Go Zetec 1800. Ten a penny and very well built/designed engines
Does C'ham have some sort of injunction against their use in other kit cars? They look like a good option as far as I can see, yet I haven't seen one in anything but a Cvan. I assume they work with the M75 or Type 9 box?
At least 1 Locoster on this site uses a K series , could be Humbug?
I think the bell housing costs money...
That's the only reason I know of (apart from the obvious, HG failures, low power output etc)
IMO it's a crap engine compared to all the jap stuff or Zetecs, Duratecs etc. That may be why they don't get used much as others may well
agree with me, or not! Anything that kills it's head gasket on a NA engine at 70,000miles is not to be recomended in my book. The construction
IIRC uses bolts through the block that hold the main bearings. Also not the best solution IMO.
Go Zetec 1800. Ten a penny and very well built/designed engines
Personally I really rate the K Series engines, this article is well worth a read http://www.aronline.co.uk/index.htm?essaykseriesf.htm
quote:
Originally posted by Strontium Dog
The construction IIRC uses bolts through the block that hold the main bearings.
Go Zetec 1800. Ten a penny and very well built/designed engines
Nothing wrong with them.
I have had no bother with mine. But like any engine if its old and been to the moon and back you may get probs.
Steve.
Fab engine if built properly! VERY light and a cheap and easy 150-160bhp.
I'd have one if building a flyweight.
you need a bellhousing from caterham, 2nd hand still about £150, and a type 9 v6 box.
the head gasket normaly goes because the coolent level drops caused by poor gaskets elswhere in the cooling system , aparrt from that its a fantastic engine , used in north /south configuration its a fantastic piece of kit , sort its issues with the uprated parts and its no worse than any other engine ........but watch those levels ! aron is a fantastic site ,
or a normal box with a 1" spacer plate.
Well, I've been thinking about it because the Zetec isn't really an option either (unless you want the SE found in the Focus), and
bellhousing is just as much of an issue. We don't have Fiestas here (at least not til 2010 models came out, of which I have seen ZERO on the
road). There are NO rear wheel drive cars left without big US engines (Cadillac, Ford Victoria et al), unless you want MX5, which also has problems of
its own. The Duratec is another choice that has left me totally confused - they are really Mazdas from what I've seen though. You can't even
buy brand new engines at all from what I gather.
I think when you see Caterhams with K's, and tens of thousands of kilometers on them and still going well, there must be something there.
You might like to read the k series page on http://www.dvandrews.co.uk/
Its a great design, badly implemented as far as I understand it. It was the K series engine tech that honda bought rover for all those years ago, and
the S2000 engine is a direct descendant of that engine. The only problem with the S2000 is the weight increased a lot - Honda engineers didn't
like the fact that the whole block was designed to flex in the K series as a unit, so massively re-inforced it in the S2000.
Regards
Hugh
quote:
Originally posted by Strontium Dog
IMO it's a crap engine compared to all the jap stuff or Zetecs, Duratecs etc. That may be why they don't get used much as others may well agree with me, or not! Anything that kills it's head gasket on a NA engine at 70,000miles is not to be recomended in my book. The construction IIRC uses bolts through the block that hold the main bearings. Also not the best solution IMO.
Go Zetec 1800. Ten a penny and very well built/designed engines
quote:
Originally posted by hughpinder
You might like to read the k series page on http://www.dvandrews.co.uk/
Its a great design, badly implemented as far as I understand it. It was the K series engine tech that honda bought rover for all those years ago, and the S2000 engine is a direct descendant of that engine. The only problem with the S2000 is the weight increased a lot - Honda engineers didn't like the fact that the whole block was designed to flex in the K series as a unit, so massively re-inforced it in the S2000.
Regards
Hugh
It's light, easy 160bhp, and with the right bits on as reliable as the next. Most of the bad press you read on the k is bollocks. If you get a later motor with the correct headgasket and steel head dowels an fit a remote thermostat it will be fine.
quote:
Originally posted by hughpinder
You might like to read the k series page on http://www.dvandrews.co.uk/
Its a great design, badly implemented as far as I understand it. It was the K series engine tech that honda bought rover for all those years ago, and the S2000 engine is a direct descendant of that engine. The only problem with the S2000 is the weight increased a lot - Honda engineers didn't like the fact that the whole block was designed to flex in the K series as a unit, so massively re-inforced it in the S2000.
Regards
Hugh
When built correctly they are meant to be brilliant, I've seen more than one case of reliable 250+ turbocharged on them (reliably), and the
bearing design is meant to be a really good design. That said, the amount of work that would go into them to get them to that stage, I'd rather
just buy a slightly heavier, more powerful stock engine.
Toyota vvti, honda...
[Edited on 20/1/11 by coyoteboy]
quote:
Originally posted by coyoteboy
When built correctly they are meant to be brilliant, I've seen more than one case of reliable 250+ turbocharged on them (reliably), and the bearing design is meant to be a really good design. That said, the amount of work that would go into them to get them to that stage, I'd rather just buy a slightly heavier, more powerful stock engine.
Toyota vvti, honda...
[Edited on 20/1/11 by coyoteboy]
GeoffT has one. If the engine is OK, then it's nice and light.
I've got a 1.4 and it is adequate if not storming
"By the way Mr. Coyote, how's the mid engine plans coming on? Have you chosen an engine/tansmission yet?"
Still no decision. I can see the benefits of all 3 philosophies, monster V8, highest power/weight 3sgte, or lightweight BEC. I've just not been
able to pick which one suits my desires yet. I've concluded all would cost about the same when done right!
What people dont realise is the reason Lotus dont use K-series anymore is because of a miscommunication with BMW!
quote:
Originally posted by theduck
What people dont realise is the reason Lotus dont use K-series anymore is because of a miscommunication with BMW!
quote:
Originally posted by hughpinder
It was the K series engine tech that honda bought rover for all those years ago, and the S2000 engine is a direct descendant of that engine.
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
quote:
Originally posted by theduck
What people dont realise is the reason Lotus dont use K-series anymore is because of a miscommunication with BMW!
I thought they changed to the Toyota lump due to emissions requirements???
quote:
WHAT has subsequently emerged from speaking with a number of people at Lotus is that Lotus had in fact been very keen to have a federalised K going back to the BMW ownership days at Rover. Mark Vinelli and Malcolm Powell tell me that an approach was made from Lotus’s highest echelons to ask whether Lotus themselves could develop the engine and federalise it for the US. No one that I can find at Powertrain or Pheonix is or was aware of this approach and so therefore it can only be speculation that Terry Payle in his inimitable style approached senior BMW figures informally with a proposal for Lotus to do this work but was rebuffed either because BMW didn’t want any competition from sporty Rovers or Rover engined Lotus’s in the US to compete with their saloons or Z3, or there was a misunderstanding about the engine involved since BMW had laid plans to replace the K with their new “common” engine in all BMWS and Rovers, this is the engine now powering the BMW 1 series.
Whatever the mechanics of this misunderstanding were, no one actually charged with the commercial dealing at the then MG Rover were aware of this approach at all, it has come as a complete surprise to everyone at Powertrain LTD that anyone at Lotus made a request to do the federalising work at Lotus. Had this proposal been formally put to the commercial Director at MG Rover, with the budget I now know that Lotus spent to federalise the Toyota for the Elise, I’m told that the Elise would have had it’s 200bhp federalised K in all likelihood two years ago. All in all the handling of this engine both by way of tuning it and in commercial negotiations has been woeful, and a huge missed opportunity and all because no one sat down and talked it through properly.
A lot of the so called head gasket problem was nothing to do with the head gasket at all but a handful of minor mistakes in the design of the
system.
For example, form from the late 1990's on Rover changed to using the Engine ECU to drive the dashboard instruments via CAN bus. Then somebody
at Rover decided that "in order to present the driver with a consistent reading" the gauge should read normal when the engines reaches
75c and not move until the engine reaches 115c. This of course is fine if everything is running well and the engine has no coolant leaks and hence
keeping the cooling system under pressure, but if there is is a leak the engine can be boiling away merrily with the temperature guage firmly planted
on "N".
The graphic bellows shows the gauge needle position v engine temperature.
Description
[Edited on 21/1/11 by britishtrident]
That explains quite a lot:d
Just had head gasket replaced on wifes zr. Not bad when you consider our works van (transit connect) just had to have egr valve replaced (including
most of the manifold) because the irreplaceable bit that broke was a 4mm bearing worth about .001p. Cost to replace, just over £600. Said when we
bought it, we should have bought a Renault. Will next time though!
ATB
Simon
Ford have lost their reputation for being easy and cheap to fix.
However the fire is much hotter than the frying pan the Renault (also used by Nissan and Vauxhall) DCi engine especially in the 1.9and larger sizes
has the poorest reputation of all modern units for very expensive major blow ups due the turbo blowing up and the shrapnel exiting via the cylinders
--- lubrication issue happens once over 70,000 miles.
[Edited on 21/1/11 by britishtrident]
There is a huge amount of knowledge on how to build a reliable high output K series if you search for it among the Lotus Elise and Caterham forums. Dave Andrews as previously mentioned is an acknowledged expert and he and his site are very 'open source'. I run a 150 bhp K series in my Elise with DVA cams and I have had no basic engine issues despite lots of track day use. Build carefully with the knowledge of the engine's critical features and you should be ok.
Excellent thread RK- nice one.
quote:
Originally posted by theduck
Personally I really rate the K Series engines, this article is well worth a read http://www.aronline.co.uk/index.htm?essaykseriesf.htm
Just to show I haven't completely made up the bit about the S200o engine being derived from the rover engine:
From the link in the previous post:
The point is that big bore short stroke engines are conceived to make high engine speeds possible, the penalty is poor torque, the Honda 2.0 litre
S2000 producing just 151 lb ft @ 7500 rpm, a figure easily eclipsed by the 1.8 litre K equipped with Piper’s 1227 cams which will give a very similar
power output to the Honda engine. So, the Honda is not such a special engine. It does have a very strong and stiff block, being a copy of the K
Series’ design, but suffers from its enormous weight of 158 kg in standard form fully dressed (figures from the Vemac Car Co.) more than 60 kg heavier
than the standard K. The only really attractive part of the Honda’s design are the roller cams which do reduce friction in the valve train but in
every other respect the K is a more efficient and effective design than the Honda.
Regards
Hugh
You have to remember from day one of BMW taking control of Rover the BMW board split into two factions one pro Rover the other anti-Rover.
quote:
Originally posted by hughpinder
Just to show I haven't completely made up the bit about the S200o engine being derived from the rover engine:
From the link in the previous post:
The point is that big bore short stroke engines are conceived to make high engine speeds possible, the penalty is poor torque, the Honda 2.0 litre S2000 producing just 151 lb ft @ 7500 rpm, a figure easily eclipsed by the 1.8 litre K equipped with Piper’s 1227 cams which will give a very similar power output to the Honda engine. So, the Honda is not such a special engine. It does have a very strong and stiff block, being a copy of the K Series’ design, but suffers from its enormous weight of 158 kg in standard form fully dressed (figures from the Vemac Car Co.) more than 60 kg heavier than the standard K. The only really attractive part of the Honda’s design are the roller cams which do reduce friction in the valve train but in every other respect the K is a more efficient and effective design than the Honda.
Regards
Hugh