Jump to content
  • Welcome to 205GTIDrivers.com!

    Hello dear visitor! Feel free to browse but we invite you to register completely free of charge in order to enjoy the full functionality of the website.

Sign in to follow this  
Sandy

Tb'd 1360 8v Results

Recommended Posts

Sandy

After the 1.4 16v I finished earlier in the week, I was expecting this one to bring me back down to earth a bit. As we worked our way up the revs mapping as we went, the figures looked encouraging and I began to think it might be something of a cracker! We took the last figure at 7000rpm, because although it was still taking more fuel there, it suffered a slight valve bounce (standard Rallye springs) at 7500rpm that meant we couldn't take it any further. The ambient air temp towards the end was 41C, pretty hot. Here are the results:

BHP at the wheels:

3000 44

3500 58

4000 66

4500 80

5000 93

5500 105

6000 112

6500 120

7000 123

 

The final figure in our experience of these rollers, equates to approximately 145bhp at the flywheel. Peak torque is approximately 113lbft at 5500rpm and it holds more than 87% of peak torque from 3500-7000rpm.

Quite a result! It left me wondering about the accuracy of the rollers, but on reflection and considering all the engines we've run there and are able to compare, i'm confident they are accurate and consistent. For example, NeilA's freakishly quick standard (GMC Exhaust manifold) 106 GTi gave 116bhp at the wheels there.

The spec on this engine is:

77mm crank, 205 XS alloy block

75mm lightweight slipper pistons, long rods (piston and rod assembly 15% lighter than 1.3 Rallye ones)

1.4 injection L+B flywheel, re-drilled profiled for 200mm clutch, cerametallic paddle plate.

Raised CR

1.6 XSi head, modified quite lightly by Mark Shillaber, standard valve sizes

Catcam 4900615 and adjustable pulley

Raceland 4-2-1 exhaust manifold and "pugsport" system

My 106 DCOE inlet manifold

40mm TH bodies and 20mm trumpets, cut scuttle

DTA S40 ECU

 

Very chuft! Again!

 

Leo04.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
swordfish210

I want, i want :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DaveK

blinkin heck, good effort

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sandy

I think the owner is doing some videos later. It sounds fantastic, really nasty!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rippthrough

You've done it again :)

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sandy

I know, I can't believe it, this engine really was built to a price, with a pretty simple spec. We're going to try another head on it soon I expect, got some ideas up my sleeve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rippthrough
I know, I can't believe it, this engine really was built to a price, with a pretty simple spec. We're going to try another head on it soon I expect, got some ideas up my sleeve.

 

 

Well, you know where the old one can be sent ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Arahan

Excellent results! Again may I add! ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sandy

Thanks very much!

 

The head belongs to a friend. I previously ran it in my 205 Rallye, but with crumby CR and std exhaust, which cramped its style a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danpug

Typical Sandy style, another great result! ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RossD
Typical Sandy style, another great result! ^_^

 

Fantastic result! How did you raise the CR, with the pistons or skimming metal from various places? Any idea what its running, 11:1??

 

Thats a BMEP of 205psi.... pretty darned good for an 8v!

Edited by RossD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alastairh

Awesome!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sandy

Thanks, it's better than I expected!

 

I raised CR by using pistons with a net 2cc protruder and skimming the head down to the chamber size I wanted, which makes the cambelt tensioner a bit marginal. I don't want to reveal the exact CR publicly, i'm happy to help the amateurs as much as I reasonably can, but don't want to give too much away to other engine builders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rob Thomson

Regarding cutting the scuttle....

 

Do you fit any additional strengthening?

 

Isn't there a potential problem with the MOT? ie. the point of the bulkhead being to keep fuel/fire out of the scuttle area? I know a lot of people do this, but I'm a little concerned about taking a grinder to my 106!

 

Are your DCOE manifolds available to non-engine customers?

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sandy

No additional strengthening and I've certainly not noticed any loss of stiffness, (something i'm usually fussy about); it's a pretty inconsequential bit of thin plate and there isn't an MOT issue, that's just another excuse from a certain AX/Saxo tuner as to why they didn't do this years ago I reckon.

 

We've got a couple manifolds left from the last batch if you want one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TKH

I think you may be talking about the Galloway Motor Company ltd as they recommend against cutting the scuttle on any car that requires a motor vehicle test (MOT). That be if its a road car or a road legal race car. There original race AX did indeed have a cut scuttle many years ago and won countless races. However they were band from racing it as it was deemed "not road legal". I suspect it was more because it was showing up all the works cars however. If you actually read your motor vehicle test (MOT) criteria the only way that a car could have this panel cut to clear for air intakes is if the car was then subsequently subjected to a successful single vehicle approval (SVA). But unfortunately a lot of events do not allow cars running on single vehicle approval (SVA). But thats not to say you will not pass a motor vehicle test (MOT) with it cut as most test stations turn a blind eye to a massive number of modifications that they strictly should not. A prime example of a test station passing a car that should be a fail are all these cars running about air filters that do away with the crank case breather system and just dump the gasses to the atmosphere. That is a out and out fail but how many people have actually failed for it? not many Im thing. along with doing away with the hand brake cable for a pure hydraulic system. That is a fail on any but they very oldest cars out there but I have never once failed for it. I have however had scruteneering pick up on it quite a few times, but I have a way round that now. But safety oriented that are strictly not road legal while you may pass a iffy motor vehicle test (MOT) your normal road insurance will tend to be invalid if ever any one was to dispute it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rippthrough
I think you may be talking about the Galloway Motor Company ltd as they recommend against cutting the scuttle on any car that requires a motor vehicle test (MOT). That be if its a road car or a road legal race car. There original race AX did indeed have a cut scuttle many years ago and won countless races. However they were band from racing it as it was deemed "not road legal". I suspect it was more because it was showing up all the works cars however. If you actually read your motor vehicle test (MOT) criteria the only way that a car could have this panel cut to clear for air intakes is if the car was then subsequently subjected to a successful single vehicle approval (SVA). But unfortunately a lot of events do not allow cars running on single vehicle approval (SVA). But thats not to say you will not pass a motor vehicle test (MOT) with it cut as most test stations turn a blind eye to a massive number of modifications that they strictly should not. A prime example of a test station passing a car that should be a fail are all these cars running about air filters that do away with the crank case breather system and just dump the gasses to the atmosphere. That is a out and out fail but how many people have actually failed for it? not many Im thing. along with doing away with the hand brake cable for a pure hydraulic system. That is a fail on any but they very oldest cars out there but I have never once failed for it. I have however had scruteneering pick up on it quite a few times, but I have a way round that now. But safety oriented that are strictly not road legal while you may pass a iffy motor vehicle test (MOT) your normal road insurance will tend to be invalid if ever any one was to dispute it.

 

 

Never failed on that, or on modifying strut tops for more camber.

Most MOT testers know when a bend of the rules doesn't hurt anything, long may it stay that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TKH

Well said Rippthrough. I am too glad there are still test stations out there with some common sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sandy
If you actually read your motor vehicle test (MOT) criteria the only way that a car could have this panel cut to clear for air intakes is if the car was then subsequently subjected to a successful single vehicle approval (SVA).

If you actually read the Testers Manual, you'll see that the scuttle panel does not fall within the "Prescribed Areas" which are considered to be load bearing.

Edited by sandy309

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TKH

Depending on the actual car AX, Saxo, 106, 205 and if its left hand drive or right hand drive but I think you will fined that the bulkhead removed is within 30cm of a load bearing component mounting point. For example strut turret mounts and steering rack mounting and so on, but as said this is depending on the actual car. But i could be wrong. Look under 6.1 then appendix C I think.

Edited by TKH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sandy

6.1 fail criteria: "Any deliberate modification, excessive corrosion, damage, fracture or inadequate repair not within a prescribed area which adversely affects braking or steering by severely reducing the strength or continuity of a main load bearing structural member." The scuttle is not a rigid panel in a unmodified condition, it merely separates the engine bay from the scuttle. neither steering or braking performance are affected by cutting it.

 

Appendix C relates to corrosion except section 18, which is a judgement call that could easily be contested.

Edited by sandy309

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TKH

Its often interpreted as removal of metrical via corrosion or damage or intentional within the designated distance of the designated structural load arrears as a fail. At least thats the way I have seen it interpreted to stop people from racing in the past. But I have not done the legal thing at university so could not really comment on how it should be interpreted. Its just the way they do use it if there being picky. There may be a possibility of taking legal action if you disagree with the interpretation? But thats not my thing. I think the bit there relying on is "check the vehicle structure for any fracture, damage or corrosion, not within the prescribed areas" I would think totally missing would be classes as damage over original spec?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sandy

I've done several cars now and not had any MOT fails yet on this, these points equally could be used to fail a car for having a trimmed wheel arch lip, or a hole drilled in the inner wing or bulkhead for any purpose. Emissions are a bigger concern for the MOT, which is why i've used an earlier carb engine block in this build (same block, different engine code that's all). With this set up it will legitimately pass the pre-cat emissions test. This car is built for use in the ASWMC speed event championship, which allows the removal of material within the vicinity of the inlet to improve air supply.

It works brilliantly. Driving along the air temp at the trumpets is ambient.

I'm generally extremely pleased with how this has turned out; I've worked very hard to test my theories and challenge assumed wisdom. If I was simply building engines to make money I would probably take a more conservative approach!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sandy

Finished another TB'd 1.4 8v, with a different spec today...

Another baking hot rolling road session! Due to their neighbours not being sympathetic with the beauty of render loosening induction hammer, SRD have to have all the doors closed during mapping, so the air temp gets well over 40C.

I fitted a new XSi head (ported lightly by me), a milder cam and my inlet to this 106 some time back now. We only mapped it on the road at the time to ensure it was safe to use and today we finally got it down to the rollers to finish the map off and get some figures.

The 149cc Rallye injectors it had on it before were max'd out when I mapped it on the road, so I first of all took them out in favour of some 176cc Alfa Romeo ones I had, almost spot on for the power!

The Omex 500 ECU fitted on this car has an auto compensation feature for injector changes, but it didn't compensate enough and we had to go through all the load/speed sites a fresh, to ensure the map was safe, before optimising it. The Omex is has its fans I know, but I find it pretty fiddly, but Mark (Shillaber) and I got a routine going that enabled us to work through the sites pretty quickly, before the coolant temp got out of hand.

The induction noise of this engine is exceptional, especially when the cam wakes up around 3.5-4k, we were all pulling "cor blimey" faces as it went through that zone :)

When we started trimming the ignition, it was clear it wanted more advance than the last one we did (Vossy's), the trend carried right through, but it is a very different engine, despite the similar cam profiles.

Anyway, after a few hours of sweat and gears, we got a very pleasing result (note the 400rpm Omex speed intervals!), power AT THE WHEELS:

3200 39

3600 51

4000 63

4800 71

5600 97

6400 106

7200 113

7600 113

8000 112

 

Past experience would suggest peak power at the flywheel to be approximately 134bhp and peak torque of approximately 104lbft and it holds over 82% of peak torque from 3600-8000rpm. It's a lovely engine to drive, sounds nuts and seems to suit the car perfectly. I'm delighted with it!

The spec is as follows:

1.4 XSi standard bottom end (pistons pocketed for valve clearance)

Lightly ported head (by me), standard valve sizes.

Catcam 4900646

Kent vernier pulley

Sandy Brown DCOE inlet manifold (the prototype!)

Jenvey downdraught pattern 45mm bodies with adapters to fit DCOE flanges

40mm trumpets

GMC 4-1 exhaust manifold

Pugsport system

Omex 500 ECU.

 

Thanks to Mark Davey for keeping the faith!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
christopher

Sandy it sound like a fantastic result to me :)

 

I am really amazed. But where does all that extra power come from? The modifications seem fairly mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×