only dickheads would say its a 4000bhp integra engine.

but there are plenty

 

Stavros

agreed

 

Its not a pre turbo throttle like the V12 engine above and that patent as you have said includes normal itbs for "control". It's more of a variable vane/aperature device, not the same at all imo. Can I ask my question for a third time lol, emphasis on the "easily" explain.


Karl, those tyres look very small on your brother's car!!!!!!

 

Dumped,

Fronts are 200/530/13 Dunlop X22 wets on a 7X13, back are some old front michelin slicks that are 210/530/13 on a 9 X 13.

Heres a pic with 8x13 fronts, 10X13 rear in tarmac sprint setup.

 

Still seems nuts although did not look that wide at the back first glance.

What turbo are you running on the engine as I remember reading it was a Gt30 on that car? Is it your turbo as well gt40?42? can't remember.

Any gossip on your new build?

 

Yes quite correct its on a Gt30 now, just does not need any more power than 560bhp in this weight of car, though we still keep a 9000rpm limit. With the GT30 gives a 4000 - 8500rpm power band which suits the car well and the ability to rev to 9000rpm helps in sprinting, as sometimes its quicker to hang onto a gear rather than shifting.

New engine is an evolution of the old unit, running a Gt4088r derivative, custom manifolds, (4 into 1 exhaust, my own inlet), short stroke bottom end, big valve head with 30mm inlet ports, 29mm exhaust ports, larger valve inserts in head allowing 38mm inlet valves, 33mm exhaust valves, 296Deg/12.8mm lift solid cams, all usual custom bits and pieces like special water pump for reduced cavitation at high rpm, twin 3" exhaust, 2.5" wastegate exhaust, keeping original quad cosworth intercooler and charge cooler, etc etc. Should make around 720bhp.

Here's a pic of the old girl.........

 

I'm not up on turbo numbers at all I am afraid, Is that a larger or smaller turbo than your last one? Every other number looks BIG if I remember my numbers right so what will retain the drivability? Or is that not the point

 

Its a similar turbo to my old unit, and just a change for the sake of it. (Different exhaust wheel and turbine housing) I will be comparing it back to back with the old turbo regardless and keeping whichever gives best results.

The engine like the old unit will still be nice to drive, as the old engine is VERY similar in spec to that above. (286 cams instead, slightly smaller valves).

The biggest problem with the drivability is the lack of bottom end torque (i.e. sub 4000rpm) making the car awkward to drive in traffic. (As it does 70mph in 1st and 105mph in 2nd!) However the revability has to be experienced to be believed and is why I prefer the short stroke engine to longer stroked item. Peak power is usually around 8500 rpm, with little drop off right through to 9500rpm.

 

Looks nice Karl

 

Flat 12?

How the fuck can you fit 12 cylinders in a line!

 

It's TWO horizontal lines of 6 cylinders..............Flat 12 is like a V 12 engine but instead of the V block shape the pistons oppose each other...
Subaru F1 flat 12:

 

haighlsby,

A flat 12 means two banks of 6 cylinders, horizontally opposed, instead of the more commonly used term V12 where there is for example a 90 degree angle between each bank.

 

Ahh I see

 

isn't a Vee configuration with a 90 degree angle usually called an 'L'?

 

I've never head of any V engine called an L even when the bank separation is 90 degree. Most V8's are at 90 degree. (V6's tend to be 60 degrees) You don't hear the yanks calling them L8's!!!

 

karl do you have any pics of the talbots engine bay,and did this win handling at totb last year

 

Fooking gorgeous!
A 10krpm YB

 

i'm mistaken i was looking at some ktm bikes at the bike show with v-twin engines called the LC8 and thought that perhaps they were a 90 degree V that they were calling an L. it made sense to me as the angle of a V is typically less than 90 degrees and an L is 90 degrees. but the LC8 engine is 75 degrees, so it has no bearing on it at all

 

Glancy,

We were 5th in rwd which we were VERY disappointed with. The car should have gone much better on the handling track (normally on a sprint track no road car can come anywhere close) but at TOTB the que for the handling was dreadfully long and we had the wrong suspension setup and no time to change it. Not trying to make excuses but we will do much better this year as we will make sure the suspension is correct!

Here's a pic of the engine bay from last year.

 

thanks Karl does it use a 4x4 manifold due to space limitations what does it weigh if you dont mind me asking and what set up does it use at the back end

 

Karl, what do you have as measured advantages to the detroked engine? I know you and martinH(i think) have commented on the revability but have you ever managed to get some sort of comparable data. I know the theory of rod angles and piston speeds/burn times, wear and pressure on the bore etc but in pure performance terms could/can you measure the difference or is it just the above?

Eg I had a lightened flywheel once, car felt like it reved nuts but obviously if you put it on the dyno the numbers would be the same as a normal flywheel recording "braked horsepower". Again it effected the drivability as the lightened flywheel was awful to pull away with.

Obviously you have stated your choice. If you had a normal yb 2 litre you would have more bottom end, just wondering what happens further up the range. Eg on boost instead of compressing charge with the cylinder volume you are doing it with the turbo to get the sameish power - what promotes det or is less efficient? turbo Vs cylinder volume. I guess you can increase you intercooling to effect this too, your running the massive cooler and charge cooler setup adding weight and complexity to your build.

hmmm all interesting, MartinH has now gone another way with more volume and "good" rod ratio but does not "seem" to need as much intercooling.

Just airing things going through my head, dont know if there is a solid question there apart from measuring the differences of setups lol

 

Its on a modified 2wd manifold with external wastegate and Gt30.

Its total weight ready to run is 910kg.

The rear suspension uses a modified atlas axle, which has 4 adjustable links for location allowing rear diff nose angle adjustment. It also has pro-flex speed adaptive coil over remote reservoir rear shock absorbers. It has a custom made bladed anti-roll bar with fully adjustable drop links to allow complete control of roll bar rate.

The front uses rose jointed TCA's, rose jointed tension struts, and two bladed anti roll bars. (there are two different roll bars so that one or the other roll bar OR both can be used to allow complete flexibility in track set up). The steering rack has adjustable mounting height for altering bump steer, and the caster is fully adjustable.

Hope that gives a brief insight into the car.

 

thanks for info Karl

 

Here's a couple of short links of the sunbeam in action. Turn up your speakers and listen to 8500rpm of YB!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQDxj08bSCk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pe70TIqbFIo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibMm6CLly5w

(Spot daz in the last vid ROFLOL! )

 

Smokin those knackerd tyres

 

Hi Daz,

If you get chance, pop by the workshop and have a look at the sunbeam now its been repainted! Be good to see you.

 

karl have you ever thought of converting the talbot to run a sierra diff but using it as a solid axel

 

[quote="Karl"]Hi Daz,

If you get chance, pop by the workshop and have a look at the sunbeam now its been repainted! Be good to see you. [/quote
.
Will do mate been really busy working permanant nights now and having to visit my mother in hospital every day havnt had much time
Will try and come up on Monday morning

 

glancy,

No the setup we run is excellent as a tarmac car, and extremely reliable. It would not be possible to use a sierra cosworth rear diff as this is not a live axle configuration.

For tarmac use independant rear suspension is pointless unless you have a very sophisticated double wishbone setup and even then its benefit over live axle are minimal.

 

this is the type of set up am talking of karl

 

Glancy,

Why have you chosen to do your axle in that way as opposed to a live axle?

This would'nt have been an option for us as the cosworth diff simply would not have been strong enough.

In any case we went with an atlas as its size was perfect for the arched sunbeam and Ford running gear.

 

i have not just looking at different options to go for as my next car will run 13x10s and a anglia axel with cosworth engine and cant see diffs and shafts lasting long

 

Well no, an english axle won't last long with a well tuned pinto let alone a cosworth engine.

YOur best bet would be a modified atlas axle, but be prepared to get your wallet out to the tune of Ł3000+ if you want to handle 500+bhp.

 

the problem seems to be the width of the axle as it runs the wheels inside the body without flared arches car will only have 350bhp but in a rwd mk1 fiesta that should be enough

 

LOL well a sunbeam is the same size as a mk1 fiesta, and 350bhp is never enough!

You're never going to get 10X13's on a mk1 fiesta anyway without MAJOR body mods, so I'd have thought your project is doomed from the outset if keeping with standard arches.

Otherwise a baby atlas would fit fine with 7X13's with a suitable offset.

 

not going to read all 3 pages but the engine in transformers is coo(z28)l!

 

the car is already sitting with the wheels under the arches Karl just looking at other solutions to the back end for when a run out of diffs and shafts

 

glancy2081

I've got a panique wide arch bodykit for sale on ebay at minute if yo need to put 10 inch wheels on the back of a fezzy.....also gives enough clerance on al arches to do a full cossie 4x4 transplant (what I was going to do before buying a 3dr shell instead)

Check it out i'll do a PF member a good deal on it.

Cheers
Dan

 

its ok the car ia rolling with the wheels under the std arches at the moment car has to look std or it no good as a sleeper

 

glancy, you cannot fit 10X13 wheels on a mk1 fiesta under standard arches and have a track that will give stable handling. The axle will end up so narrow the car will actually be undrivable! I have considerable experience of building mk1/2 fiestas!

Sounds like you're building a real peachy car!