novacaine
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 06:42 AM |
|
|
Arrgh how are you meant to decide between BEC and CEC?
As per the title,
I really can't decide, do I go with a zetec that I could tune up to 200 ish bhp or do I go with a cheap bike engine (Thinking fireblade). I
assume the cec will be faster in a straight line due to the greater power but I'm guessing the bec will be better round corners due to weight
Am I right in thinking this about the performance of the two?
Thanks everyone :-)
And you run and you run to catch up with the sun but its sinking, Racing around to come up behind you again, the sun is the same in a relative way but
your older, shorter of breath and one day closer to death
|
|
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 06:47 AM |
|
|
oh god BEC vs CEC again...
mate you need to actually try both types and then decide which suits your needs best, as each has good and bad points depending on what your going to
do with the car
[Edited on 22/4/09 by Mr Whippy]
Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet
|
|
|
Sebastian
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 06:49 AM |
|
|
I have had both 1 with a ZX-9 and currently one with a 2.0 Zetec with TB's.
IMHO for driving on the public road and cruising i would say CEC, for public road and a lot of trackdays i would go for BEC.
I choose in the end for a CEC i use it only on the public roads and it drives a lot more comfy.
But then again this is my opinion based on own experience.
|
|
|
flak monkey
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 06:53 AM |
|
|
Depends what you want.
If you want a car for longish journeys which is easy to drive and reliable go for a car engine.
If you want a track day car for short runs which is hard work to drive (up and down the gears all the time, and tiring on a long journey because of
the revs) build a bike engined one.
Having driven both, and the sort of driving I do, I know which I prefer 
[Edited on 22/4/09 by flak monkey]
Sera
http://www.motosera.com
|
|
|
speedyxjs
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 06:58 AM |
|
|
quote:
Arrgh how are you meant to decide between BEC and CEC?
Easy, forget about the BEC  
Seriously, do a search. This has been discussed many times before. There was even a poll the other day which was 50-50 iirc.
The problems with bec's are the need for a heavy reverse box, the fact that the car needs to be very light weight for any decent performance,
the screaming engine at any sort of speed, no torque and when you open the bonnet to show your mates the car you've built, they will say
'where's the engine?'
The problem with a car engine is the weight... thats it 
How long can i resist the temptation to drop a V8 in?
|
|
|
oldtimer
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 07:03 AM |
|
|
I think you are being a very naughty boy. 2 years membership and over 500 posts - then you ask this?!...Did you often start fights at school?
|
|
|
speedyxjs
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 07:08 AM |
|
|
Sorry, just looked back at the vote and it wasnt 50-50, it was 57.25-42.75
Linky
How long can i resist the temptation to drop a V8 in?
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 07:11 AM |
|
|
Also with a BEC your poor thrashed small capacity engine is now hauling the extra weight of two very large burger eating Americans and then two
passengers on top of that… Don’t expect the engine to last anything like as long as a car engine especially being mistreated in the wrong vehicle
it was designed for
Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet
|
|
|
novacaine
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 07:24 AM |
|
|
Oops looks like I've inadvertentley opened up the proverbial tin of worms,
I know there will never be a definitive answer, I was just wondering what would be quicker, all things considered between a blade and a 200 bhp
zetec,
I know the whole bec v cec has been going on since the dawn of time so sorry for bringing it up again, I just wanted opinions on these two specific
choices
Thanks
Matt
And you run and you run to catch up with the sun but its sinking, Racing around to come up behind you again, the sun is the same in a relative way but
your older, shorter of breath and one day closer to death
|
|
|
motorcycle_mayhem
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 07:24 AM |
|
|
Good grief, not again, though advice is sought so here's mine for what it's worth...
Are you doing dB attentive track days, lugging lard, shopping in town, want big numbers on torque/bhp down the pub, don't like screaming
engines, sequential gearboxes or fragile clutches? You need a CEC.
Are you an motorcyclist, like a car that screams on the track, do you weigh less than 17 stone, avoid passengers, you need a BEC. You really do, in
fact, mine!
|
|
|
Colnago_Man
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 07:31 AM |
|
|
Also bear in mind the cost of insurance, I've been getting some insurance quotes lately and because its a BEC it gets a 'weighting'
on premium. Last quote got raised from £111 to £220 because of it.
Not a great deal but will add up if you plan to keep it for a while.
[Edited on 22/4/09 by Colnago_Man]
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 07:36 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by novacaine
Oops looks like I've inadvertentley opened up the proverbial tin of worms,
I know there will never be a definitive answer, I was just wondering what would be quicker, all things considered between a blade and a 200 bhp
zetec,
I know the whole bec v cec has been going on since the dawn of time so sorry for bringing it up again, I just wanted opinions on these two specific
choices
Thanks
Matt
On those specific choices a 200bhp Zetec will be a little faster in a drag race than a 125-150bhp Blade (bhp depending on year) engine assuming it is
appropriately geared. It will also be a lot easier to drive on the road.
Blade will corner and brake better (like for like) as it will be lighter.
The difference in performance will be minimal and the style of the ride is probably more important for living with your choice.
Best idea - build one of each, one for the track one for the road
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
coozer
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 07:46 AM |
|
|
Theres hardly any difference between the two, its all down to how well the car is set up, how sticky your tyres are and how much bottle you have.
To me the 220bhp zetec with 200ftlb would be my choice
1972 V8 Jago
1980 Z750
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 07:58 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Paul TigerB6
quote:
Originally posted by Colnago_Man
Also bear in mind the cost of insurance, I've been getting some insurance quotes lately and because its a BEC it gets a 'weighting'
on premium. Last quote got raised from £111 to £220 because of it.
Not a great deal but will add up if you plan to keep it for a while.
[Edited on 22/4/09 by Colnago_Man]
Offset by cheaper tax though!!
hmm how much is a reverse box, replacement engines and clutch kits? Considering the dreadful mpg a 1000cc bike usually gets (compared to mine that
doing 110mpg )...what’s it like in a BEC?
Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet
|
|
|
novacaine
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 07:59 AM |
|
|
Thanks for the replies everyone, I think after the above posts I am more likely to go cec, I can imagine a bec to get tiresome but I would put up with
it if it was significantley quicker
Thanks
And you run and you run to catch up with the sun but its sinking, Racing around to come up behind you again, the sun is the same in a relative way but
your older, shorter of breath and one day closer to death
|
|
|
sucksqueezebangblow
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 08:21 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by novacaineI was just wondering what would be quicker, all things considered between a blade and a 200 bhp
zetec.
No question the BEC would be quicker. Weight kills two things on a car; acceleration and cornering grip. The lighter a car for a given power output
the faster it will accelerate and the faster it will go 'round corners. The sequential shift on a bike engine can also save you up to a 10th per
shift, which can amount to a second or more per lap.
Better to Burnout than to Fade Away JET METAL ~ AndySparrow © 
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 08:59 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by sucksqueezebangblow
quote:
Originally posted by novacaineI was just wondering what would be quicker, all things considered between a blade and a 200 bhp
zetec.
No question the BEC would be quicker. Weight kills two things on a car; acceleration and cornering grip. The lighter a car for a given power output
the faster it will accelerate and the faster it will go 'round corners. The sequential shift on a bike engine can also save you up to a 10th per
shift, which can amount to a second or more per lap.
I don't believe the weight will make up for 50bhp of power with a wider and larger torque band. Though as with all things it will depend on the
track. NS Dev who's driven both has said a 200bhp XE and an R1 are about equivalent.
The BEC gearchange is quicker, but you'll be making more of them, so you can end up losing over the lap.
So I believe your 'no question' is far too simplistic. On the road the whole power thing is borderline irrelevant anyway, they're
both much faster accelerating than any tin-top, and but have a lower top speed than 50% of them.
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
A1
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 09:15 AM |
|
|
after having a BEC id never consider changing, the noise, gearchange, acceleration...its brilliant...
|
|
|
afj
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 10:06 AM |
|
|
Flip a coin
eerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
|
|
|
oldtimer
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 02:32 PM |
|
|
Personally I've got a car-engined-car and a bike-engined-bike.
|
|
|
sucksqueezebangblow
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 02:53 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by iank
quote:
Originally posted by sucksqueezebangblow
quote:
Originally posted by novacaineI was just wondering what would be quicker, all things considered between a blade and a 200 bhp
zetec.
No question the BEC would be quicker. Weight kills two things on a car; acceleration and cornering grip. The lighter a car for a given power output
the faster it will accelerate and the faster it will go 'round corners. The sequential shift on a bike engine can also save you up to a 10th per
shift, which can amount to a second or more per lap.
I don't believe the weight will make up for 50bhp of power with a wider and larger torque band. Though as with all things it will depend on the
track. NS Dev who's driven both has said a 200bhp XE and an R1 are about equivalent.
The BEC gearchange is quicker, but you'll be making more of them, so you can end up losing over the lap.
So I believe your 'no question' is far too simplistic. On the road the whole power thing is borderline irrelevant anyway, they're
both much faster accelerating than any tin-top, and but have a lower top speed than 50% of them.
I disagree. This is not a subjective matter but an objective one. And in addition to the points I made previously, there is also the matter of
reciprocating and rotating mass within the drive train. Such mass also kills acceleration, and once again the BEC has less reciprocating and rotating
mass in the drive train than a CEC. In fact it is that lack of mass that makes BECs less smooth to drive on the road where the rotating mass of CECs
is desireable as it gives more flywheel effect.
Better to Burnout than to Fade Away JET METAL ~ AndySparrow ©
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 03:28 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by sucksqueezebangblow
quote:
Originally posted by iank
quote:
Originally posted by sucksqueezebangblow
quote:
Originally posted by novacaineI was just wondering what would be quicker, all things considered between a blade and a 200 bhp
zetec.
No question the BEC would be quicker. Weight kills two things on a car; acceleration and cornering grip. The lighter a car for a given power output
the faster it will accelerate and the faster it will go 'round corners. The sequential shift on a bike engine can also save you up to a 10th per
shift, which can amount to a second or more per lap.
I don't believe the weight will make up for 50bhp of power with a wider and larger torque band. Though as with all things it will depend on the
track. NS Dev who's driven both has said a 200bhp XE and an R1 are about equivalent.
The BEC gearchange is quicker, but you'll be making more of them, so you can end up losing over the lap.
So I believe your 'no question' is far too simplistic. On the road the whole power thing is borderline irrelevant anyway, they're
both much faster accelerating than any tin-top, and but have a lower top speed than 50% of them.
I disagree. This is not a subjective matter but an objective one. And in addition to the points I made previously, there is also the matter of
reciprocating and rotating mass within the drive train. Such mass also kills acceleration, and once again the BEC has less reciprocating and rotating
mass in the drive train than a CEC. In fact it is that lack of mass that makes BECs less smooth to drive on the road where the rotating mass of CECs
is desireable as it gives more flywheel effect.
Well you're quite free to disagree, but...
Can you point out where I've been subjective anywhere - I may have generalised but that's not the same thing at all.
Reciprocating mass is only relevant to the rate of change of rpm, so bike engines zing up and down the rev range quicker, but conversely they have
further to go - about twice as far (6000rpm redline vs 12000rpm) and you need a diff ratio to take that out again so at the end of the day
there's not that much advantage - a 200bhp Zetec will likely have a lightened flywheel anyway.
For the above example Blade to 200bhp CEC you're still 50bhp down - you only have 75% of the power of the zetec, that's a big figure to
make up even with the other BEC advantages.
I don't have either religion - engines are engines are engines - they all have a crank, pistons, some valves and ways of getting petrol/air in
and exhaust out. Use whichever suits what you are using it for not all BECs are the same - some suit cars better than others, same with
CEC's.
Only difference with a BEC is it comes pretuned to racing levels, that has some advantages, but don't try and pretend they're perfect for
all applications, they come with their own set of downsides - if they were perfect the mainstream manufacturers would use them in pickups and vans
(tongue firmly in cheek ).
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
ruudbeckers
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 03:48 PM |
|
|
You could also take the best of both worlds and put an s2000 engine in it. Probably a little bit more expensive than a zetec, but much faster with
240bhp and a red line of 9000 rpm.
|
|
|
alfasudsprint
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 03:57 PM |
|
|
be interested to hear the mpgs argument...surely the tuned zetec would be worse?
Do other forum users care about 20 or 30 mpgs on their seven?
|
|
|
novacaine
|
| posted on 22/4/09 at 04:10 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by afj
Flip a coin
Seems to be a pretty good way to decide
And you run and you run to catch up with the sun but its sinking, Racing around to come up behind you again, the sun is the same in a relative way but
your older, shorter of breath and one day closer to death
|
|
|
