CVH Guru's...300hp from 1600cc...your views??
12-02-2005, 11:01 AM
#41
Spanner monkey
Can't say how accurate the rollers were but other people were there at the same day ( interpro ) and they had been on other RR's with very similar results to what they got on the day.
My old CVH was a completely standard 1600 cvh with just the compression ratio lowered to 7.2 -1 by skimming the pistons and using a brand new un skimmed head, the head was un flowed, and standard size valves were used, a standard inlet and t3 manifold were used, also un flowed and the turbo was a 4x4 cossie one with a .63 exhaust housing ( not cossie one ) i had a GRS intercooler and ran 1.5 bar, it made 255bhp and 253Lb of torque and wasn't really laggy at all!
As lemon says, Tom Scarletts has also made 300 so it's not impossible
My old CVH was a completely standard 1600 cvh with just the compression ratio lowered to 7.2 -1 by skimming the pistons and using a brand new un skimmed head, the head was un flowed, and standard size valves were used, a standard inlet and t3 manifold were used, also un flowed and the turbo was a 4x4 cossie one with a .63 exhaust housing ( not cossie one ) i had a GRS intercooler and ran 1.5 bar, it made 255bhp and 253Lb of torque and wasn't really laggy at all!
As lemon says, Tom Scarletts has also made 300 so it's not impossible
12-02-2005, 11:21 AM
#42
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Didn't that OZ guy make 330 on a 1.6? Red S2 I think, I remember seeing it in Fast Ford a few years ago.
Wouldn't it be better to go for a 1.9 or a Zetec Turbo?
Wouldn't it be better to go for a 1.9 or a Zetec Turbo?
12-02-2005, 11:23 AM
#43
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[quote="M7 COS"]Didn't that OZ guy make 330 on a 1.6? Red S2 I think, I remember seeing it in Fast Ford a few years ago.
quote]
is that the one that did a 10 second 0-60 due to flapping dump vavle
quote]
is that the one that did a 10 second 0-60 due to flapping dump vavle
12-02-2005, 11:37 AM
#44
PassionFord Post Troll
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats the all time fastest proven 1/4 mile terminal speed that a road legal CVH has recorded or anyone ever quoted a proper dyno figure? I rest my case!
I know that I so shouldn't of bothered posting here but tried so hard not to considering some of the replies.
Leave you girls to it.
I know that I so shouldn't of bothered posting here but tried so hard not to considering some of the replies.
Leave you girls to it.
12-02-2005, 11:43 AM
#45
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kent
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by dingy
Oli's 1.9 is over 300bhp
Chadley's 1.6 is over 300bhp
Tim's 1.6 will be over 300bhp
Chadley's 1.6 is over 300bhp
Tim's 1.6 will be over 300bhp
(ass dyno @ brunters and pulled 160 on non timed run )Bet Tony's 1.6 CVH was 300bhp too (and i would have bet it was more than 300 bhp, but will never know
) 
12-02-2005, 12:26 PM
#47
PassionFord Post Troll
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or even prove what it claims on the black strip....but then again with your 2bar+ monster you wouldnt know anything about that hey Matt.
Bassboy - which ever route you take I say if funds allow definately dyno it properly.
Bassboy - which ever route you take I say if funds allow definately dyno it properly.
12-02-2005, 12:54 PM
#56
It seems like an awful lot of work to me to put a CVH engine on the Dyno just to prove a BHP figure. OK, so perhaps you can map it a little easier on the Dyno, but I am not sure that it can necessarily be done any better.
The reason that a CVH (or indeed a 'Normal' Zetec) is never seen on the Dyno is because for the money involved in doing it, most of us have better things to spend the money on. It's different with a Cossie Engine or a Big Zetec because the relative cost of building the engine makes the dyno session a bit less of a shock.
Thats my opinion.
The reason that a CVH (or indeed a 'Normal' Zetec) is never seen on the Dyno is because for the money involved in doing it, most of us have better things to spend the money on. It's different with a Cossie Engine or a Big Zetec because the relative cost of building the engine makes the dyno session a bit less of a shock.
Thats my opinion.
12-02-2005, 12:56 PM
#57
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,928
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Dude I can only help ya with @wheels figures of 228bhp compairing like for like with some other figures quoted this would equate to around 280ish, sorry it aint an exact science but may give you an idea.
As for 1/4 mile times 13.9 whilst it had 212bhp.
As for 1/4 mile times 13.9 whilst it had 212bhp.
12-02-2005, 01:15 PM
#59
PassionFord Post Troll
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exaclty! Besides anyone who is serious about achieving 300bhp from a CVH should be aware (and if they're not they should ask their tuner once again what sort of costs are going to be involved) that costs are not going to be cheap hence someone from the ages of the cave man all the way through to now must of had a spot of cash to put a 300bhp engine on a dyno or even better still proven a 1/4 mile terminal speed that relates to 300bhp......tell me C+B how much money is it going to cost to fund a car to run up the 1/4 mile!?
12-02-2005, 01:46 PM
#63
It Wasnt Me!
cool
end of the day this bad boy im working on will kick al your ass's yes dingy that means ollies too, no he's not got invincible power
properly hoverin past you man
thanks to whoevers car it is for the pic
end of the day this bad boy im working on will kick al your ass's yes dingy that means ollies too, no he's not got invincible power
properly hoverin past you man
thanks to whoevers car it is for the pic
12-02-2005, 02:06 PM
#67
Fucking superstar........
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Argyll.... It's lonely...
Posts: 13,240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Hardeep_Singh
@ vroooom ptssssh wait till that biatch hits 88mph 
ONE POINT TWENTY ONE GIGAWATTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
12-02-2005, 02:28 PM
#71
Originally Posted by RANJ
c+b
puting an engine on a dyno isnt about proving bhp
puting an engine on a dyno isnt about proving bhp
At the end of the day once you have arrived at the chosen spec, producing BHP is a matter of adjusting Timing/Fuelling to achieve your desired AFR at Optimum Ignition Timing and without Det. This can be done on the road. OK, agreed the Engine Dyno is optimum, but relatively speaking, thats like splitting hairs.
12-02-2005, 02:41 PM
#74
Originally Posted by vroooom ptssssh
But has anyone EVER SAW a 300bhp CVH on a DYNO producing the goods???????
But by the same token who, other than the REALLY big power Zetec's have put an engine on the Dyno??
12-02-2005, 02:44 PM
#76
It Wasnt Me!
Ok, so therefore unless a car has been on a dyno we cannot say it is 300bhp@fly because:
A. you cannot say a car is X amount of power from adding up a part list i.e. a cam gives 15bhp, an ic gives an extra 20bp etc etc
B. you cannot say a car is X amount of power from a rolling road, as we all know they are used to make a comparrison, from the original spec - adding say a cone filter which would then tell you the loss or gain, which as i understand is what a RR is used for other than mapping/fault diagnosis.
so we will only know a cars true power if its been on a dyno, so does that not mean that all these 300bhp CVH's may actually NOT be 300bhp as none have been on a dyno?? even if they been on a RR we cant tell what power they have gained because their is no comparison as the engine would be new and already completed, so theres nothing to take a comparison from!
i hope that makes sense
A. you cannot say a car is X amount of power from adding up a part list i.e. a cam gives 15bhp, an ic gives an extra 20bp etc etc
B. you cannot say a car is X amount of power from a rolling road, as we all know they are used to make a comparrison, from the original spec - adding say a cone filter which would then tell you the loss or gain, which as i understand is what a RR is used for other than mapping/fault diagnosis.
so we will only know a cars true power if its been on a dyno, so does that not mean that all these 300bhp CVH's may actually NOT be 300bhp as none have been on a dyno?? even if they been on a RR we cant tell what power they have gained because their is no comparison as the engine would be new and already completed, so theres nothing to take a comparison from!
i hope that makes sense
12-02-2005, 03:53 PM
#77
Oli's is going on the rollers in the next few weeks then getting some more mods LOL.....
So will let you know, plus oli's has tried the top speed and failed, we think this was down the aerodynamics and no grill, but as its a track car doubt we will know.
Now you top speeders get on track and see how fast ya car is.....
So will let you know, plus oli's has tried the top speed and failed, we think this was down the aerodynamics and no grill, but as its a track car doubt we will know.
Now you top speeders get on track and see how fast ya car is.....
12-02-2005, 03:57 PM
#78
OK vroooom ptssssh
Oli's runs out of fuel @ 2bar on greens at pressure i will find out, on a 1.9cc
GRP A T34 .63 spec blower, 3" system.
YOU work out the bhp.....think you will find its greater than 300 bhp
Oli's runs out of fuel @ 2bar on greens at pressure i will find out, on a 1.9cc
GRP A T34 .63 spec blower, 3" system.
YOU work out the bhp.....think you will find its greater than 300 bhp