romer
|
| posted on 8/2/06 at 10:02 PM |
|
|
Living with a BEC
Ok guys, a number of questions please if you don't mind.
Gotta be honest, I'm more biased towards a CEC than BEC (MAC#1 kit), but . . . .you got to keep your options open 
Ok, I know most BEC cars are probably built for track days and fast blasts, but are they ok and amenable to low speed driving - thinking along the
lines of nice summers days tootling around the lake district.
How does the fuel consumption vary from this kind of driving to say a good thrash on B & A roads.
Some vids I've seen seem to show . . mmm clunky, harsh gear changing. Is that the norm?
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that some days you just want to chill, go on auto pilot and enjoy the fresh air and the sights with
'er indoors sat next to you.
Thinking of standard engines, rather than tuned, which is the best bike engine to use?
Most grunt and best driveability but can still turn it on when required?
As a comparison, CEC wise, probably Zetec or K Series.
Your comments will be much appreciated and probably create even more questions but none the less, please fire away.
Romer
|
|
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 8/2/06 at 10:13 PM |
|
|
I think you need too drive both and decide,
both sides of the argument will come up with perfectly good reason why you should have either......
Me I'm biased, i love BECS and could drive them all day every day in town or country, you really need too try both and decide yourself.
Fuel consumption, never even give it a thought cos smiles per miles will always come out top in either a BEC or a CEC.
|
|
|
Wadders
|
| posted on 8/2/06 at 10:14 PM |
|
|
Only my opinion, but i'd go for a CEC with screen, option of sidescreens, comfy seats, reverse gear etc, Not that you cant cruise around in a
BEC, but somehow you seem less inclined to do so., the helmet thing can be pain as well, not mention messing up the wifes hair!
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 8/2/06 at 10:18 PM |
|
|
Id agree with Wadders, I love my BEC for what I use it for (trackdays and sunny Sunday blasts), but if I wanted to go for long relaxing drives
enjoying the scenery and having a chat with my passenger etc, I would chose a CEC.
|
|
|
romer
|
| posted on 8/2/06 at 10:35 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chris mason
if your gonna spend a lot of time "crusing" then i'd go for a CEC.
other than that you can't beat a Bec for almost everything else 
Chris
That's the trouble, even in my tin-top a little Sunday tootle often turns into a nice thrash when the road just begs for it . . . damn, wish I
was out there now
Romer
|
|
|
romer
|
| posted on 8/2/06 at 10:37 PM |
|
|
Above comments aside, which would be the best bike engine torque wise?
Romer
|
|
|
romer
|
| posted on 8/2/06 at 10:43 PM |
|
|
You've lost me with that answer and picture smart51 
Care to explain 
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 8/2/06 at 10:46 PM |
|
|
Just because you have a bike engine, doesn't mean you can't have a windscreen or side screens.
My R1 engine is at its best between 5000 RPM and the 11750 red line which in 2nd gear is 31 - 73 MPH. The sound is glorious at full throttle and the
acceleration just constant. It doesn't much like revs below 3000 unless you're in 1st or 2nd but 3000 or 4000 is nice for cruising.
The problems are that 6th gives 10.3 MPH per 1000 revs making constant speed driving a bit loud. the engine note just isn't as nice at a steady
cruise. Also, bike engines don't have a reverse.
For cruising I would have a CEC but for fun it would have to be a BEC every time.
[Edited on 9-2-2006 by smart51]
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 8/2/06 at 10:50 PM |
|
|
The most car-like BEC engine Ive driven by a fair way is the 'busa, much more torquey at low/mid range than blades / R1s etc, but obviously 3-4
times the price! However because of that, to me they don't quite raise the hairs on the back of your neck quite so much, as they don't
deliver the power in such a "banzai" manner as smaller higher revving bike engines - although I would still have one if I had the
money.
I imagine a ZX12 would probably be similar feel to a busa and you can now pick those up for under £1500 (if they were that price when I did my R1
conversion a year ago I may have been tempted).
Chris
|
|
|
Wadders
|
| posted on 8/2/06 at 11:35 PM |
|
|
Don''t be fooled into thinking CEC's are in any way slow, all sevens are amazingly quick and rewarding to drive compared to normal
cars, especially round the twisty bits.
As Jon said earlier try and get a drive in a few before you decide which is for you. Sure someone on here will oblige you with a spin in the passenger
chair. Guarantee you will be shocked no matter whats under the bonnet.
That's the trouble, even in my tin-top a little Sunday tootle often turns into a nice thrash when the road just begs for it . . . damn, wish I
was out there now
Romer
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 9/2/06 at 12:15 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChrisGamlin
I imagine a ZX12 would probably be similar feel to a busa and you can now pick those up for under £1500 (if they were that price when I did my R1
conversion a year ago I may have been tempted).
Chris
Don't forget the £2k for the drysump and associated plumbing, water pump etc...
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
Alez
|
| posted on 9/2/06 at 08:22 AM |
|
|
The FJ1300 has plenty of torque too, and it's significantly cheaper I think innit?
There's a growing number of in-between solutions.. high revving car engines (some japs you need to make scream to get any power out, like the
S2000) and the big bike engines 1200-1400 cc with good torque and not so high revs compared to the 900s.
Cheers,
Alex
|
|
|
zxrlocost
|
| posted on 9/2/06 at 09:06 AM |
|
|
when you start your bike engine for the first time in your car with a race can on and rev it up to 6k which is only half its rev range
youll understand why we persuaded you to have one
chris
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
smart51
|
| posted on 9/2/06 at 10:15 AM |
|
|
There is another thing that I don't like about a BEC and that is teh gearbox. The sequential gearbox prevents rapid down shifts like 6th to 3rd
or 4th to first. IT isn't usually a problem but If you come up to a set of lights on a fast road that suddenly change to red, you have to make
sure that you get 5 pushes of the lever in before you stop. If you stop in a higher gear then you might not be able to shift through all the gears
back to first. Bikers get over this by rocking the bike back or forward to rotate the gearbox output shaft into the right position for the gears to
engage. In the car, you have to engage the clutch a bit and pull forward by an inch to get the next gear to engage.
Don't get me wrong though, the noise and acceleration make the car huge fun. If I want quiet smoot cruising I use my ordinary car. Perhaps a
bigger bike engine that produced more torque and produces the torque and power at slightly lower revs (10,000 max rather than 12,000) would be a
better compromise. Bikes like the ZZR1200 also have slightly wider gearbox ratios, with 1st and 2nd still being racing gears but 6th being a bit
easier for cruising. Big bike engines like this are expensive, which is why I went for the R1.
|
|
|
tks
|
| posted on 9/2/06 at 08:36 PM |
|
|
thats
Wy i choosed the VFR 800 V4
The torque on low revs is huge....
It consumes less fuel, its injection.
Dunno also it whas cheap.
When i pull away i don't need accelerate the engine, just loosen the clutch step by step...
And yes my idle is just throttle complety closed.
Regards,
Tks
The above comments are always meant to be from the above persons perspective.
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 9/2/06 at 08:48 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wadders
Don''t be fooled into thinking CEC's are in any way slow
4 cylinder CECs typically do a 0-60 sprints in 6 seconds, BECs in 4. CECs are not slow, you're right, but they're not as fast.
DISCLAIMER. I know that your car is faster than the quoted figures above but I don't care. I also know that 0-60 sprints are not a good
predictor of overal performance, but I don't care about that either.
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 9/2/06 at 09:03 PM |
|
|
From on track experience, Id say you generally need 40-50bhp more CEC horsepower to be at a similar pace round a circuit to a BEC. Obviously thats
going to vary quite a bit with weight, track type etc etc, but as an example, when I had my blade I did a trackday at Cadwell and was following a
Westfield Series Race car (approx ~170-180bhp from a Zetec) round for several laps and it was very evenly matched.
For equivalent 0-60's you probably need a bit more horsepower in your CEC though because of the slower shifts between gears compared to a
BEC.
[Edited on 9/2/06 by ChrisGamlin]
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 9/2/06 at 09:50 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
quote:
Originally posted by Wadders
Don''t be fooled into thinking CEC's are in any way slow
4 cylinder CECs typically do a 0-60 sprints in 6 seconds, BECs in 4. CECs are not slow, you're right, but they're not as fast.
DISCLAIMER. I know that your car is faster than the quoted figures above but I don't care. I also know that 0-60 sprints are not a good
predictor of overal performance, but I don't care about that either.
Try doing an autotest in a BEC...
Then you will see slow...
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 10/2/06 at 10:25 AM |
|
|
LOL, just do the ones that dont require you to reverse
|
|
|
Alez
|
| posted on 13/2/06 at 08:07 AM |
|
|
quote:
There is another thing that I don't like about a BEC and that is teh gearbox.
It's funny how some people would choose something for the same reasons others dislike, I say this because one of the reasons some people go BEC
is "cheap sequential" (very quick upshifts from the stock engine).
quote:
If you stop in a higher gear then you might not be able to shift through all the gears back to first. Bikers get over this by rocking the bike
back or forward to rotate the gearbox output shaft into the right position for the gears to engage. In the car, you have to engage the clutch a bit
and pull forward by an inch to get the next gear to engage.
Not in my Blade! If a gear wouldn't engage when still, I just release clutch a bit until I hear the gearbox clunk (before ANY car movement would
take place), then I push the clutch again and the gearbox will allow shifts again. I don't need to move the car in a long gear (which obviously
isn't good for the clutch).
Cheers,
Alex
|
|
|
