Cams Supersport Kit 1.6 K rover
Discussion
Hello Dave,
I had a faulty ECU by my caterham1.6 k Rover Superlight EU2 (the slow motion wasn't good ant the engine very often died) , now mein mechanic specialist for Elise bought a news ECU from Lotus Elise MK1 (120bph) and the problem is resolute.
Now this rev limit is 6000 tr/mm. You said the SS kit rev limit is too hight. When I made remaps the ecu, what you advice for the rev Limit?
I leave in Germany and your garage is very far for me, for I am bringing mein car to you
thank you for answer
Patrick
I had a faulty ECU by my caterham1.6 k Rover Superlight EU2 (the slow motion wasn't good ant the engine very often died) , now mein mechanic specialist for Elise bought a news ECU from Lotus Elise MK1 (120bph) and the problem is resolute.
Now this rev limit is 6000 tr/mm. You said the SS kit rev limit is too hight. When I made remaps the ecu, what you advice for the rev Limit?
I leave in Germany and your garage is very far for me, for I am bringing mein car to you
thank you for answer
Patrick
DVandrews said:
The SS kit was cams and a recal of the ECU one aspect of which was the (too high) rev
Dave
Hi Dave, I am interested in your comment as I have a Caterham 1.6 Superlight (Registered 2000) which incidentally you have fitted your K14 drive ability kit to.Dave
I would very much like to understand why is the Super Sport rev limit too high and what in your opinion is the safe max RPM?
I have the ACE2 change lights and can therefore change the lights to reflect a different limit to that of the ECU Rev limiter.
George, take a look at Daves web page for info on pistons http://www.s262612653.websitehome.co.uk/kengine/in... which is part of dvapower.com
Is the rev limit really too high on a 1600?
I can see that rev's are going to be a major contributing factor towards piston failure, and that there is a significant history of piston failures in 1800's reving above 7200rpm.
However, as the stroke of the 1600 is shorter, then the piston travels less distance in the same time, therefore reaches a lower velocity, and is subjected to less force due to lower rates of acceleration.
I did a few calculations a few years ago that suggested, if an 1800's pistons were safe to 7200rpm, then a 1600's pistons would be safe to a little over 8000rpm.
An additional factor would also be that the longer rods of the 1600 improve the side forces due to rod angle, and reduce maximum acceleration rates slightly (further than simply reduced maximum velocity).
Typically, A 1600SS is going to make its maximum power at a little over the standard ECU's 6800rpm rev limit.
I can see that rev's are going to be a major contributing factor towards piston failure, and that there is a significant history of piston failures in 1800's reving above 7200rpm.
However, as the stroke of the 1600 is shorter, then the piston travels less distance in the same time, therefore reaches a lower velocity, and is subjected to less force due to lower rates of acceleration.
I did a few calculations a few years ago that suggested, if an 1800's pistons were safe to 7200rpm, then a 1600's pistons would be safe to a little over 8000rpm.
An additional factor would also be that the longer rods of the 1600 improve the side forces due to rod angle, and reduce maximum acceleration rates slightly (further than simply reduced maximum velocity).
Typically, A 1600SS is going to make its maximum power at a little over the standard ECU's 6800rpm rev limit.
Green George said:
forest07 said:
The 1.6 SS EU3 engines often suffered with the piston ring lands collapsing, the EU2 engines didn't have so many problems.
Out of interest would the engine in my 2000 build 1.6 Superlight be EU2 or EU3?Edited by Green George on Sunday 25th January 17:33
The main external difference was that the EU2 engines had a distributer rather than coil packs on the plugs.
Gassing Station | Caterham | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff