Discussion
caduceus said:
That's a nice torque figure Richard 
A very healthy engine!
Is it possible to bring the peak torque delivery lower down the rev range? So it's easier to drift... Or will the increase from porting and induction manage that?
Porting and larger valves will give good gains and you can then pick a cam that gives better torque if drifting is your thing. A very healthy engine!Is it possible to bring the peak torque delivery lower down the rev range? So it's easier to drift... Or will the increase from porting and induction manage that?
From memory I've had about. 330/340 torque from my old 4.6
When I participate in the Curborough club sprint with the 5.5 I really struggle not to drift, it's really easy and controllable with low torque.
This graph shows the 5.5 and my old 5.0 for comparison.
phazed said:
Porting and larger valves will give good gains and you can then pick a cam that gives better torque if drifting is your thing.
From memory I've had about. 330/340 torque from my old 4.6
Is there a cam that will give better low down torque, but not be lumpy at tickover? I want to retain a smooth tickover if possible and decent town/low rev driving characteristics.From memory I've had about. 330/340 torque from my old 4.6
If that's not possible, I'll just do the porting and valves
Mine's on a stealth cam - nice wide torque band, pulls well in all gears out of corners. Seems to me to have a nice steady but rumbly idle.
If you aren't up to the eyeballs in work tomorrow and are in the Cambs area, I will have the car with me in Newmarket late morning and Abington, south of Cambridge in the afternoon.
You are welcome to listen/drive and see what you think. Email me if interested
If you aren't up to the eyeballs in work tomorrow and are in the Cambs area, I will have the car with me in Newmarket late morning and Abington, south of Cambridge in the afternoon.
You are welcome to listen/drive and see what you think. Email me if interested
Typhoon or MC1 will make brutal torque with decent manners, but at the cost of top end power. The more gas you can flow, the more output you will make - the cam *just* dictates where you make it. Remember, it's a light car so doesn't need immense torque to make progress ( fun though it is)
Typhoon or MC1 will make brutal torque with decent manners, but at the cost of top end power. The more gas you can flow, the more output you will make - the cam *just* dictates where you make it. Remember, it's a light car so doesn't need immense torque to make progress ( fun though it is)
QBee said:
Mine's on a stealth cam - nice wide torque band, pulls well in all gears out of corners. Seems to me to have a nice steady but rumbly idle.
If you aren't up to the eyeballs in work tomorrow and are in the Cambs area, I will have the car with me in Newmarket late morning and Abington, south of Cambridge in the afternoon.
You are welcome to listen/drive and see what you think. Email me if interested
Thank you for the very kind offer, but I can't make it tomorrow. Too much on.If you aren't up to the eyeballs in work tomorrow and are in the Cambs area, I will have the car with me in Newmarket late morning and Abington, south of Cambridge in the afternoon.
You are welcome to listen/drive and see what you think. Email me if interested
caduceus said:
Thanks for the replies chaps. Seems there are a few cams to choose from 
Whatever is going to give me the most low down torque and smoothest idle/town manners will be my choice. Not bothered about top end power as I don't like revving the nuts off engines. Only in tunnels.
Have you considered the MC1 cam ?Whatever is going to give me the most low down torque and smoothest idle/town manners will be my choice. Not bothered about top end power as I don't like revving the nuts off engines. Only in tunnels.
http://www.v8developments.co.uk/products/camshafts...
Pupp said:
Typhoon or MC1 will make brutal torque with decent manners, but at the cost of top end power. The more gas you can flow, the more output you will make - the cam *just* dictates where you make it. Remember, it's a light car so doesn't need immense torque to make progress ( fun though it is)
+1 They're pretty good figures from a stock 450. I'm in a similar situation, albeit, I didn't bother with the Tornado stuff. From what I have heard, MA's rates are pretty reasonable, it is the hire of the RR that costs. Joolz/ Jools/ Jules (however it is spelt!) will also fit a 20am meter and map the 14CUX for you. There has been considerable effort gone into understanding and disassembling the 14CUX code over on the Griff forum.
However, most of these mappers are a long way away for me and by the time you factor in fuel, time, labour and parts, probably not worth it. Plus, with progressive tinkering, probably not the most cost effective way to go. If you're the same, then an aftermarket ECU may be the way forward. I'm progressing towards a Megasquirt, with a professionally built loom. It will probably work out a lot cheaper in the long run than sticking with 14CUX, plus will solve the shunting issue/ low rev manners on my 500.
The Microsquirt is also a cheaper alternative that the full full fat MS2, which will run a RV8 on direct fire coils with the additional plug-in. You'll probably get half or a third of the cost towards a new ECU by selling the Tornado stuff. Food for thought.
However, most of these mappers are a long way away for me and by the time you factor in fuel, time, labour and parts, probably not worth it. Plus, with progressive tinkering, probably not the most cost effective way to go. If you're the same, then an aftermarket ECU may be the way forward. I'm progressing towards a Megasquirt, with a professionally built loom. It will probably work out a lot cheaper in the long run than sticking with 14CUX, plus will solve the shunting issue/ low rev manners on my 500.
The Microsquirt is also a cheaper alternative that the full full fat MS2, which will run a RV8 on direct fire coils with the additional plug-in. You'll probably get half or a third of the cost towards a new ECU by selling the Tornado stuff. Food for thought.
Sardonicus said:
Pupp said:
Typhoon or MC1 will make brutal torque with decent manners, but at the cost of top end power. The more gas you can flow, the more output you will make - the cam *just* dictates where you make it. Remember, it's a light car so doesn't need immense torque to make progress ( fun though it is)
+1 Have you seen the torque curve on a 5.0 litre, in fact it's not a nice predictable & controllable linear torque curve that rises with the RPM & HP at all, more of an immediate Mount Everest right from the off which in my opinion is totally out of character for a sports car and completely unnecessary in such a light vehicle.
My mate has a 5.0 litre and on the road I'm never left embarrassed, but he's constantly talking about how his car spins the tyres and steps out unpredictably especially in the wet off the line where my little 4.0 litre with the extra weight of two steel gas cylinders just behind the rear axle line just digs in & goes.
I've driven it and while the big dollop of instant torque is fun, it's also a bit of a widow maker that fails to offer much genuine advantage on the road.
I suspect on the track it may be very different, but even on a slightly damp road I know which car I'd rather be in if I was trying to make moderately rapid cross country progress.
There's no point professing about drive and power delivery, as the whole experience is a personal thing. I drove a few Chims and then drove the 500 and found it to be best of the bunch (IMO). The whole point of a V8 is to have plenty of low down torque and the more horses to deliver that torque the better. However, I do agree that there is a limit with a lightweight car as to how much useable power/ torque can be delivered to the rear wheels, but I'm not convinced a standard 500 is near that limit. This is purely my opinion of course, because I like power and torque in equal doses, otherwise I may as well have bought a turbocharged Pinto. If you're after a pure trackday car, the your requirements may be different and even then, perhaps a TVR is not the best choice given the handling, but that is all part of the challenge isn't it, controlling the car! Horses for courses as they say!
Chuffmeister said:
......If you're after a pure trackday car, the your requirements may be different and even then, perhaps a TVR is not the best choice given the handling, but that is all part of the challenge isn't it, controlling the car! Horses for courses as they say!
Even that's a matter of personal taste. If you want to be the fastest thing on the track day, then no, a TVR is not the car to be taking. You will be quicker in a Porsche GT3, a Lotus Evora, a Caterham R500, probably a Noble (never seen one on track) etc etc, and it also depends on which track you are talking about - long straights and you want out and out power, handling circuits then power is irrelevant, and you will actually be virtually as fast in a 2.9 S as in a Cerbera 4.5 if the handling is set up correctly and you have your biggest cojones fitted for the day. It is however possible to make the TVR handle in a very satisfactory way, not Caterham or Lotus standard, but predictable, fun and nicely oversteery.
But for fun, that wonderful sound track, and the friendship in the paddock, the TVR takes some beating..... all IMHO, of course.
QBee said:
Even that's a matter of personal taste.
If you want to be the fastest thing on the track day, then no, a TVR is not the car to be taking. You will be quicker in a Porsche GT3, a Lotus Evora, a Caterham R500, probably a Noble (never seen one on track) etc etc, and it also depends on which track you are talking about - long straights and you want out and out power, handling circuits then power is irrelevant, and you will actually be virtually as fast in a 2.9 S as in a Cerbera 4.5 if the handling is set up correctly and you have your biggest cojones fitted for the day. It is however possible to make the TVR handle in a very satisfactory way, not Caterham or Lotus standard, but predictable, fun and nicely oversteery.
But for fun, that wonderful sound track, and the friendship in the paddock, the TVR takes some beating..... all IMHO, of course.
If you want to be the fastest thing on the track day, then no, a TVR is not the car to be taking. You will be quicker in a Porsche GT3, a Lotus Evora, a Caterham R500, probably a Noble (never seen one on track) etc etc, and it also depends on which track you are talking about - long straights and you want out and out power, handling circuits then power is irrelevant, and you will actually be virtually as fast in a 2.9 S as in a Cerbera 4.5 if the handling is set up correctly and you have your biggest cojones fitted for the day. It is however possible to make the TVR handle in a very satisfactory way, not Caterham or Lotus standard, but predictable, fun and nicely oversteery.
But for fun, that wonderful sound track, and the friendship in the paddock, the TVR takes some beating..... all IMHO, of course.
isn't that the point I making?Chuffmeister said:
QBee said:
Even that's a matter of personal taste.
If you want to be the fastest thing on the track day, then no, a TVR is not the car to be taking. You will be quicker in a Porsche GT3, a Lotus Evora, a Caterham R500, probably a Noble (never seen one on track) etc etc, and it also depends on which track you are talking about - long straights and you want out and out power, handling circuits then power is irrelevant, and you will actually be virtually as fast in a 2.9 S as in a Cerbera 4.5 if the handling is set up correctly and you have your biggest cojones fitted for the day. It is however possible to make the TVR handle in a very satisfactory way, not Caterham or Lotus standard, but predictable, fun and nicely oversteery.
But for fun, that wonderful sound track, and the friendship in the paddock, the TVR takes some beating..... all IMHO, of course.
If you want to be the fastest thing on the track day, then no, a TVR is not the car to be taking. You will be quicker in a Porsche GT3, a Lotus Evora, a Caterham R500, probably a Noble (never seen one on track) etc etc, and it also depends on which track you are talking about - long straights and you want out and out power, handling circuits then power is irrelevant, and you will actually be virtually as fast in a 2.9 S as in a Cerbera 4.5 if the handling is set up correctly and you have your biggest cojones fitted for the day. It is however possible to make the TVR handle in a very satisfactory way, not Caterham or Lotus standard, but predictable, fun and nicely oversteery.
But for fun, that wonderful sound track, and the friendship in the paddock, the TVR takes some beating..... all IMHO, of course.
isn't that the point I making?
Pupp said:
Typhoon or MC1 will make brutal torque with decent manners, but at the cost of top end power. The more gas you can flow, the more output you will make - the cam *just* dictates where you make it. Remember, it's a light car so doesn't need immense torque to make progress ( fun though it is)
My experience is that there is a relationship between valves/porting & cam choice...I changed the heads on my 4.6 from 4.6 "HC" Big Valve heads to some Pete Burgess-ported BV heads from Derek - rest of engine stayed the same - and the point of max torque increased by 500rpm (ie. 500rpm higher up the rev range)...
Larger ports presumably requires more gas flow to hit peak gas speeds - meaning more revs...
Work out where you want max torque - then match the cam and heads (if required) to that.
My gut feel is that if you want more torque lower down - you may not want to touch the heads at all...
HTH,
Dom
Well thank you all for the advice, especially Blitz, Chimpongas and Qbee, very useful as ever.
Just looked at AA Route planner and looks like a 4 hour drive each way for me to Joolz which is a shame as I think Ill try somewhere a bit nearer like Austec.
The whole thing is a bit weird as it runs fine on a full tank of fuel, but when I'm down below half it starts getting grumpy, bit shunty, and dies as soon as I come to a stop. fill it up with Shells finest V power and its fine, plenty of power right up to the limiter in 3rd and 4th.
Weird. Ill keep investigating and speak to Dan when I can.
Thanks once again, James
Just looked at AA Route planner and looks like a 4 hour drive each way for me to Joolz which is a shame as I think Ill try somewhere a bit nearer like Austec.
The whole thing is a bit weird as it runs fine on a full tank of fuel, but when I'm down below half it starts getting grumpy, bit shunty, and dies as soon as I come to a stop. fill it up with Shells finest V power and its fine, plenty of power right up to the limiter in 3rd and 4th.
Weird. Ill keep investigating and speak to Dan when I can.
Thanks once again, James
Gassing Station | Chimaera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff