How fast is a quick mini?
Discussion
Don't deal in 'bar' horsepower (i.e. the more pints you've had the faster it is/more power it has got).
Just post the dyno plot on site. If it has 150bhp (even on the most optimistic rollers, and most of the A-series aficionados know which ones they are) i'd be very surprised. I think somebody is trying to spin some yarn.
Just post the dyno plot on site. If it has 150bhp (even on the most optimistic rollers, and most of the A-series aficionados know which ones they are) i'd be very surprised. I think somebody is trying to spin some yarn.
If I still had it I would gladly post it. As most know mini's tend to ice up inside, and it got soaked and the ink ran. The graph showed peak wheel HP to be 128-130 at just shy of 8,000, making, or so I was told, 150 at the crank. Only once had to change the clutch due to the release bearing going and knackering the pressure plate up. You forget the engine's been built to turn revs, not produce large torque figures. It only made a peak of 92 lbft, but with a nice wide spread on it. The head helps with the silly power, as it's a very nearly race head. It just needs inclined valves and it would be there.
Oh, for those who like KAD, they actually told me I could not possibly run my engine on the road as it would need race fuel and be totally undrivable/useless! They were pretty much shouting at me over the phone and having a go, so I have little time for them now.
Oh, for those who like KAD, they actually told me I could not possibly run my engine on the road as it would need race fuel and be totally undrivable/useless! They were pretty much shouting at me over the phone and having a go, so I have little time for them now.
Edited by kirsty5150 on Friday 19th January 17:18
Well, the torque started to drop off past 7,250 (ish) so may be 75-80 at peak power. If it's 80 (maybe a little optimistic? ), that still gives 122 at 8,000, at the wheels. Anyone know what a reasonable figure would be for transmission loses at the speed? Straight cut box and drops if that helps.
Edited by kirsty5150 on Friday 19th January 20:52
Since I appear to have been wildly mis-infromed then, what would you expect it to do? Given an "average" set of rollers. Some of this is my own knowledge, some my local mini place who (used to?) race/rally their own cars, some book learnt stuff.
PS, Are you who I would consider THE Carl Austin of twin NOS'd drag mini fame? Amongst other things that is.
PS, Are you who I would consider THE Carl Austin of twin NOS'd drag mini fame? Amongst other things that is.
Edited by kirsty5150 on Saturday 20th January 00:41
i reckon the above engine would make a honest 80-90 bhp on a calibrated set of rollers.
it will be a revvy little beast, ive got a short stroke 1340 in bits at the mo, they are a bit of a '1071's older brother'
but 120 at the wheels, 150 at the fly, nah, someones been pulling your leg, it just doesnt have the 'suck' to make that sort of power, you would need a 1460 and about 10 grand to see that. (reliably)
i doubt you would get that sort of power out of a stroker 1340 with a all singing all dancing 8 port sat on top of it.
also, dont knock K.A.D, if someone rings me at work and starts the conversation with, 'ive got a metro trubo engine in my mini and its running 200bhp (normally with a helical box
) i mark them down as a bull$hitting timewaster - and treat them as such - dont forget that people like K.A.D will hear inflated stories of BHP and engine spec all the time - yet they are building (and charging for) the proper thing - see how much danny webster had in his beast....
still, i really like your car, its got that psycho rat look that i love in a mini, shabby but will bite you!, bet the ida scares all the little chav's as well!
it will be a revvy little beast, ive got a short stroke 1340 in bits at the mo, they are a bit of a '1071's older brother'
but 120 at the wheels, 150 at the fly, nah, someones been pulling your leg, it just doesnt have the 'suck' to make that sort of power, you would need a 1460 and about 10 grand to see that. (reliably)
i doubt you would get that sort of power out of a stroker 1340 with a all singing all dancing 8 port sat on top of it.
also, dont knock K.A.D, if someone rings me at work and starts the conversation with, 'ive got a metro trubo engine in my mini and its running 200bhp (normally with a helical box
) i mark them down as a bull$hitting timewaster - and treat them as such - dont forget that people like K.A.D will hear inflated stories of BHP and engine spec all the time - yet they are building (and charging for) the proper thing - see how much danny webster had in his beast.... still, i really like your car, its got that psycho rat look that i love in a mini, shabby but will bite you!, bet the ida scares all the little chav's as well!
I was reading some old books about tuning/cam design and I reckon 150hp would be possible. You would need to go all out though on a 5 port head. Massive ports/carbs/valves and a ridiculous CR, something like 14.5:1 and burning avgas. It wouldn't be user friendly and you would be forced to run close gears and the tall first would limit your FD choice, either that or you smoke clutches.
Having said, in an old Vizard article, he explained how he got 126hp at the wheels (helical box as well) by some sort of fluke set of components, it just worked. Some odd camshaft as well.
Having said, in an old Vizard article, he explained how he got 126hp at the wheels (helical box as well) by some sort of fluke set of components, it just worked. Some odd camshaft as well.
fastcarl said:
ok fella, i'm going to say it, if no one else will ,
either you know nothing about the A series or youre talking bollox,
carl austin [ man who knows a bit]
either you know nothing about the A series or youre talking bollox,
carl austin [ man who knows a bit]
Spoken like a true Yorkshireman.
IMHO i cant see that sort of figure either, 100 maybe not 150 ,if so ive wasted a sh1t of money sqeezing 130 out of a 1460.
From the spec I would have thought that 110-ish would be about right.
My '64 1310 cc 'S' has a 286 cam, 'proper'flowed and ported big-valve head at 11.1:1 c.r.,twin 1.5" S.U.'s, Mini Spares light steel flywheel, big-bore lcb, 'special' Maniflow/RC40 exhaust, flowed inlet manifold, Karl Schmidt pistons, stroked/indexed/balanced crank, verner duplex timing gears, all straight-cut and c.r. transmission inc drop gears, custom-built Aldon dizzy, etc.
On Peter Baldwin's rollers it gave 115 bhp at 6200 and 102 bhp at 5200 (much more relevent really), but that was before it went out to 1310 cc and it was 1293 cc at the time. I'm guessing about 117 bhp now with the additional 17 cc.
It's quite cammy, but with a 3.9 diff it will pull away cleanly at the start of an uphill special stage, albeit with a lot of revs on. I use up to about 7000 rpm in top (c.100 mph) when in a real hurry, but try to change-up at no more than 6500 which puts it back into the optimum torque band in the next gear.
Trying to get another 35 bhp is something I would not consider, as it would be absolutely undriveable on the road and, as was said above, it would need a new transmission every couple of weeks. It's bad enough now trying to get lay shafts which will last more than 2 or 3 rallies!
The problem is that people like to claim huge horsepower and some companies play on this by 'doctoring' the calibration of the rolling roads. It makes them look good, the customers are delighted to have such 'powerful' engines, no-one will ever know as very few of the cars are used in the sort of competition where it would come to light and, of course, the r-r company makes even more money for themselves. I'm sorry to be so cynical, but I've been around a long time and, as they say, I've seen a bit of this-and-that!
My '64 1310 cc 'S' has a 286 cam, 'proper'flowed and ported big-valve head at 11.1:1 c.r.,twin 1.5" S.U.'s, Mini Spares light steel flywheel, big-bore lcb, 'special' Maniflow/RC40 exhaust, flowed inlet manifold, Karl Schmidt pistons, stroked/indexed/balanced crank, verner duplex timing gears, all straight-cut and c.r. transmission inc drop gears, custom-built Aldon dizzy, etc.
On Peter Baldwin's rollers it gave 115 bhp at 6200 and 102 bhp at 5200 (much more relevent really), but that was before it went out to 1310 cc and it was 1293 cc at the time. I'm guessing about 117 bhp now with the additional 17 cc.
It's quite cammy, but with a 3.9 diff it will pull away cleanly at the start of an uphill special stage, albeit with a lot of revs on. I use up to about 7000 rpm in top (c.100 mph) when in a real hurry, but try to change-up at no more than 6500 which puts it back into the optimum torque band in the next gear.
Trying to get another 35 bhp is something I would not consider, as it would be absolutely undriveable on the road and, as was said above, it would need a new transmission every couple of weeks. It's bad enough now trying to get lay shafts which will last more than 2 or 3 rallies!
The problem is that people like to claim huge horsepower and some companies play on this by 'doctoring' the calibration of the rolling roads. It makes them look good, the customers are delighted to have such 'powerful' engines, no-one will ever know as very few of the cars are used in the sort of competition where it would come to light and, of course, the r-r company makes even more money for themselves. I'm sorry to be so cynical, but I've been around a long time and, as they say, I've seen a bit of this-and-that!
cooperman said:
On Peter Baldwin's rollers it gave 115 bhp
cooperman said:
The problem is that people like to claim huge horsepower and some companies play on this by 'doctoring' the calibration of the rolling roads.
pete
peter baldwin is well known for his 'over-reading' rollers!!
a top miglia will show 140 bhp on his, yet will show 98 bhp on the rollers i use
like you say though, its a figure at the end of the day, the drivability and the tourqe are what makes a good mini engine!
and of course reliability!!
Blimey, I know some roads can be a little high, but 40+ bhp?! How can two RR's be soo far apart? A few bhp ie 10 or so, I can understand, but that's just silly. Does anyone know an "accurate" RR in the midlands? Anyone got any knowledge of TTS at all? They're just down the road from me, so would be good to get another power run done. If Coperman's figures ARE accurate, then mine should be above his, as the VP3C should out do the 286. It'll out do a 649 too thinking about it.
Editted to say, your engine's more likely to break boxes than mine. The high torque should kill them faster than high revs will. I don't have that good a torque figure, but lots of revs. 8,000 is my safe red line. It'll withstand 8,500/8,750, but not for long.
Editted to say, your engine's more likely to break boxes than mine. The high torque should kill them faster than high revs will. I don't have that good a torque figure, but lots of revs. 8,000 is my safe red line. It'll withstand 8,500/8,750, but not for long.
Edited by kirsty5150 on Monday 22 January 21:39
you need to find some rollers where the place run race cars for one make series, these are always kept caliberated to ensure any cars they tune prior to a meeting are making the power they are supposed to, the only way they would know is to have very accurate rollers, just like GRV did in littleborough , but sadly no more.
the choice is yours , its either bar HP or real HP.
i have neither,lol
the choice is yours , its either bar HP or real HP.
i have neither,lol
Gassing Station | Classic Minis | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff