How's that mission of yours going?

Gentlemen, please can we avoid descending into the kind of nonsense I can have all day long from my 15-year-old stepson?

I'm sure the OP was simply being enthusiastic about his car and I'm equally sure the later comments were simply friendly advice to avoid any possible umwelcome follow-up.

Shall we carry on?

Yes, please keep the thread on topic.

Sorry, I've got enough friends for the time being... you'll have to join the back of the queue.

Come on dude get the graph up, all this tittle tattle is boring the shite out of me!!

Nick

Well said nick ;(

Graph's and photo's shown, after the advice of a 15 year old engine builder that crack has started it's way up the bore from well under the 270 miles its done..

After all, the builder failed his first engine build due to bore Torrance. That says it all in my eyes

Sorry, when did you join....

Here you go, pictures of the whole lot, piston ruined, block fooked. Money down the pan at the moment, letter on the way from my Solicitor who's never failed to get money back from my customers.

Engine builder failed his first engine and looks like his second ones gone pop too. Everyone can wear a Polo Shirt with their companies name on it, if they're any good at building a lump is another thing...

Well done read it then, Big horse power at big boost? Stock internals i'm guessing Whats your torque figure 320 ft/lbs tops?

Power runs i'll upload tomorrow.

Thanks

My apologies for upsetting you being such a saint yourself.

Well why reply? Awesome comment, I'll give you an amazing 1 out of 10.

Yet another useless post, please just don't and waste your time

Proving negligence isn't easy, so good luck with that.

Piston to bore tolerances wouldn't typically cause cracks along the cylinder.

With so many other factors to consider blaming failure on the build is difficult, especially when others have tuned it, fettled, fitted, and of course 'ragged it'.

No accusations as to why, just highlighting an easy defence for the person who put the engine together.

Btw, there aren't many engine builders of there, mostly fitters. I've seldom seen many that work with measuring equipment, let alone fully appreciate the need to observe tolerances and absolute cleanliness.



better than a workbench full of bits...


Other thing about pub talk figures, a car with lower max torque can be a faster car depending on delivery. Bigger isn't always better. Infact high power with delivery higher up the Rev range can often result in a slower 'fast road' car

Try comparing average torque across the Rev range.

It's all about tractability. Power under the curve.

Mate I wasn't attacking you, I just wanted to see the complete graph for comparison reasons!
Stock internals..... WRONG!
My engine was just as expensive as yours, if not More so........
AND IT STILL WORKS!

To be honest I personally think the Dyno Leighton uses is very iffy when it comes to TORQUE figures, flea said this to me himself!
I just can't see how you've got 400 ft lb at just 1.2bar ....
Most Nigel got was 389 ft lb and that was at 1.7 bar with VERY similar set up!
And Nigel's engine is pretty special, think it was 395 bhp @ just 1 bar..??

I've had my car on another Dyno since fleas and it showed 400+ ftlb at 4000 revs,
And the graph is actually a far better representation of how car drives on the road.... Full boost at 3800, where as on graph from fleas it shows full boost at over 1000rpm later????

Don't think I'll be replying in any of your threads again!!


This is in NO WAY a dig at flea or Fc performance, the work they do is fantastic

I think this thread shows how passionate we are about our cars At the end of the day that saying comes into play "How to start an argument?" - "Post an opinion online"

So who built the engine?

Are you going to retaliate to every single post on this thread that doesn't praise you?

If you retaliate so readily, you have to expect a response (although several of the responses on this thread have been less than helpful)















Getting back on topic, your collection of engine parts would suggest there was something wrong with the engine before it was built, something very wrong with the way it was built, or perhaps something wrong with the way it was driven. You say its done 270 miles since the build, but you appear to have been driving it pretty hard - never thought of running it in?

I do apologise for posting a positive comment in the sea of negativity that is this forum these days......

I'm keeping on eye on this.

Puntoturbo, you have been banned already and let back onto the forum, so if I was you, I would tend to watch what you say, else the ban will be made permanent.

Guys, we all have things to say, its the nature of forums and common interests... my initial points were intended as a warning as I've seen people post stuff only to be investigated after they'd upset someone online.

Given the attitude in response, as Nigel highlights, I couldnt give a stuff about the engine, the car or the person. Nor will I suggest any areas that could help.

In fact, the news that the engine has failed makes me think...

<sarcastic mode on> "couldn't have happened to a nicer guy" <sarcastic mode off>

Also, as Nigel points out, 270 miles for failure and having ragged it, and running "nice and rich" already points to areas for failure (other than the builder).

I'm outta here...

Wheres the massive facepalm smiley when you need it?

Will this suffice?

Ok, just a few words to bring this back in line. The engine was not rebuilt recently, but is a used forged engine that was purchased recently. It has now failed due to a significant stress crack on number 5 bore.

As for the results, well there were multiple boost issues on the day, which ultimately limited max pressure to just 1.3bar dropping off to 0.8bar. So no full on mapping session for power, and just two dyno runs in order to log the boost pressure. The plan was for Paul to go away and fix the boost issues. He also has a wideband in the car, so to put numbers to the "nice and rich" scenario, well this was between 12-11.6 AFR when on boost, as displayed in said videos.

And Nick, I know you didn't mean any harm, but for clarification I did not say my dyno was iffy on torque figures!! I said it reads lower on torque compared to many other dynos, and that is the same for both loaded and inertia modes! You should see the cars we have had on it in the last few weeks, the results are staggeringly close to the manufacturers own engine dyno! Had the guys from MBE tuning a Morgan and it was within 1bhp of the BMW figures on the factory ECU

Who assembled the parts...??

Did it come as a flat pack?

Engine was bought off "TurboJ"...
Pretty sure I remember TurboJ was involved in the building of another forged big power coupe, think it was white and owned by another "Nick"...

If this is the case then I presume he built his own engine??
Don't know that for sure though!!

Nick

Yes, the Dastek is known for 'under reading', especially if you look at the fact that every single Coupe showed far lower figures on a Dyno Dynamics, which incidentally IS classified as the industry standard.

Biggenz.... I sometimes find it hard to work out wether your being serious or sarcastic???
I'll take your last comment as sarcasm.... I think?
To be fair, my WHP was pretty similar between dastek and local dynojet...
And begbies would have been very similar is the Surrey rr could have load all of his boost!!

Nick