RND power output 364bhp

[s6boy]

I wasn't expecting to come back from holiday to find an explosion of information!

Never having dealt with the previous owner I don't know whether he was a shady character or as alluded to earlier just a bad business man suffering with a lot of problems. However it would be nice to think that...

900T-R said:

his single associate left is being taken out of the loop (and I mean that quite literally, they've been set an ultimatum for outstanding work to be released

...shows positive intent to start the new business with a clean slate by honouring the outstanding orders.

I always thought the idea of marrying a TVR Straight 6 to an E type body would be a perfect match and could prove a perfect marketing tool for Speed Eight Performance

[Sagi Badger]

Well open mind on this.

I do think the followers mentioned earlier look nice but they are a bit narrow on the tip/valve end in my opinion. Anyone who has checked clearances will know the shims get wear lines, these can stop the shim from rotating and give intermittent noise, so if the area of the follower in contact is reduced shim wear is likely to increase. Anyway splitting hairs.

I met Dave and found him to be pleasant, I couldn’t judge his skills or knowledge in the brief meeting but he was polite. I think the buisnesss problems experienced relate to others not taking care when machining or building for him, as I understood he relied heavily on others.

Not sure how many Sp6s are up for rebuilds now, but as I have written before Dom runs a commercial operation, has built quite a few already, and takes the risk out owning a Sp6 engined car for those who aren’t crazy like me and build their own.

J

[clive f]

good to see progress on the old RND front, good luck with it all Eric, I`m sure the TVR world will benefit from healthy competitive alternatives in the market place, the parts Dave uses are all top notch quality items so with a good professional business approach and reliable engine builds I`m sure there is a place for this in the TVR market.

my own engine build has been covered extensively in facebook, I dont visit on here so much these days
https://www.facebook.com/clive.ford.90/media_set?s...

To briefly summarise, my engine was running fine but approaching 49k miles so decided it was time for a refresh, I`d been hoarding parts ready for this over the last 2-3 years, and having rebuilt RV8, Essex and AJP8 TVR engines in the past then rebuilding the speed 6 myself was a no brainer, after searching for parts and deciding what I wanted from my engine I went with the RND spec, so Ross pistons, fancy con rods (which along with all the bearing shells come form TVR parts I should add), finger followers (which are a great profile, you can see how well they work when fitting and turning the cams over), bigger manley valves with 8mm stem, new valve guides and seats, porting work done by myself on the head, and all moving parts balanced, most ancilliary parts like cam chains, bearings, etc etc sourced from Powers of TVR Parts, plus a nice billet crankshaft which was balanced up nicely.

So before I did all this my engine was putting out 417bhp recorded as always on Joolz dyno, the engine at the time already had RND GT cams fitted along with other ancilliary mods already recorded on here in the past, with the new lump done I was hopeful of a figure 430 plus, so apart from a nicely balanced engine it was now a 4.1, with GTHO cams giving more lift and duration, however after 1500 miles running in and back on Joolz dyno she was only producing 421bhp and 340 ft/lbs torque, I say only lol, but I was pretty disappointed at the time.

RND response was if I had replaced the MBE with a more modern ecu then the 430+ would be a reality, yes a nice new MBE/Omex/Emerald/Syvecs set up would reap benefits but at a considerable extra cost, but, in my honest opinion and with a lot of hindsight which is a wonderful thing, I would have left my old cylinder head alone and just given it new valve guides and kept my GT cams in place, and see what she would produce with a nicely balanced 4.1 underneath, I believe it would not have been any less that what I had in the first place.

So to summarise, I`m glad I did it all myself, I have a very sweet responsive engine, much nicer than it used to be which is where the balancing comes into play, and it`s putting out a very healthy 420bhp, as Joolz said to me after the dyno runs, if I started with a standard car , mine on Joolz dyno was 356bhp many years ago, went through this process and came out the other side with 420 I`d be over the moon, very true, I`d have achieved a smooth responsive engine and an extra 64bhp on top so well worth the financial outlay.

previous mods can be found here, https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

Edited by clive f on Wednesday 23 January 08:28

[Jhonno]

clive f said:

good to see progress on the old RND front, good luck with it all Eric, I`m sure the TVR world will benefit from healthy competitive alternatives in the market place, the parts Dave uses are all top notch quality items so with a good professional business approach and reliable engine builds I`m sure there is a place for this in the TVR market.

my own engine build has been covered extensively in facebook, I dont visit on here so much these days
https://www.facebook.com/clive.ford.90/media_set?s...

To briefly summarise, my engine was running fine but approaching 49k miles so decided it was time for a refresh, I`d been hoarding parts ready for this over the last 2-3 years, and having rebuilt RV8, Essex and AJP8 TVR engines in the past then rebuilding the speed 6 myself was a no brainer, after searching for parts and deciding what I wanted from my engine I went with the RND spec, so Ross pistons, fancy con rods (which along with all the bearing shells come form TVR parts I should add), finger followers (which are a great profile, you can see how well they work when fitting and turning the cams over), bigger manley valves with 8mm stem, new valve guides and seats, porting work done by myself on the head, and all moving parts balanced, most ancilliary parts like cam chains, bearings, etc etc sourced from Powers of TVR Parts, plus a nice billet crankshaft which was balanced up nicely.

So before I did all this my engine was putting out 417bhp recorded as always on Joolz dyno, the engine at the time already had RND GT cams fitted along with other ancilliary mods already recorded on here in the past, with the new lump done I was hopeful of a figure 430 plus, so apart from a nicely balanced engine it was now a 4.1, with GTHO cams giving more lift and duration, however after 1500 miles running in and back on Joolz dyno she was only producing 421bhp and 340 ft/lbs torque, I say only lol, but I was pretty disappointed at the time.

RND response was if I had replaced the MBE with a more modern ecu then the 430+ would be a reality, yes a nice new MBE/Omex/Emerald/Syvecs set up would reap benefits but at a considerable extra cost, but, in my honest opinion and with a lot of hindsight which is a wonderful thing, I would have left my old cylinder head alone and just given it new valve guides and kept my GT cams in place, and see what she would produce with a nicely balanced 4.1 underneath, I believe it would not have been any less that what I had in the first place.

So to summarise, I`m glad I did it all myself, I have a very sweet responsive engine, much nicer than it used to be which is where the balancing comes into play, and it`s putting out a very healthy 420bhp, as Joolz said to me after the dyno runs, if I started with a standard car , mine on Joolz dyno was 356bhp many years ago, went through this process and came out the other side with 420 I`d be over the moon, very true, I`d have achieved a smooth responsive engine and an extra 64bhp on top so well worth the financial outlay.

previous mods can be found here, https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

Edited by clive f on Wednesday 23 January 08:28

In what way would a different ECU improve peak power? At the end of the day at the point of max power they both have ignition and fuelling set to the same point, the rest system is the same.. Better response and smoothness due to denser mapping points I understand.. Might be a couple of BHP if peak falls between 2 mapping points with the MBE I guess..

[spitfire4v8]

You're right, a different ecu wouldn't help, the engines aren't detonation limited for power. It was Dave at RND trying to find reasons why it didn't make the 450hp he claimed. The std MBE mapping points are 250rpm apart .. whilst a bit closer at lower revs is nice for a bit more mapping resolution, at the top end it's more than adequate.

[EvoOlli]

But am I right that with a more sophisticated ECU and knock detection you could map more aggresive to gain more HP and you know that the ECU retards if the circumstances (Heat / Octane ...) aren't so good ? Without knock detection you have to stay on the safe side ?

[900T-R]

spitfire4v8 said:

You're right, a different ecu wouldn't help, the engines aren't detonation limited for power. It was Dave at RND trying to find reasons why it didn't make the 450hp he claimed. The std MBE mapping points are 250rpm apart .. whilst a bit closer at lower revs is nice for a bit more mapping resolution, at the top end it's more than adequate.

I agree wholeheartedly with the above.

Another point of note that when I had the S6 head done as a 'project' at a large and very reputable rebuilding shop (with a bit of racing background in one or two of the people there, which helps) here in The Netherlands with the RND parts, they advised against using the Manley exhaust valves that I had a set of, citing that these were significantly heavier and they would prefer to use the originals (of which a couple were replaced with new ones from TVR Parts).

I am not one to argue with engine builders, in my experience you either trust them or go somewhere else but second guessing their reasoning is usually counterproductive and has the potential to put you between a rock and a hard place if something is found to be awry afterwards.

I am also planning on using the RG/TVR Parts rods like Clive did - we're still short a set of RND (SCAT) ones that we originally ordered and paid for but hey ho... I'm sure that they'd do the job (unlike the Indian ones that TVR stuck in) but I don't think they're anything special, anyway. If anyone had money to burn I could also spec and supply Carrillo ones but at this level of road engine I guess that'd be overkill...

[900T-R]

Oh, and 450 hp for that engine sounds more than a little optimistic to me. Dave provided us with a forecast of 440-odd based on his modelling software, but that assumed running no catalysts and an optimal exhaust system (among other things he mentioned a balance pipe IIRC), which the Sagaris exhaust certainly isn't. On ours, I am aiming for 420 bhp and that's on a Tuscan (standard non-S exhaust, ceramic coated std exhaust manifolds and cats)... That's still 70 bhp up on a healthy std 4.0 which is quite a lot in N/A terms.

[clive f]

My exhaust comprises of my large bore manifolds, no cats, standard S spec pipes 2 1/4” with cross pipe fitted half way down, then stepping up to 2.5” after that and into either end can, a straight through system, the cross pipe helps balance things out a bit and gives a nicer exhaust note, also helps as it drops noise down by around 5db. Cross pipes are commonly used in the states on their classic race cars after the circuits lowered the noise limits and the cross pipe was the cheap and easy alternative without losing power.

I should add I’m not knocking Dave Davies at all, I just tell it as I see it, warts an all, I think he is a clever bloke with some good ideas and always on the end of the phone when you needed him, but the business side and his choice of engine builder has let him down, perhaps now with a fresh approach and in new hands things will be a lot different.

Edited by clive f on Wednesday 23 January 11:52

[900T-R]

Thanks for clarifying Clive Any back to back comparos with the standard Sag exhaust system about, perchance?

[900T-R]

clive f said:

I should add I’m not knocking Dave Davies at all, I just tell it as I see it, warts an all, I think he is a clever bloke with some good ideas and always on the end of the phone when you needed him, but the business side and his choice of engine builder has let him down, perhaps now with a fresh approach and in new hands things will be a lot different.

Can't say fairer than that

[Stunned Monkey]

Just catching up on this thread and the concept of IP keeps coming up. While this could definitely have been a factor in the Al Melling/TVR era of Speed 6 development, it's more or less a non-event now. Quote:

‘Design right’ automatically protects your design for 10 years after it was first sold or 15 years after it was created - whichever is earliest.

Source: https://www.gov.uk/design-right

Note: Patents last for 20 years and only if they're maintained (an increasingly costly endeavour). It's highly unlikely anything in the design was sufficiently new to have been granted a patent, nor that that patent would have been maintained. I can't be bothered doing a search...

This is irrelevant if the "purchase of IP" literally means the design details and how to make the parts. That's good old fashioned proprietary information

[900T-R]

Stunned Monkey said:

This is irrelevant if the "purchase of IP" literally means the design details and how to make the parts. That's good old fashioned proprietary information

Well, obviously this. But there's no going around the fact that the work of Dave Davies within RND Engineering was based on the purchase of the AJP6 blueprints from Al Melling (which were included in the sale) and the subsequent careful evaluation of the changes that TVR made to these to come up with the Speed 6 as we know it, and their ramifications - so basically I'd say it's kind of hard to separate one from the other.

The manufacturing rights to the followers, camshafts, pistons et cetera as per RND's specifications, are indeed ours.

[spitfire4v8]

Has the design of the follower changed at all in the last 10 years or so ? in terms of actual physical shape or materials? or is it the same as used by autocraft back in the day? Genuine question.

[dvs_dave]

spitfire4v8 said:

Has the design of the follower changed at all in the last 10 years or so ? in terms of actual physical shape or materials? or is it the same as used by autocraft back in the day? Genuine question.

I always thought the crux of the problem was mismatched surface hardness between the cam and the follower, not particularly the design of the follower, which is essentially fine. Fix that issue by replacing the cams and followers with properly matched materials and jobs a goodun.

[Sagi Badger]

Think there are three “types” of finger follower. I have some in a box that I bought from a gent in the west of England, feel the part but I want to check their hardness before I use them, you would have thought this was an easy thing, but seeing as every engineering shop in the south of England seems to have gone in my lifteime it Is proving to be a task. Also want to compare them to see how they lift off the seat Vs another set I have. The original factory followers seem to have a wide tip and feel heavier although the actual weight doesn’t matter it’s the bit that gets flung around that makes the difference so I will attempt to go compare. Sorry not much use I know until I do the comparing but gut feel is the set in a box will have the edge

Talking to someone at the weekend who was involved in machining heads for the first batch of sixes.... Wish I had stuck to old Fords after that conversation.

J

[spitfire4v8]

I seem to be the only person who remembers the original two piece finger follower from the very first engines.

Only reason I ask if the RND follower design has changed is that I've seen an autocraft follower break (as in snap clean in half) , and wanted to see if that issue had been resolved.

[clive f]

Joolz, I remember speaking to Dave about this issue several years ago, and he assured me that the design and manufacture process of the finger followers had changed since the early Autocraft days disasters, I cant remember the name of the company that now/did make these for him, they are a quality manufacturer in that field, I think Dave Hothersall will know, or Eric perhaps?

Here are some photos I took of the new finger followers when building my engine last year, shame I only remembered after I`d fitted the things! would have been nice to have sat one over the other so you can see the difference in the profile, however you can see the underside that is in contact with the top of the valve is much wider than the standard follower, and when the camshaft is fitted and turned over by hand you can see how well the new profile works compared to the standard FF, it is a nice bit of engineering, the position of the rocker shaft hole in relation to the face that touches the cam lobe is different giving a smoother action.


these pics show the standard followers .

[spitfire4v8]

That's good news then Clive thanks for the info! As I say it was an Autocraft follower so early days (only fair to say that engine was not built by autocraft, was another company using those components). Also only fair to say I've never seen a std follower snap either though.

[spitfire4v8]

Also, I can see the racing green/tvr parts stud and nut kit in there!