as daz says it's the development of the engine thats the important factor in extracting power from an engine thats why ford /cosworth don't use a standard ford block etc etc .. if you throw enough money at it then anything is posible but would it then be a sprint engine ? although it would perhaps mimic one it's most likley that the f3 engines went as far as they could whithout spending vast sums of money when newer stronger units were out there ...toyota etc
but then didn't bmw used old engine blocks for the turbo f1 engine
Fundamentally speaking why is it
-
Purplebargeken
Never driven a sprint but I had an early chrome bumper Saab 99 and whilst it pulled well it still self-destructed due to the headgasket woes (week after I sold it 
)
Seems that the spriny engine whilst ahead of it's game at the time looses out with with the limitations imposed by the construction material of the time, machining tolerances, etc. It's like anything I suppose. Compare the 'planes of the '70's to what we have now, especially with the development of CAD. Maybe I'm just talking shite........ most likely
Talking of chains.. Jag XJ40 2.9 had 2 chains but they were utter shite and eventually led to terminal rattle. The 3.6/4.0 no problem. Micra's - chains - uber releiable. Ford's - belts....hmmmm.
Ken
)Seems that the spriny engine whilst ahead of it's game at the time looses out with with the limitations imposed by the construction material of the time, machining tolerances, etc. It's like anything I suppose. Compare the 'planes of the '70's to what we have now, especially with the development of CAD. Maybe I'm just talking shite........ most likely
Talking of chains.. Jag XJ40 2.9 had 2 chains but they were utter shite and eventually led to terminal rattle. The 3.6/4.0 no problem. Micra's - chains - uber releiable. Ford's - belts....hmmmm.
Ken
Ta peeps, so we do have one fundamental weakness - crank bearing size. Three actually - angled head fixings and compromised valve profiles. Chain drive seems to be well and truly ruled out.
On at least one of the cosworth ford collaborations the mods cosworth made to the block went into the standard production unit, you've gotta respect that. Triumph did make some changes to the casting over the years, I wonder if they were economy or strength oriented?
Liners, valve and guide material don't fall into the 'fundamental' category imho as they are changable fittings but are noted. Guide size does if there is insufficient material in the design of the head to allow for development. Poor quality casting material most certainly does. Core plug count is pretty basic too, reducing them must make it a more difficult casting increasing rejects and so cost.
Keep it coming.
Tinweevil
On at least one of the cosworth ford collaborations the mods cosworth made to the block went into the standard production unit, you've gotta respect that. Triumph did make some changes to the casting over the years, I wonder if they were economy or strength oriented?
Liners, valve and guide material don't fall into the 'fundamental' category imho as they are changable fittings but are noted. Guide size does if there is insufficient material in the design of the head to allow for development. Poor quality casting material most certainly does. Core plug count is pretty basic too, reducing them must make it a more difficult casting increasing rejects and so cost.
Keep it coming.
Tinweevil
1978 Pageant Sprint - the rustomite, 1972 Spitfire IV - sprintfire project, 1968 Valencia GT6 II - little Blue, 1980 Vermillion 1500HL - resting. 1974 Sienna 1500TC, Mrs Weevils big brown.
-
Neil907
-
ALGIK
F1 engines 1.4 ltr 1500hp forced induction
Designed for it
The cosworth yb was designed for forced induction
Mr Costin and Mr Duckworth (cosworth ) took the old pinto engine and redesigned it for competition
The Dolomite engine never had that kind of money thrown at it
Turbo it to a 300hp and it wont last be long before you have an oily mess
even if you put aftermarket rods liners and crank in it.
Why do the race cars have a girdle plate bolted on the bottom of the block ?
The block twists and throws its crank out the pram at 240hp and thats making no torque what so ever
I would like to see a rolling road graph of a race engine with hp and torque just to see how little torque they make
Also if some one did turbo a sprint engine if it wasnt put on a dyno dynamics rolling road sorry but i wouldnt believe the power figure.
Designed for it
The cosworth yb was designed for forced induction
Mr Costin and Mr Duckworth (cosworth ) took the old pinto engine and redesigned it for competition
The Dolomite engine never had that kind of money thrown at it
Turbo it to a 300hp and it wont last be long before you have an oily mess
even if you put aftermarket rods liners and crank in it.
Why do the race cars have a girdle plate bolted on the bottom of the block ?
The block twists and throws its crank out the pram at 240hp and thats making no torque what so ever
I would like to see a rolling road graph of a race engine with hp and torque just to see how little torque they make
Also if some one did turbo a sprint engine if it wasnt put on a dyno dynamics rolling road sorry but i wouldnt believe the power figure.
Last edited by ALGIK on Sun Dec 31, 2006 7:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
ALGIK
NO im pritty sure they were mono blocks as there wasnt a head gasket around that could take those kind of cyl pressuresgeorge wrote:as daz says it's the development of the engine thats the important factor in extracting power from an engine thats why ford /cosworth don't use a standard ford block etc etc .. if you throw enough money at it then anything is posible but would it then be a sprint engine ? although it would perhaps mimic one it's most likley that the f3 engines went as far as they could whithout spending vast sums of money when newer stronger units were out there ...toyota etc
but then didn't bmw used old engine blocks for the turbo f1 engine
-
george
just found this maybe ? confirms what iv'e read somewhere in the past !
and dont forget they first used a turbo in about 74 / 75 on the 2002
also go here : http://www.gurneyflap.com/bmwturbof1engine.html
DELETENOSPAMkris....@sympatico.ca writes:
> Anyone remembers from which BMW's production block was the 1.5L turbo
> based on ?
> What was the original displacement(liters or cc), and from which car
> series ? (3 series ?)
2002.
(that's the first time I could answer two questions with one word.
BMW used to call their cars by cc in the old days, and the 2002
was their AFAIK best car in the late 60's. The BMW F1 turbo was based
on a 15 year old engine!
A turbo-charged two liter, which 'Nocken Paule' (Rosche) used for
touring and sportscar experiments with reduced capacity in the 70's;
he was also dreaming of a F1 version. BMW had other things in mind
and actually forbid any further racing research! Rosche ignored the
order, and went on with the F1 project, top secret. After a management
change, Rosche's F1 engine was then happily used.
What's also of interest is that the first F1 engines were made of rather
old and used 2002 blocks (IIRC something like 100,000 km) to sort out
badly manufactured ones.
Sven.
--
and dont forget they first used a turbo in about 74 / 75 on the 2002
also go here : http://www.gurneyflap.com/bmwturbof1engine.html
DELETENOSPAMkris....@sympatico.ca writes:
> Anyone remembers from which BMW's production block was the 1.5L turbo
> based on ?
> What was the original displacement(liters or cc), and from which car
> series ? (3 series ?)
2002.
(that's the first time I could answer two questions with one word.
BMW used to call their cars by cc in the old days, and the 2002
was their AFAIK best car in the late 60's. The BMW F1 turbo was based
on a 15 year old engine!
A turbo-charged two liter, which 'Nocken Paule' (Rosche) used for
touring and sportscar experiments with reduced capacity in the 70's;
he was also dreaming of a F1 version. BMW had other things in mind
and actually forbid any further racing research! Rosche ignored the
order, and went on with the F1 project, top secret. After a management
change, Rosche's F1 engine was then happily used.
What's also of interest is that the first F1 engines were made of rather
old and used 2002 blocks (IIRC something like 100,000 km) to sort out
badly manufactured ones.
Sven.
--
Using used blocks makes sense, as George says it weeds out the week ones and they become work hardened. But peeing on them? And the three bears.
Some posts seem to be misunderstanding my motivation for the original question. I'm not trying to find ways of getting x hundred bhp out of a dolly engine. I do understand that the likes of the YB block have had years of work done on them, ribs added here or meat thinned there to get them to the point where with car they can handle phenomenal power. There have been many discussions of girdles/ladders to stop flexing so clearly the dolly block isn't particularly stiff. It never had the development done to make those adjustments to make it stiff. Anyone got a foundry in their potting shed? I havn't.
My motivation for asking the original question is that I would like to understand where the weak points of the engine lie. And the strong ones for that matter. I hope to build a reasonably powerful engine one day and it would be wise to understand what can be done safely and whats asking for trouble. It's not in my nature to just ask what should I do / what shouldn't I do and then follow the advice slavishly. I need to understand. If I understand why something is a good idea I'll remember the original advice. If I do get the budget together to build an engine you can be certain it it won't be a TriumphTune catalogue based chequebook build.
Keep it coming.
Tinweevil
Some posts seem to be misunderstanding my motivation for the original question. I'm not trying to find ways of getting x hundred bhp out of a dolly engine. I do understand that the likes of the YB block have had years of work done on them, ribs added here or meat thinned there to get them to the point where with car they can handle phenomenal power. There have been many discussions of girdles/ladders to stop flexing so clearly the dolly block isn't particularly stiff. It never had the development done to make those adjustments to make it stiff. Anyone got a foundry in their potting shed? I havn't.
My motivation for asking the original question is that I would like to understand where the weak points of the engine lie. And the strong ones for that matter. I hope to build a reasonably powerful engine one day and it would be wise to understand what can be done safely and whats asking for trouble. It's not in my nature to just ask what should I do / what shouldn't I do and then follow the advice slavishly. I need to understand. If I understand why something is a good idea I'll remember the original advice. If I do get the budget together to build an engine you can be certain it it won't be a TriumphTune catalogue based chequebook build.
Keep it coming.
Tinweevil
1978 Pageant Sprint - the rustomite, 1972 Spitfire IV - sprintfire project, 1968 Valencia GT6 II - little Blue, 1980 Vermillion 1500HL - resting. 1974 Sienna 1500TC, Mrs Weevils big brown.
-
Jon Tilson
- Guest contributor
- Posts: 11179
- Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 9:45 pm
- Location: Middlesex
Mine...
came with very little bore wear at about 80k up and no perceptible wear on the journals either. I had a cam lobe fail and some nasty top end noises so that why I rebuilt it.
I had it balanced, flywheel, pulley, crank etc, rehoned new rings shells and an STR91 cam with vernier pulley.
50 odd k miles later over several years and a longish lay up its still lively...
The original slant 4 block had a high casting failure rate. It was redesigned to cure this and genrally reduced costs...but dropped by the BL bean counters in favour of the O series and sold to...yes you guessd it, the boys in sweden. I have this on good authority form a former colleague who used to work at Canley.
Shame...we could have been looking at the 350 bhp that the SAAB guys can get..
Jonners
I had it balanced, flywheel, pulley, crank etc, rehoned new rings shells and an STR91 cam with vernier pulley.
50 odd k miles later over several years and a longish lay up its still lively...
The original slant 4 block had a high casting failure rate. It was redesigned to cure this and genrally reduced costs...but dropped by the BL bean counters in favour of the O series and sold to...yes you guessd it, the boys in sweden. I have this on good authority form a former colleague who used to work at Canley.
Shame...we could have been looking at the 350 bhp that the SAAB guys can get..
Jonners
Note from Admin: sadly Jon passed away in February 2018 but his humour and wealth of knowledge will be fondly remembered by all. RIP Jonners.