were back LOL throttle body zs

[tb steve]

just a little tease

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlmhaIY93U8

[Supercharged_Z]

2-7k rpm in seconds? er.... what a project

[Ritchy]

that sound evil haha, whens test day?

[Drew]

sounds good.

Drew

[stamford]

Looks and sounds like a caged animal bursting to get out!

[tb steve]

2-7k rpm in seconds? er.... what a project

i bet you wished you had a grey zs now :whistle:

cheers all we are getting there (well G is LOL)

[Alan.F]

i bet you wished you had a grey zs now :whistle:

cheers all we are getting there (well G is LOL)



LOL looks awesome Ste

[tb steve]

cheers alan

i here you wont a go in it

[Drew]

try and get a proper mounting for the ecu.

Drew

[MG6Turbo]

Its not finished yet, awaiting some parts from WSR however, Mr Bennets is in Shanghi so wont be this week.

G

[Alan.F]

cheers alan

i here you wont a go in it

Deffo m8 but only after you have driven it

[Drew]

Its not finished yet, awaiting some parts from WSR however, Mr Bennets is in Shanghi so wont be this week.

G

i was saying to steve he needs a mounting for the ecu sorted, something for him to look out for.

Drew

[Drew]

i bet you wished you had a grey zs now :whistle:

obviously the best colour ;)

you going battery to boot? give you some space for the inlet pipe.

Drew

[MG6Turbo]

Got a slim battery for under the hood.

Hows your zs projects going Drew?

G

[Supercharged_Z]

i bet you wished you had a grey zs now :whistle:

cheers all we are getting there (well G is LOL)

Yeah I do like grey, but I'm more of a hatch man myself

[Drew]

Got a slim battery for under the hood.

Hows your zs projects going Drew?

G

very well.

Drew

[mattie007]

Its not finished yet, awaiting some parts from WSR however, Mr Bennets is in Shanghi so wont be this week.

G

Talking to MG or on holiday?

[ZS Phil]

What are the throttle bodies off? I remember reading about a throttle bodied v6 years age, is this the same one? Looks bloody awesome!

[MG6Turbo]

Talking to MG or on holiday?

Hes running a car in WTCC there.

Mr Bennetts definitely wont be talking with MG again..

G

[MG6Turbo]

What are the throttle bodies off? I remember reading about a throttle bodied v6 years age, is this the same one? Looks bloody awesome!


They are from the WSR v6 touring zs.

This project was started in late 2009. But there were many issues which hindered its progress which doesnt need to be brought up again.

Im sure Steve will post the final results shortly.

G

[Quadcam24]

any updates ?

[MG6Turbo]

Only to say the cam belts have been changed before it gets a hammering on the rolling road shortly.

G

[Quadcam24]

good to hear , when are the rollers booked for ?...cant wait to see the graphs.

[Eddie]

I'm curious to know how this is running?
That's an airbox which replaces the OE inlet manifold, still looks to be running on the stock 180 throttle body so not an ITB set-up per say.

[Quadcam24]

interesting point, its basically a plenum with no vis....which kind of makes you think it will lose all its torque...but still a great project and it will be very interesting to see the reality of the roller graph. Will answer a lot of questions.

[Drew]

I'm curious to know how this is running?
That's an airbox which replaces the OE inlet manifold, still looks to be running on the stock 180 throttle body so not an ITB set-up per say.

some pics off xpf..

http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/1221/wsr3.jpg

http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/4347/wsr1.jpg

single throttle body into a plenum.

Drew

[tb steve]

I'm curious to know how this is running?
That's an airbox which replaces the OE inlet manifold, still looks to be running on the stock 180 throttle body so not an ITB set-up per say.

i never said it was itb or did i ?? thread was throttle body zs
we have tryed a zr and a zs TB and we have been told theres no or little difference between the two and may be going for a TOCA TB 60mm but will have to see

[tb steve]

interesting point, its basically a plenum with no vis....which kind of makes you think it will lose all its torque...but still a great project and it will be very interesting to see the reality of the roller graph. Will answer a lot of questions.

think it might lose a bit a torque but may gain this back due to the way it picks up the rev range
the magic graph shows all :)

[Quadcam24]

yes i agree, might lose low down but if you gain some back up the top then grins all round :yes:
is the need of a correctly fitting throttle body holding it up then, it seemed to be running ok in them old videos :question:
I cant see a bigger throttle body helping it to make more power tbh but you never know till you try.
Hope your soon enjoying it anyway.

[Drew]

whats the size of the inlet on the plenum?

Drew

[tb steve]

not sure drew

i think there are two options on the neck ???

[Drew]

ahh nice, hadnt seen the extendy piece before. you thought about doing a 90dgr to replace that, might make fitting the TB easier?

we have tryed a zr and a zs TB and we have been told theres no or little difference between the two

i just measured my zs TB at 55mm but its fookin long. if you cant fit that in id look at a T series TB @56mm.

toca tb sounds good but tbh its more money for little gain imo.

Drew

[Quadcam24]

yeah looks good are you looking to pipe a cone down into the inner wing?

[Drew]

it looks like the strut tower gets in the way, as well as the dta.

Drew

[tb steve]

will let G play with it and see what would be best for it anyway
the TOCA tb was not that much good price i thought thats if we get it but thats anther option if others dont work out as well

p.s i dont think the DTA will get in the way just a rough fitting

[tb steve]

yeah looks good are you looking to pipe a cone down into the inner wing?

i know what G was going for but is a bit pricey

[Drew]

you cant leave the filter in the engine bay, piping it to the inner wing is £50 at the most.

Drew

[talkingcars]

The shortest route to the inner wing would be to the gap between the chassis rail and the inner wing under where the battery normally lives. You'd struggle to get an enclosed filter in there in a direct run but you could fit an open cone just the otherside of the hole, just watch out for deep puddles.

[tb steve]

you cant leave the filter in the engine bay, piping it to the inner wing is £50 at the most.

Drew

no not in the engine bay that would be silly

[Eddie]

Maybe look at something like the ZT V8 70mm TB, have a simple adaptor plate made up.
If it's running DTA I've seen a KV6 with the VIS system de-activated and the flaps locked open, in fact I think Drew has the car now. It made very good low end torque even with all the stock inlet and it's flaps still in place, so with DTA you can map the torque curve.
I think with the increased flow from the inlet the the stock cams and valve train will be the limiting factor, to make the most of the new arrangement it would benefit from a compression hike and some nice cams.

What size exhaust manifold and secondaries are you going to run?

[tb steve]

Maybe look at something like the ZT V8 70mm TB, have a simple adaptor plate made up.
If it's running DTA I've seen a KV6 with the VIS system de-activated and the flaps locked open, in fact I think Drew has the car now. It made very good low end torque even with all the stock inlet and it's flaps still in place, so with DTA you can map the torque curve.
I think with the increased flow from the inlet the the stock cams and valve train will be the limiting factor, to make the most of the new arrangement it would benefit from a compression hike and some nice cams.

What size exhaust manifold and secondaries are you going to run?

hi ya eddie
to be 100% honest i think we will have to wait for the R/R and see if it needs a bigger T/B or not never thought about a V8 one before
i do have a DTA for it but there are no vis valves on my car also i have the 270 cams in place with J/S manifolds and the rest of the zorst done and light weight flywheel all fitted

[Eddie]

All the mods couple together should see some respectable gains, 210 to 220 I would be pleased with what's been done, I think you'll pick up a lump of torque through-out the range.
Just one last question, in the pictures on page 3 I see cable ties holding something in place under the air box, they look to be wrapped around the fuel rail?

[readie86]

love the throttle body set up nice project

[tb steve]

All the mods couple together should see some respectable gains, 210 to 220 I would be pleased with what's been done, I think you'll pick up a lump of torque through-out the range.
Just one last question, in the pictures on page 3 I see cable ties holding something in place under the air box, they look to be wrapped around the fuel rail?

i would like to see abit more than that but we dont know what it will gain and the cable ties was a test fit got all new fuel rails now

love the throttle body set up nice project

thank you

[Quadcam24]

whats wrong with the normal zs throttle body, tbh i dont see any gain coming from a bigger t.b.
Is that all it needs, just a throttle body and then mapping on the rollers ?

[Ritchy]

its got 6 individual throttle bodys has it not?

oh had an look and it doesnt, thought it did:/

[tb steve]

whats wrong with the normal zs throttle body, tbh i dont see any gain coming from a bigger t.b.
Is that all it needs, just a throttle body and then mapping on the rollers ?

you could be right there may be no or little gain with bigger t/b think G did ask the main man at WSR and he said that as well but that was on the 2.0 v6 until she goes on the R/R we just dont know

whats left to do well the big things are mapping,t/b(may be or not ???) air box/induction and probably some small bits to do as well :)

[Quadcam24]

awesome, you will have it back in a week or 2 max then, make sure you get some videos up asap. Were all waiting....... :gathering:

[MG6Turbo]

awesome, you will have it back in a week or 2 max then, make sure you get some videos up asap. Were all waiting....... :gathering:

Dave its back when its back.

Steve is kept up to date with progress as and when its made.

There isnt much to do now as Steve said, but im not around to work on it at the min.

However the end is near.

G

[MG6Turbo]

All the mods couple together should see some respectable gains, 210 to 220 I would be pleased with what's been done, I think you'll pick up a lump of torque through-out the range.
Just one last question, in the pictures on page 3 I see cable ties holding something in place under the air box, they look to be wrapped around the fuel rail?


That picture was taken during mock up.

There are no cable ties there now !

[MG6Turbo]

Well on friday the throttle body zs had its first taste of the road for the first time since it was running.

Here are some pics http://i1093.photobucket.com/albums/i430/gmackurdie/throttle%20body%20zs/zsthrottlecomesalive.jpg


http://i1093.photobucket.com/albums/i430/gmackurdie/throttle%20body%20zs/zsthrottlebyuld2.jpg

http://i1093.photobucket.com/albums/i430/gmackurdie/throttle%20body%20zs/zsthrottlebuild6.jpg

[Steves Cleenz]

how did it go today G?

[MG6Turbo]

Its going to be around a week before any results are announced.

Heres a couple of pics from today :

http://i1093.photobucket.com/albums/i430/gmackurdie/throttle%20body%20zs/zsthrottleonrd.jpg

http://i1093.photobucket.com/albums/i430/gmackurdie/throttle%20body%20zs/throttlrbodythor.jpg

[Quadcam24]

good work, awesome news for steve.
what throttle body did you go for then ?

[MG6Turbo]

At the moment its running a k series one.

It will change if its deemed necessary.

G

[talkingcars]

52 or 56?

[welshone]

52 or 56?


48 and 52 were used on the Kseries

56 was used on the Tseries Turbo was it not???

[talkingcars]

I'm not sure about the 56, I just know such a thing exists, TBH I'm not even sure what the 180 has.

[tb steve]

i must do some overtime now insurance etc etc

glad the bumper did not melt on the way down lol

it over fuels a little bit on overrun and flames pop out the back :mbounce:

[Ritchy]

flames are always fun

[Eddie]

Sounds like you're running on a base map, be careful, bore wash is a real pig, as fun as flames are it shouldn't be spitting them really.
Main thing is it's up and running, you should run a poll of what power and torque people think it will make.

[tb steve]

Sounds like you're running on a base map, be careful, bore wash is a real pig, as fun as flames are it shouldn't be spitting them really.
Main thing is it's up and running, you should run a poll of what power and torque people think it will make.

it wont be like that for long and you beat me too it i was going to do a quess what bhp thing


anyone wont to start

[Bobdope2002]

260bhp

[dean0]

218 bhp

[Ritchy]

212hp

[Quadcam24]

well my head says 225 ish bhp if im being optomistic, but after all the money, time and effort im afraid id be gutted for steve if its not a lot more than that.

[tb steve]

well my head says 225 ish bhp if im being optomistic, but after all the money, time and effort im afraid id be gutted for steve if its not a lot more than that.

time yes money wise not as bad as you might think but yes an expensive way to get shot the plen

should of said before the car was running 204-206 before tb

[sneekyparrot]

216 ish but I am thinking it would luv some cams :-))

[tb steve]

216 ish but I am thinking it would luv some cams :-))

he he its all ready got them

[stamford]

I'm guessing 230/235 hopefully more ;)

[Quadcam24]

QED made 230 bhp with 6 individual throttle bodies, dta and 285 cams, thats the only comparison we have but obviously 270's cant make as much power as 285's.
dave mgt and mine both made 212 bhp at different rr's, with similar spec but with standard plenum, although mine made 204 at another but thats just rollers for you!

220 bhp and 190ft lb is my guess.

[stamford]

230 with all of that..............not alot is it!

[Quadcam24]

and that was at 8000 rpm's on a bench dyno.

[MG6Turbo]

Sounds like you're running on a base map, be careful, bore wash is a real pig, as fun as flames are it shouldn't be spitting them really.
Main thing is it's up and running, you should run a poll of what power and torque people think it will make.

Actually it isnt running a base map.

Bore wash isnt an issue at all as it hasnt been running for very long and spent most of its time on light throttle.

Only sharp stabs on the throttle cause flames as too much fuel is being injected, and since it wasnt driven with sharp stabs of the throttle im sure the rings and liners will be quite ok,

There was no smoke following it down the motorway indicating a very rich mixture.

As for the power output, im expecting 200bhp@hubs. Id be happy with that considering we know that a std zs180 produces 148bhp@wheels.

G

[Quadcam24]

lol at that ^^

wow, thats a confident and high estimate, but maybe you know something we don't.....


















like the dyno operators favourite tipple :laugh:

[MG6Turbo]

He doesn't drink.

Well 230ish@fly equates to 200@hubs if you do the maths.

We shall see.

G

[sneekyparrot]

he he its all ready got them

Yeah baby, superb!!!

Gotta be looking around the 230 then, can't wait to see some decent torque fig's

P.

[Fred68]

QED made 230 bhp with 6 individual throttle bodies, dta and 285 cams, thats the only comparison we have but obviously 270's cant make as much power as 285's.
dave mgt and mine both made 212 bhp at different rr's, with similar spec but with standard plenum, although mine made 204 at another but thats just rollers for you!

220 bhp and 190ft lb is my guess.

That doesn't seem rite?? A friend of mine got Qed to rebuild the 2.2 Lotus engine for his Sunbeam Lotus which now makes 235 bhp @ 7800 with 48 mm Dellortos and an old school dizzy!! I don't see how the 2.5 L Kv6 makes so little?? The touring ZS made around 270 bhp from 2 liters!!

[Quadcam24]

yes i know its not much power but its correct, i still have the qed brochure for the kv6, unfortunately this engine doesnt give up power easily.
kv6 can make 300 bhp with umpteen thousand thrown at it and qed could build you one but most folk would need a mortgage to do it.

Btcc teams dont worry too much about engine build costs.lol

[Quadcam24]

Yeah baby, superb!!!

Gotta be looking around the 230 then, can't wait to see some decent torque fig's

P.

hows 343 ftlb grab ya ...Vag ;)

[Drew]

375lb/ft T series :wave:

Drew

[Quadcam24]

lol, you know were its at then drew :cool1:

[Ritchy]

anywayyyyy....back on topic, when the rollers set:)

[MG6Turbo]

Yes back on topic.. this thread isnt about forced induction.

[Jay-ZS+]

Would love to hear a drive by bet it sounds immense, worth doing just for the sound and its uniqueness!
Is it going to be a daily driver when if fine tuned?

[MG6Turbo]

The idea from the outset was to keep it a daily driver.

Steve just wanted something different and to do away with the vis valves for good.

We shall see what it does or doesnt do as the case maybe.

George

[Drew]

you changed the injectors or gone with stds?

Drew

[MG6Turbo]

The injectors are from the touring car spec engine.

G

[BUCKYDEVIL]

Would be nice to see a video of it on the rollers George ?
must sound great getting pushed to the limit.

[MG6Turbo]

I am going to try and get one sorted.

It's not going on a rolling road as such,it's being dynoed using hub packs.

G

[grimmy]

Please keep the thread on topic.if not any offending posts will be removed.

[Eddie]

I am going to try and get one sorted.

It's not going on a rolling road as such,it's being dynoed using hub packs.

G

Would that be Thor?
Will you be tuning it yourself?

[MG6Turbo]

Update.

Idle and start up now sorted. Power mapping starts Monday.

George

[MG6Turbo]

Well mapping nearly finished.. Results shortly !!

G

[stamford]

The suspense is killing me!

[Marky Mark]

Looking forward to seeing the results.

It's been along time since I have seen Steves car, really looking forward to hearing it all done, and up and running back on the road again :-D

[MG6Turbo]

Well results delayed due to a couple of failed injector seals. So just awaiting these to arrive at Thor and then it will be back on the hub packs.

G

[sneekyparrot]

Well results delayed due to a couple of failed injector seals. So just awaiting these to arrive at Thor and then it will be back on the hub packs.

G

Hi G,
What r hub packs?

Thx

[petet16]

Instead of using rollers, the wheel is removed and a dyno pack attached.

[Jay-ZS+]

Works on the same principle as the standard rollers just attached to the hubs, number of reasons for using them, one of which is that they are more versatile than having a fixed roller. Especially if short on space as can be stored away when not in use.

This makes it fairly clear despite them being unable to fit them! lol http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9dOfnpzPfQ
Theres a few videos of Thor Racing mapping cars on them here http://www.youtube.com/user/THORRacingUK

[Quadcam24]

hows it going, is it just the rubber O rings that have failed on the injectors ?

[MG6Turbo]

Spoke to Thor today.

It's back together and hopefully will be on the dynopacks tomoz.

G

[MG6Turbo]

Well its on the dynopacks as i type.. Heres hoping for some decent figs !

G

[Eddie]

215@fly ?????????????

[big_wasa]

If we are guessing, I will go 205

[Jay-ZS+]

Id say 185@wheels seeing as thats where it will have been tested.

[Quadcam24]

i was thinking 185 wheels but seein as someones already nabbbed that one, ill go 180 wheels.


















i get the feeling some'ones busy strapping on some nos to try and break through the magic 200 at fly :clown:

[tb steve]

i was thinking 185 wheels but seein as someones already nabbbed that one, ill go 180 wheels.




go 184 then :)













i get the feeling some'ones busy strapping on some nos to try and break through the magic 200 at fly :clown:

no nos :joker:

[Jay-ZS+]

i was thinking 185 wheels but seein as someones already nabbbed that one, ill go 180 wheels.

Pretty sure 180 at the wheels will be well over 200 at the fly, transmission got to be less than 90% efficient!

[Eddie]

Stock KV6 177 BHP @ flywheel
Stock KV6 144 BHP @ wheels
Equates to a 18.5% drive train loss = 33 BHP@flywheel

You have to remember the power loss is 33 BHP as stock,
When you increase the power the drive train loss has already been calculated and will not change because you make more power, why would your drive train make more losses beause the engine is making more power, what changed in the gearbox?
If you make 200 BHP@wheels you do not calculate 18.5% drive train losses, you add the factory 33 BHP it lost.
Do not make the mistake of adding the 18% power loss to your new figure.

To jump from 144@wheels to 200@wheels (56 WHP) is some good gains for a NASP build,

[Drew]

why would your drive train make more losses beause the engine is making more power, what changed in the gearbox?

torque, turning force that will generate friction/heat. the more torque you put in the more you will lose through friction/heat.

might only be a small bit but will never be the same bhp number or percentage between std and tuned.

Drew

[Quadcam24]

jay, yeah i was joking mate , 180 wheels would be 210-215.

Drew,....i would maybe agree on a small variance on a big turbo build were your throwing hundreds of extra bhp through the transmission, but at this level where the power difference is 5-10 bhp or so, it will make no difference at all.
When ross sc zs made 260 odd bhp it was still 229 at the wheels.
mine made 212 fly, 180 wheels at powerstation when i had my cams mapped in, so no extra losses.


edit, i hope no news, doesnt mean bad news, must be mapped twice over by now unless its got a problem again ?!?!

what air filter set up has it got ...cone in inner wing ?

[POMPSKI]

Thats one angry engine. I love it.

[Eddie]

Drew

Point taken, you could also factor in wear on gearbox components, diff, bearings, any kind of drag on the clutch, brake pad contact, worn wheel bearings, general wear and tear on the bottom end of the engine, tired ignition system, so many variables from the point the car leaves the factory.
Most dyno’s have compensation formula’s to allow for resistance and climatic conditions, the general rule would be to use the factory figures as a bench mark and work from this point. Always best to measure effort and find a torque curve to make rough calculation on other numbers.
Once we have wheel torque it’s a little easier to “guestimate” the potential crank HP, this you already know of course, main point being, rollers and even hub packs calculate best guess for crank figures, I don’t believe Thor calculate crank HP they just stick with hub power, that’s fairly close to WHP once they fudge in the compensations.
I will be very interested to see just how much power over stock WHP (144) Steve’s car will make, personally, I don’t think the peak numbers will be particularly high but it should have killer torque based on the other mods done to the car.
We shall see I guess,

[Quadcam24]

so many variables its never an exact science, you just have to trust that they are close and thats it........ but when youve seen 4 people sitting on a cars bonnet, because it was supposedly so powerfull it was wheel spinning on the rollers...despite having just 200ft lb, it does make you sceptical, especially when youve seen 600 bhp supras on the same rollers running fine, rflmao !

what makes you think it will have high torque ed?
personally i would expect lower torque because i know how bad the zs runs without vis and i struggle to believe all that lost torque can be recovered and then some more created just from mapping, why have the vis if it can be mapped out better without it ?
i would expect similar or maybe a nadge more torque higher up but less low down and mid range.
I have lots of modified zs roller graphs with wheels plots on, so will be interesting to compare torque when the graph is posted here.

[Eddie]

My feeling is the torque curve on the VIS enabled KV6 delivers the torque curve progressively, nice and smooth to avoid a massive dump of low down torque. Remove the VIS valves on stock ECU it will pull out timing and fuel to compensate for the change it see’s that’s quite a change it cannot adjust and pull the best performance from.
With standalone management and unimpeded airflow you can create the curve how you want, depending on how the engine is breathing in other areas such as head and valves and of course out of the exhaust manifold, good flow coupled with some scavenging and maybe some cam over lap if the build will allow then you can tune your torque curve with timing, both mechanical by adjusting the cams gear/s and in the ECU. If I remember well he runs JS Manifolds which are designed for midrange, not sure which cams but it won’t be 285’s with stock valve train so 270’s at best, these aren’t designed to make power above a certain rpm. With the DTA they can tune the AFR’s to where they need to be then build an ignition map, based on components used in the build the airbox will flow for sure but there will be other restrictions and this will limit the full potential. Open out the ports in the head and use the different valves and new profile it will flow a lot more air, add larger cams it’ll flow more again, change compression ratio of pistons you gain again and put cams and breathing mods to full use, it’s ok having the airbox but how much can the head digest?
Small exhaust manifold system with short primaries will be good for torque, map in some ignition in the low rpm range and see what it likes, I feel this is where Steve’s car will make killer torque over the VIS enable engine.

[Ritchy]

like the technical talk here:) just need snowy senior across here now

[Drew]

not the easiest to see, it got wet in the door pocket before i bought it!

steve's 200 v6. std manifold but the valves open, so short runners and large plenum with a single throttle body.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b5/Roverdose/Photo0280.jpg

Drew

[MG6Turbo]

Nope nothing bads happend, just Thor busy at the min. Its on the dyno just not finished yet as Peter has other jobs on which took him off the dyno.

So hopefully Monday I should hear something.

Interesting read though of the points, but it is an unknown so it will be interesting to see what difference the box has made.

As for seeing what the heads can flow, we know the std heads can flow 260bhp without any fettling, so theres no reason the heads will be a restriction at this level of tune with the piper cams used.

Also the inlet and injectors have been changed, so everything that has been bolted to the heads is totally different now anyway.

G

[Jay-ZS+]

Cant wait to hear George, any idea of the volume of the airbox and the runner length. Been learning alot of theory around air flow and helmholtz resonance just wondered what rev range the runners are designed to produce peak power.

Have read that in theory the airbox should be between 1.5-2x the displacement of the engine, be interested to see how this works in practice.

[tb steve]

like the technical talk here:) just need snowy senior across here now

that would be fun :) i get the gist of all the tec talk but i could never do it my self lol

hi G
im off all week (should be if i dont get called in)

[Quadcam24]

not the easiest to see, it got wet in the door pocket before i bought it!

steve's 200 v6. std manifold but the valves open, so short runners and large plenum with a single throttle body.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b5/Roverdose/Photo0280.jpg

Drew

thats showing huge torque loss in the low and midrange, you can see where its missing !, compared to my last kv6 graph from reylands , which can be seen on xpf i believe. Mines showing 185ftlb at 3500, that ones showing about 147 !!....and wheres the power gone at 5800 revs, it should still be pulling strong up to at least 6500 revs, not tailing off !
In a zr i can imagine it would feel pretty quick but in a zs it would be gutless.


Imo the head will start to become a restriction at the power levels were talking about, put it this way , if you were to have them ported and polished etc you would see some gains....hence they must be restricting power.
Its good having free flowing intake and exhaust but if the actual engine is standard internally then it cant flow anymore air or make anymore power.
yes ross car made 260 on standard heads but thats with forced induction so you cant compare, it may have made 280 with head work for all we know.



edit, my last kv6 graph....click to enlarge, its the blue lines, red ones are the audi engine, before and after comparison on the same rollers.

[Maxxed_Ross]

there does seem to be a fair sized dip at the start of the graph... but from my limited experiance with mapping that could just as well be fueling issues

[Quadcam24]

possibly but this graph is the finshed job, if it had issues, then surely they would have been adressed and then the car re run and a better graph produced.

[Maxxed_Ross]

I say fuel as the only car I've been involved with mapping had a similar flat spot on the rev range, after spending quite alot of time at a supposed specialist. A bit of tweeking with fuel rates around the flat spot and it totally vanished.

I'm convinced some tuners just go after peak figures and forget about how the car feels lower down

[Drew]

that was track'n'road, if there was a flat spot they could tune out, it would have gone.

now that was a std manifold with no vis, and average exhaust manifolds as it was in a bubble. so results could have been better. but that doesnt mean it would have gained 30-40bhp from it!

depending on what revs these tb's are tuned at id expect to see a few lumps where the cams+tbs come on song.

Drew

[Drew]

just put a few graphs on dyno-plot if you want a comparison...
http://www.dyno-plot.co.uk/dyno/dynoplot/index.htm

Drew

[Eddie]

Steve had the bubble remapped and smoothed out a lot of the power, in fact, he done a fair amount of road mapping himself. When G built Steve’s bubble and had it mapped at PTS it was an unknown assortment of parts, the inlet was OE but PTS where unable to find an auxiliary to run the VIS system so mapped around them (left wide open), the exhaust manifold was made by Tony Law and in my opinion didn’t really suite the KV6 for making good power, just a very good OE replacement. Steve then insisted G use his very expensive back box and induction kit in the build, this limited power a lot (at the time). The car felt quick as it was in a lighter shell but in reality it went down POD in a 15 second quarter.
As I said in my last post, it’s OK to bolt on cams and exhaust manifolds which are designed for a stock KV6, you know what to expect, good punch of mid range with average top end gains. To increase on this you are looking at tuning the complete system from inlet to down pipe, remember, the engine is only an air pump, the more air you put “through” it (notice I never said “in”) the more power you’ll gain.
NASP tuning relies on flow, give an engine a massive gulp of air it will only digest what it’s internal components will allow (unless forced induction), increase the size of its throat (cams and ports) then it will swallow more, then increase its ability to digest that air (lungs) combination of compression ratio and exhaust manifold design it will consume the air with a mix of fuel and produce some power. Simplified yes, but NASP tuning rules are fairly basic, you can put in the same volume of air through 2 KV6’s and make each one produce its power in completely different ways, look at what happens when you replace the OE airbox for an induction kit, it flows more, this will only work up to a given point before the OE system will choke, some engine designs are very good from the factory and will have bolt on modification that promote power in different ways, low end with midrange punch or a lot or top end power, all down to the design of the parts installed.
IMO, Steve’s engine will maximise the potential of the exhaust manifold fitted, JS I believe, these have been proven to make good midrange power compared to say the H&S tuned system, there is a lot of research in manifold design’s for a good reason, what I do see is plenty of potential for development in the future, the induction and, injectors and management have been nailed, with increased compression ratio (pistons) with a cam profile and manifold matched for flow characteristics it will be interesting to see the results.

[Fred68]

I can't believe dumping the vis looses more then 20ftlb at lower rpms ? Does anybody remember the rover V8? It made 155 bhp in injected form and 212 ftlb of torque. But this had over a liter extra and two more cylinders !! The Kv6 may seem low on power but in real terms it's pretty good out the factory. If only it could be tuned as easily as the old V8!!

[Jay-ZS+]

Great post Eddie, as you say its all about choked or unchoked flow. Reducing flow losses to maximise volumetric efficiency. Guess I've learnt something this year.

Have heard that the KV6 heads are pretty good, would be good to get one on a flow bench and see some actual figures for them.

[Fred68]

Great post Eddie, as you say its all about choked or unchoked flow. Reducing flow losses to maximise volumetric efficiency. Guess I've learnt something this year.

Have heard that the KV6 heads are pretty good, would be good to get one on a flow bench and see some actual figures for them.

Snowy over on XPF has flow tested them and found they flow much the same as the 160!! So it should make something like 220-230 bhp with it's extra capacity!! It must have a lower VE or it would!! Unless there is something inherent in the design that is stopping it?? It is all about getting the air in and exhaust back out as efficiently as possible but even that seems to fail to deliver the goods :(

[Maxxed_Ross]

it's one of the smoothest engines I've ever driven though, and at a constant speed fuel economy on a standard engine seems to be good too... it even gets better if you go a bit faster!

Perhaps it was designed more for that and not future tweeking

[Phate]

Any results? :p

[Eddie]

A good friend of mine is running a Honda Civic EG, engine is a K24 block 4 cylinder from the Accord (2400cc) with a K20 Civic Type R head (VTEC).
It's still on stock sleeves and crank, runs an off the shelf set of cams (VTEC killer cams) higher compression forged pistons, modified inlet and throttle body.
It has a few other goodies and shiny bits but nothing that would promote the power it makes, 300hp@wheels NASP and it runs 10's, can be daily driven too.
Point being, with years of development and a known quantity you can build some engines with off the shelf parts and know roughly what you're going to get, KV6 seems to be an untapped market due to the costs of developing the engine, shame MGR went under when they did as quite a few companies where starting to do stuff with the KV6, think G and Drew are about all there is now, which is good as I would really love to see someone pull the potential from this lump.

[MG6Turbo]

Well no results as of yet, still waiting for Thor . They had issues with a previous car which has delayed this one. This car seems to attract delays lol.

As for Kv6 tuning, the issue with it is cost and demand. I do have a soft spot for the Kv6 and would like to see the 2.5 unit pushed, however, we already know what the 2.0ltr Kv6 is capable of. The touring cars managed 275bhp from the KV6 2.0ltr nasp, and i know its been pushed passed this, so i would deffo say that a 2.5kv6 should be able to push over 300bhp nasp !

I do know Mg/Rover did a low blow twin turbo KV6 and this pushed out well over 400bhp ! Its a shame it never went into production !

G

[Quadcam24]

bu55er....i wonder what will be the cause of tomorrows delay :whip:

that sounds awesome ed...300 wheels nasp, is that an expensive build or is it as simple as you make it sound ,lol.
Imagine that screaming banshee in a zs !

[Quadcam24]

it's one of the smoothest engines I've ever driven though, and at a constant speed fuel economy on a standard engine seems to be good too... it even gets better if you go a bit faster!

Perhaps it was designed more for that and not future tweeking

true, it wasnt designed as a performance engine, it was just a handy, tried and tested v6 that mgr could get at the right price.

If only it had been vvc'd it would have been a different beast altogether.

[MG6Turbo]

[QUOTE=Quadcam24;254896]bu55er....i wonder what will be the cause of tomorrows delay :whip:


Dave im as disappointed as anyone else.

However, we know Thor are a reputable company so im sure they are as eager to move it on as anyone !

G

[Quadcam24]

any progress ?

[Quadcam24]

any mapping yet?

[MG6Turbo]

Results are in. However will leave Steve to be the one to announce !

[lawrence-zs180]

epic news... without giving anything away are you pleased with it after all the hard work thats gone into it?

[tb steve]

I'm guessing 230/235 hopefully more ;)

and what a good guess

230-240 at the fly and thats about 196 at the wheel :mbounce::mbounce:

can i add some more bounce :mbounce::mbounce::mbounce::mbounce::mbounce:


car should be back with me in a month as ive got a holiday and i wont G to have it for runs out etc etc


well done G you did say 200 at the wheel

[Jay-ZS+]

Thats great news, very impressive result. Bet you are well chuffed. You had a chance to give it a test on the roads, bet its a real joy to drive :)

I guess you meant 196 atw and 230-240 at the fly, unless you have done something VERY clever to the transmission!!! ;)

What does the graph look like? Would be interesting to see how it compares to a stock 180.

[lawrence-zs180]

thats awsome, bet it flys and sounds epic at full chat.
Well done

[MG6Turbo]

Steve is a bit chuffed. It's actually 196bhp@ hubs. And approx 234bhp @ fly.

The torque low down is not as good as a std car being 140ftlbs however it increases to over 160ftlbs and holds it to over 6000rpm.

Peak power is at 6800rpm and revs to 7200rpm.

It has made what I predicted and I'm more than pleased with the final result.

250-260bhp achievable with 285 cams and head work.

It is completely docile to drive and when you stamp on the throttle it revs to 7k in a blink of an eye and sounds awesome.

It's been a long haul but a good result.

George

[Jay-ZS+]

250-260bhp achievable with 285 cams and head work.

Is this something that Steve is tempted to pursue? Would top it off as an awesome Nasp build!! Bet it sounds phenomenal at 7000rpm :bounce:

How do you feel the internals would hold up if pushed to 250-260?

Reckon Steve is gonna be spending a few quid on petrol this month, I know I would be if it was mine, any excuse to go for a drive!!

[MG6Turbo]

I think Steve will have the car back for a year and then maybe pursue it.

The std Internals are well up for 260bhp Nasp.

Steves going on holiday and has asked me to run the car for a month to make sure it has no gremlins.

George

[Quadcam24]

awesome bhp gain for just a visless plenum and standalone ecu.....poor torque though, it wouldnt matter on a track engine but for road it will mean stirring the box more than normal, i guess vis is king for torque but not for bhp......doesnt matter, as i think steve will be driving like hes on a track just to hear it ,lol.
Get it down pod, see what top speed it pulls.

[Quadcam24]

can we see the dyno graph please?
one picture speaks a thousand words and all that ,lol.

[MG6Turbo]

You can once I get them from Thor.

G

[tb steve]

think i will keep the car for a while before i do any thing else to it plus i think G does not wont to see the car again lol well not for a little while anyway

[Eddie]

Good results George/Steve,
I wouldn’t be disappointed with the lower torque, I think George said torque comes in earlier and holds longer, sure this will translate to good power delivery. Peak power is pretty much what the super charger offered in its basic form, 235hp is very respectable on the road and I would guess it comes with an instant throttle response, which is also something nice to have in the bag.
From the results it sounds as if the 270 cams have maxed out so with the additional porting and 285 cams this should take the car to the next level and make the very most of the induction box and ECU.
Let me know when or if you plan to run it at POD.

[MG6Turbo]

Thanks Ed.

Im sure Steve will just want to enjoy his car for a bit before wanting anymore.

To be honest, Im sure with over 230bhp without any lag, will be awesome, especially the roar.

I do have some 285`s sitting in a box, just pondering what to do with them.

Project Mg6 is consuming a lot of my time, so need to get that sorted first before i think about doing another KV6.

G

[Quadcam24]

can we see the graph yet ?

[p_b82]

Congrats on the project finally getting there - nothing better than a good result :)

[stamford]

Wow that was a good guess! :D Hope to see the zed one day, now go have some fun ;)

[tb steve]

cheers guys

think its going to scare me tho been driving a 1.2 63bhp auto micra :laugh:

all goes credit to G on this one and the other stuff that no ones no's about like the two years free car cover so i did'nt pay for any tax,mot or insurance :) i did not need the a car after that as i moved in with the g/f but he still left it with me just in case i needed it.i know some peps may say but he did have it for a long time yes he did but this was my choice i left it with him no ifs or buts and i could of taken it away or popped up any time i liked to have a look at it,god there's loads of other stuff that G paid out for as well on it
i never can write what i quite mean to say (if that makes sense ) but a big thank you G

OFF TOPIC
one of my mate's offered me a race (on track) he has a 330d mmmm i said wait and see

[stamford]

As the saying goes..........at the end of the day as long as you are happy with the results and effort put in then it is worth it. Some may bang on about the duration and costs but that sits with you and if happy then all's good :yes:

Good to see something different being explored with positive results, albeit a one off no doubt.................

[Quadcam24]

Steve is a bit chuffed. It's actually 196bhp@ hubs. And approx 234bhp @ fly.

The torque low down is not as good as a std car being 140ftlbs however it increases to over 160ftlbs and holds it to over 6000rpm.

Peak power is at 6800rpm and revs to 7200rpm.

It has made what I predicted and I'm more than pleased with the final result.

250-260bhp achievable with 285 cams and head work.

It is completely docile to drive and when you stamp on the throttle it revs to 7k in a blink of an eye and sounds awesome.

It's been a long haul but a good result.

George

what rpm's is peak torque made and what is the peak torque?...it seems as if the plenum has moved the power band up the revs a bit, which is nice for a revvy engine. :trampoline:

[Quadcam24]

hmmmm, ive been thinking about this build and its results today because somehow it didn't add up and ive figured it out.
Now this isn't meant to cause arguemnet or upset anyone, but steve and george after all the work and time need to know the results are correct or not, because as it stands the quoted results are just impossible to achieve...so this is hopefully a constructive post, leading to investigation to solve or find out who is at error.

quote george

"The torque low down is not as good as a std car being 140ftlbs however it increases to over 160ftlbs and holds it to over 6000rpm.

Peak power is at 6800rpm and revs to 7200rpm."

please anyone who has a roller graph dig it out to try this or refer to drews graph 2-3 pages earlier in this thread.

put simply........Torque x revs creates bhp.
The actual formula is torque x revs divide 5252 = flywheel bhp.
This info is all on the net and applies to all engines wether large or small, standard or modified from fiesta to ferrari.

You can check on your graphs, pick a point in the revs anywhere, note the torque figure, then do the sum.....torque x revs divide 5252 and you will get your bhp for the same revs, try it !

Now then if we look at steves results , being 234 bhp and 160ft lb, we do the sums and realise these numbers are impossible.

peak torque is quote " over 160 and holds it to over 6000".
Ok so as we know torque is dropping off at 6000 revs, and so at 6800 its actually back down to circa 140ft lb...but for the sake of argumenet we will assume that the engine is still making peak torque of 160 at 6800 revs peak power,
( even though thats impossible), now lets do the sums.

( torque) 160 x (revs) 6800 divide by 5252 = 207 bhp flywheel

now if we take the actual torque at 6800 of 140 ft lb

140 x 6800 divide by 5252 = 181 bhp flywheel

we know torque is dropping over 6000 because george indirectly says so and hes seen the graph, but also because on a genuine roller graph torque and bhp always cross at 5252 rpm's, this is the point where torque is dropping and bhp is building, so at 6k torque is falling off quickly, once again check your own graphs to see.

To sum up , it is impossible to have less torque but more bhp at the same point in the revs, thats just fact.
You can lose torque low down and gain bhp high up but you will also gain torque high up. Anywhere torque is lost or gained in the rev range, the same will be mirrored by the bhp, check how on your graphs the torque and bhp mirror each other through the revs.
You cannot lose torque high up and yet gain bhp because one is as a direct result of the other.

To make a peak of 234 bhp steves engine actually needs 181ft lb at 6800 rpm's, and its just nowhere near , and cant get anywhere near with its current spec.
To gain top end bhp it needs to gain top end torque, and its actually lost torque compared to when the car was making 204 bhp on the standard plenum, so its actually making less power now than it was before the btcc plenum was fitted......assuming the quoted torque figures are correct.

Once again, this isnt intended to wind anyone up and i wonder if this is why we have no roller graph from thor...because its wrong!
I leave it to steve and george to decide how to go about solving this, but please keep us updated.

I can't believe no'one else spotted this !

[MG6Turbo]

Dave I havent even seen the Graph.

Ive requested it the day Steve posted the results.

I had a call from Thor regarding the results and i rang Steve and gave them to him.

Until I see the graph I cant comment, and Im sure the graph will put things into perspective.

Dave, only you have noticed it and thats because you have been dying to pick fault yet again.

Hondas dont have much torque, but have high horse power.

Once I have the graphs I will pass a comment, until then I wont.

However, why is it then, a Honda can make 271bhp but only have 150ftlb Dave?

I have never had doubts with Thor, and will ring them tomoz to chase the graphs.

I havent been to collect the car, as I have been involved with MG6 things !!

G

[Quadcam24]

sorry you seem to have taken offence.
You judge me wrongly, yes we have argued in the past and still disagree on things, but im trying to help here not pick fault !

hondas make high bhp with low torque because they rev much higher.
Bhp is a direct result of torque x revs ,so higher revs equals higher power
As i stated the formula works on every engine regardless of make or size, try it out or just do some research on the internet. I thought more people would have known this.
You need to check this out so you can sort steves car, please dont just discount this because its me saying it.

edit, find me a honda graph and post it here and we will test it.

[Quadcam24]

honda graph...click to enlarge, low torque but high power because of high revs.
Try it, take any point in the rev range, note the torque and the revs , then do torque x revs divide by 5252.
All im saying is, there is something here to investigate , im not blaming anyone so please dont take it personally.

[Drew]

he's not the only one to notice, but i was waiting for the graph to show me different.

honda's rev a lot higher..

153.5lb/ft @ 5758, 213.7bhp @ 7476...
http://www.dyno-plot.co.uk/dyno/dynoplot/id%3D136%26sort%3Deng%26but_sea%3Dqs%26sea_simple% 3Dhonda/Honda-Accura.htm

closest i could find to 270bhp with the lowest torque..

169.8lb/ft @ 7428, 275.7bhp @ 9115!!
http://www.dyno-plot.co.uk/dyno/dynoplot/id%3D495%26sort%3Deng%26but_sea%3Dqs%26sea_simple% 3Dhonda/Honda-Civic-ce-tech-dk.htm

Drew

[ZS]

I had also noticed, but was waiting to see the graph before commenting...

As George says he hasn't seen the graph, so is relaying info passed to him over the phone... its quite possible that chinese whispers has twisted the torque figure, but until George (and us) see the graph, no one knows!

Credit for doing something different though!!

[Quadcam24]

hope thor can give us steves graph today , and that it makes sense, because this is just another worry for him in a long line of worries i suppose.

[MG6Turbo]

Just spoke to Thor.

The peak torque figure @ fly is 192.7ftlb. Torque @ fly @ 6000rpm is 181ftlbs.

I'm waiting for graphs.

Power @ wheels is 196bhp !

[tb steve]

hope thor can give us steves graph today , and that it makes sense, because this is just another worry for him in a long line of worries i suppose.

na mate never been worry'd about it to be honest nothing that a quick phone call did not sort out anyway (ok may be once,but there was a GOOD reason and i think i would of done the same and this was long long long time ago )

as for the graphs all in good time :tease: lol

[Quadcam24]

well thats a tiny bit better but still doesn't add up, so we know nothing till we can see the graphs.
On the new figures you still only have 207 bhp max peak power at 6800.

How can thor tell you peak torque was 160 but after another phone call its suddenly 190...someone over at thor is either havin a giraffe or they're a biscuit short of the full pack.

Are you sure they have even mapped it , i reckon they're playing you off.
have you or steve actually been to test drive it and seen it finished ?

Get your a55 over there and kick up a stink is my advice.

[Jay-ZS+]

How can thor tell you peak torque was 160 but after another phone call its suddenly 190...someone over at thor is either havin a giraffe or they're a biscuit short of the full pack.

From reading it I read the 160ftlb to be at the hubs which would give just over 190ftlb at the fly.

[Jay-ZS+]

Just done some maths myself using only values at the hubs

If 160ftlb is peak torque at hubs at 6000 and peak power is 196 at hubs at 6800.

At 6000rpm Peak Torque=160ftlb Power=182bhp
Then at 6800 torque drops off Torque=151ftlb Peak Power=196bhp

[MG6Turbo]

Yes Jay. That's correct !

G

[tb steve]

pm'ed

[Quadcam24]

all torque figures given have been flywheel not hubs, only hubs reading is bhp at 196.

quote jay
"Just done some maths myself using only values at the hubs

If 160ftlb is peak torque at hubs at 6000 and peak power is 196 at hubs at 6800.

At 6000rpm Peak Torque=160ftlb Power=182bhp
Then at 6800 torque drops off Torque=151ftlb Peak Power=196bhp"

yes you calculate correctly but its not hubs torque its flywheel torque as in georges post.

quote
"Just spoke to Thor.

The peak torque figure @ fly is 192.7ftlb. Torque @ fly @ 6000rpm is 181ftlbs.

I'm waiting for graphs.

Power @ wheels is 196bhp !"


anyway its not my car and ive said enough already, i dont want any arguements so ill leave it alone, steve and george are happy so all is well !

[Jay-ZS+]

all torque figures given have been flywheel not hubs, only hubs reading is bhp at 196.


George didn't actually state whether the torque was at the hubs or the fly, considering it was tested at the hubs I assumed it was a the figure obtained by the dynopacks

Steve is a bit chuffed. It's actually 196bhp@ hubs. And approx 234bhp @ fly.

The torque low down is not as good as a std car being 140ftlbs however it increases to over 160ftlbs and holds it to over 6000rpm.


Anyway look forward to seeing some finished pics and a decent drive by video!!!

[Quadcam24]

George didn't actually state whether the torque was at the hubs or the fly, considering it was tested at the hubs I assumed it was a the figure obtained by the dynopacks

yes george did quote torque figures as flywheel figures, and i quoted them in my last post.

Anyway look forward to seeing some finished pics and a decent drive by video!!!



amen to that :thumbsup:

[MG6Turbo]

Ive just read through my post.

A bit vaque.

Just thought that when i posted i gathered people realised Thor only give results at the hubs !

The related flywheel figures are calculated.

When I spoke to Peter at Thor when the results came in, he said that low down torque was lower, but it was better higher up and held better.

As we all did, we assumed the figure was a flywheel one and not at the hubs.

So apologies to Dave, and thanks for pointing it out.

However, since it has now been explained, we can all get on again.

Im awaiting the graphs from Thor.

George

[Quadcam24]

that is good news..........moving on then !

[grimmy]

Been up for 24 hours straight unable to sleep, had a look at this thread last night guess what? just woke up,easily the best cure for insomnia on the internet this,keep it up lads.

[welshone]

Been up for 24 hours straight unable to sleep, had a look at this thread last night guess what? just woke up,easily the best cure for insomnia on the internet this,keep it up lads.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

[Drew]

Steves going on holiday and has asked me to run the car for a month to make sure it has no gremlins.

George

its a good idea to run it for a month to iron out any problems, but surely that means you have to go get it!
then post the graph up :)

Drew

[grimmy]

:book:

[MG6Turbo]

Plots are here at last !!!!

http://i1093.photobucket.com/albums/i430/gmackurdie/throttle%20body%20zs/zsdynoplots.png

Let the debating begin.

Please remember these are hub figures and not flywheel !!!

G

[ZS]

Rover 45... :sly::sly:

Looks good to me :) and should put a few of the doubters to rest :p

[MG6Turbo]

One would hope so lol

[Drew]

almost 2 different cars on one graph!
i think you may notice the dip at 2.5 but nice power after 4k.

Drew

[Jay-ZS+]

Scale for the torque, graph is deceptive, makes the variance look alot greater than it actually is.

Slightly off topic, wasnt the WSR BTCC engine a 2L. Just wonder how the performance gains of the plenum are effected by the chance in capacity. Would be interesting to design a plenum optimised for the 2.5l and see how the two compare. Only say as its something I've been learning the science behind this year.

[Fred68]

Scale for the torque, graph is deceptive, makes the variance look alot greater than it actually is.

Slightly off topic, wasnt the WSR BTCC engine a 2L. Just wonder how the performance gains of the plenum are effected by the chance in capacity. Would be interesting to design a plenum optimised for the 2.5l and see how the two compare. Only say as its something I've been learning the science behind this year.

It seems to produce power for which i'm suprised tbh. I'm not a fan of the design and feel the trumpets are to long for proper air flow to the front cylinders. Looks like it does make power though.
If I was going to design a vis free plenum I'd go for a more tubular design with the throttle body at one end more like the Alfa V6!!
Well done on the result ;)

[Quadcam24]

almost 2 different cars on one graph!
i think you may notice the dip at 2.5 but nice power after 4k.

Drew

agreed, the graph suggests you could drive ultra sensible and effortless but then if your in the mood just venture up the revs, its a bit jekyll and hyde.
What happens at 4k, its like vvc or vtec, what is the difference between sub 4k and after 4k that suddenly makes it go ?

[Drew]

http://www.dyno-plot.co.uk/dyno/dynoplot/id%3D986%26but_sea%3Dqs/Rover-200-lol.htm

cam and inlet length make the change.

Drew

[Fred68]

The standard Vis plenum is a clever idea but it's performance is hampered by the reliability of the motors and butterfly linkages. The idea Is to alter induction length to give a torque increase at key points in the rev range at a variety of throttle openings. After considerable research I believe the main idea behind the Vis system was to improve fuel efficiency and low to mid rpm torque at the expense of ultimate power. The cam timings don't help power ether as the inlet cam has only 238° of duration which would explain why a cam change, to even a mild 270° pushes power up considerably. Of course if you fit a set of cams in conjunction with the standard Vis plenum you won't generally see such good gains as with an open plenum simply because the Vis plenum is'nt designed to flow the volume of air required for 240 bhp (around 500 cubic feet per minute)!!
I'm pretty sure there is more power to come with the KV6 it's just working out what does and doesn't produce it? The open plenum does seem to work pretty well looking at the power graph of this one.

[stamford]

Don't you people ever sleep.............I'm at work and not thinking that technical yet! :laugh: :book:

[Eddie]

In my mind I see a V6 with many restrictions bolted to it, (stock KV6)
The static CR of the KV6 is fairly good out of the box 10.25 (5).1
The Static CR would make good use of the 270 cam profile with stock valves and standard cam pulley's.
The restriction is in the inlet and exhaust manifold arrangements, NASP tuning really is a black art and more attention to the engines flow should be considered when trying to produce additional power.
Many variables, all which have been discussed hundreds of times before shouldn't be forgotten, it's basic stuff that you can apply to almost any engine BUT it's the way you put these variable combinations together what counts.
As for why this particular set-up is making power the way it is could be the mapping, you can only map around what you have built and in my mind this configuration is an unknown untested quantity, the engine build will dictate what fuel and ignition it wants and where it works bests, Thor have maximized the combination of parts provided.
It's not taken the same shape as the stock KV6 power curves but why would it as much has changed and it makes power differently, not ideal if you like the delivery of the stock-ish engine but this was always going to be the case.
At this stage, I see the engine crying out for bigger cams, possibly some head work, and custom exhaust manifold set-up with the inclusion of a bump in compression.

[Jay-ZS+]

The restriction is in the inlet and exhaust manifold arrangements, NASP tuning really is a black art and more attention to the engines flow should be considered when trying to produce additional power.

Its not a black art at all its just involves lots of complex science. Turbo tuning is easy as you can just ram as much air in a possible and get over any flow losses.

I think the VIS system is a good concept, but its nothing new cars have had variable induction tracts for years, Porsche had a system back in the 50's cant remember the model of car off the top of my head.

The trouble is MG didnt make a great job of it. There are much more effective systems that can be seen in other marquees on top of this match it with a variable valve system gives decent torque, power and efficiency from engines smaller than 2L.

This makes me wish I'd gone for looking at redesigning the plenum for my dissertation. However the future of SI engines is a cam-less one :cool1:

[grimmy]

:book:

[Smokey]

Wow, too much info that's beyond me!

:book:

[Quadcam24]

blumming hell the silence is deafening....where's the pics & vids, what t.b did you use, is it piped down to a cone in the inner wing ?, weve not even heard if anyones driven it !?!?!?!?
considering everything, its all very low key, wheres the drop jaw pod time, and the drooling mg fans pics of it a meet ? !

[grimmy]

:book:

[welshone]

Was thinking the same about the MG6 :whistle:

[Ritchy]

think BMW have gone camless with the bigger engines now,

[Drew]

steve should have it in a few weeks, hopefully it will be run in and all problems sorted!

Drew

[Drew]

car should be back with me in a month as ive got a holiday and i wont G to have it for runs out etc etc

well that was 6 weeks ago, do you have it back?

Drew

[MG6Turbo]

No he doesnt have it back yet. Hes only just got back from Holiday.

There are a couple of small bits to do then he will have it back.

G

[Drew]

another 3 weeks. back on the road?

Drew

[dida4g]

some pics off xpf..

http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/1221/wsr3.jpg

http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/4347/wsr1.jpg

single throttle body into a plenum.

Drew
Just read through this,
I think I would have had shorter pipes tbh, seems little restictive to me.

[tb steve]

another 3 weeks. back on the road?

Drew

well he should of picked it up on friday but had to wait till the boss got back as there was a problem with something but all sorted now

[tb steve]

Just read through this,
I think I would have had shorter pipes tbh, seems little restictive to me.

well as it come back with 234bhp dont think its too restictive plus dont forget this is the first time it's been done mate on a road car

[petet16]

So 50bhp for an airbox with trumpets and an aftermarket throttle body, or are there other mods.

[tb steve]

So 50bhp for an airbox with trumpets and an aftermarket throttle body, or are there other mods.

yes cams,mani,sports cat,zorst,lightweight flywheel it was 203/204 before so about 30 bhp for the thottle body mod

[petet16]

ok:cool1:

[Drew]

well he should of picked it up on friday but had to wait till the boss got back as there was a problem with something but all sorted now

so reading that again, is george not actually working on it then?

Drew

[tb steve]

so reading that again, is george not actually working on it then?

Drew

na from thor i ment opps

car being mot'ed this or next weekend :)

[Drew]

excellent, cant wait to see it on the road. you going to try brands at some point? could get a trackday meet going?

Drew

[Fred68]

yes cams,mani,sports cat,zorst,lightweight flywheel it was 203/204 before so about 30 bhp for the thottle body mod

30 bhp would seem pretty good for a single mod!! Is it still running the std Ecu and injectors?

[tb steve]

30 bhp would seem pretty good for a single mod!! Is it still running the std Ecu and injectors?

no after market ecu and bigger injectors

[tb steve]

excellent, cant wait to see it on the road. you going to try brands at some point? could get a trackday meet going?

Drew

need to get some over time in first tax insurance first
but in the future yer

[sneekyparrot]

need to get some over time in first tax insurance first
but in the future yer

Sound, that would be cool for a group meet up and blast round a decent track, be good to meet up night before for a barbi / beer / talk car bollo!cks

Paul.

[Quadcam24]

be interested to see it run on a dyno dynamics rolling road to get a true before and after comparison, apparently hub packs give slightly higher numbers than a normal rolling road.
Best measure is top speed at santa pod, no hiding there!

[Supercharged_Z]

be interested to see it run on a dyno dynamics rolling road to get a true before and after comparison, apparently hub packs give slightly higher numbers than a normal rolling road.
Best measure is top speed at santa pod, no hiding there!

even the audi zs only went through at 109mph

[Eddie]

I run mid to high 12 second quarters at 110mph with 300bhp @fly and 250 ft/lbs.
What did you run with the 109mph terminal?
I was itching to see the VAG ZS run at POD, I know the geo was set-up for track but it would have still run a quick time.

Oh, and hope you enjoy the car Steve.

[Supercharged_Z]

13.8 @109 with a tailwind.

60ft was 2.3 power was tricky to get down but its not as fast as you think

before you ask i know how to drive at pod also, i maxed it out

[Dave MGT]

13.8 @109 with a tailwind.

60ft was 2.3 power was tricky to get down but its not as fast as you think

before you ask i know how to drive at pod also, i maxed it out

What did you run my blue 180 at pod Ross...? About the same time wasn't it...?

[Quadcam24]

109 is not quite what i would have expected , having out dragged supercars on track that would deffinitely pull more than 109 mph, then it doesnt really make sense.
However the condition of engine and car when you ran it was different to when i had it, i pamperd it like a baby , since then i have heard its been rather abused.
However i wouldn't call an M3 slow ?....and georges M3 pulled 101 mph at pod so 109 would be quite a crushing defeat for what is rated as one of the best sporting road cars ever made!
I actually think your 60ft time at pod was good for the car ross, if it was set up anything like i had it, then launching was impossible, everything about the car was compromising its ability to get away quickly, and when you are trying to pull a time at pod the launch is everything.
Ive known kev make a 1.9 60ft on normal road tyres, and with that top speed it is deffinitely a car with a high enough power to weight to pull a high 12 second run.........however i doubt anyone could ever do it without changing lots and lots of things on the car.
Its like ive always said then, an extra 10 bhp equates to about 1mph extra on your terminal speed, in which case steves car should pull a top speed over 100 mph and i dont see it tbh. Mine and daves both pulled 99 mph top speed with 210 bhp, so with another 25 bhp steves should go over 100 mph.......and i hope it does !.

[Drew]

that all going to be in the launch though, its not got anything below 4k so getting off the line well will be everything.

Drew

[Eddie]

13.8 @109 with a tailwind.

60ft was 2.3 power was tricky to get down but its not as fast as you think

before you ask i know how to drive at pod also, i maxed it out

Hi Ross

I know you can drive a car on the strip :D
We've raced a few times and I've watched you run many times, the terminal was about right for a car with 300-ish bhp.
The 60 ft is pretty poor compared to what I've seen you nail in a ZS but as Dave said the car was set-up for corners in mind.
Would like to spend a day with this car at POD and try some of my tyres and play with the set-up and see what it could do.

Anyway, not to nick the thread but last question have you run the S2K down the srip yet?

[harland292]

Awesome project..

George Also did the Conversion on my zr :D...

Very tidy conversion.. Dont see why people have such a problem with his work. :/ But anyway..

Seen your Tb setup in the flesh and it does look a peice of art :)

Nice one on your figures mate..

Can i ask why is He banned?

[sneekyparrot]

Awesome project..

George Also did the Conversion on my zr :D...

Very tidy conversion.. Dont see why people have such a problem with his work. :/ But anyway..

Seen your Tb setup in the flesh and it does look a peice of art :)

Nice one on your figures mate..

Can i ask why is He banned?

I don't think George's ability / engineering was the problem his business ethics
We're a different matter completely!

[harland292]

I don't think George's ability / engineering was the problem his business ethics
We're a different matter completely!

Ah right... Wont ask questions i dont want to no the answer too...

[Fred68]

no after market ecu and bigger injectors

So the throttle bode gives less than 30 bhp if you factor in the new ecu and larger injectors!! Would that be about 10 - 15 bhp for the throttle body then? Still a worthwhile mod imo!!

[tb steve]

just got back from a week in devon with some bad news well not that bad really

failure on the mot

windscreen wipers (£10)
clutch hydraulics went (i was waiting for that to go lasted 9 years :) )
rear brakes not braking hard enough (needs cleaning up just calipers i hope second time in 9 years)
rear bush on the trailing arm (not to sure could be easy or a pig to do lol never done)
and the one i cant understand is it failed on the emissions ??? even tho its just been mapped it runs fine on the motorway but traffic cuts out and runs ruff ??
so a little more mapping to do there we think

all in all not bad for a car thats been off the road for 3.5 years :)

[Lukeus101]

Thats good going though mate :)

[Quadcam24]

i would have been half expecting expecting it to fail emissions now tbh with being standalone ecu , seems tuners forget to mention that extracting peak power wont neccesarily run hand in hand with passing emissions, its just a little detail they leave out when they're selling you the dream ,lol. Trouble is tuners go for power and sod the emissions because they think numbers make them look good and they dont have to worry about mot time, that becomes your problem.....
After all this time the Mot ought to have been done for you really....good will and all that !

[tb steve]

G is sorting the mot for me he has already put some tyres on it change the cam belt and thermo stat
he is sorting out the brakes and bush etc etc
now i would of thought that any mapper would go within mot emissions but then again i dont think i/we said it was for road use not track ??

sorry dave that did sound like i have the car back but just this little bit to go

[Eddie]

As Dave said, tuners are always going to tune a road car for maximum power then back out a couple of degrees of timing for reliability. It’s nothing G can’t teach you in a few minutes how to change the map just before you do the emission test again, fuel it for the purpose it needs then switch it back again.
Small issue compared to changing out the rear trailing arm bushes, be happy you’re not having to do this as it can be an horrendous job.

[tb steve]

spoke to G the other day and he did ask for it to be mapped for the MOT so dont know if its spring an air leak or something
G did think it could just a box thats not been ticked in the ecu menu but he did say its was over fulling low down he could smell it was so dont now whats happend there then

[Quadcam24]

hopefully you will get to drive your car in full working order before the 4 year marker goes past....

heres to steve for not going totally insane !.....though i suppose he had no choice.

[Drew]

it wont be just a box that needs ticking. for the mot you will need a good working lambda that is plugged in the loom and working on the ecu.
also some good time and effort in setting up the lambda as its not a plug and play thing to do.

your best off with a wideband as they have more control.

plus you will need the cat on it if it isnt already there as you wont pass an mot without it. definatly leave that till last though as you dont want to kill it by overfuelling from the engine.

Drew

[tb steve]

just got a sports cat on there drew not to sure about the lambda ??

[tb steve]

hopefully you will get to drive your car in full working order before the 4 year marker goes past....

heres to steve for not going totally insane !.....though i suppose he had no choice.

lets hope so and there's always a choice lol

[Drew]

not tried a sports cat, i should do i suppose, ive got the janspeed manifolds on it too so wanted to make sure and fit the std cat back on.

ive got 2 innovate LC1 widebands's fitted to mine, if i were buying again i think id go for an AEM inline instead. just as easy to fit but ive heard better reviews.

if you dont have the lambda working your going to have to run lean and high tickover to get anywhere near an mot. but that will also make the engine quite hot.

Drew

[Maxxed_Ross]

I wasn't at all impressed with the Janspeed manifolds. The first set they sent me were covered in weld spatter and the insides of the pipes were raggy as hell.

Janspeed claimed they had missed the quality control and were sending me another set. I marked mine before sending them back and would you know it 4 days later my "new" manifolds turned up with a mark in exactly the same place!

All they did was grind the first few joints that you could see to make them look a bit tidier

[Drew]

yeah i fitted my manifolds only to find the link pipe didnt fit properly!

i was told it was because they had a few polish there who didnt use the jig!

Drew

[tb steve]

have to admit mine was not the best ,top of the manis was slightly warped

got mine years ago some one bought about ten of them in an auction

[Quadcam24]

just got back from a week in devon with some bad news well not that bad really

failure on the mot

windscreen wipers (£10)
clutch hydraulics went (i was waiting for that to go lasted 9 years :) )
rear brakes not braking hard enough (needs cleaning up just calipers i hope second time in 9 years)
rear bush on the trailing arm (not to sure could be easy or a pig to do lol never done)
and the one i cant understand is it failed on the emissions ??? even tho its just been mapped it runs fine on the motorway but traffic cuts out and runs ruff ??
so a little more mapping to do there we think

all in all not bad for a car thats been off the road for 3.5 years :)



another month gone by !... are you any closer to a happy conclusion ?

[tb steve]

yes dave a bit closer

all the MOT bits have been done
and steve from track and road is popping up to look at the bottom end(revs) on friday for some live mapping and may be some more RR but have to wait and see if it needs it or not

[Quadcam24]

good news :clap2:

[Drew]

mine did alright with me playing with it! steve should be able to sort yours no problem.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b5/Roverdose/mot.jpg

Drew

[Drew]

any better?

Drew

[sneekyparrot]

mine did alright with me playing with it! steve should be able to sort yours no problem.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b5/Roverdose/mot.jpg

Drew

impressive m8 for a base setup but you gotta be running lean to get those fast idle co's

P.