Its a Mate of mine here in Melbourne, Australia
He works for his own backyard and has been playing with pintos for a long time
Cheers
Matt
Its a Mate of mine here in Melbourne, Australia
He works for his own backyard and has been playing with pintos for a long time
Cheers
Matt
Is your engine builder warren h by any chance cheers mario.
Yes he is.
Knows his stuff
Cheers
Matt
hi matt
what ignition timing did you end up running with 98 octane fuel for make power
cheers mario.
Having just re-read the whole thread (and referring to the budget build you were originally following) I have to say that with the two compared i'd be a little disappointed with your end result. The budget build used 40mm R1 carbs and what looked like a mediocre 4 branch manifold that resulted in 171 odd HP whereas you have gained 18hp with use of 48mm DCOE's and a better manifold? Ultimately if you are good with the end result then fine, but i'd have that niggling doubt there's still power to be had.
After re-reading the bike / weber comparisons, its true bigger holes will generally flow more but one area that a 'std' bike carb scores, & that can't be shown on a flow bench is atomisation of fuel / air which in good carbs is approaching / better than injector set-ups.
Bike carb tuning is often referred to as 'dark arts' due to complexity which a lot of people adopting them on to car applications just don't understand, for example - idle range has air jet, fuel jet and progression metering, off idle has idle jet, emulsion tube, needle jet, needle, needle groove. Mid range - idle jet, emulsion tube, needle, needle groove, diaphragm spring, slide holes and main jet then WOT pretty much just left to needle, needle groove and main jet. So JUST changing a main jet to add more fuel and calling the carbs 'tuned' is really doing them a dis-service.
It was a bloody good thread read regardless!
Last edited by katana; 30-06-2017 at 09:51.
I'm surprised you made this comment to be honest
I originally was expecting 170hp using the R1 carbs. I was offered a direct swap for the R1's for the Dellortos and always had plans to get a better exhaust manifold so to get more power with these changes seems to me to be a good result.
To say you'd be disappointed with an extra 18hp (or 10% increase in power) for just changing carbs and exhaust shows a lack of understanding of the work involved in getting more power from a highly tuned engine at this level.
The engine will be dyno'd again once in the car and we can play with a bit more then so there may well be more power to be had
Cheers
Matt
It wasn't meant to be derogatory and as I did say I'D be disappointed! Again I say you've gained 18hp over a 'budget limited' 40mm carb'd and small tube exhaust to a (by your own description) an all out race engine in the end on 48 DHLA's with lary cam, headwork?, compression hike and decent big bore manifold. To my mind that should be a 220 - 240hp engine! You might say i'm naive but i've added TB's and a 4-2-1 exhaust to a Zetec motor raising its output from 130hp to 177hp - no head work, no cams, no additional compression - that's 37hp or over 25%. And as regards tuning at 'this level', my primary experience is with bikes, one of which makes 186hp NA and 371hp turbo'd........from 1460cc so I do know what makes them tick!
Maybe i was being a bit harsh then. As the thread was started a few years ago it's a bit hard to remember exactly what was planned up front. In the end all we changed was carbs and exhaust so i was very happy with that. There was no more headwork done then when i bought it.
Im not sure a 220hp exists these days and certainly not a 240hp one. To get this power if its even possible would require soooo much work it would be cost prohibitive given the modern cheaper engine options available.
The bike carb option is really for std or mild tune and as expected using a more suitable setup had released what was there to be had. It's not that they can't be tuned by someone who has the knowledge just no point.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
for a 2 litre Pinto
Lol, agreed
Most of the big power Harris engines are 2.3's, has anyone seen the Connaught 265hp big cc Pinto recently, SRD are getting 220hp from their 2.0l on 42mm chokes, raised port head etc.
A tune by adding throttle bodies to a standard engine will always produce far bigger gains than chasing the final few ponies from an already highly tuned engine. You cant really compare adding TB's and an exhaust to a std Zetec to this case, its not relevant at all, 18hp by changing carbs is a huge gain, id be well happy with that, i recently only gained 4.5hp and a better torque spread with a £500 exhaust manifold, re-choke and jet of my 48's and i was happy.
Nice thread Matt, just spotted this whilst browsing! I screwed this engine together.
Good to see some decent testing on the Webers & bike carbs. I have had exactly the same results and similar comparisons, and I have also been modifying 45s to flow like 48's with custom made venturi & aux vents with the same results (although other experts will argue otherwise!).
Matts head as stated here was ported previously when it arrived to my workshop. IMO the exhaust ports were already too large (it would carry more air speed and still flow the same or more if smaller and a better shape), the short side was shallow and there was material removed from where it didn't need to be, but I did the best I could with it, and it worked out alright.
Cam wise, as someone stated it is similar to the HT1E, Matts cam was actually a test cam I was toying with at the time. I have since improved it again.
As for the improvement over what Matt had before, IMO the older engine was never making 170hp. I think more like 145-150, so its a decent improvement. There is still more to come with some finer tuning on the carbs.
A good read on the Carbs, backs up my testing
Cheers
Warren
Hi warren glad you joint turbosports cheers Mario.
Bookmarks