Racing Green - buckets anyone?

[andyoleary]

The initial message has been deleted from this topic.

[andyoleary]

T40ORA said:

....Oh, and the engine runs cooler due to less mass..

Simplex chains too in place of the duplex ones,

Andy

[andyoleary]

T40ORA said:

zooooom said:

Hey Andy
Sound very interesting, was the engine a 3.6 or 4.0 litre are they offering an increase in capacity as well ?
Any idea when Racing Green will release some official details ? Cannot find any details on their website.

It was a 4.0. Sweet and free rev'ing as the nicest 3.6. There is a 3.6 - 4.0 option (I'm going for that). They won't be going above 4.0l, for reasons which should become clear when they formerly announce the engine and go through the technical stuff.

Which, to answer your question, will be at Britcar. Andy and I were in the same position (although Andy was a little ahead of me) in that we were taking the RG engine rebuild; when they decided on this development they offered it to us as obviously it cannot be retro-engineered, so they didn't want us to be left with a nasty taste in our mouths. We were sworn to secrecy on pain of..., well, something very painful.

BTW the tests yesterday were straight out of the box. 27 miles on the clock in my case, which must have been put on by Andy! No set up or re-maping. Can't wait to go back and try it when it's run in and mapped. Really, really liked it.

Hi Paul, hope you are well mate,

Lee is right, they are going to be at Britcar and will be able to provide full details then. They've had their exchange unit in the market now for a while (I think most of the components are listed on their parts website actually) but the bucket development is a brand new thing.

I could be wrong but I am pretty sure it can be offered as a retro-fit - the new design is tooled up to sit inside the existing head casting. I did have the first "public" drive but as Lee says it was straight out of the box with no mapping as yet and is solid as a rock. I saw the casting designs and it is clear that a huge amount of work has been put in before they were happy to tell people about this.

Cheers

Andy

Edited by andytuscrr on Friday 12th September 22:37

[andyoleary]

Didn't think it would be long before negative comments started appearing.....

I would recommend anyone with any queries contacts RG and talks to them directly. Myself and Lee are not test engineers and probably dont have 100% of the story between us. However, I know what I saw/felt and I listened to what I was told and shown. Oil temps aren't going to stay low, of course, and we all know that pushing the SP6 hard when the engine is not up to temp is a bad idea - their demo engine was just starting its running in process so there was no way the rev's were going above 3K. Whether or not it needs mapping right now is academic at the moment, they were happy with the initial set-up and are under no illusions that the engine will need proper setting up before they are 100% happy with the fueling/mapping - they're not idiots!

Personally, I can't see the down-side to this development, even knowing roughly what the likely costs are going to be, so good luck to them I say. As with all things, time will tell.

Andy

[andyoleary]

trackcar said:

.. so the bucket carrier fits inside an existing head casting with minimal machining ie a retro fit into an existing casting? amazing if i've interpreted that correctly

Hi Joolz,

Yeah, as far as I understand it, that's pretty much how it works. I think there is machining needed of the original head but the new casting for the cam/bucket set-up then sits inside it. Looks pretty cool.

Cheers

Andy

[andyoleary]

Pascal,

I do recall seeing a swordfish colour Tuscan whilst I was there, not sure whether it was being worked on at the time though,

Hope you get it all sorted soon enough,

Andy

[andyoleary]

ceejay said:

There is always going to be a certain amount of scepticism about speed 6 developments especially something as new as this. I really hope it works out for Racing Green (I don't know them well but whenever I bought parts for the T350R they were always very helpful and prompt with their delivery). If it does then it's good news for speed 6 owners with another option on the table.

ceejay

Precisely

[andyoleary]

Whitey makes a good point actually. However, if you talk to RG about power figures (before any mapping has been done) they will tell you that their focus has not been on top-end power, their focus has been completely on re-engineered reliability. Improved driveability, smoother delivery, more power - all these things are consequential of the new design and components used (in my somewhat limited opinion)

As I see it, the bucket modification is an extension to the design work they have been doing for a long time on the SP6 in general. The new/exchange units they are fitting (with followers) have all the re-engineered components that have been listed before already on this thread and have been designed for reliability.

So, you have 3 options really with RG - go with a new engine design based on the "current" top-end follower/cam set-up (with improved bottom-end components etc) or go with the new top-end bucket/cam set-up (with improved bottom-end components etc) or, lastly, keep your current bottom-end and just retro-fit the new top-end bucket/cam set-up.

This is how I see it anyway, I stand to be corrected of course.

Andy

PS: Potential 4th option perhaps?.....bucket/cam with supercharger....mmmmm

[andyoleary]

T40ORA said:

....Now it's just the wife I need to convince....

[andyoleary]

trackcar said:

Funny you should say that, I'm developing some sp6 goodies to address the low end hp issues, but sadly you can't massively increase them, but gains can be made

Sounds interesting...I might have to drop you a line about possible mapping on my engine



Andy

Edited by andytuscrr on Friday 12th September 22:50

[andyoleary]

T40ORA said:

TVR_owner said:

JonRB said:

With the Sag, I find I need to grind along in a lower gear when wanting to overtake, as otherwise the car is sluggish until the engine comes on song. I just don't like that.

Why blame the engine when it's probably the car that geared wrongly.

A CR box and a decent diff ratio will do more for your car's performance than most N/A S6 mods will ever do.

I've never found the Tam sluggish, even with normal gearing. I must admit John after the rebuild my next mod will be to change the diff to the 3.9 you suggested.

Not sure about a CR box thougb; don't know enough about the different gearings. Any info?

Off for a second test of the RG 350 today, now that it"s run in. I placed my order for the bucket engine Monday. Mine is struggling a bit now.

BTW saw the article in SPRINT; well done John.

Nice one Lee!

I took the demo for a spin the other week now that it's run in. Very, very smooth and plenty of pull. Soooo quiet too. The oil pressure was really strong, even when hot and idling. I saw the power curves and they looked good and smooth - just a bit of tweaking needed by all accounts.

Cheers

Andy

Edited by andytuscrr on Friday 12th September 22:51

[andyoleary]

T40ORA said:

rev-erend said:

TallMark said:

zooooom said:

s6boy said:

Obviously this question is on behalf of the numpties on here who aren't that mechanically minded unlike myself, but could someone please post a description of what 'bucket' heads are and what advantages they give.

Have a look here http://www.carbibles.com/fuel_engine_bible.html about half way down the page.
It not actually a "bucket head" as such, its the name of the design/layout in which the camshaft opens the valves.

OK - I've looked through that and I've had as close a look at the old 2000 engine block where you can see the finger followers. Previously I'd heard that the finger followers allow a round-and-round motion to convert to an up-and-down motion without bending the valves (ie the lateral force is on the finger follower and the only force the valve gets is a downward one). So, if thats accurate, what's significantly better with the bucket arrangement than the finger follower one? (This is not skepticism, its ignorance!) I mean I've read the reports of how much smoother the engine seems, but what makes it so? A noddy level explanation would be preferable...

Thanks,
Mark

It's said that the followers is slightly off centre and that the valve gets a slight side ways push every time. Over time this creates a lot of ware. THere is also inadaquate oil flow - the original design had 4 oil feeds - the current design has just the 2.

Not sure if the RG design has addressed the oil feed issue but the design does at least let the oil stay around longer and not drain off...

I'm too much of a numpty to to be able to talk technically on this, but (a) RG have gone this (FFF) route to avoid the above mentioned laterl stresses on the valves.

Also, the have addressed the oil feeds significantly. It looks like there is a much, much more adequate/appropriate supply of oil everywhere. They've always recommended 0W/40 oil despite it's lack of viscosity, to ensure a proper spread/supply. But now they are looking at 15W/40 I believe, as it has better viscosity (esp at higher temp) but will now be able to reach the parts previously at risk of starvation.

Correct. Even with their "standard" re-engineered RR exchange unit (which I have, without the FFF head), they have modified the oil ways to "close the loop" so to speak with a new feed at the back where the #6 cyl exhaust port is. This balances the oil feed in and around the head rather than pushing from front to back which previously tended to lead to oil starvation at the #6 end. My oil pressure is much more consistent and I am using 10/40 (sometimes 15/40) mineral still (3K miles done).

This is one of many modifications that they have done to their new engines to improve the longevity - the FFF head is an extension of those mods.

Andy

[andyoleary]

Shims, I believe. Although I think the "check/adjust" interval will be longer than currently needed for the follower-type head arrangement.

I stand to be corrected though....

Andy

[andyoleary]

My old engine was hitting around 370 at the fly (original factory red rose) and that was "tired". The new one feels much more responsive and keeps pulling well into mid-6Krpm territory. I have 3K on the clock now and will be having a remap/dyno session done as soon as I can with RG - after a quick check of the head/clearances and an intermediate service is carried out. If I hit over 390 at the fly I'll be happy but will be pleasantly surprised if it is over that. Saying that, my aim with the remap is to get a smooth and progressive throttle response across the whole range rather than top-end numbers...

Andy

[andyoleary]

Evenin' all,

If you really want to push the boat out, those balanced manifolds are the dog's danglies I reckon - priced to suit too... As mentioned, up to maybe 200mm difference in each run with the standard ones so it's got to make some difference in the running and balance of the front/rear banks. How much difference in terms of numbers, I have no idea.

My Tuscan was RR'd by Charlie just after I got it, on a basic power run. At that time, he wasn't too happy with the AFR readings and suspected something going on higher up in the rev range but the readout showed just shy of 370. I didn't take too much notice of it and carried on with the repeated servicing, balancing, "tuning" etc right up until it needed the rebuild although I was never 100% happy (are we ever?? ). I always suspected a dodgy TB set too but since the exchange (kept the same inlet manifold) it's infinitely more able to hold a tune, so to speak and runs just so much smoother.

No, I don't have the manifolds fitted. They're not cheap but they're on the "wishlist"...

Andy

[andyoleary]

Do Power still honour the warranty if they do not do the servicing?

Andy

[andyoleary]

I'll be heading over from Kent Jon, leaving around 10am I guess, there or thereabouts anyway. Aim to get there before midday. I'll be on the M20, M26, M25, A3 etc. Will have the daughter with me so might go straight there with her or take her to my parents up the road from RG first.

Andy