bi22le
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 12:16 PM |
|
|
Not just another BEC Vs CEC post
I was reminising again the other day about my old GSXR BEC and how much fun it was to drive with the raw noise and sequencial gearbox.
It got me thinking about the comparisons between that and my 4age CEC.
Many comparisons have been covered before but as I have driven both almost back to back I really cant decide what is fastest. This is not a comfort
consideration, just lap times.
It basically comes down to torque Vs reduced weight. My current striker is 60Kg heavier but has twice (approx 80lbs\ft) the torque to compensate. In
a straight drag I think the BEC was quicker to 60 after that my CEC is faster.
I am all about track days, which I think is a good playing field allowing for all of a cars attributes to shine. When I do track days and find a BEC
on track, with one person each in a car, I am as fast a a BEC. Now this can be hard to judge because of tyre condition, driver skill, car set up to
name a few variables. If I see a BEC in the pits I dont assume he is faster so it must be level pegging.
So,
where is the cross over point of power, weight, torque. I want this discussion to not involve money as money can be spent on chassis developments of
both.
Obviously a turbo BEC changes the game slightly as it would beat a 220bhp CEC as it overcomes the torque and keeps the weight down, so is THAT the
factor. Turbo BEC is the best combo or can it be beaten when a turbo is slapped on an average 180bhp CEC giving 250bhp?!?
THoughts and experiences please.
Track days ARE the best thing since sliced bread, until I get a supercharger that is!
Please read my ring story:
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/forum/13/viewthread.php?tid=139152&page=1
Me doing a sub 56sec lap around Brands Indy. I need a geo set up! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHksfvIGB3I
|
|
|
|
|
theduck
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 01:06 PM |
|
|
Personally I think if you have a lightweight car and will be happy with the power a BEC produces in standard form, and like the high revs etc etc,
then a BEC is the way to go.
However, if you have a heavier car and/or you want to be able to go beyond the power to weight available with a standard bike engine, then a car
engine of the correct type (power capability etc) should be used.
It all comes down to using the best tool for the job.
|
|
|
Doctor Derek Doctors
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 01:47 PM |
|
|
Reduced weight improves acceleration, braking and cornering speed. Extra power can only improve acceleration.
You can make a bike engine more powerful but its hard to remove weight from a car engine and gearbox.
Designer and Supplier of the T89 Designs - Single Seater Locost. Build you own Single Seater Racecar for ~£5k.
Plans and Drawings available, U2U or e-mail for details.
Available Now: The Sports Racer Add-On pack, Build a full bodied Sports Racer for Trackdays, Sprints and Racing.
www.t89.co.uk
www.racecarwings.co.uk
callan@t89.co.uk
|
NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
|
Wadders
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 03:14 PM |
|
|
I think another factor is are we talking about trackday lap times or just lap times ?
Trackdays can be really frustrating in a BEC as you get passed on the straights by fairly mundane CECS and then held up in the
corners which scrubs off all your speed.
If you had only BECS on track or an empty track, lap times would drop.
Think if i built another track car it would have to be a 300kg BEC or just go with a CEC.
|
|
|
ctwv50
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 04:48 PM |
|
|
When you put a car engine in a lightweight car you get a gearbox that's design for a car maybe twice the weight. When you put a bike engine into
a lightweight car you get a gearbox that's design for a much lighter bike, so 60kg may not matter that much. I like low end torque but you can
get more work done with torque at high revolutions. I think a high reving NA car engine would perform the best.
These are just my thoughts, I've messed around with gearboxes and engines in the past but have no experience of bike engines or high reving car
engines.
[Edited on 24/4/15 by ctwv50]
|
|
|
ceebmoj
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 05:29 PM |
|
|
Having also spent a lot of time driving two very similar cars back to back, for me it comes down to the sequential gearbox. The gear box in my BEC was
great and the reduced shift time made it feel a lot faster, than a CEC. Having said that I'm currently building a CEC and some day would like to
put a sequential gear box in it, im hoping to end up with a car that weighs about 520 kg wet.
[Edited on 24/4/15 by ceebmoj]
|
|
|
mark chandler
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 06:02 PM |
|
|
With modern lightweight car engines i think the gap closes right down, the weight penalty has moved away.
Although I like the sequential box in my BEC I prefer a proper manual with reverse.....
I will seriously consider a 1.6 ford sigma with turbo on the side when my blade bites the dust.
|
|
|
Volvorsport
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 06:09 PM |
|
|
A series 2 Millington and tractive sequential box would be probably fast as NA car as could make
30k tho...
www.dbsmotorsport.co.uk
getting dirty under a bus
|
|
|
daniel mason
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 06:37 PM |
|
|
In the westfield speed series the times are very close on the larger circuits. John hoyle, David cleaver and Adrian cliton Watkins are very quick in
there cec's
But terry everall and tim nunn set incredible times in there 1000cc rr blade cars. On the tighter sprints and hills the bike motors perform better.
On the longer circuit sprints the cec's probably just have the edge.but it's close. The cec's are also probably around 100bhp more
than the 1000cc motors though.
|
|
|
jeffw
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 07:52 PM |
|
|
Ecoboost has to be the way forward
|
|
|
daniel mason
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 07:59 PM |
|
|
Seems like a logical step! And I think a few will start to fit them once the development has been done properly and prices start to fall! Unless you
can afford one of the AER units like the one in wills force! Let's see how it performs at Prescott this weekend!
|
|
|
bi22le
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 08:22 PM |
|
|
Mountune do a 212bhp upgrade now.
What box would you use for the ecoboost?
Track days ARE the best thing since sliced bread, until I get a supercharger that is!
Please read my ring story:
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/forum/13/viewthread.php?tid=139152&page=1
Me doing a sub 56sec lap around Brands Indy. I need a geo set up! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHksfvIGB3I
|
|
|
Dopdog
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 08:31 PM |
|
|
I also have driven both types of car and sprinted them both so I have times to compare.
I had a supercharged 4age in a striker with 260bhp. It was great pulled like a train. I now have a busa fury and this baby is a different word to the
cec on a short circuit. It is so much quicker and handles so much better but the proof will be in the morning we are off to goodwood and this will be
the first time in the fury. I will let you know if I am any quicker on a big circuit.
Will have to clean my mirror so that I can see Jeff 
|
|
|
mark chandler
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 09:31 PM |
|
|
Gearing also holds BEC's back, I can max out with a 3.14 diff on my turbo blade, ~ 135mph hitting the rev limiter.
|
|
|
daniel mason
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 09:38 PM |
|
|
I think the freelander ratios suit the bike motors well! May lack a little top end over the 3.14 but everywhere else it's an improvement I
think
[Edited on 24/4/15 by daniel mason]
|
|
|
mark chandler
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 09:58 PM |
|
|
BECs like short tracks however I hit the limiter at Brands, Donnington, Cadwell, Woodbridge, Mallory and Lyden Hill... Blyton is the only one where I
brake before maxing out.
With CEC's you can easily overgear which suits me as I have mechanical sympathy so I start backing off when doing track days unless chasing
someone down.
|
|
|
daniel mason
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 10:32 PM |
|
|
I'll be on the limiter at blyton in 2 or 3 areas in the force I'd imagine
|
|
|
Sam_68
|
| posted on 24/4/15 at 11:06 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doctor Derek Doctors
Reduced weight improves acceleration, braking and cornering speed. Extra power can only improve acceleration.
That's not quite true.
Extra power improves top speed too; which in turn means that it massively and disproportionately improves top-end acceleration (which is
basically dependent on the amount of power you have left over after subtracting the exponentially rising amount that is absorbed by aerodynamic
drag).
Directly relevant to the OP's question (and as Mark has already said using other words): there will therefore be a crossover point on average
lap speed where the extra cornering and braking capability is outweighed by the extra top-end acceleration. On slow, tight circuits, the
balance will be tipped in favour of the lighter car; on fast, open circuits, it will be in favour of the more powerful car.
Where that crossover point occurs is the how-long-is-a-piece-of-string question,as it will depend on a whole host of other factors, so there's
never going to be a fixed answer.
|
|
|
Wadders
|
| posted on 25/4/15 at 08:47 AM |
|
|
Agree on the track being a factor, but for trackdays the only place I've ever felt BECS had the edge was Teeside, which is essentially a carting
venue.
All the other tracks I've been to have long enough straights for CEC's to become a pain in the arse.
It would be a totally different story if you were allowed to pass them in the corners though. 
|
|
|
Dopdog
|
| posted on 25/4/15 at 06:51 PM |
|
|
So report as promised,
been to Goodwood today and my BEC fury is 1 second quicker over a lap compared to my supercharged striker.
Not sure what it tells us but the BEC fury is soooo much better I love it 
|
|
|
sdh2903
|
| posted on 25/4/15 at 07:14 PM |
|
|
Interesting discussion.
Ive built a BEC and next i plan to do a CEC, I had been set on a duratec but ive just had a new tintop delivered with the 1.6 L ecoboost 180bhp engine
and i think it would be an epic engine in a 7 dependant on a suitable gearbox. Simple remap gives 215bhp and further work you can be up at 250BHP in a
nice lightweight package. I'm led to believe its a sigma bolt pattern for a bellhousing.
|
|
|
mark chandler
|
| posted on 25/4/15 at 07:48 PM |
|
|
Nice light RWD gearbox seems to be the issue, type 9's are very long in the tooth.
When I replaced the gearbox in my blade engined car I could not believe how small the gears are compared to a car box.
|
|
|
Volvorsport
|
| posted on 25/4/15 at 10:39 PM |
|
|
sellholm MPG is 18kgs dry .......
www.dbsmotorsport.co.uk
getting dirty under a bus
|
|
|
beaver34
|
| posted on 26/4/15 at 07:40 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by sdh2903
Interesting discussion.
Ive built a BEC and next i plan to do a CEC, I had been set on a duratec but ive just had a new tintop delivered with the 1.6 L ecoboost 180bhp engine
and i think it would be an epic engine in a 7 dependant on a suitable gearbox. Simple remap gives 215bhp and further work you can be up at 250BHP in a
nice lightweight package. I'm led to believe its a sigma bolt pattern for a bellhousing.
thats what i run in my car, i use a type 9 with quaife gearset in there, i agree with your they are good engines very light before you bolt a heavy
turbo on them
|
|
|
Sam_68
|
| posted on 26/4/15 at 08:18 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mark chandler
Nice light RWD gearbox seems to be the issue, type 9's are very long in the tooth.
Maybe you need to think outside the box (pardon the pun)?
The FW400 and at least one other Westfield I know of used rear-mounted Hewland transaxles.
Relatively light - circa 30-36 kilos, depending on model (but that includes the diff, remember; and a separate diff will weigh 21kg
(Freelander) or 27 kg (Sierra) on its own), gives you choice of whatever gearing you want, no problems with bellhousing/engine compatibility.
Certainly not a Locost option if you buy new, but plenty of second-hand Formula Ford units around.
Buy yourself some earplugs, though - they're not quiet when fitted in a 'Seven'!
quote:
Originally posted by mark chandler
When I replaced the gearbox in my blade engined car I could not believe how small the gears are compared to a car box.
Which might have had something to do with the fact that you were replacing the gearbox in your blade-engined car?
Car boxes are designed to cope with a lot more torque and a lot more traction.
To be fair, road car boxes are also designed for much more weight that you have in a Seven, and to last 200K miles in the hands of numpty
drivers. But gear and dog design is pretty straightforward, and you'll find that even race gearboxes like Hewland and Sadev use much bigger
gears and more robust dog rings than the dainty little things you'll find in a bike box, for good reason.
|
|
|
