cam and trying to pick the torque back up with high compression and inlet/exhaust work?

 

We'll to be fair this all going off topic, it's a good discussion but it's unfair on the chap who started it.

 

Just before PRs engine got really sick I had indeed purchased the original spec cam (dave made a good choice and the choice made later didn't quiet cut it). But that cam isnt going into the new engine, another one entirely. All i'll say is that the new one is a popular choice (or a close alternative to one). I'm not posting specifics..that would spoil the surprise This time I have ensured that most of the build is based on proven products/suppliers. If 'they', or 'it' hasn't been proven to deliver similar before then they don't join the party.

 

I'm happy to talk around it more, but it needs a new topic really; we've gone way off topic

[Rippthrough 98]

We'll to be fair this all going off topic, it's a good discussion but it's unfair on the chap who started it.

 

Just before PRs engine got really sick I had indeed purchased the original spec cam (dave made a good choice and the choice made later didn't quiet cut it). But that cam isnt going into the new engine, another one entirely. All i'll say is that the new one is a popular choice (or a close alternative to one). I'm not posting specifics..that would spoil the surprise This time I have ensured that most of the build is based on proven products/suppliers. If 'they', or 'it' hasn't been proven to deliver similar before then they don't join the party.

 

I'm happy to talk around it more, but it needs a new topic really; we've gone way off topic

 

Been a fun learning curve for you!

 

There's only so many envious responses you can put in one topic, eh mos?

[Sandy 189]

Graph is on thsi forum...

 

Both Dave W & Karl said that engine peaked @ 7800rpm when I last asked them. Even the article talks about 7800rpm

Colin is quite adamant it peaked there at 7k and when I was at SRD with it recently it most definately peaked at 7k, saw it with my own eyes. It is a remarkably gutsy mi16 and if I didn't know the car and Colin so well, I might not believe it either.

[maxi 36 1 Cars]

i don't think Sean or I were suggesting the 8v was better. clearly it's not. the reality is though that a high headline HP figure means nothing for speed. I've been in Revla's car which is a roadgoing highpower MI, admittedly it's two up but it didn't feel fast (sorry Revla!). Seans car I have driven on the other hand and is ballistic. I think the point we are making is that it take a LOT of power to make up for extra weight both in a straightline and on the twisties.

e.g road going MI, Iron block, all trim, no cage, 220hp

stripped lightweight track prepared 1.6 8v - 160hp

the former would cost a lot more to make, be eligible for very few events and would probably not get close to the latter on circuit.

 

it think the issue at stake here is that peugeot never made the MI16 205. Over in golf land for a minute if anyone had an 8v and wanted to tune it i'd say get a 16v. It's not quite so clearcut in 205 land....

 

 

I will put money on my car feeling more than balastic and blowing seans 8v out of the water.

 

Maxi

[Mattsav 1]

Torque figures for 3 cars on Emerald rollers in 2006 :-

 

Revla (S16) 16v205(gti-6) 16v205(mi16)

2500 82 104 ?

 

3000 92 115 105

 

3500 110 128 104

 

4000 132 137 105

 

4500 140 140 119

 

5000 147 145 125

Rough specs :-

 

Revla 2.0 S16, tbs, 40mm trumpets, CAT Cams, GTI-6 exhaust manifold, 158.7lbft @5896

 

16v205 - 2.0 GTI-6, tbs, CAT Cams, 161.6lbft@6417

 

16v205 1.9Mi16, 90mm trumpets, 141.3 lbft@5436

 

Thse are quite a good comparison. It shows the short duration, high lift profile in the GTI-6 combined with better head flow gives good gains up to 4500rpm when the longer duration of the S16 cams start to take over.

 

Also these are basically standard engines with cams and throttle bodies so nowhere near the amount of development of a 8v.

 

But as said its all horses for courses.

Anyone who been in a car with Maxi will know he wont use mid range torque. It spends its life in the upper 1500 rpm and thats how he likes to drive it.

 

For race use low down torque can be vital.

With Oval race cars which run in a single gear a wide powerband is what wins races. Its all about getting out ot the corners quickly. Power at the end of the straight is useless as the car in front will have the right line for the corner and there's no room or time for passing.

 

Thats why our 2.2 Pinto won the last 3 championships and also gave the spaceframed 16v's a run for their money even though the Pinto was carrying a steel shelled Startlet around.

 

 

Thats said we're going Xe powered in a 205 sillohete space framed car this year so its another learing curve.

[smckeown 1]

I will put money on my car feeling more than balastic and blowing seans 8v out of the water.

 

Maxi

 

Such macho chest thumping. Our cars were built for different purposes. Around a track yours would be going backwards in relative terms.

Edited February 1, 2007 by smckeown

[maxi 36 1 Cars]

Such macho chest thumping. Our cars were built for different purposes. Around a track yours would be going backwards in relative terms.

 

 

Didnt mean anything by it sean me old chum! And yes, I should think handling wise, around a track it would be a lot quicker due to the suspension setup!

 

Maxi

[Robsbc 0 1 Cars]

2.0 S16 standard v 2.0 S16 on bodies & CAT Cams (Revla's).

S16.pdf

[Robsbc 0 1 Cars]

And here's Revla trumpet comparison graph for 40 & 75mm trumpets. Maps weren't fully optimised. Dave W roughly mapped the car on 40's then swapped over to the 75's.Trumpets.pdf

[smckeown 1]

And here's Revla trumpet comparison graph for 40 & 75mm trumpets. Maps weren't fully optimised. Dave W roughly mapped the car on 40's then swapped over to the 75's.Trumpets.pdf

 

that's fascinating. It looks to me like the 2nd run on larger trumpets has meant that one of the reflections has come in from 5750 to 5000. Resulting in that nice bump of torque right in the middle of the graph. Which concurs with the reflection theory I posted about a while ago. Great to see some real comparative results.

 

I've pre-paid for a good number of runs on the bnew engine, we'll be testing on lengths from 90mm trumpets up to 160mm in small increments (with the ability to run from 30mm trumpets if we want).

 

I'll have the spacers ready in no time now

[Henry 1.9GTi 36]

good reading this one

 

if i had the money id go for a 200bhp + 8v

but I dont so its 16v for me.

Is this 10 or 20kg = -0.1 sec 0-60 correct? Might have to visit the pod with some removable ballast to get a very rough comparision.

[Batfink 201]

just met a guy last night with a 220bhp 8v race engine bet that was fast. He's fitted an mi16 instead so maybe the mi16 is progress

[veloce200 3]

good reading this one

 

if i had the money id go for a 200bhp + 8v

but I dont so its 16v for me.

Is this 10 or 20kg = -0.1 sec 0-60 correct? Might have to visit the pod with some removable ballast to get a very rough comparision.

 

my pug weighs 810kg and has 121hp 8v engine. does 0-60 -6.9 and 1/4 mile in 15.9. best I got with std car was 7.2 and 16.2. (using race technology gear). Weight loss was 65 kg so the 20kg thing isn't far off!

Ultimately it's the way the car feels. the std car never felt quick. with the weight stripped it never feels slow. ultimately it's all power to weight.

8v fully stripped and lightened 720kg 180hp = 250 ton

16v iron block in a late road car with PAS ( 930?) 230hp = 247 ton

[Craigb 2]

my pug weighs 810kg and has 121hp 8v engine. does 0-60 -6.9 and 1/4 mile in 15.9. best I got with std car was 7.2 and 16.2. (using race technology gear). Weight loss was 65 kg so the 20kg thing isn't far off!

Ultimately it's the way the car feels. the std car never felt quick. with the weight stripped it never feels slow. ultimately it's all power to weight.

8v fully stripped and lightened 720kg 180hp = 250 ton

16v iron block in a late road car with PAS ( 930?) 230hp = 247 ton

 

Just for info

 

Mine 8V 150 hp 1075 kg with me (fat boy) in it

 

Best 0-60 8.1 and qtr in 16.1

 

also done with g meter .

 

it would appear that my 0-60 is being compromised by getting that weight off the line! as by the QTR it is pulling some back

[maxi 36 1 Cars]

Just for info

 

Mine 8V 150 hp 1075 kg with me (fat boy) in it

 

Best 0-60 8.1 and qtr in 16.1

 

also done with g meter .

 

it would appear that my 0-60 is being compromised by getting that weight off the line! as by the QTR it is pulling some back

 

 

Yet I ran a 14.7 in a std mi(shortened inlet) @ santa pod. Dosent make sense to me to throw fortunes on a wanky old 8v when you can go straight out and run a std mi for a fraction of the cost and still kill it.

 

Maxi

[Craigb 2]

Yet I ran a 14.7 in a std mi(shortened inlet) @ santa pod. Dosent make sense to me to throw fortunes on a wanky old 8v when you can go straight out and run a std mi for a fraction of the cost and still kill it.

 

Maxi

 

absolutley agree with you , but at the time i had all the work done on mine 16V in a 205 was banned by the MSA.

[smckeown 1]

Yet I ran a 14.7 in a std mi(shortened inlet) @ santa pod. Dosent make sense to me to throw fortunes on a wanky old 8v when you can go straight out and run a std mi for a fraction of the cost and still kill it.

 

Maxi

 

for a road car i'm 100% with you. But you got to remember there are other factors/uses of 205s other than roads and santa pod. Hilclimbing/Sprinting/Circuit Racing/Road rallying/Track days. All these different applications would possibly make the mi16 angined 205 less competative. It was only until recently with the peterT solution that the mi16 was any use on track either.

[maxi 36 1 Cars]

for a road car i'm 100% with you. But you got to remember there are other factors/uses of 205s other than roads and santa pod. Hilclimbing/Sprinting/Circuit Racing/Road rallying/Track days. All these different applications would possibly make the mi16 angined 205 less competative. It was only until recently with the peterT solution that the mi16 was any use on track either.

 

 

I can see your point, but isnt there several hillclimbing 16v 205s on here (one of them being sandy's mate? or the car is from the west country?) and most competitive classes not using the mi16 purely because regulations do not allow??? The only down side I can see of using an alloy mi over an 8v for track days is the oil surge issue. Witht he later solid blocks and gti6's I find this isnt anywhere near as much of a problem and I can make the STOP light come on as a result of surge easier in an 8v than one of these later 16v units.

 

I still feel its regulations that stops the 16v being used competitively and where it is allowed, the mi's are out in force. Also lets not forget what the mi16 is, a TOURING CAR ENGINE. Surely you cant get any more motorsport bred than that?

 

Maxi

Edited February 2, 2007 by maxi

[Batfink 201]

and for 10keuros you can buy a new touring car spec mi16 engine which isnt a bad price considering how much we throw at our continuously changing engines over the years

[veloce200 3]

I can see your point, but isnt there several hillclimbing 16v 205s on here (one of them being sandy's mate? or the car is from the west country?) and most competitive classes not using the mi16 purely because regulations do not allow??? The only down side I can see of using an alloy mi over an 8v for track days is the oil surge issue. Witht he later solid blocks and gti6's I find this isnt anywhere near as much of a problem and I can make the STOP light come on as a result of surge easier in an 8v than one of these later 16v units.

 

I still feel its regulations that stops the 16v being used competitively and where it is allowed, the mi's are out in force. Also lets not forget what the mi16 is, a TOURING CAR ENGINE. Surely you cant get any more motorsport bred than that?

 

Maxi

 

TOURING CAR HEAD....

in the west country I think the regs are up to 1.8 to 2.4 litres. given the choice I'd run an 8v Turbo... i think then the 8v vs 16v starts to blur.

[maxi 36 1 Cars]

and for 10keuros you can buy a new touring car spec mi16 engine which isnt a bad price considering how much we throw at our continuously changing engines over the years

 

 

And for a fraction of that cost its possible for QEP to supply a 220BHP solid block mi16, with the added bonus of it being Dyno mapped very soon.

 

Maybe I should let sean and Veloce drive my car to see how much real mid range torque a tuned mi has.......

 

Maxi

[maxi 36 1 Cars]

TOURING CAR HEAD....

in the west country I think the regs are up to 1.8 to 2.4 litres. given the choice I'd run an 8v Turbo... i think then the 8v vs 16v starts to blur.

 

 

But surely oyu are contradicting the whole reason you want to use an 8v, for the nice spread of power. With a turbo you will have a certain issue of lag and sean with his midrange torque will be getting away. IT seems to me the whole 8v argment is very wooly.......

 

Maxi