Motorbike engine conversion or Honda conversion?

[rob-ix]

If money was not too much of an issue what would offer the best performance a Honda conversion or a motorbike engine conversion (eg zcars.org.uk), or maybe something else? I'm not fussed about increasing the top speed but I want to scrap as many seconds off the 0-60 times as possible. I had considered an Arial Atom, but the lack of decent windscreen puts me off.

Has anyone here any experience of motorbike engined Elise's?

thanks

[Philygumbo]

There has been talk of v8 concersions based on motorcycle engines.
I don't know of anyone converting an Elise though.
I have seen a Cyclone Power v8 in a 7 style chassis, but it's expensive.

You will be asked why you are interested in 0to60 times, the Elise is not about that.

Edited by Philygumbo on Monday 6th August 20:28

[Paul RN]

hmmm look at how many motorbike engine conversions there are compared to hondas. I seem to remember reading somewhere is the weight issue with a bike engine having to move an elise, not that its heavy but its not as efficent as something like a honda.

[rob-ix]

Philygumbo said:

You will be asked why you are interested in 0to60 times, the Elise is not about that.

Well 60 is the NSL - I wouldn't want to speed or anything ;-). I know the Elise is all about the handling but acceleration certainly plays a part of the experience - if it didn't Lotus would have just stuck the engine from the Smartcar in there.

I probably should have worded things slightly differently. If a car was perfectly setup (suspension, brakes, geo, etc) and the only thing left to upgrade was the engine what would be the best for twisty roads and tracks? In my eyes the only ways to improve track times is either through an increased top end or increased acceleration, if we ignore the driver training/skill aspect of things of course and carrying the speed through the corners etc. Whilst an increased topend would improve things it's only really legally usable on tracks, whereas an improvement in acceleration can be used legally on the road. So hence my question what would offer the best performance for the Elise ignoring topend performance.

[S Works]

Either a Supercharged Honda or Turbo'd Audi lump would be the smart choice. Proven, warranteed turnkey conversions that will give you 300bhp+, sub 4 secs to 60, 9ish to 100.

If you need anything faster than that in a straight line you're into supercar territory.

[kevin ritson]

Trouble with a bike engine, apart from durability, is that with an Elise it will be pulling a lot more weight than it was designed for - at least a Caterham, for example weighs half a ton - an Elise is half of that again. Even in a 500kg car the clutch is an achillies heel.

[4pot]

The Honda is well regarded as a proven option, whereas the bike engine less so. Infact I've never actually seen one at a trackday or a meeting.

Have you considered the other alternative, Audi turbo lump?

[Concerned cat]

Bike engines have no fly-wheel, so the power is brutal.

Also the clutches are not particularly user friendly in a car.

[cej]

Get a Honda swap, proven reliability and great power

[bogie]

you cant beat CCs ...bike engines were not designed to shove around 800Kg of car ..sure they are lighter, but not enough to make up for a lack of capacity...what can you bore out a 1300 Busa engine to? ..1500 maybe, then turbo it....in a high state of tune they last about 30 hours ..is that what you really want.

Get a lightweight S1 Elise and strip it out for trackdays..with an SC Honda in it (320bhp ish) you should be able to get it down to low 700kgs ...that will be plenty quick enough - mid 3's to 60 sub 8 to a ton...and will last 30K race miles not 30 hours

[wetny]

Looked into building Westfield Megabusa a while ago. The feedback that I got was that the car had phenomenal acceleration, but was very hard work to drive on the road as the clutch was very snatchy and lack of torque. Owners told me that the life of the clutch was very limited. Not sure how you would fit a reverse box in either with the engine in the back. All very well if you are going hell for leather on a track. The Elise is also heavy by comparison. Not sure what elise would weigh with engine and box removed.

[Frik]

Bike engines may make good power, but only because they can rev so high. They have relatively little torque (because bikes are light and don't need it) and if it's good 0-60 times you're after, you need all the torque you can muster...

[rob-ix]

Thanks for all the tips guys, I've certainly learnt a thing or two about motorbike engines.

I realise most chaps (and chapesses?) have gone for Honda lumps, but how do these compare to the Audi conversions? Which would offer the most reliable tuning experience between rebuilds and which would go the longest between rebuilds after being considerably tuned?

[bogie]

rob-ix said:

Thanks for all the tips guys, I've certainly learnt a thing or two about motorbike engines.

I realise most chaps (and chapesses?) have gone for Honda lumps, but how do these compare to the Audi conversions? Which would offer the most reliable tuning experience between rebuilds and which would go the longest between rebuilds after being considerably tuned?

you have to do some research on Honda and Audi tuning...the engine conversion section on www.seloc.org has a ton of stuff also

the Honda is 220bhp NA and 300Bhp with a light pressure charger

the Audi starts life as a 180bhp or 220 engine and is either remapped to 250, or bigger turbo to 300bhp

some of the guys racing the Hondas have done 30K race miles on them...so like 100K road miles probably.

both are similar price, but drive quite differently. The Audi has more torque being a turbo and is a little heavier..the Honda keeps its revvy nature even in SC form, with an 8600rpm limit....best drive them both and see what you prefer to be honest.

[McQueen S]

I read somewhere that you lose the airconditioning, when you do a Honda or Audi conversion.
Is that true?

Edited by McQueen S on Wednesday 8th August 00:25

[bogie]

kind of - if you had a late S2111S that came with it ..thats the only car affected...you can keep it, it just costs more and is more hassle to do...

[cej]

Even though the Honda is high revving doesn't mean it doesn't have good low end torque as well, due to the adjustable intake cam.
Also, you can't beat the reliability of a Honda engine. I've been tuning Honda for almost 10 years now (road cars and race cars) and the K series engine is the best I've seen so far

I'm not doing any forced induction tuning so I can only speak of my experiences with natural aspiration.

A couple of examples, both tuned with Hondata Kpro EMS:

Race car with K20a2 engine , ITBs, toda cams (very very mild cams) and race exhaust: 250hp .

Street car with k20a (dc5 engine), Sixsigma exhaust header and 2.5" catback, everything else stock: 227hp.

Next project is a race car with ITBs, import builders s2 cams, sixsigma exhaust header and 2.5" catback. Currently puts down 265hp, but with a very crappy tune and 95 octane gas And this is on a dyno that measures very low.

My task will be to completely rewrite the kpro calibration from scratch and tune it with 102 octane gas. I'm amazed it can even run with the current tune, so I won't take any guesses as to where it'll end up with regards to power. But it's really got potential.

In short: get the Honda And get someone who knows what they're doing to tune it with Kpro. Or come to Denmark and I'll do it for you