Finally Mapped

[boombang 2]

Why didn't DES build the engine instead of being done by a third party i.e QEP? Not capable who knows?

Which engine?

[Robsbc 0 1 Cars]

Being the position to have had detailed discussions with DES, PR and QEP about engine builds over the years (less so with QEP compared to PR/DES), you have to appreciate the time and effort they all put into a build; it really has been an eye opener.

 

Yes DES are doing my current build (no secret in that), and boy the package has been well disucssed and thought through. It also helps i've been through this before so picked up a few things that are important to discuss and agree upfront has been useful (and expensive..haha).

 

Know it all to well Sean...Hope this one lasts....Fingers crossed!

[Robsbc 0 1 Cars]

Which engine?

 

The one discussed in this thread...

 

QEP do also do the head for DES...

[smckeown 1]

Why didn't DES build the engine instead of being done by a third party i.e QEP? Not capable who knows?

 

It was booked into DES anyway for new exhaust experimentation and inspect the sickness. Don't forget QEP don't generally work on cars, whereas DES do. So once it was obvious that things were bad enough that it had to come apart anyway; it stayed there. It's also because there a few other things i'm having done at the same time and wanted one person to do the lot.

 

I'd trust QEP any day of the week to build an engine of any spec, they are a great company to deal with in many respects. And i've had great experiences with them.

[Robsbc 0 1 Cars]

Sean mate not talking about your engine...

[boombang 2]

I know too much regards DES and still bound by confidentiality agreements, so apologies if I can't carry on this "debate" fully, however will reply where I can.

 

"Why didn't DES build the engine instead of being done by a third party i.e QEP? Not capable who knows?"

 

I don't know which engine you mean, thought you talking about Seans' and very lost now.

 

The "Not capable" bit wasn't necessary though was it?

 

At the end of the day Neal at DES is a good mate of mine and knows his stuff. If anyone seems to be having any sort of dig I'll defend him (he doesn't use this forum, or forums in general) so don't take my posts personally.

 

But you say you praised them, then the last few posts regards DES seem to be having a dig at them.

 

If you have a valid reason it'd be nice to hear it (by PM is fine) and if it is a genuine concern I can pass it over to Neal. However if you haven't dealt with them or have no problem, then it'd be polite not to comment.

[Robsbc 0 1 Cars]

I will comment all i like...It is after all a fourm....

[mos 1]

one of the biggest deciding factors for me in selecting the engine builder for my engine was cost

an engine from skip brown was likely to set me back in the region of £5000 and they would not touch the iron block engine as they feel the weight aspect was a big issue and would only entertain a 1.9 alloy mi16

now this was a problem for me as by this point i already had 2 s16 engines and ancillaries in my shed so i started looking elsewhere

after hours of research on here and other forums i decided on qep

spoke to matt about what they could offer got some prices, discussed cams, big valve heads etc and basically told him it was for a fast road car and pretty much went along with his recommendations

i do honestly believe that for my money i got better value from qep than skip brown and i think i have an engine equally capable for half the outlay

 

i am not having a go at skip brown here,

as i still have my 1.9s running carbs and its a great little engine and i am still a regular customer of theirs

but my 16v head did have some head work at qep and it was not just a case of bolting things together they are better than that

skip brown are not blemish free in my opinion i did have a bad experience with my carbs being tuned there for a fault they could not find and when i did find it myself it was an small but blatantly obvious thing they missed

consequently i dont go there anymore for carb tuning i found through recommendation a great carb expert just outside york and although his rolling road is incredibly unrealistic (i have the worlds only 202bhp 1.9s!!!)

which was about 160bhp on skips (according to some) over reading rollers a week earlier.

i will defo use skip brown and qep again but i honestly dont think when it comes to engines they are much, if at all any better than matt.

if i didnt think qep could produce the goods i would not have used them

 

just my opinion

 

thanks

 

mark

[niklas 1]

I don't think there's any doubt that 20 or 40 kg difference of weight up front will make a difference to handling and balance.

Whether most of us on here can feel and take advantage of the difference is another matter though...

 

I mean how many of us have cornerweighted their car and had a clear improvement in lap times afterwards?

Or how many of us are using 3/4-way shocks and adjusting them accordingly during every track occurence to suit the actual parameters of that day and track?

 

I think adding, removing or moving 20-40 kg's on a 205 is, handling-wise, on that level!

 

 

One thing on the broad vs narrow powerband discussion; It doesn't matter whether you have a broad or narrow powerband, what matters is the area of the powerband and how the car is geared to utilise it. Two optimum-geared cars with the same weight where one engine have a 3k wide powerband and the other a 1.5k narrow one will accelerate exactly the same if the areas of those two powerbands are equal!

Maybe it's not clear what I mean, but then I can paint something up

[smckeown 1]

I don't think there's any doubt that 20 or 40 kg difference of weight up front will make a difference to handling and balance.

 

It's not just the fact it's 30kgs (otherise i'd agree to an extent), it the fact it's over the front wheels

 

One thing on the broad vs narrow powerband discussion; It doesn't matter whether you have a broad or narrow powerband, what matters is the area of the powerband and how the car is geared to utilise it.

 

Maybe in theory, but I believe it would be far harder (and a lot more tiring) to get the most out of the narrow band car (especially on a twisty track) than the narrow powerband car.

[niklas 1]

It's not just the fact it's 30kgs (otherise i'd agree to an extent), it the fact it's over the front wheels

 

Obviously, but how many of us improve their lap times with a noticeable amount when moving the battery??

As I said, these kind of improvements are on par with damper adjustments, corner weighting and moving the battery.

And my point is basically that we do notice and appreciate the basic tuning but the details are still left to the pro's.

 

Maybe in theory, but I believe it would be far harder (and a lot more tiring) to get the most out of the narrow band car (especially on a twisty track) than the narrow powerband car.

 

It all depends on gearing I would say. Look at a diesel for example..

The gearbox is simply a converter, from engine power to wheel torque! The amount of power you put in and the amount of torque on the wheels you require defines what gear ratio to use..

[Rippthrough 98]

I mean how many of us have cornerweighted their car and had a clear improvement in lap times afterwards?

Or how many of us are using 3/4-way shocks and adjusting them accordingly during every track occurence to suit the actual parameters of that day and track?

 

 

And it's a pity people aren't, as you can pick up few seconds there.

[kyepan 291]

assuming the cars weighed the same, and all other things were equal, then YES. the point is people are underestimating just how much faster you can turn in and and exit a corner with a significant weight advantage of a basic alloy 8v versus and iron 16v. It makes me laugh when people slate the K-Series - it is one of the most clever engines of recent years - why do you think Caterham used it? Granted if put together badly it's not reliable but most Lotus owners agree a significant on track speed advantage with K Series power EVEN with less power than eg Honda/ Toyota conversions.

 

for example look below and tell me which one you think would be quicker - no contest right?

 

4 wd turbo 960 hp, bhp/ton = 738

2wd atmo 115 hp , bhp/ton = 328

I also like the K series, we had one in a rover, and kaned it with in an inch of its life for 130k very revvy free engine.

 

Its very light, approx 90kgs dry weight, all alloy, with big rods all the way through to hold it together, which is aparently derived from f1 engines.. correct if wrong. The replacement toyota unit in an elise is 156kg. The issues with the K series blowing head gaskets, were due to plastic head locating studs used in later cars, and the fact the thermostat was in the wrong place to get it up to temperature quickly on an urban cycle. It was intended for the metro after all.

[16v205 9]

Its been an interesting thread, even though its gone a little off tangent.

 

Im just climbing up onto my soap box, no kicking me off till ive finished

From reading the last few pages it appears to have gone a bit off track relating to what companys better than the next for reasons unjustified.

We all know words can be misinterpreted when read on a forum, im sure no one really means to discredit/belittle any company mentioned in the posts. I believe that as customer loyalty is involved we want to show we are appreciative of the work carried out for us. It doesnt mean the companys not chosen are below par or generate substandard work, as we all know theres a wide range of factors to consider when making a decision.

 

So how about we get on track again? Ive got a fiancée here whos just got the flu/cold thing thats going around. She's bound to become moody as hell soon so ill off load her to the next agitator

 

Anyway my reason for posting is ive just plotted Maxi's torque on the graph and well, im jealous.

I now need more techy info to read, not that im an obsessive 205 owner or anything.

 

Maxi Any chance you can post your hp @ 500rpm intervals as well please?

 

Cheers

Rich

enginepower.pdf

[Henry 1.9GTi 38]

the head gaskets also went on K-series from ppl ragging them from cold, headbolts go all the way through the block into another piece of metal, not sure on the name, and as they r steel in an ali engine. They dont expand as much under heat effectively clamping the engine together.

[kyepan 291]

do have a question about the engine actually, was there anything other than 3 angle valve seats done to the head, and who did the head work?

[veloce200 3]

However, if anyone with a tin top is concerned enough about weight to choose an alloy block XU over an iron one with the bonus of more capacity it begs the question were they concerned enough about weight distribution to move the battery into the boot? If not then there's no real logic to the engine choice.

 

Battery in the boot is the worst place you could put it in a FWD !

[GLPoomobile 958]

Battery in the boot is the worst place you could put it in a FWD !

I presume you are referring to weight balance, and the fact that more weight in the boot will not be good when the back end steps out as you would get a 911esque pendulam effect?

 

If so, then riddle me this - it's OK to have a spare wheel mounted under the boot floor. So considering that a stripped out 205 will not be carrying a spare wheel, how is it suddenly going to have a catastrophic effect by putting the battery in the boot?

 

If I'm completely off track then fair enough, I'll get me coat.

[Rippthrough 98]

I presume you are referring to weight balance, and the fact that more weight in the boot will not be good when the back end steps out as you would get a 911esque pendulam effect?

 

If so, then riddle me this - it's OK to have a spare wheel mounted under the boot floor. So considering that a stripped out 205 will not be carrying a spare wheel, how is it suddenly going to have a catastrophic effect by putting the battery in the boot?

 

If I'm completely off track then fair enough, I'll get me coat.

 

 

Better off moving all excess weight to the rear passenger footwells.

[boombang 2]

The one discussed in this thread...

 

QEP do also do the head for DES...

Just spoken to Neal.

 

QEP have done some machining, flow testing and supply of PARTS for DES, however DES build all their own engines.

[mos 1]

ok

updated info from my graphs as requested to include 500rpm increments

 

2000rpm 30bhp 75lbft

2500rpm 47bhp 103lbft

3000rpm 68bhp 121lbft

3500rpm 82bhp 121lbft

4000rpm 100bhp 129lbft

4500rpm 121bhp 141lbft

5000rpm 142bhp 148lbft

5500rpm 171bhp 162lbft

6000rpm 190bhp 171lbft

6500rpm 210bhp 171lbft

7000rpm 224bhp 171lbft

7500rpm 232bhp 164lbft

 

peak bhp is 232bhp at 7441rpm

peak torque is 171lbft at 6421rpm

 

updated 7500rpm as for some reason i posted 224bhp instead of 232bhp

torque continues to tail off to upto rev limiters but bhp stays fairly stead at 232ish until sof t rev limiter comes in at 7800rpm

the trumpets are 60mm, anyone think there would be a benefit in switching to 75mm etc, dont think 90mm will fit, would they lower the peak torque etc

i am currently running a 1.9 box but do have in the shed a 1.6 and an s/mi16 one as well

bearing in mind the above which box would you recommend or possibly a hybrid moving the final drives around between the boxes

the car will be running a quaiffe diff to aid traction

[Robsbc 0 1 Cars]

Mark,

 

With Revla's peak torque dropped from 5800 to 5400rpm, that was using 40mm and 75mm trumpets...There' space issues using 90's with a pipercross px600 filter under a 205 bonnet.

 

Rob

Edited February 4, 2007 by Robsbc

[mos 1]

Mark,

 

With Trev's peak torque dropped from 5800 to 5400rpm that was using 40mm and 75mm trumpets...There' space issues using 90's with a pipercorss px600 filter.

 

Rob

space is a problem especially on the taller iron block engine

[veloce200 3]

I presume you are referring to weight balance, and the fact that more weight in the boot will not be good when the back end steps out as you would get a 911esque pendulam effect?

 

If so, then riddle me this - it's OK to have a spare wheel mounted under the boot floor. So considering that a stripped out 205 will not be carrying a spare wheel, how is it suddenly going to have a catastrophic effect by putting the battery in the boot?

 

If I'm completely off track then fair enough, I'll get me coat.

 

nothing to do with balance. in actual fact a FWD car is better with more weight at the front. in it's location at the front of the car it may not be ideal but at least it aids traction. putting it in the back moves it a long way from the CofG so you are not helping the handling. ideally you want it as low down and as close to the CofG position as possible. If we were talking RWD it makes sense to put it in the back. eg RWD car with 65% weight up front and 35% at the back will almost certainly be slower than a FWD car of the same split. Hence BMW's 50/50 weight distribution. on FWD 50/50 would make for a truly awful traction! Apologies as it's all off topic but the reality of the Iron block is in actual fact being in the front is not as bad as it seems - it's more the simple fact of adding weight. If you fitted the iron block and then lay it down (touring car style) and moved it back then the extra weight would be negated!

 

Anyway I am blown away by the figures of this engine. Considering many would part with £15000 for engine alone to get 250-280 hp from Rover/Ford/Vauxhall it makes the MI look such good value.

I can vouch for Matts work - I recently did a head for a chap with a Golf 8v and the seats and back cut valves QEP did were superbly done.

[Sandy 191]

There' space issues using 90's with a pipercross px600 filter under a 205 bonnet.

 

Rob

Depends what manifold you're using, the Jenvey/Longmans manifold gives clearance issues, but ours don't.