Well 2.5 years after finishing the AJ30 install I have got round to getting it on a rolling road.
Two things that amaze me are:
How good this engine is and how close VEAL got the tune.

A power pull before adjustment saw 239bhp tuned solely with VEAL, however there is no substitute
for a rolling road tune, because you can't hit all the cells, and the ignition timing is not touched.
Before tuning on the RR the car was very good, but after the RR season it is superb
The BHP and Torque traces where a bit wiggly, to say the least, after RR tuning a complete contrast.
The Torque came in around 190/195ftlb from around 1500rpm up to 4000rpm, then climbed up
to 215lbft at 5600rpm before decaying.
The power peak was around 242bhp, flat between 6000rpm and 7200rpm and was still going
It will pull away from standstill in 5th with 2 up
If you are building an AJ30 install, you will not be disappointed, it was well worth the effort

Nice result

Nice. The car must go like stink. Do you know what the car weighs by any chance ?

Awesome! I can't wait to finish mine

That must be a great sound track.

I sort of wish I had gone with it instead of the turbo Zetec, maybe next time. I still look at and think that’s a lot of engine for a Locost

quote:

---

Originally posted by wylliezx9r
Nice. The car must go like stink. Do you know what the car weighs by any chance ?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
That must be a great sound track.

---

Thats a really good result

Peak Torque and BHP within 1500 rpm of each other, There ain't much wrong with that engine

Heard good things about Jools and his mapping

Oh this is great to hear

Especially using the ST200 Inlet which looks more restrictive than the standard AJ30 one

Did you experiment with the VVT?

Did the mapper say it's worth while/noticeable when the VVT is used?

[Edited on 28/2/19 by CosKev3]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3
Did you experiment with the VVT?

Did the mapper say it's worth while/noticeable when the VVT is used?

[Edited on 28/2/19 by CosKev3]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3
Did you experiment with the VVT?

Did the mapper say it's worth while/noticeable when the VVT is used?

[Edited on 28/2/19 by CosKev3]

---

The VVT was set to cut in at 5200rpm as on the S-Type, and yes you can see the blip on the graph, worth about
15bhp and 10 torques
I am going back, in about an hour, to have a play with the VVT. A power run with and without it fully activated, the logic being that there should be a cross over point that will become the switch point
The ST200 plenum and ST220 throttle body work well, still accelerating past the 7200RPM red line.
If you are running MS2 Extra I can email you the Msq file, when it is finalised?

---

Well after an afternoon on the RR, it's all good news.
By moving switching points up and down the rev range Jools managed to get a conservative increase of
around 20bhp all the way from 2000rpm to 6200rpm with around 10bhp at the rev limit
Unfortunately the whole map was weak, so it will have to go back on the rollers for a remap.
So the gains with a remap should exceed 20bhp. That will be done in a few weeks time
I woder what the safe rev limit is? It sounds mega at 7000rpm as it is

Nice one

So what revs was the best point for VVT?

I've read on line they can do 8000rpm happily due to the solid lifters.

How are you running the injection, batch fire or semi sequential?

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3
Nice one

So what revs was the best point for VVT?

I've read on line they can do 8000rpm happily due to the solid lifters.

How are you running the injection, batch fire or semi sequential?

---

Great result Dave, feels like a different car afterwards doesn’t it....

quote:

---

Originally posted by r1_pete
Great result Dave, feels like a different car afterwards doesn’t it....

---

The vct sound like it is similar to the Puma 1.7. Have search for Jenko on here. He found that it was best off up to about 2k then on until 6k and then off again above that. Without turning it off again he was loosing top end power. He also turn his off below about 30% load iirc. He used an onex600 ecu. The latest emerald k6 and me221 can do a fully mapped vct I think.

[Edited on 1/3/19 by Ugg10]

[Edited on 1/3/19 by Ugg10]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3
Nice one

So what revs was the best point for VVT?

I've read on line they can do 8000rpm happily due to the solid lifters.

How are you running the injection, batch fire or semi sequential?

---

The VVT was a bit of a head scratcher, and reverse intuative.
With no VVT the lower (2000rpm to 6000rpm) was the same, but the graph kept climbing up to the redline for
over 250bhp
With the VVT activated the lower showed a 10% (20-25)increase of torque and power but fell off at 6000rpm to 240bhp
but wouldn't idle
We figured out that the VVT was 2 stage and to combine the two graphs would need 2 programmable outputs from
the MS, and an extra relay i:e The VVT is off until 2000rpm, On until 6000rpm then back off!
So I am adding an extra relay to the VVT "control" box and then another full mapping season.
The injection is Semi sequential and ,surprisingly, Alpha N gave the best results..

[Edited on 1-3-19 by 40inches]

---

That's right, I used the Fidle output, and now another spare output for the extra switch over.
Without activating the VVT the engine will still put out a lot of power low down, and will probably have an extra 15-20bhp
above 6000rpm (255-260) but, by activating it at 2000rpm and deactivating at 6000rpm that 15-20 bhp/torque will be
all the way from 2000rpm up to 7200rpm It's a no brainer.
We saw 254bhp, but with a weak mixture Once it's remapped?????????
I'll see if I can put up the initial graph.

This is the initial graph, you can see the bumps in the graphs when the VVT switches.
This is a very Torquey motor.

This is the graph with the power trace manually overlaid with 'OFF' VVT ,Red trace and
'ON' VVT Green trace. Just have to combine the two.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
That's right, I used the Fidle output, and now another spare output for the extra switch over.
Without activating the VVT the engine will still put out a lot of power low down, and will probably have an extra 15-20bhp
above 6000rpm (255-260) but, by activating it at 2000rpm and deactivating at 6000rpm that 15-20 bhp/torque will be
all the way from 2000rpm up to 7200rpm It's a no brainer.
We saw 254bhp, but with a weak mixture Once it's remapped?????????
I'll see if I can put up the initial graph.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3
I'm struggling to understand the need for two outputs to control it though,surely one output can switch it on at 2000rpm then switch it off at 6000rpm?
Graph looks great

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3
I'm struggling to understand the need for two outputs to control it though,surely one output can switch it on at 2000rpm then switch it off at 6000rpm?
Graph looks great

---

The programmable outputs on Megasquirt are only single action, If it is programmed to switch on, at say 6000rpm, that's it, until the revs drop bellow 6000rpm again. It isn't a deal breaker, I always use relays for the programmable outputs anyway, so it
is a simple job to put another relay alongside the original and cut into the VVT feed wire with the other relay.
I did that this afternoon
If you have yet to order your MS, get Phil to activate all the outputs ( costs £5 each) you can have dual maps for a fiver also

---

Boost control is a pwm output and different to the “programmable” outputs.

quote:

---

Originally posted by theduck
Boost control is a pwm output and different to the “programmable” outputs.

---

Just got back from having the VVT set up.
272bhp after 2 hours on the dyno.
The photo upload has stopped working again So will post the Dyno graphs when I find
a suitable hosting site.

shiver me timbers
you must be happy with that.

How many torques.

quote:

---

Originally posted by pigeondave
shiver me timbers
you must be happy with that.

How many torques.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches

With the VVT set up as Jaguar from the factory, we got the rated 240bhp, it looks like
Jaguar neutered the engine, possibly for emissions????

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
Just got back from having the VVT set up.
272bhp after 2 hours on the dyno.
The photo upload has stopped working again So will post the Dyno graphs when I find
a suitable hosting site.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pigeondave

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches

With the VVT set up as Jaguar from the factory, we got the rated 240bhp, it looks like
Jaguar neutered the engine, possibly for emissions????

---

And I trust you'l bee winding it back a little for the same reasons

Out of interest what box and diff are you using?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
Just got back from having the VVT set up.
272bhp after 2 hours on the dyno.
The photo upload has stopped working again So will post the Dyno graphs when I find
a suitable hosting site.

---

Wow

So what was your setting on the VVT to get that power?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
Just got back from having the VVT set up.
272bhp after 2 hours on the dyno.
The photo upload has stopped working again So will post the Dyno graphs when I find
a suitable hosting site.

---

Wow

So what was your setting on the VVT to get that power?

---

I think on at 1800rpm with 60% TPS and off at 5800RPM.
Strangely the Jag setting is on at 5200rpm, according to one of the Jag manuals, and that
gives 240bhp as per the specs.
The engine had been mapped at the standard settings, but needed a lot more fuel added at the optimum settings.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
Just got back from having the VVT set up.
272bhp after 2 hours on the dyno.
The photo upload has stopped working again So will post the Dyno graphs when I find
a suitable hosting site.

---

Wow

So what was your setting on the VVT to get that power?

---

I think on at 1800rpm with 60% TPS and off at 5800RPM.
Strangely the Jag setting is on at 5200rpm, according to one of the Jag manuals, and that
gives 240bhp as per the specs.
The engine had been mapped at the standard settings, but needed a lot more fuel added at the optimum settings.

---

Really good to know that the ST200 inlet hasn't restricted the engine!

How much more fuel could the standard injectors put in?

I've bought a set of 6 hole mustang injectors for mine,picked them up for what it would cost to get the originals refurbed so thought give them a go.

---

What did your car make at the wheels?

Looks like a great result Dave, its really tempting to go for a similar setup in my Scimitar....

If your not in a rush Pete I may be selling mine in a few weeks. I just want to make some brum brum noises first.

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
If your not in a rush Pete I may be selling mine in a few weeks. I just want to make some brum brum noises first.

---

Yeh just the silicone hoses are making me wince this month.

Trying to find a photo hosting site that will embed the photo in a post.
This is the best I can do at the moment https://btcloud.bt.com/web/app/share/invite/uanmtLGpRY

That is seriously impressive output for an off the shelf engine, especially one normally used to lug an executive car up and down motorways. 90bhp/L without anything more than an engine map!

The problem is this is making me excited to get mine built, but I'm doing the kit car thing in reverse. Currently dismantling my second donor, so starting off with a car and ending up with a kit.

I keep looking at it and think how the hel does it fit in the hole

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
I keep looking at it and think how the hel does it fit in the hole

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
I keep looking at it and think how the hel does it fit in the hole

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
I keep looking at it and think how the hel does it fit in the hole

---

Only just, I had to fit a SAAB idler pulley to clear the chassis. There is 20mm clearance at the cam covers.
Doing it again I would fit an electric water pump, so no need for idler pulleys.

---

Incase anybody comes across this thread in future and is interested in the weight of the engine heres some idea:

Bare engine with just small Denso alt fitted=120kg.

As above with ST200 upper inlet manifold and ST200 solid flywheel =132kg.

As above with RX8 6 speed gearbox and Mondeo 240mm clutch=181kg.

[Edited on 17/4/19 by CosKev3]

On the St220 the water pump is driven from a pulley on the back of the head and is prety compact. But that means more plumbing like a Zetec.

I did test fit the adapter plate last week end. One of the locating dowls is in a differant place.

I hope to get started on the wiring loom Easter Monday as the wife is working

[Edited on 17/4/19 by big_wasa]

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
On the St220 the water pump is driven from a pulley on the back of the head and is prety compact. But that means more plumbing like a Zetec.

I did test fit the adapter plate last week end. One of the locating dowls is in a differant place.

I hope to get started on the wiring loom Easter Monday as the wife is working

[Edited on 17/4/19 by big_wasa]

---

One of Jonathan Hughes Aj30 to Rx8 plates.

What is the direction of rotation of the AJ30 engine? Just asking for a mate who has just rung and asked me.
Thanks

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
One of Jonathan Hughes Aj30 to Rx8 plates.

---

Isn’t yours a jag lump ? Mines a Ford.

There are two holes for the dowl. The jag must use one and the ford another.

I will get a photo.

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
Isn’t yours a jag lump ? Mines a Ford.

There are two holes for the dowl. The jag must use one and the ford another.

I will get a photo.

---

Well mines up and running

Big thanks to Dave(40inches) for his help and knowledge on this engine on here and via email

Mapped yesterday by Dale @Bailey Performance and the results were awesome!

286bhp,254bhp at the wheels

https://youtu.be/cR57ENgqC_M

Wet roads on the drive home meant I didn't use more than half throttle, and it was still very fast

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3
Well mines up and running

Big thanks to Dave(40inches) for his help and knowledge on this engine on here and via email

Mapped yesterday by Dale @Bailey Performance and the results were awesome!

286bhp,254bhp at the wheels

https://youtu.be/cR57ENgqC_M

Wet roads on the drive home meant I didn't use more than half throttle, and it was still very fast

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BaileyPerformance

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3
Well mines up and running

Big thanks to Dave(40inches) for his help and knowledge on this engine on here and via email

Mapped yesterday by Dale @Bailey Performance and the results were awesome!

286bhp,254bhp at the wheels

https://youtu.be/cR57ENgqC_M

Wet roads on the drive home meant I didn't use more than half throttle, and it was still very fast

---

I look a bit miserable in the video, i should be smiling we power like that out of a stock engine!

[Edited on 11/6/19 by BaileyPerformance]

---

Cheers for yesterday,totally different car now!

Fired up lovely cold too this morn

quote:

---

Originally posted by BaileyPerformance


Cheers for yesterday,totally different car now!

Fired up lovely cold too this morn

---

Brilliant Kev
What RPM was peak power at?
Doesn't seem worth the effort fitting ITB's!

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
Brilliant Kev
What RPM was peak power at?
Doesn't seem worth the effort fitting ITB's!

---

The limiter was set at 7200rpm on mine and was still climbing



[img][/img]

That’s a great result.

Any chance of some engine bay shots now the photo uploader is working ?

I would love to see what this engine could make with some long primary headers and throttle bodies. I just don't know how you would get them in a 7.

[Edited on 11/6/19 by big_wasa]

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
That’s a great result.

Any chance of some engine bay shots now the photo uploader is working ?

I would love to see what this engine could make with some long primary headers and throttle bodies.

---

Thats amazing power if mine is near that i will be very happy

Photo uploader still wont allow pics off my phone

'Sorry! is an unnsuported file type. Please email ChrisW if you believe it should be'

You have to re size them first.

I already have the exhaust manifolds but there going to be more suited to a Gt style car.

Rocketeer have ran jenveys and their own inlets on the dyno and the jenveys were down on power. I reckon I could fit itbs under my scoop but after seeing the results on a standard engine I'm not sure it's worth it. After seeing Dave's and kevs results on the st200 manifold I'm kind of a bit annoyed I didn't go that route. I always thought it just looked a bit restrictive obviously not!

Ive got a couple of st200 manifolds but mine needs the throttle body at the front as the rear is too close to my bulkhead in my focus, i did consider chopping one up and moving throttle body to other end.

The Rocketeer tbs where on very short inlets with sock filters that are well known to rob power.

I am surprised how the st200 mani performs. Given the restrictions here and the exhaust 300bhp can’t be far off.

I guess the question I really want to know is what it drives and handles like ?

quote:

---

Originally posted by RWD Focus
Ive got a couple of st200 manifolds but mine needs the throttle body at the front as the rear is too close to my bulkhead in my focus, i did consider chopping one up and moving throttle body to other end.

---

You mate the two together if i remember correctly. A member on here showed me how he had done his. Im gonna hang onto them just for now incase i need to cut more than one up to make it suit my application. There was one on eBay i think.

Ignore that last message, ive just had a look in my other unit and found another st200 inlet complete. So if you want one give me a shout. Its upper with throttle body, lower, injectors and fuel rail. Can post if need be.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903

quote:

---

Originally posted by RWD Focus
Ive got a couple of st200 manifolds but mine needs the throttle body at the front as the rear is too close to my bulkhead in my focus, i did consider chopping one up and moving throttle body to other end.

---

You maybe interested in selling one?

If using the st200 setup do you need both upper and lower manifolds? Or do you mate the upper to the jag lower?

---

How do you sort the oval jag lower manifold ports and the round st200 upper?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Partofthechaos
How do you sort the oval jag lower manifold ports and the round st200 upper?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RWD Focus
Ive got a couple of st200 manifolds but mine needs the throttle body at the front as the rear is too close to my bulkhead in my focus, i did consider chopping one up and moving throttle body to other end.

---

Are they reversible? Would the majority of the bolts line up ?

quote:

---

Originally posted by RWD Focus
Are they reversible? Would the majority of the bolts line up ?

---

Just offered it up reversed but it catches on oil filler. In order to get it to clear it would be too high and catch on my wiper motor and linkage. Looks like I’m stuck with the one I made using jag inlet.
Thank you for your help and advice

Hope you don't mind me putting up your photos Kev?
This is how Kev did it, in my opinion the best way. It's much lower than mine, but needs a small amount of welding, i did mine
without resorting to machining or welding, but would do it Kevs way in hindsight

Description
Description
Description

Description
Description

[Edited on 12-6-19 by 40inches]

[Edited on 12-6-19 by 40inches]

[Edited on 12-6-19 by 40inches]

[Edited on 12-6-19 by 40inches]

quote:

---

Originally posted by RWD Focus
Just offered it up reversed but it catches on oil filler. In order to get it to clear it would be too high and catch on my wiper motor and linkage. Looks like I’m stuck with the one I made using jag inlet.
Thank you for your help and advice

---

Worth a look yes. Thanks

Have sent you a u2u RWDfocus regarding the inlet.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
Hope you don't mind me putting up your photos Kev?
This is how Kev did it, in my opinion the best way. It's much lower than mine, but needs a small amount of welding, i did mine
without resorting to machining or welding, but would do it Kevs way in hindsight

Description
Description
Description

Description
Description

[Edited on 12-6-19 by 40inches]

[Edited on 12-6-19 by 40inches]

[Edited on 12-6-19 by 40inches]

[Edited on 12-6-19 by 40inches]

---

The reason for not using the full lower St220 on the Aj is it because the bolts don’t line up or the injectors are in a slightly different place ?

Edit st220 not st200

[Edited on 13/6/19 by big_wasa]

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
The reason for not using the full lower St on the Aj is it because the bolts don’t line up or the injectors are in a slightly different place ?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
The reason for not using the full lower St on the Aj is it because the bolts don’t line up or the injectors are in a slightly different place ?

---

Mines an ST220.

Would be nice if it stopped bloody raining so I could drag it out. I need to sort some engine mounts.

Just dug up my research on the AJ30 from 6 years ago
I found one fitted to a Robin Hood that had the standard Jag exhaust manifolds
and a ST220 inlet and Emerald ECU. It made less than the standard power, about 220bhp I think.
Another was fitted in a Westfield, this is the spec from his website:

"Jenvey inlet manifolds and 45mm throttle bodies
Simpson race exhausts stainless 3 2 1 merge collectors
Raceco 7 1/4" titanium re-packable silencers"

That must have been eye wateringly expensive for:
Maximum bhp: 270bhp @ 7050rpm
Maximum torque: 222lbft @ 5322rpm

I think we accidentally hit on the perfect combination with the ST200

I can’t get my head around that.

In the back of my mind I recall all the st200 / st24 owners wanting the American Svt manifold.

Is there a difference between st200 and the vanilla 2.5 Mondeo/ Cougar inlet ?

Funny enough the Rocketeer on carbon plenums with exhausts didn’t make the numbers either.

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
Funny enough the Rocketeer on carbon plenums with exhausts didn’t make the numbers either.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
Funny enough the Rocketeer on carbon plenums with exhausts didn’t make the numbers either.

---

I've seen a post on Facebook by them with over 280bhp from one,running 750cc injectors without the VVT wired up

---

I was going on this one.

233 @ the crank

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
Is there a difference between st200 and the vanilla 2.5 Mondeo/ Cougar inlet ?

---

Another v6 Indy.

The st200 inlet is different (I'm assuming bigger bore) as it used to be the upgrade of choice along with the throttle body on the st24.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Partofthechaos

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
Is there a difference between st200 and the vanilla 2.5 Mondeo/ Cougar inlet ?

---

I hope not, I've just bought a standard one after spending a while looking at photos and concluding there was no visible difference.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
Another v6 Indy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903
The st200 inlet is different (I'm assuming bigger bore) as it used to be the upgrade of choice along with the throttle body on the st24.

---

I've used the rocketeer adapter, sump and flywheel in my Westfield I'm currently building. It's all good kit. Very well made.

How long did you have to wait for the rocketeer sump? Im fed up of emailing them asking when they will have some in stock again. Last i heard from them they said end of may, but now they won't even reply to my emails.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903
I've used the rocketeer adapter, sump and flywheel in my Westfield I'm currently building. It's all good kit. Very well made.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RWD Focus
How long did you have to wait for the rocketeer sump? Im fed up of emailing them asking when they will have some in stock again. Last i heard from them they said end of may, but now they won't even reply to my emails.

---

Rocket1

Rocket2

Rocket3

Rocket4

Rocket5

Yes its Bruce
Ive actually made a sump in the meantime so i can get my engine in and running.

quote:

---

Originally posted by RWD Focus
Just offered it up reversed but it catches on oil filler. In order to get it to clear it would be too high and catch on my wiper motor and linkage. Looks like I’m stuck with the one I made using jag inlet.
Thank you for your help and advice

---

I’ve fabricated one using the ST220 inlet tracts and made my own plenum with flange welded on for the throttle body. I’m using an Impreza throttle body. It fits nice and snug to rocker cover and fits under my wiper linkage. My engine is mounted as far back as it can be without touching the bulkhead

Any chance of sticking some photos up please ?

Im away for the weekend but will sort some when I'm back

No problem, Thankyou.

After yet another day of frustration, I'm finally giving up on my ITB set up - there's just too many problems and it's too fragile (due to my inexperience with such systems and learning as I go); also the results you guys are getting from the ST200 inlet are awesome!

As I can't really be bothered to start an ITB setup from scratch again at this point; can someone tell me what the dimensions of the ST200 manifold are? Especially how far back the throttle body sits, as my coolant bottle is slap bang in the middle of my bulkhead!

Cheers,
Ben

quote:

---

Originally posted by Badger_McLetcher
After yet another day of frustration, I'm finally giving up on my ITB set up - there's just too many problems and it's too fragile (due to my inexperience with such systems and learning as I go); also the results you guys are getting from the ST200 inlet are awesome!

As I can't really be bothered to start an ITB setup from scratch again at this point; can someone tell me what the dimensions of the ST200 manifold are? Especially how far back the throttle body sits, as my coolant bottle is slap bang in the middle of my bulkhead!

Cheers,
Ben

---

Description

Description

Description

That sounds promising then! If you could tell me how far back from the rear of the engine the throttle body protudes I can make a call on whether I've got the room to fit it!
Cheers,
Ben

quote:

---

Originally posted by Badger_McLetcher
That sounds promising then! If you could tell me how far back from the rear of the engine the throttle body protudes I can make a call on whether I've got the room to fit it!
Cheers,
Ben

---

Dave are you using a std 220 60mm throttle body or an enlarged one?

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903
Dave are you using a std 220 60mm throttle body or an enlarged one?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
From the back of the left hand/nearside cylinder head = 90mm, that's a ST220 TB

---

Not sure if any of you have any luck dealing with Bruce at Rocketeer but heres my experience of trying to buy a sump and gated baffle kit from him for the AJ30 engine.

Original enquiry by phone in early April, and he told me to email my enquiry him. This i did mid April and was told sumps available end of May. I then by reply sent him my full name, address, phone number and offered to pay in full up front for a sump. No reply to that email. In early June i emailed and asked if he had any update on the availability of sumps. again no reply. This morning i emailed him asking if he had any update and also asked if he was receiving my emails as he didn't seem to reply very often. His reply has just landed and it says the following:

Richard.
The sumps we have in stock are earmarked for kits. It'll be another couple of months before we have any surplus.

Best regards

Bruce

I understand a kit sale will make him more money than a sump sale but why not make it clear the sumps in production were for kits and not individual sale. The word tosser springs to mind, im pretty sure if i dealt with my customers in this way in either of my businesses i would have some very unhappy customers.
Rant over.
On with sump making tomorrow that will be ok for rallying rather than the one i made just to get a run out of the car as i was fully intent on using a proven one from Rocketeer.

[Edited on 16/6/19 by RWD Focus]

quote:

---

Originally posted by RWD Focus
Not sure if any of you have any luck dealing with Bruce at Rocketeer but heres my experience of trying to buy a sump and gated baffle kit from him for the AJ30 engine.

Original enquiry by phone in early April, and he told me to email my enquiry him. This i did mid April and was told sumps available end of May. I then by reply sent him my full name, address, phone number and offered to pay in full up front for a sump. No reply to that email. In early June i emailed and asked if he had any update on the availability of sumps. again no reply. This morning i emailed him asking if he had any update and also asked if he was receiving my emails as he didn't seem to reply very often. His reply has just landed and it says the following:

Richard.
The sumps we have in stock are earmarked for kits. It'll be another couple of months before we have any surplus.

Best regards

Bruce

I understand a kit sale will make him more money than a sump sale but why not make it clear the sumps in production were for kits and not individual sale. The word tosser springs to mind, im pretty sure if i dealt with my customers in this way in either of my businesses i would have some very unhappy customers.
Rant over.
On with sump making tomorrow that will be ok for rallying rather than the one i made just to get a run out of the car as i was fully intent on using a proven one from Rocketeer.

[Edited on 16/6/19 by RWD Focus]

---

It hits my crossmember, Its an xtype one i have altered to get a run out of the car.
I will just baffle it properly and use that one with slight changes to my crossmember.


Update on Rocketeers customer service skills. My latest email below and then his reply.

Bruce
Why didn’t you say that in April when i first emailed you, this was after phoning to enquire about a sump and being told to email my enquiry.
You then sent the following email on 26th April
"Richard,
New sumps should be in at the end of May.
Price is £350 including fitting kit and baffle.
A gated baffle is available if you're thinking of track work. Price £75
Bruce”

I then offered to pay for one and sent you my full name and address to which i received no reply.

Now you tell me no sumps available. Brilliant customer service skills i must say.
I will ensure as many people as possible get to know how you look after potential customers.


His reply has just arrived.

Richard.
I am looking after customers who have bought full kits. I'm sorry if that is inconvenient for you.
I'm grateful for the condor in your reply. Given your reaction I'll not be supplying you any parts at any time at any price.

Good day.


Im impressed by his response
What a legend.

Tig welder out tomorrow and Bruce can stick his sump up his hole, what a wanker.

[Edited on 16/6/19 by RWD Focus]

[Edited on 16/6/19 by RWD Focus]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3
Did you experiment with the VVT?

Did the mapper say it's worth while/noticeable when the VVT is used?

[Edited on 28/2/19 by CosKev3]

---

The VVT was set to cut in at 5200rpm as on the S-Type, and yes you can see the blip on the graph, worth about
15bhp and 10 torques
I am going back, in about an hour, to have a play with the VVT. A power run with and without it fully activated, the logic being that there should be a cross over point that will become the switch point
The ST200 plenum and ST220 throttle body work well, still accelerating past the 7200RPM red line.
If you are running MS2 Extra I can email you the Msq file, when it is finalised?

---

I've measured the standard (?) 2.5L Ford V6 manifold. The inlet is 57mm, the ports onto the lower manifold are 27mm (long) and 30mm (short). Is anyone able to tell me how far away from the ST200 manifold is this please? Externally it is a very similar design as far as I can tell.

Thanks.


Description
Description

[Edited on 17/6/19 by Partofthechaos]

[Edited on 17/6/19 by Partofthechaos]

St200 inlet. Throttle inlet is just over 65mm. Smaller port is 30mm and bigger 31.5.


Jagin1


Jagin2


Jagin3

I want to hear these bad boys sing, shiny shiny. Just a shame there no good for a 7





[Edited on 18/6/19 by big_wasa]

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903
St200 inlet. Throttle inlet is just over 65mm. Smaller port is 30mm and bigger 31.5.


Jagin1


Jagin2


Jagin3

---

If nothing else it will get you up and running until you find one.

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
If nothing else it will get you up and running until you find one.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches

---

Right, I got me an ST24 inlet manifold to be getting on with, an ST220 throttle body and some 15mm aluminium plate to make some spacers out of. I offered up the Jag fuel rail but it's too tall - I'd need to make the spacer about 20mm. What fuel rails are you guys using? The ST220 and ST200 ones both look a bit lower profile.

Cheers,
Ben

Standard AJ30 fuel rail on mine,with all the standard crap cut off the ends and AN6 fittings welded on.

ST220 injectors are at a different angle to AJ30,hence why a ST220 lower inlet wont fit.

What makes you say AJ30 rail wont fit?

[Edited on 22/6/19 by CosKev3]

There must be different versions of the aj30 fuel rail as mine is plastic?

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903
There must be different versions of the aj30 fuel rail as mine is plastic?

---

Oh nutsack my freshly arrived 15mm ally will be useless then

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903
Oh nutsack my freshly arrived 15mm ally will be useless then

---

What year engines did the plastic ones come off?

Both engines I've got had metal ones,strange

Oh yeah just looked on ebay,the plastic fuel rail lower inlet is quite different to the one with a metal fuel rail.

I think you will need to get one with a metal rail to work with the ST200 upper.

On the top of the metal rail I've cut the pipe inlet off flat with the rail,then welded AN fittings on the ends.
On the rear of the rail under the TB I've had to extend the rail with some steel pipe and angle it down so the rail exits under the TB.

https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.co.uk%2Fulk%2Fitm%2F201946977532

Mine is the plastic lower, but I used the 2litre fuel rail because it's dead ended.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
Mine is the plastic lower, but I used the 2litre fuel rail because it's dead ended.

---

This is what I have.


Jagplain

Seems to be the early engines had this set up then 01 onwards have the steel rail. This uses gaskets rather than the oval o rings.

Dave was yours the same as this? And you used the 2.0 v6 one? A straight swap I take it with injector fitment/angles etc?

In fact looking on the bigger screen on the laptop looks like its going to have to be a full lower manifold change. Ffs. Hope the injectors are all the same as I've had these overhauled.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903
In fact looking on the bigger screen on the laptop looks like its going to have to be a full lower manifold change. Ffs. Hope the injectors are all the same as I've had these overhauled.

---

Cheers Dave. I dont know if its camera angles or if the lower manifold with the steel rail looks thinner? than the one with the plastic rail aswell.

The steel rail is thinner and much lower profile.

Have just offered up the inlet (with fuel rail removed) and I'm still probably a 25mm spacer short.


Jaginlet5

Having seen the pics of kevs build up his lower inlet looks a bit thicker. Have measured up the lower inlet and I have a depth of around 47mm. If anyone has the type of lower manifold with the metal fuel rail could you by any chance measure its thickness to compare?


Jaginlet6

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
The steel rail is thinner and much lower profile.

---

I have just measured my spacer and it is 30mm, that gives me 30mm clearance to the highest part of the steel fuel rail
from the manifold. So a 15mm spacer would give 15mm clearance.
I will see if I can measure the lower inlet. my engine is a 2001.

As near as I can tell the lower manifold is 50mm high.

Thanks Dave. And apologies for taking over your dyno thread

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903
Thanks Dave. And apologies for taking over your dyno thread

---

I've just sussed that another reason why its sat a bit higher is of the COP's its resting on them. A 25mm spacer will do I think. Think I'm going to have to go the same road as kev and machine an st220 manifold to suit as I dont fancy drilling out a 25mm block of ally

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903
I've just sussed that another reason why its sat a bit higher is of the COP's its resting on them. A 25mm spacer will do I think. Think I'm going to have to go the same road as kev and machine an st220 manifold to suit as I dont fancy drilling out a 25mm block of ally

---

If anyone interested here is the difference between the 2 lower inlets. The all plastic fuel rail version is 99-01 and the steel rail is 01 onwards. There is a 10mm difference in height with the steel rail version being taller aswell as the much taller fuel rail with the plastic rail.


Jagfuelrail

The 2.1 rail works a treat with no blanking of the fuel rail pressure sensor needed. Thanks for the heads up with that Dave.

[Edited on 30/6/19 by sdh2903]

I finally got around to slapping the plenum on the Duratec 30. The ports are huge and look much bigger than the St200.

Question, how high does the st200 manifold sit above the rocker cover please ?

I will try and get some better photos if it compares well.



I also commented that the Aj30 plate didn’t bolt direct to the Duratec 30 as there was a dowl in a differant location. I got the dowl out but the plate doesn’t seem a great fit. Even with just one dowl in the block I can’t get all the bolts to go in. And I can tell from the starter flywheel it’s not 100% centred.



[Edited on 18/7/19 by big_wasa]

[Edited on 18/7/19 by big_wasa]

And the first start on the Oem ecu

On the Jaguar version there are two senders close to each other on the near side of the engine tapped into an oil gallery. One has one wire one has two wires. Am I right in thinking the one with one wire is oil light and the other one is oil temperature? Or is it an oil pressure sender ? Thanks

One wire is the low oil pressure switch. It earths through the block. The second ? Wouldn’t oil temp need more volume like in the sump ?

I thought 1 wire would be for oil pressure light. Maybe the car had an oil pressure gauge, i can't remember, that may be the 2 wire sender. Your right about oil temp probably needing to be in the sump.
I will get a couple of pics tomorrow.

quote:

---

Originally posted by RWD Focus
I thought 1 wire would be for oil pressure light. Maybe the car had an oil pressure gauge, i can't remember, that may be the 2 wire sender. Your right about oil temp probably needing to be in the sump.
I will get a couple of pics tomorrow.

---

Thank you

Bit more googling and 1 is oil pressure light, other one is oil temp.

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/3330/1961/1600/0ld%20asy.0.jpg

Thanks

[Edited on 22/7/19 by RWD Focus]

quote:

---

Originally posted by RWD Focus
Bit more googling and 1 is oil pressure light, other one is oil temp.

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/3330/1961/1600/0ld%20asy.0.jpg

Thanks

[Edited on 22/7/19 by RWD Focus]

---

Strange isn't it. I would say FWD. Mine is mounted very differently. Ive fabricated mounts to pick up on the bolt holes around the oil switches, and same area on the other side

[Edited on 22/7/19 by RWD Focus]

Looks like a Ford FWD, possibly a X-type. That photo is the front view.
When they converted it to RWD they used the oil filter/cooler as the engine mount you find on the S-Type.

Description
Description

Yeh that looks like an x type lump. There is a huge lump of cast iron in the V to hang it of the inner wing. It’s so big you have to take a head of to get it out.

So I am pondering now.

I’ve seen an st220 converted to Awd with the jag x type box so they must be the same bolt drilling’s.

The block for the 3.0L S type / X type and ST220 are the same so all the boxes bolt up if you move the dowels.

Crank is also the the same as is oil pump etc.

Ive swopped between blocks from each in my car when Ive done rebuilds.


Incidentally has anyone considered the plastic plenum from the Maverick... as used on nobles to over 700bhp (mine being one of them).
Looking at the Rocketeer carbon manifold, it looks loverly, but for a single throttle NA engine the chambers look too large to me... given the results being poorer than the ST200 manifold I wonder if they got it wrong.
Ive developed ITB's for mine... it outperforms the ST220 manifold above 6500rpm considerably.


Description

[Edited on 10/10/19 by andygtt]

Ive been looking at plenum options. Including the 3.7L Cobra.
Trouble with itb's for a 7 style car is going to be height. The fwd manifold actually sits nicely in a 7 due to the step in the bulkhead.

Ive got a lovely set of Nasp exhaust manifolds designed for 3.5/3.7. Not that they would be any good in a 7.

I would love to find a set of -1mm rods like the Nobel. Yours is definitely something to aspire to.

actually -2mm

I actually have 5 spare... as I seem to have lost the 6th one lol

you can get forged pistons that suit the stock length rod (which I run) and you can get KI stock length rods for $600.... but it starts to add up when you find you need oil squirters machined into the stock block and the gaskets and stretch bolts are not cheap...

Not cheap... but then what engine is when your tuning it 3-4 times its stock power?

quote:

---

Originally posted by andygtt
The block for the 3.0L S type / X type and ST220 are the same so all the boxes bolt up if you move the dowels.

Crank is also the the same as is oil pump etc.

Ive swopped between blocks from each in my car when Ive done rebuilds.


Incidentally has anyone considered the plastic plenum from the Maverick... as used on nobles to over 700bhp (mine being one of them).
Looking at the Rocketeer carbon manifold, it looks loverly, but for a single throttle NA engine the chambers look too large to me... given the results being poorer than the ST200 manifold I wonder if they got it wrong.
Ive developed ITB's for mine... it outperforms the ST220 manifold above 6500rpm considerably.


Description

[Edited on 10/10/19 by andygtt]

---

I used to run a BW S300SX, made over 700bhp easy and my intake was the limitation... it WAS NOT laggy before anyone asks, it way outperformed any previous twin turbo setup I previously ran.

This engine made power from 4000-8000rpm... it made 700bhp for 1500rpm so wasn't peaky.
It was making 500ftlb from 4000rpm! peak torque was 630ftlb wish from memory.

For the Jag heads and the new engine package Im targeting 8500rpm and much more power than before.

For the new spec engine I have moved to a BW EFR9174 which I have seen make 1000bhp... but you really need to match the compressor map to your engine.



[Edited on 10/10/19 by andygtt]

Was this the one Andy?

Description

Yes thats one of my old dyno charts, I moved it on 50bhp from that a few years later

had the same throttle response to my V10 M5's so it was very controllable on the throttle.... This V6 is a truly awesome bit of kit and very underrated and underused.

Worth mentioning the ford version of the sump has the bowl and pickup at the rear so might well miss a 7 type crossmember!

quote:

---

Originally posted by andygtt
The block for the 3.0L S type / X type and ST220 are the same so all the boxes bolt up if you move the dowels.

Crank is also the the same as is oil pump etc.

Ive swopped between blocks from each in my car when Ive done rebuilds.


Incidentally has anyone considered the plastic plenum from the Maverick... as used on nobles to over 700bhp (mine being one of them).
Looking at the Rocketeer carbon manifold, it looks loverly, but for a single throttle NA engine the chambers look too large to me... given the results being poorer than the ST200 manifold I wonder if they got it wrong.
Ive developed ITB's for mine... it outperforms the ST220 manifold above 6500rpm considerably.


Description

[Edited on 10/10/19 by andygtt]

---

I used to run a ford mondeo ST220 gearbox (that's what's fitted stock in the noble)... but Ive made an adapter plate and moved to a more modern box with beefier internals so I can release more torque (it was capped at around 630ftlb in the mod range). Not run the new box yet.

I developed a triple plate clutch to fit the engine, very light and responsive... so light it allows flat shifts going up (similar shift times to a sequential) but has to be heavily blipped going down as it drops to idle between shifts if you change normally. kinda tainted the driving experience on the road but I wasn't prepared to take a backwards step so am going DBW to control the down shifts and retain the awesome upshifts.

Its not a dyno queen engine either, totally usable the car does 0-150mph in sub 10 seconds... that's with no traction aids, which shows the spread of power and contrail nature of the engine.

I love this engine which is why i'm continuing to tweek it and find the best places to make more power for less boost.

Hi Andy
You say you have developed a throttle body set up. What actual throttle bodies are you using?
Thank you
Richard

M3 throttle bodies with a carbon lower manifold to adapt from the ITB's to the head.

quote:

---

Originally posted by andygtt
I used to run a ford mondeo ST220 gearbox (that's what's fitted stock in the noble)... but Ive made an adapter plate and moved to a more modern box with beefier internals so I can release more torque (it was capped at around 630ftlb in the mod range). Not run the new box yet.

I developed a triple plate clutch to fit the engine, very light and responsive... so light it allows flat shifts going up (similar shift times to a sequential) but has to be heavily blipped going down as it drops to idle between shifts if you change normally. kinda tainted the driving experience on the road but I wasn't prepared to take a backwards step so am going DBW to control the down shifts and retain the awesome upshifts.

Its not a dyno queen engine either, totally usable the car does 0-150mph in sub 10 seconds... that's with no traction aids, which shows the spread of power and contrail nature of the engine.

I love this engine which is why i'm continuing to tweek it and find the best places to make more power for less boost.

---

there is a picture above of the carbon plenum I made... my whole car is carbon, just making a new dash ATM.

Really must stop playing with the noble and get back to the carbon capri... Im easily distracted with my hobby projects lol

I must admit i'm really looking forward to playing with the VVT on the jag heads, the ford ones were on the absolute limit at 8000rpm (due to the rockers but I never actually had a failure despite going to 8100rpm), I've gone dry sump so I can go higher with the jag ones (oil pump is the limitation on revs on the Jag BTW) but i'm not sure if the VVT is going to cope at those rev ranges.

The fact the stock engine with a decent intake and exhaust can go to 270-280bhp bodes well compared to the Ford heads that can't get close to that.

I get excited by threads like this by people bucking the trend and trying there own ideas... so many armchair experts when it comes to these areas its hard to sift the facts from the bull.

The VVT restricted top end power on mine,so now it comes on at 1800rpm and goes off at 5800rpm,rev limit set to 7100rpm and power was still climbing but mapper wasn't too keen to rev it higher!

My m8 has deleted the VVT,runs Piper cams and a 8500rpm rev limiter,running a dry sump system along with forged rods and pistons and Jenvey Itbs,that made 326bhp.

On stock pistons I wouldn't rev it too high either, I run forged pistons.

Main reason to run ITB's on mine is so I could make the plenum to whatever size I wanted, my stock ford one becomes less efficient above 6500rpm and can't flow enough air for much more than 700bhp... the gains Im expecting will be from that rather than the ITB's themselves.
As I said earlier, whilst good looking the Rocketeer plenum doesn't look the right volumes for NA to me, if its slightly wrong it will loose power all over the place... its this reason I went ITB, as the plenum size is less sensitive, its just about getting runner lengths correct on ITB's and they are relatively easy to get right.

On the dyno on a stock ST220 engine my ITB's gained power everywhere except between 4500-6500rpm... and I cap torque to save the box in that rev range..... now don't get me wrong the ITB's never bettered the stock plenum as the engines peak was in that range, but stock it goes off a total cliff at 6500rpm and my ITB's kept it climbing to 7100rpm were the engine hit its cam limit.
I expected the mid and top end results, but it was a total surprise to find they were better slightly low down, I was expecting it to be rubbish there.

Im also hoping to unleash some music from the engine, the turbo makes it loose the V6 song and just becomes angry sounding rather than tuneful if that makes sense.

My goals are only 450/500bhp (at least for now lol). Plan is just fit k1 rods, forged pistons, drill for the oil squirters (but also fit jets, not just drilled holes...), mild porting/cleaning up in the heads and it should make what i'm after with less than 1 bar boost. Interesting that your running up to 8000rpm on the st220 heads/finger follows, standard valve springs or uprated?.

Ian

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oddified
My goals are only 450/500bhp (at least for now lol). Plan is just fit k1 rods, forged pistons, drill for the oil squirters (but also fit jets, not just drilled holes...), mild porting/cleaning up in the heads and it should make what i'm after with less than 1 bar boost. Interesting that your running up to 8000rpm on the st220 heads/finger follows, standard valve springs or uprated?.

Ian

---

That's great info thank you very much, i'll add valve springs to my list of parts i'm gathering at the moment

Ian

Wow that moves.

quote:

---

Originally posted by andygtt

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oddified
My goals are only 450/500bhp (at least for now lol). Plan is just fit k1 rods, forged pistons, drill for the oil squirters (but also fit jets, not just drilled holes...), mild porting/cleaning up in the heads and it should make what i'm after with less than 1 bar boost. Interesting that your running up to 8000rpm on the st220 heads/finger follows, standard valve springs or uprated?.

Ian

---

Stock noble engines with cast pistons and short rods make reliable 450-500bhp, add forged pistons and you can go to 550bhp.

What you plan should see your target at 0.6-7 bar... the ford heads respond fantastically to mild flowing (much better than the jag versions).... with my massive old truck turbo mine made 480bhp at 0.6bar and a very usable power band, I could give it full beans in wet with this actuator pressure it was so smooth.

DONT run stock valve springs, fit the piper upgraded ones, boost makes the valves bounce with stock springs even at low revs and in worst case can cause the valves to fail (ie head drop off), its rare, but it has happened.... its for this reason noble retarded the exhaust cam one tooth to reduce the engines top end rpm range.

The noble block just has welding tips drilled and tapped into the block, I've had the valve versions but am moving away from them as its another thing to fail without you being aware... I can monitor and manage idle oil pressure.

The oil pump is the mechanical limitation for revs as past 8000rpm it cavities and can also break, the followers are claimed to fail, but I've not know of them failing even though I've rev'd to that for 8 years and know of others who have taken them to 8600rpm (big issues for the ST220 engine at those revs tho).

edited to add a video of my lardy ST220 powered car on Silverstone... gives you an idea what this engine is capable of with a turbo.


ST220 engine with a turbo


[Edited on 11/10/19 by andygtt]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3
Did you experiment with the VVT?

Did the mapper say it's worth while/noticeable when the VVT is used?

[Edited on 28/2/19 by CosKev3]

---

The VVT was set to cut in at 5200rpm as on the S-Type, and yes you can see the blip on the graph, worth about
15bhp and 10 torques
I am going back, in about an hour, to have a play with the VVT. A power run with and without it fully activated, the logic being that there should be a cross over point that will become the switch point
The ST200 plenum and ST220 throttle body work well, still accelerating past the 7200RPM red line.
If you are running MS2 Extra I can email you the Msq file, when it is finalised?

---

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JjiGmJXOjAea5lGTwCKgG8o_xC9wuCXM/view

Page 24 in that

Very interesting/useful document for info, i've saved a copy just in case in the future i want to play with a mix and match engine combination of st220/jag hybrid

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oddified
Very interesting/useful document for info, i've saved a copy just in case in the future i want to play with a mix and match engine combination of st220/jag hybrid

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oddified
Very interesting/useful document for info, i've saved a copy just in case in the future i want to play with a mix and match engine combination of st220/jag hybrid

---

Hows the running in going?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oddified

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oddified
Very interesting/useful document for info, i've saved a copy just in case in the future i want to play with a mix and match engine combination of st220/jag hybrid

---

Hows the running in going?

---

All good got a few hundred miles on the engine now. As suspected it is a bit quicker with the head porting even though the compression has been dropped a bit. Just gathering the last few parts and machining/making/welding up the parts for the turbo install...next week is the plan

---

With the lock down, i've been using the car for essential journeys/shopping, and perhaps a little bit of mapping/fine tuning along the way. Started with 0.6bar boost, then shortly after increasing that i needed larger injectors again and a stronger clutch and upped the wastegate spring, boost solenoid/closed loop, ecu knock detection/control, water/meth injection over 1 bar and data logging everything. The engines really do like a bit of boost! , 3 switchable maps set up now with 0.85bar, 1 bar and 1.25 bar...for now!. It does go very well indeed

Ian

Very very cool

Hi guys a bit of advice if I may.

I’m using the AJ30 with an RX8 gearbox in a Chrysler Sunbeam With some of the Rocketeer parts.

What exhaust manifolds are being used? I can find Moneo tubular ones but I can’t seem to find any RWD application ones that I can then modify?

Nev

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nevtiger
Hi guys a bit of advice if I may.

I’m using the AJ30 with an RX8 gearbox in a Chrysler Sunbeam With some of the Rocketeer parts.

What exhaust manifolds are being used? I can find Moneo tubular ones but I can’t seem to find any RWD application ones that I can then modify?

Nev

---

Mine

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
Mine

---

They are from a Ginetta G50 with the 3.5/3.7 cyclone engine.

I’ve chopped the flange of and bought some thick stainless steel Aj/Duratec30 flanges. I’ve only got as far as tacking one side on due to multi projects.

They will suit a Gt style car but probably not my 7.

If you have been lucky enough to be able to buy Rocketeer parts would they not sell you a pair of there’s ?

Interesting you should say that!

I had asked Bruce for a pair of manifolds, he said they would be a few months but eventually he then sent out the email to all customers stating they were going to concentrate on converting cars only so I never did get a pair. However they would still need modifying as the starter is still in the Jaguar position and not the Rocketeer position.

One of the chaps on here had a similar run in with a Bruce but didn’t manage to get any parts. I think he then said he would only do the kits. Strange as the market for a kit must be small but people spending smaller chunks for there own projects will be larger. In my book a sale is a profit, so his must be more off a hobby for like minded mx5 fans with deep pockets.


DanSt does some nice head flanges.

I didn’t have a run in with Bruce I found him to be a nice guy. Biggest issue for him I believe was he was/is? In full time employment as well as doing the kits.

But I do agree that sales to allow conversions to other vehicles would be a cash bonus for him.

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
One of the chaps on here had a similar run in with a Bruce but didn’t manage to get any parts. I think he then said he would only do the kits. Strange as the market for a kit must be small but people spending smaller chunks for there own projects will be larger. In my book a sale is a profit, so his must be more off a hobby for like minded mx5 fans with deep pockets.


DanSt does some nice head flanges.

---

I don’t mind paying for good quality parts but there is something very satisfying about macking stuff.

Interestingly Rocketeer have started selling things again to self builders. They had put a stop on it.

Wow wow wow.

I’ve just watched Ian’s latest dyno vid and wow again 500 bhp plus. That is a very cool engine in a very cool car.

Can I ask where you sourced the pistons and rods please.

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
Wow wow wow.

I’ve just watched Ian’s latest dyno vid and wow again 500 bhp plus. That is a very cool engine in a very cool car.

Can I ask where you sourced the pistons and rods please.

---

Hi, sorry to hijack the thread but Oddified what piston oil cooler jets did you use (part number?) as I could do with adding some in my engine, Alfa V6, having changed the rods these are now missing, the high output engines had them as standard in the block as well. If this is doable it would be a great solution. Some pics would be really useful. PM me if you don't want to derail this excellent thread.

Many Thanks in advance

Mark

[Edited on 1/6/20 by Markymark]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markymark
Hi, sorry to hijack the thread but Oddified what piston oil cooler jets did you use (part number?) as I could do with adding some in my engine, Alfa V6, having changed the rods these are now missing, the high output engines had them as standard in the block as well. If this is doable it would be a great solution. Some pics would be really useful. PM me if you don't want to derail this excellent thread.

Many Thanks in advance

Mark

[Edited on 1/6/20 by Markymark]

---

Thanks Oddified will have a look into that, see if its a goer

Mark

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oddified

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
Wow wow wow.

I’ve just watched Ian’s latest dyno vid and wow again 500 bhp plus. That is a very cool engine in a very cool car.

Can I ask where you sourced the pistons and rods please.

---

The engines do work well with a bit of boost!

I had a set of custom Wiseco pistons made, i wanted 9.5-1 comp and it was the easiest way (if not cheap..) to get exactly what i wanted.
The rods came from Xpower engines with ARP bolts, probably just Chinese rods like K1's and most others that are sub £100 each, look, feel and measured up spot on though.

The only other things i did to the engine are- under piston oil jets (i used BMW valved jets, drilled the block and pressed in), Piper valve springs/caps, mild porting in the heads/cut the seats/valves and Siemens 60lb/630cc injectors (they are maxed out at over 90% duty cycles on the high boost setting though).

It seems you don't have to try to hard to make over 500bhp with these engines...

---

BTW... my experience is EGT is the enemy with this engine when turbocharged, it’s worth monitoring and putting safeties in for it.

I've turned the fuel pressure up a few weeks ago , 4 bar at idle now but i've also been tinkering with many other things as well, on maximum attack mode the injectors are touching 92% duty, afr's around 11.4 so not overly rich either for the boost/power.

I have the pre turbo/exhaust manifold pressure connected into the ecu and logged so i can see the pre/post turbo pressure ratio, that also gives some very good info on the general 'happiness' of the setup and turbo efficiency but an egt sensor connected into the ecu is probably also a good idea with some trims/compensations mapped in.

quote:

---

Originally posted by andygtt
BTW... my experience is EGT is the enemy with this engine when turbocharged, it’s worth monitoring and putting safeties in for it.

---

well the material the valves are made of is rated to 850 deg c... i recorded 900 deg c on 0.6bar and 950 deg c on high boost.

So i upgraded to inconel valves

quote:

---

Originally posted by andygtt
well the material the valves are made of is rated to 850 deg c... i recorded 900 deg c on 0.6bar and 950 deg c on high boost.

So i upgraded to inconel valves

---

Im mine i ran one per bank in the noble collector which is about 6inches from the head... its not an idea reading but better than nothing.
Certainly its better than running one post turbo which is what all the others running EGT on the noble do.

Im currently upgrading the Motec ECU to something a bit more advanced and will monitor every bank.... its gets expensive very quickly as just getting the bung welded into the inconel manifolds is over £500, then i need the sensor etc etc

Useful info as always

I fitted one sensor, it's on no2 cylinder about 4" from the head/exhaust flange. On my low boost setting (0.75 bar boost / 430bhp) the highest peak egt i've had is 792c and that was foot flat uphill.

I've not tried it yet on the higher boost settings as i'm trying to be kind to a new clutch and bed it it in a bit lol. Obviously i expect the EGT's to go up with the higher boost settings. Googling and reading various forums, 900c generally seems to be considered the maximum, above is a bit risky and get up to 950 - 1000c is very risky (all assuming regular exhaust valves of course).

The gauge is linked into the ecu and i've setup compensations to add fuel above 900c but i'll have to see yet where it ends up on maximum attack mode

Ian

I suspect a lot of the heat is because of the noble collector design which seems restrictive plus im measuring 3 cylinders all in that very restriction.
Im remaking one of the manifolds to get rid of this restriction... can do nothing about the other as the turbo is there

I think your way is better for getting an accurate reading... I based my safeties off of it, so if one changed significantly from the other it would start cutting boost etc.

quote:

---

Originally posted by andygtt
I suspect a lot of the heat is because of the noble collector design which seems restrictive plus im measuring 3 cylinders all in that very restriction.
Im remaking one of the manifolds to get rid of this restriction... can do nothing about the other as the turbo is there

I think your way is better for getting an accurate reading... I based my safeties off of it, so if one changed significantly from the other it would start cutting boost etc.

---

Im afraid not

quote:

---

Originally posted by andygtt
Im afraid not

---

With a few more miles on the clutch, i checked the EGT's on map 2 today (1.25bar boost, ~500bhp) and peaked at 890c. Logically map 3 will create higher EGT's again but i have map 3 running a bit richer and it also activates the water/meth system (on maps 1 and 2 the water/meth isn't used) so time will tell when i check it, plus i only intend to run this setting for a bit of drag racing so it'll only be for a few seconds

Ian

My EGT went from 900deg c on low boost 0.6bar to 950deg c on 1.45bar high boost.... it was around 470-480bhp on 0.6bar so not miles away from what your seeing at 500bhp so Im interested if you see the same increase trend I had when you push the power up.

My build is now complete (well as complete as they ever get) big thanks to dave and kev for all their help along the way. Without seeing dave's build I prob never would have thought of using the Aj30.

Had the car back on the rollers a couple weeks back to iron out a couple of wrinkles and also the first visit my fuel pump was starting to fail. Gained a useful 20bhp and ended up with 229 bhp on a hub dyno.

Very nice

Any chance of some under bonnet pics. I would love to see how its packaged, I’ve seen kevs.

[Edited on 4/10/20 by big_wasa]

Very similar to kevs.

Anything of the exhaust please And I though a turbo zetec was crammed in.

I don't have many useful pics of the exhausts to be honest. I'm using the same st220 manifolds as dave. If I were chasing more power theres prob some decent gains to be had from a pair of tubular manifolds. I do fancy giving tig welding a bash at some point so may well revisit.

Good job Steve Another AJ30, we need to start a club
Kev has long exhaust manifold headers, his has around 10bhp more than mine.

Very nice, thank you.

I've got some veeeeery long primary headers. I can't see me getting them in a 7 though. Hence comparing other ideas.

What starter did you use Steve?
I had to use 25mm spacers for the downpipe to clear it.

Description

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
Good job Steve Another AJ30, we need to start a club
Kev has long exhaust manifold headers, his has around 10bhp more than mine.

---

I am using the rocketeer sump which tucks the standard s type starter right in so no issues with clearance.


image hosting

quote:

---

Originally posted by andygtt
My EGT went from 900deg c on low boost 0.6bar to 950deg c on 1.45bar high boost.... it was around 470-480bhp on 0.6bar so not miles away from what your seeing at 500bhp so Im interested if you see the same increase trend I had when you push the power up.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oddified

quote:

---

Originally posted by andygtt
My EGT went from 900deg c on low boost 0.6bar to 950deg c on 1.45bar high boost.... it was around 470-480bhp on 0.6bar so not miles away from what your seeing at 500bhp so Im interested if you see the same increase trend I had when you push the power up.

---

Well after much messing about with clutches for several months, making my own twin plate which sorted that and then breaking 4th gear in the gearbox a few days afterwards which is now changed for the bigger/stronger 01E box...everything's holding together perfectly now! lol . Boost setting #3/maximum attack mode tested up to 2 bar boost, the peak egt's are only around 880c but on this setting i have it running richer at around 11.0 afr and also water/meth activated with a 10 gph nozzle (devils own system) which is no higher egt's than the lower boost setting (but that's a little leaner and no water/meth). The engine certainly likes a little bit more fuel and water/meth (which also helped lower the IAT's as expected) and the car is quite nippy at 2 bar boost!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by andygtt

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oddified

quote:

---

Originally posted by andygtt
My EGT went from 900deg c on low boost 0.6bar to 950deg c on 1.45bar high boost.... it was around 470-480bhp on 0.6bar so not miles away from what your seeing at 500bhp so Im interested if you see the same increase trend I had when you push the power up.

---

Well after much messing about with clutches for several months, making my own twin plate which sorted that and then breaking 4th gear in the gearbox a few days afterwards which is now changed for the bigger/stronger 01E box...everything's holding together perfectly now! lol . Boost setting #3/maximum attack mode tested up to 2 bar boost, the peak egt's are only around 880c but on this setting i have it running richer at around 11.0 afr and also water/meth activated with a 10 gph nozzle (devils own system) which is no higher egt's than the lower boost setting (but that's a little leaner and no water/meth). The engine certainly likes a little bit more fuel and water/meth (which also helped lower the IAT's as expected) and the car is quite nippy at 2 bar boost!

---

2bar, very impressive!!!! i was 650hp at the hubs with 1.45bar, but i couldn't get the inlet to make more power with extra boost above that even though my turbo could deliver 2bar.

What inlet manifold are you running? did you machine your cams?.

Good to know the heads can take that kind of boost, In previous iterations I ran up to 1.6bar but it was actually less power (626bhp flywheel) at the time due to the engine spec i ran.... I capped at 1.6bar as at the time didn't know if the engine/transmission could take more than 600bhp (it was widely thought it couldn't at the time).

---

If anyone is looking for a cheap 65mm throttle body the go to Ebay.com (USA) and search for a Ford Crown Victoria throttle body from the late nineties on a 4.6 litre V8. It has the same mounting hole distances. I paid less than £30 including postage from a 56000 mile car.

Costkev
What do you put the variation down to? two of you posted similar figures last year (or was it the year before) when the mapping was done. A 40bhp drop is quite a chunk, were the original figures a little ambitious or are there other factors, not finger pointing just curious.

[Edited on 20/3/21 by mgb281]

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903
St200 inlet. Throttle inlet is just over 65mm. Smaller port is 30mm and bigger 31.5.


Jagin1


Jagin2


Jagin3

---

I used the ST220 throttle body, can't remember the size but Joolz didn't find any a problem with idle.
Should say that I think the ST220 TB is around 68-70mm and is cable operated which gives a good amount of adjustment for idle.

Description

[Edited on 28-3-21 by 40inches]
eBay Item

[Edited on 28-3-21 by 40inches]

I do not have a ST220 throttle body to measure but this ad off Ebay says that it is 60mm;
k8AAOSwXSJXOtN0" target="_blank">https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Mondeo-st220-enlarged-throttle-body-65mm/393184243385?hash=item5b8b9b6eb9:gk8AAOSwXSJXOtN0
The Crown Victoria/Mustang one is actually 67mm, its worth a look, you may need to look for a while due to most of the sellers charging silly prices to send to the UK. When I bought is was with Ebay's Global Shipping but here is an example;
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1998-2004-98-99-00-01-02-03-04-FORD-CROWN-VICTORIA-THROTTLE-BODY-OEM/312570090899?fits=Model%3ACrown+Victoria&hash=item48 c6a11593%3Ag%3AEo4AAOSw2XFUh6MZ&LH_ItemCondition=3000

[Edited on 28/3/21 by mgb281]

I'm fairly sure the standard ST220 throttle body is 60mm (i'll double check tomorrow as i have one on my bench..). I have a 68mm fbw on now from a Merc, no issues what so ever but not really relevant as the engine isn't standard and a turbo fitted.

Standard st200/st220 is 60mm. I had mine bored out to 65mm.

The only issues I've had with idle were air leak issues between the st200 inlet and the adapter plates. Thick Cork gaskets cured it. I don't run an Iacv and mine idles even from cold with no pedal input quite happily. Although to assist I did raise the idle to around 950/1000 rpms.

I found it to be hyper sensitive when trying to use an iacv, I tried the Ford and also a bosch one.

Yep, I was wrong. Checking my notes and memory the ST220 is 60mm and the TB that came with the ST200 inlet was 50mm
My set up with ST200 inlet and ST220 TB was still flowing and increasing power at 7200rpm

from the info above am I right in saying:

The ST200 plenum would have come with a 50mm TB but some have fitted a ST220 TB (60mm) or even a bored out one to 68mm with good results.

I presume the ST200 plenum inlet has been opened up and tapered from ,say, 60mm to the 50mm throat. Then a tapered make up piece to connect the 65/68/70mm TB to the ST200 plenum inlet?

Or has the ST200 inlet been opened up so the smallest dia is 60mm?

The stock st200 TB is 60mm. The stock st220 TB is also 60mm.

The lesser 2.5 v6 is the one with the smaller body.

The inlet to the st200 plenum is around 65mm so that's why I had the body bored to match.

The st24 plenums have smaller diameter runners and inlet.

quote:

---

Originally posted by magpies
from the info above am I right in saying:

The ST200 plenum would have come with a 50mm TB but some have fitted a ST220 TB (60mm) or even a bored out one to 68mm with good results.

I presume the ST200 plenum inlet has been opened up and tapered from ,say, 60mm to the 50mm throat. Then a tapered make up piece to connect the 65/68/70mm TB to the ST200 plenum inlet?

Or has the ST200 inlet been opened up so the smallest dia is 60mm?

---

Just been down to the garage and measured the inlet. 65mm. Looks easy to open up to 70 to fit the Jag or vw Audi TB.

Or you could try fitting 6 x 45mm ones instead

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903
Or you could try fitting 6 x 45mm ones instead

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oddified

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903
Or you could try fitting 6 x 45mm ones instead

---

Before going the turbo route i did look at the Jenvey TB's, not cheap but i bet they sound awesome!

---

aiming for about 270bhp which seems to be middle of the road, but more importantly driveability as the car will be used for 'touring' and the wife will drive it too.
60 or 65mm throttle body being the choice of ST200.220.
These are cable operated .

I have a TVR with the Jag engine and a Fly By Wire
70mm Throttle Body - mapped by Joolz.
There is a bit of 'hunting' at tickover, Joolz again saying low power throttle response it better with the cable operated TB's. Also better with the smaller TBs

This engine will have to have Cats fitted as it is a 1993, so looking at Kraken 200 or even 100 cell units.

[Edited on 29/3/21 by magpies]

I have the opportunity to buy the Mondeo Fidanza flywheel for less than the cost of having my ST200 flywheel refaced, balanced and lightened, in fact if I sold the ST200 one I would be pounds in pocket. BUT will I have a problem with the starter engaging the flywheel from the wrong side? Is it a good or bad move?

Cheapest 65mm throttle body is this; https://www.ebay.com/itm/98-04-GRAND-MARQUIS-Throttle-Body/301834522457?hash=item4646bd4f59%3Ag%3A4oIAAOSwSHZWfujf&LH_ItemCondition=4
The seller is not stating postage but when I enquired about one (different seller) they sent it with Ebay's Global Shipping Program. I have now forgotten how much the total was but I have posted it somewhere on this forum. Standard Ford TPS plug as well

[Edited on 15/4/21 by mgb281]

I believe there's two versions of Fidanza flywheel with differing back spacing and use different clutch cover and release bearing positions. Just something to look into/check out.

Its the Fidanza flywheel for 2.5 Mondeos, since we know the standard 2.5 Mondeo flywheel works this one should too. The only thing in my mind is the starter engaging from the wrong side but the ring gear sits on a shoulder which should prevent it moving, that assuming that it does.

What gearbox are you using ?

5 speed RX8, I am sure that we all know that the internet quotes that fifth gear is 0.82 when we in Europe got 0.76

If you are using Johnathan's adapter plate then NO the jag starter motor will not match the ford flywheel ring gear. The jag has a bigger dia and differant pitch.

Two options.
Modify the Ford flywheel to take the jag ring gear.
Or
Modify the starter motor and adapter very slightly.

I have already modified both Freddy’s adapter plate and the S type starter motor and they do fit. The question is all about the Fidanza flywheel which is the correct one for Mondeo so the same dimensions as the ST24/200. I cannot remember which is the lighter one but that’s what I have. My build is the standard one that most of you are following; 2002 S Type engine, Freddy’s adapter plate, RX8 5 speed gearbox, ST220 sump, ST200 inlet manifold, ST220 lower inlet manifold, Crown Victoria 65mm throttle body, Mazda Tribute crank pulley and Rocketeer ECU and loom.
Back to the question, will I have a problem with the starter motor engaging the flywheel from the opposite side intended? I think not because the ring gear sits on a shoulder and is retained by set screws.

I don't think you will have a problem if the flywheel has the same offset.
I don't think the pinion is going to hit the ring gear and try and push it of.

What do you guys have your rev limits set to (stock engine) ?

Mine is going back on the dyno at the end of the month for a map check after an engine swap and toying with lifting the limit a bit. Currently set at 7k and the power was still climbing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sdh2903
What do you guys have your rev limits set to (stock engine) ?

Mine is going back on the dyno at the end of the month for a map check after an engine swap and toying with lifting the limit a bit. Currently set at 7k and the power was still climbing.

---

7200 still climbing

From what i read, the standard rods are the limit as they stretch/go oval on the big ends, drop oil pressure then spin bearings. When i ran a standard engine i set the limiter to 7000rpm.

Forged rods and ARP bolts opens the door somewhat

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oddified
From what i read, the standard rods are the limit as they stretch/go oval on the big ends, drop oil pressure then spin bearings. When i ran a standard engine i set the limiter to 7000rpm.

Forged rods and ARP bolts opens the door somewhat

---

I'm struggling to find an ST200 flywheel, can anyone suggest a good place to get them from please?

quote:

---

Originally posted by mgb281
...The question is all about the Fidanza flywheel...



...Back to the question, will I have a problem with the starter motor engaging the flywheel from the opposite side intended? I think not because the ring gear sits on a shoulder and is retained by set screws.

---

If you have patience they do come up on ebay, last year I had to drive up to Stafford and looked on ebay to see what was about and without going five miles off my route I had picked up a AJV6 engine, manual gearbox and a ST200 flywheel for a total of £295 and sold the gearbox and cats for exactly £400! Engine and flywheel was free and £105 more than covered the fuel etc.
Any Mondeo/Cougar V6 flywheel will fit, the only difference is a few pounds in weight but they all weigh far less than the dual mass flywheel. I have decided to go with the ST200 flywheel rather than the Fidanza, a few people who have had Fidanza's have pointed out to me that they are not always perfectly balanced on arrival.

Hi I have an ST200 flywheel available if anyone is interested

Definitely interested, will send you a message.

Which clutch are you guys with the RX8 box using? Is it the ST200 one?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Partofthechaos
Which clutch are you guys with the RX8 box using? Is it the ST200 one?

---

I have another question! As this seems to be the thread for al things AJ30 and you guys have been so helpful, I thought I would add it here.

Between the banks of the older engine is an oil separator. Separating oil and fumes presumably? It is in the way of cleaning the middle of the V (not essential, but it would be nice to tidy it up). Its also looking a bit tatty, so I want to check it hasn't rusted through etc. I can't get it off in one piece without removing one of the heads, which I have no intention of doing.

The newer version of the engine doesn't have this, instead it has a blanking plate. So is it required? Have you guys left it in?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Partofthechaos
I have another question! As this seems to be the thread for al things AJ30 and you guys have been so helpful, I thought I would add it here.

Between the banks of the older engine is an oil separator. Separating oil and fumes presumably? It is in the way of cleaning the middle of the V (not essential, but it would be nice to tidy it up). Its also looking a bit tatty, so I want to check it hasn't rusted through etc. I can't get it off in one piece without removing one of the heads, which I have no intention of doing.

The newer version of the engine doesn't have this, instead it has a blanking plate. So is it required? Have you guys left it in?

---

Ah OK. I had expected that the cam cover breathers would do that, in hindsight it does make sense to have one on the block too. OK, I'll leave it as it is.

Thank you!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Partofthechaos
Ah OK. I had expected that the cam cover breathers would do that, in hindsight it does make sense to have one on the block too. OK, I'll leave it as it is.

Thank you!

---

On the post 2002 engines the crankcase breather was blanked off,and the PCV valve was fitted to one of the cam cover breathers.
I would keep the crankcase breather but gut the PCV valve.

[Edited on 1-9-21 by 40inches]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
On the post 2002 engines the crankcase breather was blanked off,and the PCV valve was fitted to one of the cam cover breathers.
I would keep the crankcase breather but gut the PCV valve.

[Edited on 1-9-21 by 40inches]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
On the post 2002 engines the crankcase breather was blanked off,and the PCV valve was fitted to one of the cam cover breathers.
I would keep the crankcase breather but gut the PCV valve.

[Edited on 1-9-21 by 40inches]

---

They must have increased the diameter of the cam cover connections?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3

quote:

---

Originally posted by 40inches
On the post 2002 engines the crankcase breather was blanked off,and the PCV valve was fitted to one of the cam cover breathers.
I would keep the crankcase breather but gut the PCV valve.

[Edited on 1-9-21 by 40inches]

---

They must have increased the diameter of the cam cover connections?

---

It's the same valve as on the crankcase with an elbow stuck on it
https://www.carid.com/genuine/pcv-valve-mpn-aj812570.html?singleid=4047307380&url=12761753

---

So is the consensus that as long as I put one of those valves on each cam cover, I can get rid of the big one in the V?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Partofthechaos
So is the consensus that as long as I put one of those valves on each cam cover, I can get rid of the big one in the V?

---

Mine has a smaller breather outlet, maybe 8mm on one cam cover, near the middle and on the other cam cover at the back it has a larger elbow which is probably 12ish mm, not measured them yet but will be one of the next jobs I do, piping them back to my catch tank.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Partofthechaos
So is the consensus that as long as I put one of those valves on each cam cover, I can get rid of the big one in the V?

---

That makes sense. So if both cam cover vents go to a catch can without PCVs, can I still get rid of the PCV in the V?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Partofthechaos
That makes sense. So if both cam cover vents go to a catch can without PCVs, can I still get rid of the PCV in the V?

---

I found if also depends on the engine, ware and tare and the use.

I would always fit one in the block now.

I took mine for mapping on Thursday down to Cooksport in Radstock, and thought I'd chip in mine - only 230bhp peak, but a goodly amount of torque. A little lower than I'd hoped, but OK for now. At least it's running right and not randomly rich/lean!

This is with Jag lower intake and injectors, homemade adapters to the ST200 intake manifold and an ST220 throttle body, custom 3-1 equal length stainless manifold and 200 cell sports cats.



I do have a sneaking suspicion that the throttle body may not have been fully opening through at least part of the session though - I wasn't allowed in with it during the mapping, and when I got it back there was significant play in the throttle linkage. It's a little bodged together at the moment, and think one of the link pieces slipped when the guy doing the mapping floored it.

Of course I may be wrong, and it's just an honest 230hp engine! Something to play around with in the future As are wind deflectors - it gets very buffety above 60!

Wouldn't worry too much on the numbers they all read wildly different.

The only thing I would say is that all the graphs I've seen the power is still climbing at 7k and beyond where yours tails off a cliff earlier. I had a similar graph when my fuel pump was letting go so I think your suspicion could be right on the throttle not fully opening.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Badger_McLetcher
I took mine for mapping on Thursday down to Cooksport in Radstock, and thought I'd chip in mine - only 230bhp peak, but a goodly amount of torque. A little lower than I'd hoped, but OK for now. At least it's running right and not randomly rich/lean!

This is with Jag lower intake and injectors, homemade adapters to the ST200 intake manifold and an ST220 throttle body, custom 3-1 equal length stainless manifold and 200 cell sports cats.



I do have a sneaking suspicion that the throttle body may not have been fully opening through at least part of the session though - I wasn't allowed in with it during the mapping, and when I got it back there was significant play in the throttle linkage. It's a little bodged together at the moment, and think one of the link pieces slipped when the guy doing the mapping floored it.

Of course I may be wrong, and it's just an honest 230hp engine! Something to play around with in the future As are wind deflectors - it gets very buffety above 60!

---

I don't understand the drop off at 6700 when others, including mine, are still climbing at 7200.

maybe fitting a fuel pressure gauge may help with the investigation. I would think it could only be fuel or air flow. Unless yours is at the wheels figures

[Edited on 29/11/21 by magpies]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3
Are you using the VVT?

If so what revs are you switching it off at?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by magpies
I don't understand the drop off at 6700 when others, including mine, are still climbing at 7200.

maybe fitting a fuel pressure gauge may help with the investigation. I would think it could only be fuel or air flow. Unless yours is at the wheels figures

[Edited on 29/11/21 by magpies]

---

Yeah the VVT needs to go off high up in the 5k rpms,it reduces power at the higher revs.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3
All the 2.5 V6 clutches seem to be the same,240mm drive plate.
I'm using a hybrid plate thats paddle on one side and organic on the other,from Black Diamond.
It's the clutch they do for Noble owners.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Partofthechaos

quote:

---

Originally posted by CosKev3
All the 2.5 V6 clutches seem to be the same,240mm drive plate.
I'm using a hybrid plate thats paddle on one side and organic on the other,from Black Diamond.
It's the clutch they do for Noble owners.

---

I have managed to get round to looking into this finally. I have spoken to Black Diamond, but they say they they need more info to be able to tell me which clutch I need. I don't suppose anyone has a Black Diamond part number or link do they please? Failing that they said I can post them my flywheel with a torque figue and they can work it out. I mentioned they sold it to Noble for the same basic engine, but apparently that didn't help.

They also said they can amend the clutch to fit the RX8 input shaft which surprised me as I hadn't heard that was required. Have any of you needed to alter the clutch to fit the gearbox?

---

Black Diamond told me that they don't do a clutch for the ST200, which presumably means either it takes a standard one, or one of their other upgrades is fit for purpose, but it is likely to need some faffing about.

I've also found this one, about the same price, but it is actually listed for the ST200, any opinions appreciated! I'll be putting through more torque, but the car is about a tonne lighter, so I'm anticipating it's fine? https://www.burtonpower.com/helix-hd-clutch-plate-ford-mondeo-st24-st200-2-5-v6-240mm-70-2729.html

quote:

---

Originally posted by Partofthechaos
Black Diamond told me that they don't do a clutch for the ST200, which presumably means either it takes a standard one, or one of their other upgrades is fit for purpose, but it is likely to need some faffing about.

I've also found this one, about the same price, but it is actually listed for the ST200, any opinions appreciated! I'll be putting through more torque, but the car is about a tonne lighter, so I'm anticipating it's fine? https://www.burtonpower.com/helix-hd-clutch-plate-ford-mondeo-st24-st200-2-5-v6-240mm-70-2729.html

---

Thanks for the link, I hadn't managed to find that on my phone. It does clearly state the ST200 engine code, so like you say he doesn't have a clue! With that in the list I will get one ordered. Thank you for your help! I think the organic one should be fine, suspect the modest increase in power won't tax the clutch. I'm not planning turbos (yet!).

I'm hoping the experience on here will help me with my next problem! Any suggestions welcome.

I'm trying to sort the fuel rail and I was wondering if you would be able to share your setups please. I was planning to use the Jag rail as the ST200 one is copmpletely the wrong shape for the Jag lower inlet. I was hoping to put this on backwards as this will put the rail inlet close to where the fuel pipes come through from the tunnel. I was also hoping to use the fuel pressure sensor on the other end of the rail to feed into the ECU or at the very least as a way of sealing the end of the rail. However, the sensor fouls on the coolant inlet pipe when it is on in my prefered orientation.

So the options that I can see are:

1. I use the rail the way round that Jag intended and add 1m to the fuel pipe to run it past the exhaust (not overwhelmed with this option)
2. Don't use this sensor and try to find another way of blocking the end of the rail
3. Use a different rail (aftermarket, DIY etc)
4. Something else I havent thought of

Use the fuel rail off a 2.1 XType, cheap simple and fits! I bought one recently for 7.50 including postage.

quote:

---

Originally posted by mgb281
Use the fuel rail off a 2.1 XType, cheap simple and fits! I bought one recently for 7.50 including postage.

---

I cut the end off both ends of the rail and welded on AN6 male connections,then run a FPR holder I bought off Jenvey with a Bosch button style FPR

I’ve used a vw fuel filter that has the fpr built in. So pump to the filter. Filter to the fuel rail and the filter bleeds of back to the tank.

Thanks guys! I don't trust my welding for fuel grade joints so looks like I need the one from the 2.1V6. I take it the pimple with the black cover near the fuel in end doesn't foul on the underside of the inlet manifold? Or does this need modification?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Partofthechaos
Thanks guys! I don't trust my welding for fuel grade joints so looks like I need the one from the 2.1V6. I take it the pimple with the black cover near the fuel in end doesn't foul on the underside of the inlet manifold? Or does this need modification?

---

Description

Thank you, that's another problem answered!

So the 2.1L rail I bought seems to be a different rail to the one you have and unfortunately it is too tall. It doesn't have the 45 degree bend near the inlet either, so definitely a different version. I wonder if they changed it with the newer engine, so there are 2 different versions of the 2.1L rail and I have the wrong one.

On another issue, do any of you have a source of electrical terminals for the sensors? I am making my own loom so need to get new ones. Even if I reuse the exisiting loom all of the clips on the injector connectors are broken so will need to replace these as a minimum.

Injector connectors here http://www.efiextras.co.uk/

Thank you, thats a big help

I have the Pierberg CWA200 which I am currently fitting and planning the hose routing. However, I am struggling with the connectors. The AJ30 (and by chance my MX5 compatable rad too) is 32mm, but the pump is 40mm. I cannot find an off the shelf adapter or useful existing pipe, so I am about to see if I can find someone with a lathe. I like the idea of a lathe, but I think it more than my garage and my wife have the capacity for...

Th only option I have found is a 1.6 1971 to 1980 Ford Escort which has 32mm one end and 40mm the other, but with the bends on it this pre-made hose may not be feasable for my layout. I have one on order so I can see if I can cut it up to use as an adapter. Failing that I was wondering how you Pierberg users overcame this obsicle? I have tried to hunt around the photos on here but as ever there is never the one photo that you are after.

Any help gratefully apreciated.

This would fit https://www.forgemotorsport.co.uk/3832mm_Straight_Reducer_Silicone_Hose--product--453.html or this one
eBay

Ah thank you! So the 38mm has enough stretch to do 40mm, that does make sense. I have never actually worked with silicone pipework, this project is a steeper learning curve than expected! Glad I have your knowledge to refer to or I would never get the car finished.

Quick question for the AJ30 thread, I am installing the battery support and wondering what the smallest battery is that I can get away with. What size do you all have?

I have checked the advised battery from Tayna.co.uk and Halfords and they both indicate the same one which is massively bigger than the one wihch came with the donor car. So probably unlikely that I can reduce the physical size any further as apparently my current one is already on the small side. I have a 540A 60Ah one currently, is this about right? Tayna says it should be 840A and 100Ah. Its 35cm long! I'd rather not have to move all of the battery supports if i use my current one then find it is too small, but also don't want to carry a boat anchor around. Any thoughts?

It's going in a KitCar, very basic electrics.
I used a Varta B34 330ca, 8 years old now,started today after 3 months in garage with no chugging
It's in the passenger footwell.

Description
https://www.tayna.co.uk/car-batteries/varta/b34/reviews/p3/
It takes up the same space as the drivers pedals, so not a problem with foot space

[Edited on 22-4-24 by 40inches]

Thank you, I saw that one in your photos but thought it would have been for the previous bike engine as its small! That is good to know, in that case I will hopefully be able to reduce the size a bit.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Partofthechaos
Thank you, I saw that one in your photos but thought it would have been for the previous bike engine as its small! That is good to know, in that case I will hopefully be able to reduce the size a bit.

---

That does look like a good one, I shall investigate further.

There is no need to have a huge battery, find one that fits and order a version with the highest CCA (cold cranking amps), the battery is not required other than starting, once up and running the alternator supplies all that you need. Despite dynamo's disappearing more than fifty years ago we still believe that we need a large battery to feed everything.

Yes I suppose my question was a little vague, my concern is that I don't have a good feel for the CCA needed for this engine in our application.

It will be less than it was in the Jag as I have removed the AC compressor, power steering pump, water pump, tensioner pullies, torque converter and reduced the size of the alternator (which also doesnt have to accomodate things heated seats on start up), so the parasitic drag is going to be much less.

I was thinking that could equate to something like a third, especially in the context of light use rather than a commuter car, so I was after some real world numbers from thouse who have already worked it all out.

However, with the AGM batteries (such as the Odyssey PC680) the 5 second CCA are high enough that it won't matter (aside from prolonged cranking while setting things up for which I will have the original battery). I can have a much smaller capacity battery which still has enough starting power. I hadn't come accross this function before so it is all useful info.

In the USA there are plenty of MGB owners with Rover and Ford V8 engines using MX5 batteries, granted they don't drive them when it's cold but very often they have air con although at start up the compressor pulley is free wheeling

Yes minimal AC specific drag at that point, though it still needs a longer belt and pullies which will add something.

If a V8 can be started with an MX5 battery then I am probably over assessing this a bit! This car won't be used in cold weather either, certainly not as cold as the Jag tin top would have been designed for, so another justification for a capacity reduction.

I tend to use Tanya batteries partly due to their wide range to choose from and easy to see specs, just choose one with the highest CCA. I have had good results with Yuasa batteries that are smaller than the S types on a 4 litre Perkins diesel, the premium grades from other manufacturers will probably be identical. There aren't that many manufacturers just a lot of badge engineering.