V8 MX-5

Author
Discussion

swansea v6

Original Poster:

1,279 posts

226 months

Friday 17th August 2007
quotequote all
Do not know if this link will work but check this out, bet they are quick but how would they handle? anyone driven one??? http://youtube.com/watch?v=hsh4cEhEWlg

RedCabbage

3,606 posts

233 months

Friday 17th August 2007
quotequote all
With a Mustang engine in - badly it's twice the weight of a RV8.

Use the search function to find my prevoius threads on this subject, if you are intersted in building one then let me know as some development costs could be shared.

Try this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPuhA2taax4

Edited by RedCabbage on Friday 17th August 12:44

swansea v6

Original Poster:

1,279 posts

226 months

Friday 17th August 2007
quotequote all
Just looking into what kind of engine transplants the MX-5 will take, fancied something different to turbo/supercharging, although I know these are probably the best pound for pound ways of gaining more oomph. Really fancy a lightweight high rev screamer, maybe 2.0 litre V-tec from the S2000? or lightweight V6 maybe???????????????????

lord summerisle

8,138 posts

226 months

Friday 17th August 2007
quotequote all
RST v8?

lord summerisle

8,138 posts

226 months

Friday 17th August 2007
quotequote all
RedCabbage said:
  • drool*
would almost make up for not being able to afford a Marcos TSO

how much i wonder

skinny

5,269 posts

236 months

Saturday 18th August 2007
quotequote all
there's a few rx7 conversions...

DennisTheMenace

15,603 posts

269 months

Saturday 18th August 2007
quotequote all
I keep thinking about a vauxhall 2.0 16v red top motor , one of the bet mass produced 4 pots around IMO

NiceCupOfTea

25,289 posts

252 months

Saturday 18th August 2007
quotequote all
That LS1 does sound lovely - I have also heard that it destroys the car's balance though. Plus it just doesn't really sit right with me, looks wrong for the car. I think turbo/super charger or RX7 engine is the way to go.

I think I would spend my money on selling the 5 and buying a Chim if I could afford it!

NiceCupOfTea

25,289 posts

252 months

Saturday 18th August 2007
quotequote all
That LS1 does sound lovely - I have also heard that it destroys the car's balance though. Plus it just doesn't really sit right with me, looks wrong for the car. I think turbo/super charger or RX7 engine is the way to go.

I think I would spend my money on selling the 5 and buying a Chim if I could afford it!

MX-5 Lazza

7,952 posts

220 months

Monday 20th August 2007
quotequote all
NiceCupOfTea said:
That LS1 does sound lovely - I have also heard that it destroys the car's balance though. Plus it just doesn't really sit right with me, looks wrong for the car. I think turbo/super charger or RX7 engine is the way to go.

I think I would spend my money on selling the 5 and buying a Chim if I could afford it!
Surely an LS1 engine can't spoil the balance of the car any more than an RX7 engine would.
The MX-5 has 51/49 weight distribution - if you fit a heavier engine it will put more of the weight over the front and if you fit a lighter engine it would take some weight off the front. Either way you wouldn't still have 51/49 front/rear.

Edited by MX-5 Lazza on Monday 20th August 13:14

NiceCupOfTea

25,289 posts

252 months

Monday 20th August 2007
quotequote all
Sorry, was thinking more of the RV8 conversions.

redgriff500

26,903 posts

264 months

Monday 20th August 2007
quotequote all
Yep rover is light and plentiful.

Couple were converted up north and one was sold on Ebay.

Bob carter had a decent site up on his conversion which I think was the first UK Rover V8 but as he didn't come from a car modifying background he did some things the HARD way.

RedCabbage

3,606 posts

233 months

Monday 20th August 2007
quotequote all
redgriff500 said:
Yep rover is light and plentiful.

Couple were converted up north and one was sold on Ebay.

Bob carter had a decent site up on his conversion which I think was the first UK Rover V8 but as he didn't come from a car modifying background he did some things the HARD way.
We'll have to have a chat about the spec, Mark.

redgriff500

26,903 posts

264 months

Monday 20th August 2007
quotequote all
Its been a while since I looked at it...

I was an avid reader of CCC and Fast Car (before it went downhill !)

Mate is a R Rover specialist too...

But I seem to remember that you want P6 manifolds (very tight fitting) and the short (sd1?) water pump etc.

Most seem to rec. starting with the 3.9 if you want a revvy V8 too.

SD1 box is ok, better out of a Sherpa (apparently) T5 stands more abuse but is slower shifting.

The question is which diff as ther std one is too high geared, have heard of Cossie, BMW and RX7 ones being used.

HTH

Firefox1

140 posts

201 months

Monday 20th August 2007
quotequote all
Typical americans if it ain't broke fix it 'till it is.

To be fair people though the same about the AC Ace when Carrol Shelby put a V8 in the create the Cobra, Rootes were not quite so clever when they did the same to the Sunbeam Alpine. If you want a real V8 laxative try a 60's TVR Griffith 400 4.7litres of V8 in a car designed for a 1500cc B series.

redgriff500

26,903 posts

264 months

Tuesday 21st August 2007
quotequote all
I believe Shelby was involved with the Sunbeam Tigers too, as a mate has a signed cert from Shelby congratulating him on re engineering his Tiger better than the original design (he redesigned the suspension and steering)

swansea v6

Original Poster:

1,279 posts

226 months

Tuesday 21st August 2007
quotequote all
So if we could have any engine (within reason....imagine the mclaren F1 V12 in there mmmmmmm) what engine would you have?? lightweight high revving V6? Big ballsy V8???? or force fed 4 pot

Chris71

21,536 posts

243 months

Tuesday 21st August 2007
quotequote all
Isn't the obvious MX5 engine swap a....... highly supercharged MX5 engine smile

I think people often lose sight of the fact a standard Rover V8 only produces about 160hp (probably 150hp now they're a few years old) and although they are light for a big engine, they're still heavier than a small four cylinder.

Firefox1

140 posts

201 months

Tuesday 21st August 2007
quotequote all
How about a triple rotor turbo charged wanknel, Mazda built or had one built for IMSA(Group C) sports prototypes in the early ninties. It will probably maintain the front to rear weight balance and on the overrun you can set fire to anything within 20 meters. There was one racing a the Silverstone Classic meeting recently and as a bonus it sounded awesome.

redgriff500

26,903 posts

264 months

Tuesday 21st August 2007
quotequote all
I wanted the V8 burble but to build a 3.9 that revs and gives around 250bhp plus fitting I reckoned would cost around £3500...

and I'd still lose the 7200 redline and the slick gearchange so I supercharged mine.