RK
|
| posted on 19/1/11 at 08:14 PM |
|
|
Why no Rover K 1.8 engines on here?
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?
|
|
|
|
|
rusty nuts
|
| posted on 19/1/11 at 08:20 PM |
|
|
At least 1 Locoster on this site uses a K series , could be Humbug?
|
|
|
Steve Hignett
|
| posted on 19/1/11 at 08:25 PM |
|
|
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)
|
|
|
Strontium Dog
|
| posted on 19/1/11 at 08:31 PM |
|
|
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
|
|
|
theduck
|
| posted on 19/1/11 at 08:54 PM |
|
|
Personally I really rate the K Series engines, this article is well worth a read http://www.aronline.co.uk/index.htm?essaykseriesf.htm
|
|
|
liam.mccaffrey
|
| posted on 19/1/11 at 08:55 PM |
|
|
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
Isn't the S2000 constructed in the same way? That has the huge NA power. The issue with K HG is easily sorted if you understand the problem 
If its good enough for Caterham and Lotus, a K series is good enough for me.
Build Blog
Build Photo Album
|
|
|
stevec
|
| posted on 19/1/11 at 09:08 PM |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 19/1/11 at 09:31 PM |
|
|
Fab engine if built properly! VERY light and a cheap and easy 150-160bhp.
I'd have one if building a flyweight.
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
Hammerhead
|
| posted on 19/1/11 at 10:11 PM |
|
|
you need a bellhousing from caterham, 2nd hand still about £150, and a type 9 v6 box.
|
|
|
mogman1969
|
| posted on 19/1/11 at 10:33 PM |
|
|
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 ,
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 19/1/11 at 10:33 PM |
|
|
or a normal box with a 1" spacer plate.
|
|
|
RK
|
| posted on 19/1/11 at 11:56 PM |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
hughpinder
|
| posted on 20/1/11 at 09:03 AM |
|
|
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
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 20/1/11 at 09:23 AM |
|
|
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
Thats funny cos my dailly driver has a 1.8 with 97,000 miles on the clock and never had a head gasket.
Boltthrough construction is by far the strongest way to build an all alloy engine --- as a result it weighs half what the Zetec weighs.
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 20/1/11 at 09:35 AM |
|
|
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
No connection with Honda engines in either direction the K series development started in the era when Donald Stokes was running BL, it went through
several complete re-thinks before it was launched.
|
|
|
Yazza54
|
| posted on 20/1/11 at 10:28 AM |
|
|
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.
I'm unhappy cos I eat and I eat cos I'm unhappy
|
|
|
Strontium Dog
|
| posted on 20/1/11 at 10:43 AM |
|
|
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
My understanding too. Not to mention the no. of early engines that failed! There must be a reason people took them out of the Elise and replaced with
something else.
Still, if in a very light vehicle and not stressed or reved then they might be OK. Not my choice though but each to there own!
Of course, if you are prepared to spend the money on stripping and rebuilding the engine properly with all the nice bits you can get then it may well
be a different animal!
[Edited on 20/1/11 by Strontium Dog]
|
|
|
coyoteboy
|
| posted on 20/1/11 at 11:10 AM |
|
|
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]
|
|
|
Strontium Dog
|
| posted on 20/1/11 at 11:44 AM |
|
|
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]
I wonder what the oil consumption was like at those power levels. I bet there was some serious bore flex going on. Like you, I would go for the
heavier option with greater rigidity. If it was for track days only it would be different, but I use my cars on the road and do many miles every year
so longevity is desirable. I get 300hp from my 3SGTE all day every day (very different construction I know but entirely stock internals) and it gets
ragged most of the time. I only killed my last engine at 120,000 miles due to 1.4bar boost, (slightly out of the compressors efficiency and pushing
too much hot air) around 330hp and a retarded ignition map. Oops! I was retarding ignition to speed up spool but over did it. The engine still runs
and pulls well but is slightly low on compression on 3rd cylinder (the usual 3SGTE point of fail). I haven't stripped it yet to see what is
wrong but could be just a burnt valve. Current engine is 80,000miles and going strong
PS.
By the way Mr. Coyote, how's the mid engine plans coming on? Have you chosen an engine/tansmission yet?
[Edited on 20/1/11 by Strontium Dog]
|
|
|
Humbug
|
| posted on 20/1/11 at 12:30 PM |
|
|
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
|
|
|
coyoteboy
|
| posted on 20/1/11 at 12:38 PM |
|
|
"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!
|
|
|
theduck
|
| posted on 20/1/11 at 07:32 PM |
|
|
What people dont realise is the reason Lotus dont use K-series anymore is because of a miscommunication with BMW!
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 20/1/11 at 07:40 PM |
|
|
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???
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 20/1/11 at 07:49 PM |
|
|
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.
I have serious doubts about this; apart from both being 4 cylinder DOHC engines what design features do they share? The F20 is chain driven, has
enormous ports and valves (The K series has rather small valves for it's capacity in 1.8L guise), has Hondas VTEC system, it doesn't have
the sandwich construction of the Rover engine, it's over square with a good rod ratio unlike the 1.8K which is undersquare with a less good rod
ratio (due to being a 1.4L engine at heart), and the Honda weighs nearly 50% more than a K.
|
|
|
theduck
|
| posted on 20/1/11 at 08:03 PM |
|
|
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???
Nope, they could over come the emissions with the K-Series, but when Rover was sold to BMW there was some kind of misunderstanding
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.
|
|
|
.jpg)
