G.Man
|
| posted on 26/12/06 at 07:13 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by zxrlocost
take it there going to need dry sumping aswell?
Been told they have been fine with sump chop, baffle and accusump.. mind you, a few seem to get good results on that with the zx12r as well...
Should just add, that dry sump adds benefits to any engine, including reduced windage, oil aeration and usually better oil cooling as well...
[Edited on 26/12/06 by G.Man]
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
|
|
zxrlocost
|
| posted on 26/12/06 at 09:40 PM |
|
|
ok so lets say 3k
But then Ive got specialist engine mounting to be done fabricated exhaust etc
powercommander
and how much are the baffle chops etc
Im going to be looking at 4k where as my original locost zx9r engine costs 500 quid which will still be fun
its back to that where do you draw the line for that sunday fun
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 26/12/06 at 09:56 PM |
|
|
Am I missing something here ?
Brand New $6295 complete with wiring, thrttle bodies etc...
About the same price as a used busa motor... lol
Where does it say how much better than any other motor they are ?
Happy new year.
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 27/12/06 at 01:43 PM |
|
|
http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/Article_Page.aspx?ArticleID=3504
some at the wheel dyno printouts, about 10% on torque and bhp for the zx over the Busa...
However, its about whether these numbers add up and to 180mph from standstill the ZX is about half a second faster, so in reality you are talking
about the same per lap all else being equal (chassis driver etc)..
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
bike_power
|
| posted on 28/12/06 at 10:44 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by G.Man
And still you havent mentioned where you can get brand new crate R1 or Busa motors for..
Like I said, this was posted for people who might be looking to build a brand new car, on an 07 registration... if you want a second hand zx14, they
can be had far cheaper than the Busa...
So bike power, if you are gonna compare like for like, try doing it on a level playing field..
Malc will do a full zx14 kit, low mileage, for far less than the £2.5k you are quoting for a Busa....
As for 30bhp, the late model r1 delivers all that BHP due to rpm, its torque I am interested in, the zx12r already beat the BUSA in both columns, the
zx14 takes that even further...
BTW, rather be ugly than dumb
Your first post said the ZX14 was available for the same price as a used busa, you only mentioned the 07 plate thing after somebody else posted and
even then you forgot to add VAT and import duty. The cost of a new ZX14 is massivly higher than any engine in the UK.
Second Hand ZX14's are £3k from the chap that advertises on here and there is considerably more risk in that than a busa - simply because nobody
else has run one hard in a car yet. Remember how many GSXR1000's were scrapped when they first came out and that was just because of oil
issues.
Brand new busa engines are available from Power-Tec if you're interested.
You think the ZX12 deliveres more power and torque than a busa ? The busa has more power at every rpm than the 12. There were some dodgy rwhp dyno
graphs doing the rounds that claimed the 12 had a few more than the busa but if you look at the torque curve the busa is way ahead of the 12. Ask
anybody who has driven a busa and a 12 in a car - they are close but the busa is faster.
The 14 will have more power than a busa or a 12 but it's a 2006 engine, the busa is a 1997 engine - there's 9 years between them !
The R1 may deliver it's power using revs but that's exactly how the 12 manages to get so close to the busa - it revs 2k higher ! Are you
getting it now
With a low weight car you don't need torque, you need power, you only need torque where you have to have tall gearing or you have a very high
weight to haul. We have neither so just like an F1 car, power is pretty much all that's necessary. The last 20% of the rev range is
what's important, assuming you're building a car to go fast, not a pub wagon.
|
|
|
gttman
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 10:12 AM |
|
|
Sorry, I can see what Gman is going on about its a good option for those wanting to be different etc.... not everyone wants to go the tried and tested
route.
But regarding the 07 plate, you don't have to have a brand new motor to get a new plate. One component needs to be fully reconditioned and this
can be the motor.... so you could have a 2nd hand engined and still get a new plate.
Andygtt
Please redefine your limits
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 11:48 AM |
|
|
The argument of 'Which is faster, Busa or ZX12R' goes back six years now. Busa owners will say Busa, ZX12R owners will say ZX12R. Both
camps will be able to provide tables, graphs and video footage to prove their claims.
Personally, I don't really care which is best. What I do know is that the 12 is considerably cheaper than the Busa for more/same/less power and
at present we have been more than happy with our choice of engine.
An almost new ZZR1400 can be had for a few hundred pounds more than a well used Busa and raises the bar again in terms of BHP and torque. Yes, the
reliablilty issues are somewhat unknown at present but I'm sure that won't put anyone off using one in a BEC application.
If you want to do a similar comparison, how much are new Busa engines from Power-Tec?
Phil
|
|
|
zxrlocost
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 12:05 PM |
|
|
I am very tempted by the engine, but then Ive got to remind myself that like now its pissing down and the car will be sitting in the garage...
its a lot of money unless your absolutely dedicated to track days ets
who knows in a months time
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 12:15 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by bike_power
Your first post said the ZX14 was available for the same price as a used busa, you only mentioned the 07 plate thing after somebody else posted and
even then you forgot to add VAT and import duty.
Try reading my second post blind_power...
and torque is THE most important thing as torque = accelleration... BHP is just a multiple of torque/rpm so without the torque in the first place you
get no BHP...
That is why I ginore the R1's BHP figures, and who mentioned the zx12r? I didn't..
The zx12r also makes more torque than the BUSA so it isnt all RPM based anyway...
The BHP is all about where you gearchange, the raw accelleration is where the torque comes in...
However, its not just about peak torque, its about how FLAT the torque curve is and how slowly it drops off after peak torque... Maintaining the
useable torque as long as possible...
[Edited on 29/12/06 by G.Man]
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 12:17 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by gttman
Sorry, I can see what Gman is going on about its a good option for those wanting to be different etc.... not everyone wants to go the tried and tested
route.
But regarding the 07 plate, you don't have to have a brand new motor to get a new plate. One component needs to be fully reconditioned and this
can be the motor.... so you could have a 2nd hand engined and still get a new plate.
Absolutely correct, but you better make sure you have brand new front and rear axles, brakes, steering column etc as well...
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
gttman
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 01:55 PM |
|
|
Agree... but you would need to do that even if the engine was new... only one component is allowed to be reconditioned.
If it was my money I'd buy a BMW V12 from ebay for £10.51 and then slap a pair of turbos on for 600+bhp...
Andygtt
Please redefine your limits
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 03:10 PM |
|
|
Vosa will accept the entire rear axle assembly as one part for purposes of reconditioning..
Set of raceleda uprights at the front, and you are pretty much covered, I believe MNR did this with their demonstrator
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
Bob C
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 03:42 PM |
|
|
"and torque is THE most important thing as torque = accelleration... BHP is just a multiple of torque/rpm so without the torque in the first
place you get no BHP... "
actually there are an awful lot of terms missing from that equation, including primary and secondary gear ratios, diff ratio, driving wheel effective
radius & torque lost in the various bearings and gearboxes.....
However, the equation:
power = mass x speed x acceleration
IS correct and complete and might be viewed as more easily applicable!
Forgive me - just having a nitpicky moment: l
Bob
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 03:56 PM |
|
|
You are indeed correct.. it wasnt meant to be an accurate equation, the correct equation is bhp=torque x rpm / 5252 which is why on a dyno printout
the torque and power curves cross at 5252 rpm
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
bike_power
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 05:03 PM |
|
|
G-Man, you state some silly things, torque being higher in the 12 than the busa ? Come on, where did you read that ? Even Kawasaki don't claim
that for it. Actually, having thought again, don't show me, I can't cope with idiot arguments like that.
I mentioned the 12 because you did first, you stated that the 14 was a completely different engine from the 12 when I questioned the strength of an
unknown gearbox. I'd not mentioned it before you because I wasn't making broad brush comparisons.
Your assumption that torque is all that counts is completely wrong, somebody has tried to point this out to you but you've pretty much ignored
it. If you were correct then a Rover V8 engined 7 would be much faster than a Busa engined 7 - the V8 will have at least double the torque at a much
lower rpm than the busa and it will also have a much flatter torque curve.
The fact is that a stock busa engined (all other things being equal) 7 will spank a 200 lb ft Rover V8 engined 7 into next week - that's why we
all build them isn't it ?
You need to reconsider your position with respect to gearing, rpm, weight, torque and power because you're missing something very important.
As for the R1, have you been up against an R1 car on a track ? You wouldn't dismiss that engine as quickly as you do if you had.
Getting back to the original point of this "debate" the ZX14 might be a great engine but not for the money they cost right now and
given that it's a completely unknown engine. You were recommending people rush out and buy one without any thought to how reliable or strong
they will be in a car.
The ZX12, Busa and R1 are all proven to be reasonably strong, reliable engines that deliver the goods - the 14 isn't in that list yet and
won't be until at least the end of next summer.
Phew . . .
(Edited to add: Just noticed that you have a ZX12 engined car . . . which explains a lot.)
[Edited on 29/12/06 by bike_power]
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 05:39 PM |
|
|
Perhaps because the rover v8 and box weighs SUBSTANTIALLY more...
And the top speed will be lower on the rv8 as the max power is generally lower on most models... like I said before ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL.. same car,
same weight, then torque becomes a factor...
I could provide you with some evidence, but I doubt you could read it... and countering your zx14 claims by saying the zx14 is not the same as the
faults with a zx12 is hardly bringing the zx12 into the argument...
The torque figures I had for the busa and the zx12 came from a BEC article, it was probably wrong... but I know the zx12r has its torque at higher RPM
which is a good thing... with the right gearing...
I have made no position on gearing etc, where the hell have you read that?
No I have not been up against an R1 car on the track, I have been in one, probably driven by a more competent driver than most will ever go in the car
with...
If the R1 was more than amatch for a ZX12r then we would see more of them in the top positions of the BEC championship I would suggest..
Out of the zx12r and the BUSA motor, I would agree the BUSA is the better motor, with no doubt in my mind...
But eh zx14 is a different beast...
Shows the zx14, stock at 17 miles and 124 miles....
103 lb/ft and 169.45 bhp WHP... No stock BUSA makes those numbers.. A stock BUSA makes 80 lb/ft at the red line, zx12r makes 85lb/ft at the red line
and the zx14 is making 91.58 at the red line...
Peak on the BUSA is better than the zx12r, but the zx12r has a flatter torque curve with less drop off hence why it manages to post very similar,
albeit lower, performance figures than the BUSA..
The zx14 is well known in drag racing, and working well... yes its not as well known in a car application as a BUSA but it soon will be... Oh and dont
forget, suzuki and kawasaki collaborate on engine development.. so the similarities between them are greater than you would think...
I have run R1's and GSXR1000's in bike racing including BSB for many years, so I am a little more familiar with R1's than you would
think, and I would never use an R1 in a car because the gearbox sucks ass.... sucks much worse than any kwack box... I have lost count of the number
of R1 gearboxes we have killed, we never killed a zx or gsxr box..
Anyway, you have stated your preference, and thats fair enough... its still a good price for a good engine that will aid you getting an 07 plate...
like I said... hwoever, if you want to avoid all the import duty, vat etc, you will probably have to source one thru kawasaki in holland...
How much are the BUSA crate motors btw?
[Edited on 29/12/06 by G.Man]
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
gttman
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 05:55 PM |
|
|
Hang on, gman just pointed out that you could buy the ZX14.... he certainly didn't start saying it was the be all and end all, just ended
defending from people saying how unsuitable it is just because they prefer the busa or R1.
And I think it was the ZX14 that was said to have more torque than the Busa not the ZX12.
And if all things were equal the car with more torque over the same rev range WILL be faster... torque is the measure of power of the engine.
[Edited on 29/12/06 by gttman]
Andygtt
Please redefine your limits
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 05:58 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by gttman
Hang on, he just pointed out that you could buy the ZX14.... he certainly didn't start saying it was the be all and end all, just ended
defending from people saying how unsuitable it is just because they prefer the busa or R1.
And I think it was the ZX14 that was said to have more torque than the Busa not the ZX12.
And if all things were equal the car with more torque over the same rev range WILL be faster... torque is the measure of power of the engine.
Thanks Andy, I was beginning to think I was mad, love the look of your GT car btw..
I would also like to say, that an RV8 engined 7, or even a decent cossie turbo, with a sequential box, will give a bike engined car a good run for its
money, however, the weight will slow it in the corners, and THAT'S the reason we build bike engined cars..
[Edited on 29/12/06 by G.Man]
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
gttman
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 06:16 PM |
|
|
Thats OK there is nothing wrong with being mad.... Did I mention that one of the R1 engines I have for my Indy is 160WHP.
and the busa is still the BEC daddy lol.
[Edited on 29/12/06 by gttman]
[Edited on 29/12/06 by gttman]
Andygtt
Please redefine your limits
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 06:57 PM |
|
|
160whp is pathetic... we have one r1 thats over 200whp, its rediculous to ride...
I would love a 650bhp Busa turbo in my car... but I cant afford the £15k it would cost to get it reliably... lol...
[Edited on 29/12/06 by G.Man]
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
gttman
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 07:55 PM |
|
|
quote:
I would love a 650bhp Busa turbo in my car... but I cant afford the £15k it would cost to get it reliably... lol...
[Edited on 29/12/06 by G.Man]
A 7 would never take that kind of power.... you'd need a stiffer chasis and better aerodynamics. It would also be better if it was mid engined
with Huge brakes and tyres.
Andygtt
Please redefine your limits
|
|
|
zxrlocost
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 08:33 PM |
|
|
Bouldy has a rover v8 indy
standing start I dont think he could compete
but BIG BUT!!!!!!!!
from 60 ie rolling already etc his car would tear up the tarmac aint much keeping up with a v8 kit car
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
Bob C
|
| posted on 29/12/06 at 09:05 PM |
|
|
tut tut - another one at it...
"torque is the measure of power of the engine."
no it isn't.
power is the measure of the power of an engine.
I agree with the underlying sentiment, that it's a wide spread of torque (or power) that makes the power usable and accessible. However,
accelerating a vehicle is increasing it's kinetic energy. The rate of energy increase is called POWER.
All arguments about whether power is more important than torque are, in fact, badly stated comments on the ideal shape of the power OR torque graphs.
And they always make me want to have a little rant. This is it.
All the best
Bob
|
|
|
gttman
|
| posted on 30/12/06 at 11:39 AM |
|
|
You distort the point. Torque is the measure of an engines power.
Fact is, it is measured at different RPM's to establish the dynamics of the engine which are what you are reffering to.
You will get no argument from me that the power curve is the most important aspect of an engine... but at the end of the day this is only a measure of
the torque at different RPM's.
Andygtt
Please redefine your limits
|
|
|
Lippoman
|
| posted on 31/12/06 at 10:41 AM |
|
|
No gttman, torque is not a way to measure power.
Torque is something we can measure easily that can be used to calculate power.
If you measure only the torque you do not know anything about the power of an engine. You also need to know the rpm.
Torque is a measure of force, power is a measure of energy/time.
So if you have two engines with the same torque, but one delivers that torque at a rpm higher than the other, the higher revving engine will yield
better performance (using correct gearing). That is the reason F1 is chasing higher and higher rpms at the cost of millions each year...
|
|
|
