Diesel – I have searched and read the posts and am still intrigued. I know that a MEV Rocket has been built as have the original Weasel and more
recent westfield in Ireland/Australia. I have also read comments about the effects of weight and preferring a lighter engine.
I recently learned that the 1.6 TDCI focus/fiesta is relatively light (engine stated as <120Kg) and can be persuaded to provide 130bhp. I am
curious about its use in midi with its complete drivetrain.
Does anyone have the engine / transaxle weights and external dimensions for this beastie and can anyone speak to the complexity or any hurdles in
using this in a midi. I am assuming that the management would have to be transplanted complete and with the drive by wire pedal assembly.
thanks
Beardy
Sorry don't know about the weights, but I do know that when they built the MEV they had to use the original ECU with the Dash still connected and
some ancillaries as they couldn't fool the ECU and remove them.
I understand the builder put the dash and all the associated bits inside a metal box and hid them away behind the drivers seat.
Then he was able to build the Dash he wanted, there's a write up in kit car magazine somewhere.
So It would seem the electronics can be fun.
Also welcome to the Forum.
I simply can't understand the reasoning for even considering a crappy diesel in a lightweight kit car, unless you are going to be do some serious mileage in it? These are weekend toys to enjoy being driven, not something to slog along for 20,000+ miles a year where you put up with the crappy engine to make the fuel savings.
First of all, welcome to the website. You'll love the mad house
As for the diesel.. what is your reason for wanting to build one?
If it's just to try and do something different, then fair enough, by all means give it a go, and make sure to post your progress on here!
If you want it to try and be sensible, make sure you do your homework before going ahead. How much are you realistically going to drive this car? How
much fuel savings will a diesel ultimately give you? How much money does that translate into (looking at your location, I'd say petrol is not
massively expensive so the savings would be even less!).
You'll find that with all the extra work associated with getting a relatively powerful (i.e. very modern) diesel to run, you'd much rather
spend that enjoying driving your car.
If you want something different, why not try getting something to run on ethanol? I understand you can get it quite easily in USA for not extortionate
amounts of money?
Just make sure you've thought rationally about what you're going to do.
Either way, we'll be here to help! 
The focus 1.6tdci engines (DLD416 engines) are Peugeot engines and are fitted in some Mazdas volvos and peugeots aswell as the focuses so you might be able to find specs on the engine under those cars.
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
I simply can't understand the reasoning for even considering a crappy diesel in a lightweight kit car, unless you are going to be do some serious mileage in it? These are weekend toys to enjoy being driven, not something to slog along for 20,000+ miles a year where you put up with the crappy engine to make the fuel savings.
Hi Mike,
I am not advocating this as the best option - merely one that I am considering.
The primary reason against diesels appears to be the weight and this engine is allegedly lighter than a duratec. It seems to offer adequate power -
people seem happy with lumps producing this kind of power and typically swap out the crossflow due to weight/handling issues. Chipped it will provide
buckets of torque and this again, is less of an issue in a midi (though I have seen pictures of the diesel powered strimmer).
You dont need such a big fuel tank and the exhaust can also be lighter and less space consuming.
Yes it makes a different noise, and yes it is a stinky fuel, but if the throttle response is OK, then much of the arguments against seem to be more of
the religous kind rather than the ones based on evidence.
I would like to know more (primarily confirmation of the weight and exterior dimensions) before I discount it.
B
[Edited on 29/12/11 by Beardy]
i put the donk in the rocket. never regretted a single mile. Goes like stink and is buckets of fun.
really wouldnt recommend a common rail engine though, there just too complicated as i found out.
If i were to do build again it would be VW 1.9 tdi 'PD' engine, easily upped to 200hp, fairly refined and dead easy to wire up.
my HDi is currently running about 180hp with over 300lb/ft's of torque. as for exhausts... ive never bothered.]
will 
I love the idea of putting a stonking modern diesel in something like a Locost.
The Volvo D5 engine is the most evil sounding diesel I have ever heard with awesome, tree stump pulling torque. They can be chipped to a reliable 400
hp from what a lot of people say... yes, please!
V8s are mostly about torque so what is so strange about fitting a modern diesel?
Hi Will,
I note your commments about the wiring and appreciate where you are coming from. However, the older diesels are really heavy and that puts me off the
1.9TDi.
Dont think the Diesel is lighter than a Duratec, they come in at less than 100kg's.
I can actually lift mine in my arms!!
quote:
Originally posted by Beardy
Hi Will,
I note your commments about the wiring and appreciate where you are coming from. However, the older diesels are really heavy and that puts me off the 1.9TDi.
according to exhaustive internet browsing:
Duratec 2.0 95Kg for a bare longblock (119Kg ready to install)
This is with lightweight steel flywheel at 4.7Kg – so add another ~5Kg for standard ford item
so best figures I could come up with were close to 125Kg ready to install as standard.
I've got the 1.6d in my V70. It isn't quick, but then it weighs lots! I revs far more freely than the 2.0d. If you are putting it in a mid
engine set up, bear in mind the turbo is mounted at the front of the engine, therefore just behind you. Warm kidneys?! As well as the weight of the
engine, consider the additional bits like pipework and intercooling. Even a tiny lump like this needs to be intercooled. Good effort though in
considering it. As a fast road car the torque will make things fun. Welcome to the forum!
Lee
in a midi it probably needs to be a water to air intervooler with a rad up the front.
its another thing to consider though.
quote:
Originally posted by Mr C
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
I simply can't understand the reasoning for even considering a crappy diesel in a lightweight kit car, unless you are going to be do some serious mileage in it? These are weekend toys to enjoy being driven, not something to slog along for 20,000+ miles a year where you put up with the crappy engine to make the fuel savings.
I'm not sure what diesels you've driven to class them all as crappy, for example the BMW 335 diesel point to point, is no slower than an M3. Indeed the current crop of Common rail diesels are very refined and have an abundance of torque. My daily driver is a 170bhp diesel that is good for 140mph.
Whilst I understand where you are coming from in relation to putting a diesel in a weekend toy, I wouldn't be adverse to a twin turbo V6 diesel set up in a Spire. With 260bhp and over 400ftlb it would be quite interesting.
Everyone to their own.
I'd worry about the noise. All the Diesel engined cars that I have owned have had lots of sound insulation to minimise the rattly sounds (fuel
pump?). You don't want to put lots of sound deadening into a kit.
Maybe listen to the engine with the bonnet open before you make your final decision.
all good points
thanks
I can't understand the arguments against diesel either - have mentioned in the past that I'd like to try a diesel in something.
As for the lack of revs and massive torque in a lightweight car, both can be overcome using a lower ration diff. This brings the effective torque at
rear wheels down and makes up the difference in lack of revs.
As for the noise, if you've been on a bike with noisey pipes, the sound becomes irrelevant above about 40mph cos you leave the sound behind
ATB
Simon
Although not something I’m considering I also can’t see the problem with using a diesel, they just have their own characteristics. Just like a bike
engine and a big V8 are very different but both can be fun to drive. Even the race LMP diesel engines don’t rev but they are still devastatingly quick
and even though the drivers admit they are different to drive I’m sure they don’t find them dull!
I personally have always enjoyed driving diesels, I find something feels good about hustling them along on a wave of torque, in some ways it is like
driving a tuned petrol engine with a narrow power-band, it’s just that it all happens lower down the rev range.
Anyway, I say go for it! Go midi, make it LMP inspired and you’ll have something that more closely reflects the way modern LMP’s are going.
have you looked into the fiat engines 1.9 150bhp, easy mapped to 200 bhp, found in the alfa 159 vecta and saab 93.
As they said (repeatedly) in the Highlander movie... THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!!!
Yes, it weighs the same as the moon, but it will drag Uranus no problem!
quote:
Originally posted by matt_gsxr
I'd worry about the noise. All the Diesel engined cars that I have owned have had lots of sound insulation to minimise the rattly sounds (fuel pump?). You don't want to put lots of sound deadening into a kit.
Maybe listen to the engine with the bonnet open before you make your final decision.
Good testament to diesel power is the le mans racers produced by Audi that won a few years back. I love the Jidda, especially with some producing an
easy 200hp+ with enough torque to spin the wheels off the rims.
Found Here
[Edited on 30-12-11 by MakeEverything]
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
Good testament to diesel power is the le mans racers produced by Audi that won a few years back. I love the Jidda, especially with some producing an easy 200hp+ with enough torque to spin the wheels off the rims.
quote:
Originally posted by phelpsa
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
Good testament to diesel power is the le mans racers produced by Audi that won a few years back. I love the Jidda, especially with some producing an easy 200hp+ with enough torque to spin the wheels off the rims.
That was a good testament to rule changes giving diesels a big advantage
I'd love a go out in one if someone made it work, but diesels just don't make driving exciting. A 335d might be fast, but most drivers cars don't need to be massively fast to be fun.
quote:
Originally posted by Simon
I can't understand the arguments against diesel either - have mentioned in the past that I'd like to try a diesel in something.
As for the lack of revs and massive torque in a lightweight car, both can be overcome using a lower ration diff. This brings the effective torque at rear wheels down and makes up the difference in lack of revs.
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
Well I don't know anything about the rules or e changes, so that may well be true though it is still an impressive feat for them to have survived the 24h race and be competitive?
I'm with MikeRJ, but then I've never driven a diesel car with a decent engine. I've had modern VWs and Peugeots but the 1.3 16v petrol
in our old Toyoya is miles nicer than any of them.
I can totally understand why folks fit bike engines, but diesels just feel like the opposite end of the scale.
Stu
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
No they can't, whatever diff ratio you use a diesel is still a low revving engine. My argument is nothing to do with the low RPM meaning low road speed, very clearly this is entirely dependant on gearing and is why all diesel cars have much higher gearing. This also doesn't address the problem of peaky torque delivery whatsoever, the torque at the wheels is directly proportional to torque developed by the engine irrespective of the overall gear ratio.
Id be putting a 1.9pd vag engine in one if i was to do a derv. 150 remapped. Would shred the tyres and return 100 mpg at a guess as the car would weigh bugger all. Especially if you could get it on a 6 speed. win win imo. For the proper pur a v6 tdi would be superb but too much agro to set up.
Got a Diesel 3litre V6 A4 Avant with Quattro, Love it
With a remap, it is a quick motor
My main (one of a few) issue with diesels, modern ones included, is lack of torque spread. Sure they make big peak numbers, but apart from in-gear overtaking they are very unrewarding to drive. Don't make the mistake of applying paper numbers to a hobby car. You'd have more fun with an old fashioned petrol with half the power I'm afraid!
Those peak numbers come in with the turbo and once they are in, are very flat (a bit like the V8 in toy car). Use the bit before the turbo comes in,
and that's where the economy comes from (not like in the toy car)
ATB
Simon
There's been a few posts mentioning the peakiness of the torque as Simon mentions they are very flat and also on modern engines are early and
smooth in the delivery. On the road this does equate to good in gear acceleration and overtaking, My Daily Driver is good for 30mph to 100mph in
fourth in a seamless manner delivered at a fair rate of knots (in the right places) Which IMO is ideal for pressing on, suiting the roads of today.
Swmbo has the 200bhp petrol version of my daily driver (170bhp Common Rail). The cars are identical in every respect except the engine and
drivetrain. I still opt for mine each time as its no slower point to point and I can cane it and still get over 40mpg (swmbos drops to low 20's)
and lets face it the high fuel prices do factor in to this. It is a close call between the two versions, this is no doubt reflected in the debate
taking place here
My idea and experience of a peaky engine is an early VTEC in a CRX which I found difficult to drive very quickly, always stirring the gearstick and
arriving at a corner with the engine off cam or revving away franticly.
As I posted previously its everyone to their own.
Re. "very flat" delivery, what is the rpm range?!
Re. Comparison with v8, I have the same issue with many of those as fitted to lightweight cars, I.e. Torque curve at odds with traction!
These diesels may have a flat delivery for, say 3000 rpm, but that's all.
Diesel with lots of torque in lightweight car = accelerate, bang, boost, wheelspin, gearchange, bang, wheelspin, and so on, while you get driven round
by someone with a nice duratec, vauxhall xe or big bike engine. A mildly tuned xe pulls from 3000 revs to 8000 revs very linearly, meaning you can
actually use your gears properly, duratec is similar.
Been driving Turbo Diesels now since the mid 90's and absolutely love them, on my 5th. They get better with every new generation and a modern 16
valve normally aspirated petrol of the same capacity, although probably as powerful on paper is a poor drive due to the lack of torque. Only cars I
have driven recently that I would buy instead of a TD is one of the modern low pressure Turbo Petrols, the VW I drove was particulary good (only the
simple 1.4 122bhp turbo only model), keep meaning to try the new BMW 1.6 turbo petrol with 140 bhp, gets great reviews. They fall down on fuel
consumption of course but are a bit chepaer to buy, down to mileage.
With regards to a forced induction Seven, no thanks. Whether petrol or diesel I would not want the type of power delivery they provide, drove one many
years ago, 1.6 supercharged CVH, owner had spent a fortune on it to get BDA type performance, sounded rubish, he could have bought a proper BDA and
still had change. Over the past 23 years I have had Sevens with N/A petrols and I honestly belive they are the engine that suits the car best, in a
car weighing 600kg the lack of torque relative to a turbo is meaningless and even if you only have 130 bhp its still a supercar power to weight ratio.
some very good points raised here, all of which i was concerned about when i pulled my finger out and took on the diesel challenge. im still amazed
nearly 4 years later not many others have.
The power range is different. I currently have about 180hp at 4000rpm, and max torque of 300lb'ft at 2000, so basically i can double my speed in
every gear. Works fairly well in practise. 2nd gear pulls strong to 50, then 3rd to 70 and after that 4th is quite happy between 40 and 90. I have
quite a lazy driving style and find theres not much benefit changing up and down too often.
weight is an issue, my complete drivetrain (engine, box, driveshafts) is 240kg's. Certainly know its there, and think far to often i could be
going round corners 5mph faster if it wasnt. But its just how it is unfortunately. its only a passenger away from a lightweight petrol engine, at
least thats what i keep telling myself.
Noise is an odd one. I love how it sounds.... some hate it. Definately has a satisfying grumble when giving it some stick...
quote:
Originally posted by Simon
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
No they can't, whatever diff ratio you use a diesel is still a low revving engine. My argument is nothing to do with the low RPM meaning low road speed, very clearly this is entirely dependant on gearing and is why all diesel cars have much higher gearing. This also doesn't address the problem of peaky torque delivery whatsoever, the torque at the wheels is directly proportional to torque developed by the engine irrespective of the overall gear ratio.
Of course it does. If you use a petrol engine that revs to 6k, or a diesel that revs to 4, instead of using the petrols 3.9:1 use the diesels 3.14 (both Sierra for eg) then the lack of rpm is translated into a higher speed because of the gearing. Try doing a spreadsheet in excel or similar and you'll see that the road speed/revs arguments can be lost in the final drive ratio. If I find the one I did for toy car, I'll put it up
As for the torque argument, get on a bicycle, stick it in the lowest gear you can and go ride in some mud, I bet you can spin the wheel. Stick it in the highest gear, bet you can't.
ATB
Simon
Go for it, my 2 litre mondeo has a good chunk of go to it when driven "properly" and that's the 115 bhp version.. Tops out at just
under 130 too in such a heavy car. As for everyone complaining about that narrow band and lack of grunt I find slipping the clutch slightly when
upshifting keeps the turbo spinning and keeps you in that power band.
And if you want more power there are bigger turbos available, I'm sure you could go to Iveco and fit one to a Ford engine
Paul turner and dinosaur juice both hit the nail on the head. For all my anti diesel comments on here my daily driver has one in it!
In the future I am sure that we can really make a diesel deliver the goods......the answer is a good cvt, in fact two of them, one from rotrak for the
supercharger drive and one in the transmission from tototrak. I would also make it a two stroke diesel as well.......
with a properly geared transmission , i see no reason why a diesel cant be as quick as a petrol variant .
you just dont get the throttle response associated with a petrol engine , which makes the drive more interesting .
My daily driver is a BMW 535d m sport twin turbo. 286bhp - 1660kg : 0-60 in 6.7 seconds.
With a chip another 40hp is possible.
The lag takes some getting used to. Sounds like a bag of spanners tho....
quote:
Originally posted by MattStorey
My daily driver is a BMW 535d m sport twin turbo. 286bhp - 1660kg : 0-60 in 6.7 seconds.
With a chip another 40hp is possible.
The lag takes some getting used to. Sounds like a bag of spanners tho....