Tempted by FFF
Discussion
Dropped the car of yeterday for a service and got chatting at the guys from RGreen about the FFF... Quite like the idea of a higher revving Speed6 engine withought 'chocolate fingers'.
What are people's experiences thus far
of the FFF and the Syvecs?
What are people's experiences thus far
of the FFF and the Syvecs?
Edited by ruta87 on Monday 19th November 07:42
ruta87 said:
Sripped the car of yeterday for a service and got chatting at the guys from RGreen about the FFF... Quite like the idea of a higher revving Speed6 engine withought 'chocolate fingers'.
What are people's experiences thus far
of the FFF and the Syvecs?
I see you are in Somerset, if you want to see how a Power 4.3 compares to FFF give me a shout and you can have a go in my Tam.What are people's experiences thus far
of the FFF and the Syvecs?
I'm probably out of touch here, but aren't RG on the verge of releasing the variable valve timing version of their head? You'd think that if you're not in a position where you have to rebuild the engine that it msy be worth waiting for the results of that before deciding on your upgrade path?
I don't think you need to worry about 'chocolate fingers' these days. I believe that the solutions for getting proper, efficient and even oil flow into the heads now mean that the FFs wear far less and so don't reach the point of shearing of flaking metal off into the engine.
The brand 'FFF' obviously stems from the days when there were extreme concerns over the followers and the Gen I head was designed to be an alternative to this particular issue by switching to buckets.
The Gen II is actually far more important than this, it is a total redesign and fabrication of the head by Simon Armstrong of Ilmore and F1 background and using far more accurate and modern machining. It is designed to flow more air and use a toppy cam. The net result is a considerable amplification of the core characteristics of a straight six engine.
As mentioned, the development of the final stage, the VCT system, is well under way and this addition will allow the cam timing at the top to be advanced right up to make the most of the breathing and cam, then pulled back to generate additional torque at the bottom end to enhance useability there. An area where torque is often lost when running a higher reving and cammy engine.
Combine this with the Syvecs unit and you get to run the engine right at its peak performance while being protected from bad fuel, flat spots and pinking etc.
I've run the set up for two seasons now and it is an absolutely superb package, the smoothness is outstanding, silky from tickover to 8k. When you come up on the cam it is phenominal.
But, it is very important to note that this type of engine is for the experience of driving the car through the gears and holding higher revs to obtain peak performance. It's a straight 6, not a V8. But, if this is not your style of driving or what you are looking for then there are other options out there that fill this gap rather well.
The brand 'FFF' obviously stems from the days when there were extreme concerns over the followers and the Gen I head was designed to be an alternative to this particular issue by switching to buckets.
The Gen II is actually far more important than this, it is a total redesign and fabrication of the head by Simon Armstrong of Ilmore and F1 background and using far more accurate and modern machining. It is designed to flow more air and use a toppy cam. The net result is a considerable amplification of the core characteristics of a straight six engine.
As mentioned, the development of the final stage, the VCT system, is well under way and this addition will allow the cam timing at the top to be advanced right up to make the most of the breathing and cam, then pulled back to generate additional torque at the bottom end to enhance useability there. An area where torque is often lost when running a higher reving and cammy engine.
Combine this with the Syvecs unit and you get to run the engine right at its peak performance while being protected from bad fuel, flat spots and pinking etc.
I've run the set up for two seasons now and it is an absolutely superb package, the smoothness is outstanding, silky from tickover to 8k. When you come up on the cam it is phenominal.
But, it is very important to note that this type of engine is for the experience of driving the car through the gears and holding higher revs to obtain peak performance. It's a straight 6, not a V8. But, if this is not your style of driving or what you are looking for then there are other options out there that fill this gap rather well.
Walford said:
DonkeyApple said:
The Gen II is actually far more important than this, it is a total redesign and fabrication of the head by Simon Armstrong of Ilmore and F1 background and using far more accurate and modern machining. It is designed to flow more air and use a toppy cam. The net result is a considerable amplification of the core characteristics of a straight six engine.
As mentioned, the development of the final stage, the VCT system, is well under way and this addition will allow the cam timing at the top to be advanced right up to make the most of the breathing and cam, then pulled back to generate additional torque at the bottom end to enhance useability there. An area where torque is often lost when running a higher reving and cammy engine.
Combine this with the Syvecs unit and you get to run the engine right at its peak performance while being protected from bad fuel, flat spots and pinking etc.
I've run the set up for two seasons now and it is an absolutely superb package, the smoothness is outstanding, silky from tickover to 8k. When you come up on the cam it is phenominal.
What is max RPM ?As mentioned, the development of the final stage, the VCT system, is well under way and this addition will allow the cam timing at the top to be advanced right up to make the most of the breathing and cam, then pulled back to generate additional torque at the bottom end to enhance useability there. An area where torque is often lost when running a higher reving and cammy engine.
Combine this with the Syvecs unit and you get to run the engine right at its peak performance while being protected from bad fuel, flat spots and pinking etc.
I've run the set up for two seasons now and it is an absolutely superb package, the smoothness is outstanding, silky from tickover to 8k. When you come up on the cam it is phenominal.
What RPM give peak power and torque ?
Max RPM is somewhere around 8k+. I've not run mine much above 7k to date. The power starts kicking in hard at around 4k RPM and peak outputs appear to be around 5K for torque with BHP still climbing at 7500 RPM.
The chart below was my engine after basic running in. It has not had its bespoke map and is running a restricted breathing system as it still has the original SC system on it. This winter will see the bespoke breathing fitted and the final map so we are looking at more torque. The VCT will then add more torque off the cam and allow a little more BHP at the top.
The thing is that it's important to note that this option could be referred to as 'Straight Six Max' as it enhances all the characteristics of a S6, more revs, more top end. Really racey. Whereas, the other options available of increasing the CC give more V8 character of lower revs and more low down punch.
So people must test drive both types before spending what is going to be a big lump of money to really be able to decide which options suits their driving style and what they want from their car. It's chalk and cheese between the FF head or a CC increase in terms of the character you end up with.
For me, personally, I wanted a car that was very smooth with oomph when driving normally out and about but when you had the opportunity to run it out at high revs would be immensely rewarding and exciting. Others may well prefer to have the bulk of the performance low down in that range where we most commanly drive around in.
I've always loved the English straight 6 and find it a more exciting engine than the style of the traditional V8 so the FFF was the best by a mile.
It'll be very interesting to see firstly the results of getting mine breathing and mapped and you can see the potential from Don1's latest RR session. But also the addition of VCT and putting more torque in the area off the cam.
Edited by DonkeyApple on Tuesday 20th November 11:15
Mine doesn't feel like a V8 it feels and sounds like a Speed Six only more so. Still revs very well, still has the power kick at about 5k revs and keeps on pulling thereafter in every gear. Probably not as quiet as the FFF but its a simple concept to take quality components and an increase in capacity to make a good engine design great without the need to fiddle around with VVT to fix the issues caused by a head redesign. Not saying one is better than the other but its definitely not a V8.
Edited by sidpinup on Tuesday 20th November 15:57
sidpinup said:
Mine doesn't feel like a V8 it feels land sounds like a Speed Six only more so. Still revs very well, still has the power kick at ably 5k revs and keeps on pulling thereafter in every gear. Probably not a quiet as the FFF but its a simple concept to take quality components and an increase in capacity to make a good engine design great without the need to fiddle around with VVT to fix the issues caused by a head redesign. Not saying one is better than the other but its definitely not a V8.
The key is 'more' like a V8. What I mean by this is that as you increase the CC of the S6 you obtain amplification of characteristics akin to the delivery of a V8. This doesn't mean it's 'like' a V8 at all.The VCT isn't needed to fix any issues of the head design, you can see from the power charts various FFF owners have posted that the head does its job extremely well without this. The VCT is an option for anyone wanting to really push the boundaries and get the absolute best out of the head. It isn't a requirement by a long shot.
For me, I've always prefered the nature of the 3.6 over the 4.0. It's more revvy and responsive and the FFF option keeps that, if not amplifies it but gives more torque and BHP.
As you start stroking the engine the character changes. If it is these characteristics that you want then boring and stroking may not be the most suitable route.
This is why anyone interested really must test both options as neither is better than the other but both are very different.
Without wishing to derail the thread I think it is easy to fall into the trap of assuming V8s don't really rev...an LS7 will rev over 7k and is very responsive across the range, believe me 
The point is that you don't need to do this in order to make effective progress....with a speed 6 you need to wind it up to get the most out of it and therein lies its character and charm.
Just my thoughts having lived with both in the same car.
Anyway, back to topic!
The point is that you don't need to do this in order to make effective progress....with a speed 6 you need to wind it up to get the most out of it and therein lies its character and charm.
Just my thoughts having lived with both in the same car.
Anyway, back to topic!
DonkeyApple said:
The key is 'more' like a V8. What I mean by this is that as you increase the CC of the S6 you obtain amplification of characteristics akin to the delivery of a V8. This doesn't mean it's 'like' a V8 at all.
The VCT isn't needed to fix any issues of the head design, you can see from the power charts various FFF owners have posted that the head does its job extremely well without this. The VCT is an option for anyone wanting to really push the boundaries and get the absolute best out of the head. It isn't a requirement by a long shot.
For me, I've always prefered the nature of the 3.6 over the 4.0. It's more revvy and responsive and the FFF option keeps that, if not amplifies it but gives more torque and BHP.
As you start stroking the engine the character changes. If it is these characteristics that you want then boring and stroking may not be the most suitable route.
This is why anyone interested really must test both options as neither is better than the other but both are very different.
I do understand what you are saying I just don't see it in my 4.3. It's exactly like the 3.6 just with a lot more power and much more torque. Revs the same and power/torque come in at the same points. It may be different in the 4.5SS though. I would love to compare the two side by side.The VCT isn't needed to fix any issues of the head design, you can see from the power charts various FFF owners have posted that the head does its job extremely well without this. The VCT is an option for anyone wanting to really push the boundaries and get the absolute best out of the head. It isn't a requirement by a long shot.
For me, I've always prefered the nature of the 3.6 over the 4.0. It's more revvy and responsive and the FFF option keeps that, if not amplifies it but gives more torque and BHP.
As you start stroking the engine the character changes. If it is these characteristics that you want then boring and stroking may not be the most suitable route.
This is why anyone interested really must test both options as neither is better than the other but both are very different.
sidpinup said:
DonkeyApple said:
The key is 'more' like a V8. What I mean by this is that as you increase the CC of the S6 you obtain amplification of characteristics akin to the delivery of a V8. This doesn't mean it's 'like' a V8 at all.
The VCT isn't needed to fix any issues of the head design, you can see from the power charts various FFF owners have posted that the head does its job extremely well without this. The VCT is an option for anyone wanting to really push the boundaries and get the absolute best out of the head. It isn't a requirement by a long shot.
For me, I've always prefered the nature of the 3.6 over the 4.0. It's more revvy and responsive and the FFF option keeps that, if not amplifies it but gives more torque and BHP.
As you start stroking the engine the character changes. If it is these characteristics that you want then boring and stroking may not be the most suitable route.
This is why anyone interested really must test both options as neither is better than the other but both are very different.
I do understand what you are saying I just don't see it in my 4.3. It's exactly like the 3.6 just with a lot more power and much more torque. Revs the same and power/torque come in at the same points. It may be different in the 4.5SS though. I would love to compare the two side by side.The VCT isn't needed to fix any issues of the head design, you can see from the power charts various FFF owners have posted that the head does its job extremely well without this. The VCT is an option for anyone wanting to really push the boundaries and get the absolute best out of the head. It isn't a requirement by a long shot.
For me, I've always prefered the nature of the 3.6 over the 4.0. It's more revvy and responsive and the FFF option keeps that, if not amplifies it but gives more torque and BHP.
As you start stroking the engine the character changes. If it is these characteristics that you want then boring and stroking may not be the most suitable route.
This is why anyone interested really must test both options as neither is better than the other but both are very different.
I can imagine that some people who opt for a higher CC will be dissapointed by the change of character and likewise some FFF customers may also. This is why I think people really must try both before spending £10k as they achieve the same goals but very differently.
DonkeyApple said:
The 4.3 and 4.5 I tested (customer cars) definitely didn't rev as quick or as fast as a 3.6, but certainly had more oomph all over, most noticeably at the lower end. The standard 4.0 doesn't rev quite like the 3.6 either. I think if you can drive them both on the same day, one after the other, you can see this.
I can imagine that some people who opt for a higher CC will be dissapointed by the change of character and likewise some FFF customers may also. This is why I think people really must try both before spending £10k as they achieve the same goals but very differently.
Not one bit of disappointment here! The 4.3 totally transformed my car in to what it should have been in the first place. Revs like fu,ck and goes the same.I can imagine that some people who opt for a higher CC will be dissapointed by the change of character and likewise some FFF customers may also. This is why I think people really must try both before spending £10k as they achieve the same goals but very differently.
collingbroon said:
DonkeyApple said:
The 4.3 and 4.5 I tested (customer cars) definitely didn't rev as quick or as fast as a 3.6, but certainly had more oomph all over, most noticeably at the lower end. The standard 4.0 doesn't rev quite like the 3.6 either. I think if you can drive them both on the same day, one after the other, you can see this.
I can imagine that some people who opt for a higher CC will be dissapointed by the change of character and likewise some FFF customers may also. This is why I think people really must try both before spending £10k as they achieve the same goals but very differently.
Not one bit of disappointment here! The 4.3 totally transformed my car in to what it should have been in the first place. Revs like fu,ck and goes the same.I can imagine that some people who opt for a higher CC will be dissapointed by the change of character and likewise some FFF customers may also. This is why I think people really must try both before spending £10k as they achieve the same goals but very differently.
DonkeyApple said:
Like the use of 'more' that was misinterpreted earlier, 'some' was used above for a reason.
Just my opinion on the subject. If its more power throughout the entire rev range you want, then I can't see why anyone would be disappointed. Can't comment on the FFF as Iv not had a go in one, but as for the power 4.3 I can't think of a single bad thing to say about it. And no I don't work for themGassing Station | Tuscan | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff