Board logo

Turbocharged X flow - results
BaileyPerformance - 1/12/12 at 07:25 PM

Hello!

Just finished mapping a turbocharged 1300cc HC X flow in a mk1 escort.

Maybe of interest to the folks who are running X flows in there cars, the conversion was not done by us, it was done by the customer using mostly scrapyard bits.

The engine is a totally stock 1300cc HC from around 1974.

Vectra 1.7L diesel turbocharger mounted on cut and welded stock cast X flow manifold
front mounted intercooler (not sure what car that was off)
homemade exhaust downpipe connected to Escort system
Saab dump valve
Jenvey single throttle body mounted on stock 1300cc X flow carb inlet manifold
single 750cc/min injector
Bosch fuel pump
weber alpha FPR
Ford coilpack (dizzy removed)
36-1 trigger wheel
megasquirt MS3

The car made 110BHP at 5800RPM and 121lb/ft at 3300RPM at 8PSI of boost on 95RON, this is more than a good 2.0L pinto!!

It would make over 140BHP with more boost (12PSI), but we tuned it for MPG and to use 95RON fuel.

britishtrident - 1/12/12 at 07:58 PM

It used to amaze me how much effort used to go into getting bigger power outputs from 1172cc side valve Fords, same applies these days you can go into any scrap yard and buy a 14 year old 1.4 litre that gives 102bhp out of the box which might have less peak torque but it has no turbo lag.

steve m - 1/12/12 at 08:01 PM

Im interested!

please post pics, of the setup

Steve (1700 crossflow)

snapper - 1/12/12 at 08:04 PM

Impressive results from a 1.3 with scrapyard parts

Looking forward to the new Ford Ecotechs

BaileyPerformance - 1/12/12 at 08:13 PM

quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
It used to amaze me how much effort used to go into getting bigger power outputs from 1172cc side valve Fords, same applies these days you can go into any scrap yard and buy a 14 year old 1.4 litre that gives 102bhp out of the box which might have less peak torque but it has no turbo lag.


True, but this X flow had full boost at 1300RPM, are you thinking of the fiesta/KA 16v 1.4L zetec? This will not bolt directly to the escort 'box, and has a peaky torque curve, so you end up revving it everywhere to make it go.

The torque curve on the this X flow was quite flat from 2000RPM to 5000RPM, it made 75BHP at 3500RPM

At 12PSI the little X flow will be quicker in the Escort than a tuned Pinto, and handle better, at 1bar it will be quicker than a stock 2.0L zetec. We didnt want to push our luck with boost, but these engines are pretty tuff so i would say 1bar it would be fine. I think the turbo would start to be the limiting factor after 1bar as its too small really, but would be a shame to fit a bigger one as this may cause the dreaded throttle lag!

Confused but excited. - 1/12/12 at 08:20 PM


What size was the Jenvey TB? Or is that a stupid question in view of the fact it is on a standard manifold?
Or was the manifold opened up somewhat?
Very interesting post, thanks.

BaileyPerformance - 1/12/12 at 08:22 PM

quote:
Originally posted by steve m
Im interested!

please post pics, of the setup

Steve (1700 crossflow)


Hi steve,

I do have some nice pics, and some impressive power printouts from our dyno but will need to ask permission to post them as its not my car, we only mapped it for the owner. (and advised along the build process)

The little 1300 ran spot on, very nice idle, good power for low boost (these engine made around 75BHP stock!) it does make me wonder what a well built 1600/1700 would do with a decent turbo. My engine builder has always been a fan of the X flow, he has built close on 200BHP 9500RPM big bore steel X flows in his time, lets not forget the Ford RS200 engine was a 711M block!! (800BHP!!)

Confused but excited. - 1/12/12 at 08:24 PM

quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
It used to amaze me how much effort used to go into getting bigger power outputs from 1172cc side valve Fords, same applies these days you can go into any scrap yard and buy a 14 year old 1.4 litre that gives 102bhp out of the box which might have less peak torque but it has no turbo lag.


Because I have two 1300 X-Flow engines and no Zetecs.
Also like me, they are old and simple.

Staple balls - 1/12/12 at 08:25 PM

If only I had some cash.

BaileyPerformance - 1/12/12 at 08:25 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Confused but excited.

What size was the Jenvey TB? Or is that a stupid question in view of the fact it is on a standard manifold?
Or was the manifold opened up somewhat?
Very interesting post, thanks.


Hi, thanks for your interest!

The inlet manifold was stock single carb version, just cleaned up with the grinder, not opened. Water heating retained.

A single 45mm jenvey (single throttle plate) with a single 750cc injector fitted.

BaileyPerformance - 1/12/12 at 08:36 PM

quote:
Originally posted by snapper
Impressive results from a 1.3 with scrapyard parts

Looking forward to the new Ford Ecotechs


of course, you know what would be good, a turbo pinto!! 500BHP possible!!

lets go old skool!

Essex 3.0L next after the pinto?

steve m - 1/12/12 at 08:42 PM

"of course, you know what would be good, a turbo pinto!! 500BHP possible!! "

but you would need a chassis, built like the titanic to hold it

BaileyPerformance - 1/12/12 at 08:44 PM

quote:
Originally posted by steve m
"of course, you know what would be good, a turbo pinto!! 500BHP possible!! "

but you would need a chassis, built like the titanic to hold it



......so you don't fancy a nice light weight Essex V6 then??

steve m - 1/12/12 at 08:49 PM

Err

no a turbo 1700 xflow would hit the spot

Steve

Confused but excited. - 1/12/12 at 08:50 PM

quote:
Originally posted by BaileyPerformance
quote:
Originally posted by Confused but excited.

What size was the Jenvey TB? Or is that a stupid question in view of the fact it is on a standard manifold?
Or was the manifold opened up somewhat?
Very interesting post, thanks.


Hi, thanks for your interest!

The inlet manifold was stock single carb version, just cleaned up with the grinder, not opened. Water heating retained.

A single 45mm jenvey (single throttle plate) with a single 750cc injector fitted.


Thanks for taking the time to reply. Much appreciated, cheers.

BaileyPerformance - 1/12/12 at 09:01 PM

quote:
Originally posted by steve m
Err

no a turbo 1700 xflow would hit the spot

Steve


Humm,

i would say a 1700 X flow (assuming forged pistons, good head and race cam), with decent inlet system (jenveys with jenvey turbo plenum), big intercooler, megasquirt 2 engine management, 625cc injectors, garret T34 360 0.63 running 20-24PSI of boost will make at least 300BHP, 280lb/ft and pull 8500RPM.

Hows that? ;-)

BaileyPerformance - 1/12/12 at 09:08 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Confused but excited.
quote:
Originally posted by BaileyPerformance
quote:
Originally posted by Confused but excited.

What size was the Jenvey TB? Or is that a stupid question in view of the fact it is on a standard manifold?
Or was the manifold opened up somewhat?
Very interesting post, thanks.


Hi, thanks for your interest!

The inlet manifold was stock single carb version, just cleaned up with the grinder, not opened. Water heating retained.

A single 45mm jenvey (single throttle plate) with a single 750cc injector fitted.


Thanks for taking the time to reply. Much appreciated, cheers.


No problem, good luck with your project.

gazza285 - 2/12/12 at 12:45 AM

quote:
Originally posted by BaileyPerformance
Lets not forget the Ford RS200 engine was a 711M block!! (800BHP!!)


Lets not let fact get in the way of a good tale either. The BDT had an aluminium block with nikasil liners. Based on the 711, yes, only in bore spacing and bearing sizes. Identical? Not even near.

MikeR - 2/12/12 at 01:27 AM

I thought diesel turbos where supposed to be a bad idea on petrol engines - something to do with the exhaust gass temperature. Petrol is a lot higher and destroys them or something. Am i wrong?

Very interested in this as I've been wondering about supercharging a xflow recently.

What did the bloke do to reduce the compression in the engine?

Paul Turner - 2/12/12 at 09:15 AM

Bought a 2 litre Zetec from scrappy, £150. Bolted strait to standard Ford bellhousing. Fitting bits cost me, don't they always but still using them 10 years later. Used 45's from old engine with a Weber Alpha ECU and it made 160 corrected bhp. Later put in a pair of Kent FZ2002 cams, made 178 corrected bhp.

The torque was there from tickover with the standard engine, you needed at least 3000 rpm on the clock with the FZ2002's before it really got going, in reality I preferred the standard engine on the road, run a standard engine now.

Makes 110 bhp form a turbo x-flow with all the work and potential unreliability look like a total waste of time and effort.

steve m - 2/12/12 at 09:22 AM

Yours is a 2.0 zetec
110bhp is form a 1300 standard engine

thats "why"

Oddified - 2/12/12 at 09:35 AM

For me part of the reason for playing with a fun car, is the tinkering and playing about with ideas which to me is all part of the fun

There maybe a few reasons not to turbo a 1.3 xflow, but why not if it puts a smile on his face, good on him and respect

Ian

Craigorypeck - 2/12/12 at 11:41 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Oddified
For me part of the reason for playing with a fun car, is the tinkering and playing about with ideas which to me is all part of the fun

There maybe a few reasons not to turbo a 1.3 xflow, but why not if it puts a smile on his face, good on him and respect

Ian



I completely agree... people laughed at me too..

BaileyPerformance - 2/12/12 at 11:52 AM

quote:
Originally posted by gazza285
quote:
Originally posted by BaileyPerformance
Lets not forget the Ford RS200 engine was a 711M block!! (800BHP!!)


Lets not let fact get in the way of a good tale either. The BDT had an aluminium block with nikasil liners. Based on the 711, yes, only in bore spacing and bearing sizes. Identical? Not even near.


You are correct, the BDT was an aluminium block, and was i direct copy of the 711. This was done to make the engine lighter not stronger, i would expect the BDT block is not as strong as an iron 711......

For example, we are in the process of building a 1000BHP cosworth YB, and liked the idea of using a nice light ally block, we had already been in contact with Cosworth in Northhampton and the guy there was very interested in our project - he offered us a discount on there recently developed tall ally YB block.
So, my engine builder and me traveled down to cosworth to have a look at the block - we had a great day looking at all the fancy F1 stuff as well as looking at the block. After an hour of so of looking at this nice shiny £5K block my engine builder said it would not be strong enough for what we need, when we quizzed the cosworth guy he stated that it was not as strong as a 200 iron block....
The same will apply to the ally 711(BDT) - assuming a direct copy an iron block will always be stronger than an ally block.

Nikasil liners are not installed in an engine to make it stronger, they are only used to make it last longer and are common in very high power engines due to increased bore side loads on small capacity forced induction engines.

BaileyPerformance - 2/12/12 at 12:02 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Paul Turner
Bought a 2 litre Zetec from scrappy, £150. Bolted strait to standard Ford bellhousing. Fitting bits cost me, don't they always but still using them 10 years later. Used 45's from old engine with a Weber Alpha ECU and it made 160 corrected bhp. Later put in a pair of Kent FZ2002 cams, made 178 corrected bhp.

The torque was there from tickover with the standard engine, you needed at least 3000 rpm on the clock with the FZ2002's before it really got going, in reality I preferred the standard engine on the road, run a standard engine now.

Makes 110 bhp form a turbo x-flow with all the work and potential unreliability look like a total waste of time and effort.


The 1.6L/1.8L/2.0L zetec (iron block) shares the same bolt pattern with a X flow/pinto.

The later zetecs (1.2L/1.4L) are not the same

A totally stock 2.0L zetec will make 175BHP, with cams 190BHP.
If you only made 178BHP with cams you tuned it wrong - FZ2002 cams are not that wild, so with proper tuning it will drive very near to a stock engine.

The key to it is proper tuning - you have an expensive ignition box with carbs, you would have been better using EFI with a cheap ECU such as megasquirt. Carbs are a waste of time, but if you must use carbs Dellortos are better for drivablity.

BaileyPerformance - 2/12/12 at 12:09 PM

quote:
Originally posted by MikeR
I thought diesel turbos where supposed to be a bad idea on petrol engines - something to do with the exhaust gass temperature. Petrol is a lot higher and destroys them or something. Am i wrong?

Very interested in this as I've been wondering about supercharging a xflow recently.

What did the bloke do to reduce the compression in the engine?


Hi,

That a good point, i have heard that a few times now, to be honest i'm not sure if its true but we have used turbos from diesel engines several times before without a problem.

I think the issue here (as always) is proper tuning, we spend hours getting the engine tuned 100%, making sure the fuelling is spot on, making sure engine temps are fine and so on.

Another point is reducing the compression of an engine ready to fit a turbo is not what we do, we leave our turbo conversions at stock CR. Reducing the CR of an engine increases the exhaust gas temperature and so would increase the risk of turbo damage.

Simon - 2/12/12 at 12:26 PM

quote:
Originally posted by steve m
"of course, you know what would be good, a turbo pinto!! 500BHP possible!! "

but you would need a chassis, built like the titanic to hold it


And look what happened to the last one of them

ATB

Simon

BaileyPerformance - 2/12/12 at 12:49 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Oddified
For me part of the reason for playing with a fun car, is the tinkering and playing about with ideas which to me is all part of the fun

There maybe a few reasons not to turbo a 1.3 xflow, but why not if it puts a smile on his face, good on him and respect

Ian


Thats exactly how i look at it!!!

Lets not forget, you could turbo a 1600/1700 xflow, zetec, CVH, XE as well!!

The owners logic for doing this (and not changing the engine for a better/bigger one) is the fact that the 1300 xflow ready fitted was in good order, nice and sweet, and the customer was also concerned about MPG so fitting a bigger engine mite effect the fuel economy. The turbo conversion should make it better on fuel assuming it is driven steady.

Paul Turner - 2/12/12 at 01:24 PM

quote:
Originally posted by BaileyPerformance

The 1.6L/1.8L/2.0L zetec (iron block) shares the same bolt pattern with a X flow/pinto.

The later zetecs (1.2L/1.4L) are not the same



Fully aware of that, been using Pre-X-flows, X-Flows, Pintos and Zetecs since the early 70's.

quote:
Originally posted by BaileyPerformance

A totally stock 2.0L zetec will make 175BHP, with cams 190BHP.
If you only made 178BHP with cams you tuned it wrong - FZ2002 cams are not that wild, so with proper tuning it will drive very near to a stock engine.



A stock Silvertop that has probably been to the moon is unlikely to give 175 bhp, Weber/Dunnell/Raceline only quote 165 bhp for a fit engine on Weber 45's and they have built way more engines than me. I was delighted with 160 bhp. From memory Kent quoted +23 bhp for the cams but claims are never achieved in the real world, was delighted with +18 bhp. Tried cams with various timing settings, the best power was of 178 bhp @7300 was achieved with stock timing using the slots. The max torque was 148 ft/lbs at 5600 rpm which I found a little disappointing but it was very smooth. Retimed cams to Kents figures, 176 bhp @ 7000 rpm and 155 ft/lbs @ 4500 rpm, on paper way better but was quite "snatchy" low down (never had a progression problem using 3 hole Webers with the standard timing or with standard cams). On the sprint tracks the best times were virtually identical.

On a 2.1 with ported ahead and the FZ2002 cams we saw 208 bhp @7200 using MBE ECU and Jenvey 45's. Great on th track but wasted on the road.

quote:
Originally posted by BaileyPerformance

The key to it is proper tuning - you have an expensive ignition box with carbs, you would have been better using EFI with a cheap ECU such as megasquirt. Carbs are a waste of time, but if you must use carbs Dellortos are better for drivablity.



Car now has a totally standard Blacktop with MBE ECU and Jenvey 45's. Set up by myself and gives 175 bhp @ 6800. Drives like a shopping car and has averaged 31 mpg since fitted.

BaileyPerformance - 2/12/12 at 01:38 PM

"Car now has a totally standard Blacktop with MBE ECU and Jenvey 45's. Set up by myself and gives 175 bhp @ 6800. Drives like a shopping car and has averaged 31 mpg since fitted."

Yep, thats what we see on our blacktop engines, glad you have seen the light and got rid of the carbs!
http://baileyperformance.co.uk/?p=184

there is very little power difference between a silvertop and blacktop on jenveys, 5bhp.

mileage has little effect on power unless the engine has been abused, in fact we have seen smokers still make good power

scimjim - 3/12/12 at 02:05 PM

quote:
Originally posted by BaileyPerformance
lets go old skool!

Essex 3.0L next after the pinto?

Robin Rew did an AC3000M in 1980:

http://www.race-cars.com/carsold/other/1130618461/1130618461ss.htm

and various Scimitars - still some running like this but turbo technology has progressed somewhat :-)



and this:

BaileyPerformance - 4/12/12 at 01:59 PM

quote:
Originally posted by steve m
Im interested!

please post pics, of the setup

Steve (1700 crossflow)


Hi Steve,

I have spoken to the owner of the Escort, he is hoping to get a feature in a mag soon so would prefer it if i didn't distribute any pictures as he would like to keep them fresh for the mag.

If you are interested in doing a turbo conversion of your own i can advise you of what to use and how to do it - FOC!

coyoteboy - 4/12/12 at 02:35 PM

I'm in agreement with BT here - seems like a whole heap of effort and expense to get sod all power out of an anchient piece of hardware, and I can't really see any advantages. OBviously "because I can" is a valid point, but still not sure I understand the reasoning.

CNHSS1 - 4/12/12 at 02:50 PM

whilst i have to say on the face of it, a xflow with a wind pump is flogging the proverbial dead horse to some, when it comes to competing then things take a different slant.
getting 140hp out of a xflow takes a huge amount of money, machoining etc whereas adding a light pressure turbo setup gives the power without the bucks, and isnt an engine change so doesnt chuck you into sports libre automatically.
for 2013 i think the need to stay in original capacity class for sprints and hills has gone (havent got my copy to hand, but believe so), so we could see more peeps adding turbos and blowers to cars rather than swapping engines. Back to the days of austin 7s with howling superchargers!

the other almost always overlooked area is weight and packaging. A xflow is dinky and looks lost even in a 7type engine bay. all modern stuff tends to be ally blocked which are always bulkier than their iron equivalents and then they have a 'muffin top' cylinder head with eleventy valves in it! whilst modern twin cams are fine in most 7types, a small hillclimber or similar is a different matter. The turbo and ancillaries can often be packaged easier than the bulkier modern engine.


as for essexs, dont get me started... yuk

[Edited on 4/12/12 by CNHSS1]

BaileyPerformance - 4/12/12 at 03:50 PM

quote:
Originally posted by CNHSS1
whilst i have to say on the face of it, a xflow with a wind pump is flogging the proverbial dead horse to some, when it comes to competing then things take a different slant.
getting 140hp out of a xflow takes a huge amount of money, machoining etc whereas adding a light pressure turbo setup gives the power without the bucks, and isnt an engine change so doesnt chuck you into sports libre automatically.
for 2013 i think the need to stay in original capacity class for sprints and hills has gone (havent got my copy to hand, but believe so), so we could see more peeps adding turbos and blowers to cars rather than swapping engines. Back to the days of austin 7s with howling superchargers!

the other almost always overlooked area is weight and packaging. A xflow is dinky and looks lost even in a 7type engine bay. all modern stuff tends to be ally blocked which are always bulkier than their iron equivalents and then they have a 'muffin top' cylinder head with eleventy valves in it! whilst modern twin cams are fine in most 7types, a small hillclimber or similar is a different matter. The turbo and ancillaries can often be packaged easier than the bulkier modern engine.


as for essexs, dont get me started... yuk

[Edited on 4/12/12 by CNHSS1]


Hi, i would chk the reg book carefully, normally added forced induction i say a 1300cc engine would put you in the 2000cc class. But, as you say the xflow is a very compact little engine and fancy parts such as ally heads are now available so it is possible for it to loose some weight.

The owner of the Escort says it goes really well, looking at the power curve i can see why, it has more low down power than a 2.0L pinto with less weight.

CNHSS1 - 4/12/12 at 04:47 PM

yes the BB has always had a 1.4x for circuits and 1.7x capacity hike for speed events (sprints/hillclimbs) but it looks like the need to stay within capacity 'class' has been removed for 2013 speed events, so that whilst say a 1300 with a turbo would be over 2000cc now, it could still stay in Roadgoing or ModProd and not bung you in Sports Libre as was previously the case, just move from class 3A to 3C in modprod for instance

coyoteboy - 4/12/12 at 05:45 PM

I still don't see it, the added mass for a turbo including manifolds and generally an intercooler too is in the region of 10-15kg, sure a turbo addition is a bit easier to position than a whole bulkier engine and maybe I'm just not appreciating the size difference but it seems relatively minimal.

Dualist - 4/12/12 at 05:55 PM

quote:
Originally posted by coyoteboy
I'm in agreement with BT here - seems like a whole heap of effort and expense to get sod all power out of an anchient piece of hardware, and I can't really see any advantages. OBviously "because I can" is a valid point, but still not sure I understand the reasoning.


Probably 'cos it was fun, if you can get the bits cheaply then why the hell not.?

mark chandler - 4/12/12 at 06:10 PM

It's not because you can get more power more cheaply, it's just something that is nice to do.

No engine or gearbox changes
No chassis mods to suit

It's Bolt on power, when I turbo'd my blade engine I could have sold the package, stuck £££ on top and dropped in something more powerful, instead chose to fiddle around relatively cheaply and derive the same power with what I had.

Run on optimax, not available 30 years ago, and away you go.

Vecta turbo is only £30 on eBay and its all transportable anyway so nothing lost if you decide to change the lump.

If I had been as capable when I was 20 as I am now I would have shoved a turbo on a few of my cars that's for sure.

BaileyPerformance - 4/12/12 at 07:01 PM

quote:
Originally posted by mark chandler
It's not because you can get more power more cheaply, it's just something that is nice to do.

No engine or gearbox changes
No chassis mods to suit

It's Bolt on power, when I turbo'd my blade engine I could have sold the package, stuck £££ on top and dropped in something more powerful, instead chose to fiddle around relatively cheaply and derive the same power with what I had.

Run on optimax, not available 30 years ago, and away you go.

Vecta turbo is only £30 on eBay and its all transportable anyway so nothing lost if you decide to change the lump.

If I had been as capable when I was 20 as I am now I would have shoved a turbo on a few of my cars that's for sure.


Yep, i built myself a turbo XR2 when i was 19 using a sierra engine (1800CVH) cosworth T3 with 1 3/4" SU on the intake "such thru system" it ran 16PSI, no idea of the power but estimate 170BHP.