K Series replacement

[Markwoodbridge]

Stephen, thanks for heads up on the Blatchat K series engine. As I'm not a member of the L7 club I have not way of contacting these folk. Luckily I don't need one but it would certainly have been fun. I think the 165 was the latest VVC engine in the MGTF. Mine is the 135 so non-VVC but with slightly higher lift cams, I think..

Quick progress update
Photos of sawn-off original engine mounts. The ali cage thing on the RHS of the engine is to house the Titan dry sump pump which I've sent off to be serviced as all I know about it was that it came from an ex-race Caterham, or at least that's what the chap I bought it from said
[attachment=0]DSCF4035.jpg[/attachment]


LHS engine mount with engine using Caterham K Series brackets and standard Caterham K series exhaust manifold which isn't a million miles away from where it needs to be. I reckon if I get the hacksaw on the Westfield A series manifold then I may be able to make a thing of functional beauty.
[attachment=2]DSCF4037.jpg[/attachment]

Engine is in place but nothing is fixed
[attachment=1]DSCF4033.jpg[/attachment]

[erictharg]

Watching with interest. And I think I'll buy my 1.5 ratio rockers new from MED rather than used as my current 1.3's are. My A Series has been reliable to date (touch wood), but you never know. I might even feel the need to be competitive in class, in which case the K Series would be up there as an option...

[sgrant]

Caterham got up to over 250bhp (NA) from the k-series 1.9 Scholer block with all the R500 gubbins strapped on.

Just sayin'.......

[erictharg]

Still watching with interest. Any updates Mark?

[sgrant]

Hi Mark,

Just to say....that metal "triangle" bolted to the front of the timing case can come off; it's a couple of kg's and you can just cover the hole with some wire mesh or similar....
Funny how many Caterham owners will spend a fortune on carbon bodywork that saves 0.5kg, and there's a 2kg lump of metal sitting right there that they can remove for free.....
s

[Markwoodbridge]

Here with brief update following recent motivation to attend Le Man Classic this year with some friends..

I've realised I'm going to have to bolt all the ancillaries on to work out the exact best position for the engine so next job is .. get all the ancillaries bolted on including;
water circuit
alternator
fueling circuit
remote oil filter
Throttle bodies

I've got my reconditioned dry sump pump back from titian motorsport plus a massive dry sump oil tank (it's huge and will have to live behind the driver's side front splash guard).

Emarald seems to have extended the parts they now supply so am going to them for fueling circuit parts (HP pump, filter, swirl pot) as well as the ECU.

Re power output, I'll be happy with a strong 160 hp. As many of you I'm know the emerald ecu has a function to switch the ecu map to one of three settings so I'm going to have something like, standard 1275 A series, tuned A series and full bore K series. Basically like a slow, medium fast spin speed on a new washing machine which is probably what it will feel like.

[Westfield 129]

Why not mount the tank in the rear, passenger side?

Or, acquire a smaller tank that might fit on the passenger's sidem forward, perhaps beneath the scuttle, above the exhaust system (lots of very effective insulating materials available to keep the heat out of the oil).

Sure, there will be a few feet more plumbing, but the weight distribution will be far better. As it is now, you are sitting next to the fuel tank, which is about 35 lb. filled, and your dry sump tank, which is another 15 lb., plus your own weight...

The car is small, very light, and changes in static weight distribution can make dramatic changes (hopefully for the better) in the handling.

The RHD cars are already at a disadvantage with the fuel tank (and the battery, on some cars) all on the driver's side. Why compound this problem?

Also, setting up one really good ECU program is hard enough. Programming three, two with lower HP? Sort of sounds like a make work project. Your left foot is the best power modulator.

If you have a good LSD and proper axles, there should be no problem with 160 HP. Just don't run too stiff a spring in the rear or too stiff compression damping.

Also, there is plenty of room in the rear to vary the rear track by an inch, maybe two, depending on your wheel measurements. Just another tuning trick that you can use.

[Markwoodbridge]

I thank you for your comments on my weight distribution..

I've realised that the car will be pretty right hand side heavy with varying deposits of fluid and fat. I can hopefully jack up the RHS springs a little to compensate. The recommendation as to location of the dry sump oil reservoir is to get it as close as possible to the pump so locating it elsewhere seems to be contrary to that.

Good point on the ECU maps. A lesser power option will only be necessary for my mate Rich, great enthusiasm, but unable to control his right foot. Deffinitely something to do once all is up and running.

[Westfield 129]

Actually, one of the main reasons for running a dry sump is so that the oil can be put someplace where its weight can do some good. I have had many race cars with the engine in the front, and the oil tank a few feet away, behind the driver. There is really no reason to put the oil so close to the pump.

Even the dry sump in my Renault R5Turbo (Mid engine, Aviaid scavage pump) is about four feet of hose away from the main oil pump (on the side opposite the driver, farther away from the oil pump, for balance). What is important is that the oil tank is above the pump, so that there is continuous flow. With the short Westfield chassis, you can put the tank in the rear, and have a down hill feed to the engine. There is no reason that you need to mount the tank right next to the engine, and exacerbate an existing problem.

Note that the very successful Ford GT40 (the original version from the 60s) has its oil tank mounted forward, beneath the windshield, many feet away from the engine oil pump. Trans-Am, NASCAR and other production based racers have their oil tanks mounted behind the driver. You can do the same. With the XI's chassis design, it is easy to run the lines forward through the side panels and into the engine compartment. Just mount the oil tank so that the oil runs down hill to the engine. The pumps will take care of the rest.

While you can set the ride height with the springs, you wont be able to get the "wedge" out. There will always be more weight on one set of wheels, and different handling between the left and right hand corners. You want to get to 50% of the weight between the diagonal wheels (LF/RR), if you can't get equal weights left to right wheels. Moving static weight is the only way you can get the weight where you need to have it when the driver is 20% of the vehicle's total weight, sitting on one side of the chassis. The battery, and the oil tank will be important to have on the opposite side, in the rear. Note that on a long lever, these components can reduce the weight on that right front tire.

The other possibility is to use a smaller tank, mounted on the opposite side of the chassis.

Nothing beats the proper positioning of static weight on a light race car when trying to improve handling. Packaging is everything in sports racing cars.

[adamwilkinson]

Mark, fit the sump as to the recommended guide lines - I'm sure titan can supple these. If you can get it on the passenger side that would aid weight distribution as already mentioned, a certain amount of the weight distribution can be dialed out using the spring platforms to get reasonable corner weights. Theres not enough weight over the rear end to get a 50:50 split front to rear, i personally would say go for the 50:50 split side to side - maybe thats what Jan was implying but thats not how it read.
In theory, the drivers side should sit slightly higher when you're not in the car.