its on 45mm TB's
its on 45mm TB's
i'm changing 182 to 186 now, didn't realise it was on 45 throttle bodies, thought it was going on 45 webers, thats gotta be worth a good couple of horsepower top end surely.
its not dead till it's buried!
T.I.T engineering. "Feel the power!"
172
Cosworth Electronics / Pectel Dealer, Syvecs Dealer.
Europes Largest Link ECU Dealer - Aim Sportline Dash and Datalogger Dealer, ECU Master for South East UK
UK Mahle and Reinz Distributor - 3J Driveline Dealer - Corbeau Seat Dealer
ECU & Dash packages preconfigured and custom looms made to order.
Professional conversions - Engine Swaps - Complete Project Design
0% Finance Available on all products and services.
[B]Engine Parts for most makes, all Ford parts kept in stock, Pinto, Xflow, YB, V4, V6, Zetec, Dratec, Wiring Looms Plugs, Plug Kits and Loom Products, Head Refurbishment and Porting, Engine Rebuilding Services.
w: www.shopbhp.com e: sales@shopbhp.com
Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/brandshatchperformance
I would expect 185 - 187 due to being 2.2 but if it was 2.0 lt with the CR of 11 to 1, it will probably produce around 170-175.
The head porting is very very nice.
May I ask, What lenght are the valves in this head ?
Regards
dont remember valve length but they came from vulcan engineering
I should really have asked this before I went!!
Cheers
Dazzle
168bhp
191 bhp
I can already guess there will be a lot of speculation/doubt/disagreement about this!!
I know people will say it's the rollers, how they were set up or something was missed!
But all I can do is show you the graph
That's 197bhp and 164lbft
And when you've all had time to see it, I'll tell you something else
Cheers
Dazzle
F@@K me! TBH i'd of been a pretty dissappointed it didnt make at least 180, in the back of my mind was the fact on a 2.0 peps get 175 from that cam i reasoned 185 perhaps as high as 190 might of been possible.
dazzle if you remember we fiirst talked about this engine having 180 odd bhp, i said that not problem but if you also want it proper useable road going grunt it needs to have big cc and rally cam, but i never imagined an RL31 would knock the door of 200bhp, mr walker would of been getting a bit excited i know for sure he gets all very misty eyed when he sees a good pinto!
Last edited by Graham; 11-09-2011 at 06:07.
looks about right to me. I have the same cam and 2.2 set up and when it was fresh and new went on the rollers at 167bhp at the wheels.
nice figures
Now thats a result! And not at all out of puff at 7000
Makes me think how would it perform with 12,5cr and all racy cam.... but obviously would ruin the road going features of the engine. I believe it's perfect for intended use.
Any pics of the installation/ bay dazzle?
Carbs, 45s with 40mm chokes. So with the benefit of hindsight, not quite the same set up. Just looking at going over to TB's now.
What a lovely road engine, thats very impressive
Cosworth Electronics / Pectel Dealer, Syvecs Dealer.
Europes Largest Link ECU Dealer - Aim Sportline Dash and Datalogger Dealer, ECU Master for South East UK
UK Mahle and Reinz Distributor - 3J Driveline Dealer - Corbeau Seat Dealer
ECU & Dash packages preconfigured and custom looms made to order.
Professional conversions - Engine Swaps - Complete Project Design
0% Finance Available on all products and services.
[B]Engine Parts for most makes, all Ford parts kept in stock, Pinto, Xflow, YB, V4, V6, Zetec, Dratec, Wiring Looms Plugs, Plug Kits and Loom Products, Head Refurbishment and Porting, Engine Rebuilding Services.
w: www.shopbhp.com e: sales@shopbhp.com
Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/brandshatchperformance
Such a nice engine. Really to have this much power with rather moderate CR is absolutely wonderful.
The RL31 is a very very nice rally cam but I am sure this is the first engine here having this much power using this profile. It must be because of the excellent cylinder head port job, the capacity and the TBs plus the quality build when into this engine.
Conguratulations.
May I ask, what was the fuel, cam timing and the ignition advance during the run ?
Graham, what would be the MAX CR to use with RL31 in your opinion in the non-long rod engine ?
Regards,
Kerem
i'm absolutely amazed, never knew the rl31 would give so much, i bet that it really really nice to drive
its not dead till it's buried!
T.I.T engineering. "Feel the power!"
Eh sorry lads but 197bhp with that cam is impossible imho, the RL31 cam only have 245*@.050" lift with lash, where as the GTS4, HT1 etc cams have 260*@.050", which is a massive difference in inlet open area
The tb's are undoubtedly adding a lot more power but 197 is very hard to believe unless you've got the best pinto head in the country by a long shot
Great result anyway, it is obviously dialed in really well regardless of what the figures might be on a bolt on dyno and that's all that really matters
"Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races" - Enzo Ferrari
On second thoughts I could be wrong, we recently built a 2027cc pinto with a BF63 cam (which also has 245*@.050" but a tighter LSA), on 50's with longer rods, injection stage 3 head, just under 12 to 1 comp etc, and it made 190bhp and 158lb/ft, so if that had have been 2.2 it would have made 203bhp and 169lb/ft (80mm stroke x 93mm bore)
So your figures sound right actually, the 2.2 bit was throwing me off
"Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races" - Enzo Ferrari
What sort of exhaust manifold and system did you use, primary and main pipe diameters?
"Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races" - Enzo Ferrari
The RL31 cam has a much wider LSA than the GTS4, HT1, RL32 etc cams, which I believe works far better with the pinto engine, wider LSA = less overlap which gives you much better low to mid range power and the later intake closing point gives you all the top end you need, I hate how the GTS4 and HT1 etc cams perform below 4000rpm, total rubbish for rallying imho as they have no go out of the corners no matter what compression you are running, wider LSA makes a really nice engine, building on the torque the pinto already has instead of turning it into something very much like a peaky hp tuned low cc 16v engine
"Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races" - Enzo Ferrari
its a 105speed, dazzle already had it so it just went back on
thanks, daves rollers have regularly produced results that match proper engine dynos, and my bmw engines always make the expected power, if anything the on track performance of my engines suggest the rollers conservativeSo your figures sound right actually, the 2.2 bit was throwing me off
quite a few peps use HT's on the road, i dont regard it as a road cam by any stretch of the imagination, hense why i went for a sane cam and big cc, in my view the longer stroke and diesel rods really add a lot to the engine, by comparison Boxxers full on 2.1 HT1 vulcan pinto made 195 if i recall correctlyThe RL31 cam has a much wider LSA than the GTS4, HT1, RL32 etc cams, which I believe works far better with the pinto engine, wider LSA = less overlap which gives you much better low to mid range power and the later intake closing point gives you all the top end you need, I hate how the GTS4 and HT1 etc cams perform below 4000rpm, total rubbish for rallying imho as they have no go out of the corners no matter what compression you are running, wider LSA makes a really nice engine, building on the torque the pinto already has instead of turning it into something very much like a peaky hp tuned low cc 16v engine
Last edited by Graham; 12-09-2011 at 13:43.
That is going to be an unreal road engine lol, I hope the rear suspension, gearbox and axle location can cope with it lol
"Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races" - Enzo Ferrari
what i have just noticed is peak power is basically 7000rpm, i would have thought the 2.2 bottom end would have made peak power quite abit lower at about 6600rpm considering the power bands are ment to be 2750 to 7500rpm, surely if this head was on a 2.0litre bottom end, peak power could be as much as 7500rpm couldn't it? any idea why peak power is so far up the rpm? is it just a well flowing head doing that?
its not dead till it's buried!
T.I.T engineering. "Feel the power!"
power bands quoted by cam manufacturers usually show the extreme upper limit the cam will work at, but if the heads better than the average head then you would expect it to rev on harder
IIRC jasons RL31 engine peaked at about 7500, as can be seen from the graph an early power run gave 192 @ 7500, before finishing with a final peak fig @7000 so the engine does infact peak at lower revs.
whilst a dont know the details i do know dave played with induction lengths, i also suspect he swapped the normal heavily flared jenvey trumpets for narrower angled ones, which tends to produce a stronger induction pulse so IF you hit the right length you will get a real power bonus
Last edited by Graham; 12-09-2011 at 16:45.
This Dave fella does this for you?? I want an RR operator like that who has trumpets on shelf to try out for me.
this dave is dave walker of emerald cams / ecu and magazine jurno.
the problem there is as i've discovered theres much more to it than length, angle and flare on the trumpet also have an effect as does the exact cc, cam valve timing, and even exhaust, there are so many variables and different lengths suit different parts of the rev range, trial and error and overlaying graphs is about the only way to get a complete picture
sounds like it would be quicker to change them rather than calculate it too
its not dead till it's buried!
T.I.T engineering. "Feel the power!"
I have just made a basic power curve comparison between 2.2 Pete, 2.0 Linford and the 2.0 BF63 engine we built
Tom (Group4_Mark2) sent me a good chart before comparing different engines, I adapted his graph to suit, I am sure Tom could make a much better graph but its not too bad, you can see Pete has more bhp all the way up than Linford and it murders Linford for low to mid range torque, bhp and torque curves for Pete and the BF63 engine are quite similar, Pete has more torque from 3750 to 6000rpm or so, I beleive this is the extra cc and also possibly the effect of the different manifold, 45mm TB's and trumpets
BF63, 50mm carbs, 136mm rods, a tad under 12 to 1, stage 3 inj head, BF63 cam, ashley 3 piece manfiold, 3" system etc 2027cc
Linford, 45mm TB's, YB rods, 12.1 to 1, stage 3 inj head, Phase 5 cam, ashley 3 piece, 2.5" system, 2000cc
Pete, 45mm TB's, 1.6 diesel rods, 11.1 cr, stage 3 inj head, RL31 cam, 105 speed manifold, ??" system, 2173cc
Last edited by Graham; 12-09-2011 at 18:38. Reason: added comp ratio
"Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races" - Enzo Ferrari
It can easily be seen that cams like RL31 and BF63 with wider LSA's and lot less lift on overlap give soooo much more low to mid range power and torque than cams like GTS4, HT1, RL32, Newman Phase 5 etc, they destroy low to mid range all for a little more top end, not at all worth it for rallying or racing imho, as they are very lazy out of corners compared to a cam with less overlap + wider LSA
"Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races" - Enzo Ferrari
well pete is 10% more of linford and by looking at the graph its just shy of 10 percent more power too, if both were pure 2000cc i think linford would still just have it.
edit: just a note though, what fuel was linford on?
its not dead till it's buried!
T.I.T engineering. "Feel the power!"
very interesting, were never know but im pretty sure linford would of actually peaked @ about 7700 pretty close to petes power, bearing in mind the last two degrees advance added put a whole stack more power, which usually means you got more to go.
i must say after seeing this result when i saw dave white on sat i said "we need to chuck the yb head away and go big cc pinto"
It is the shape of the power and torque curves that matter most, not the peak figures, look at the BF63 engine, it is 2.0 with an almost identical cam to the RL31 but with a slightly tighter LSA, (I have previously mapped both profiles at a series of lift points) and yet it makes more power than the Linford engine at all rpm's, my point is the RL31 and BF63 cams are much better than Phase 5, HT1 etc
"Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races" - Enzo Ferrari
To be honest Graham, after having looked at several N/A cossie power and torque curves a good pinto would murder them, they are very peaky not much happening until over 6k, personally I would not bother building one for NA use as they are not good unless you really go crazy with the modifications and big ££££'s
I would build a 2.3 pinto instead, honestly much faster on a sensible ish budget
"Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races" - Enzo Ferrari
Bookmarks