Rover K series (turbo) - can it be made reliable now?

[Ive]

westwood35 said:

Well said that man...... Nearer to three times tensile strength.

I had cracked a OEM liner with a slight misfire under moderate boost.
The Westwood liners have withstand some serious big and loud banging flame spitting combustion related misevents under reasonably high boost without any consequences. A std liner'd bottom end would have failed instantly I am sure.

These liners are ace for any Rover K build with forced induction and/or increased rev limits. IMHO these are a key ingredient.

I have also found that the N-series gasket given the other aspects of building a K are taken care off, works really well in a FI application.
DVA aka Dave Andrews did a lot of work figuring out what to do and actually made these information publicly available. Liner hight, casting hardness and controlling porosity are among these. I think these contributions made it possible that a properly build K is as reliable as any other engine these days.

I personally believe that a electric water pump, e.g. a DC EWP80, in series with the mechanical one is an other key ingredient for any high power K as it helps with a major issue of the Rover K in mid engined applications. Its water pump provides insufficient flow at low revs and idle. This IMHO leads to local hot spots in the head if high load conditions are followed by low revs or idle. If the hardened casting of the head near the fire ring gets exposed to temperatures well above 130C, it softens. This lead to a loss of the integrity of the fire ring. Could of course be the other ways round. Still, the pumps help.

[s91]

I'm interested to know what sort of power a totally standard bottom end could handle, wouldn't need to make a huge amount of power somewhere around 230-250 would be fine, on a smallish turbo, something like a T28R or GT2554R.

[anonymous-user]

The question for me is why bother?

Sure you can make a K series reliable, and if you need to use a K series for some reason (original car used one and you want originality, or racing regs force you to use an original engine block for example), then great, use one.

But there are now plenty of turbo engines, that'll make 250bhp all day long with OE levels of durability with just a swap onto an aftermarket EMS. Use a Megaquirt or similar, and get a nice low miles engine from a "one careless owner" car at the breakers, and for the price of just the K series strengthened liners you'd have the whole lot! I mean, you can buy a brand new, complete duratec from Power products for less than £2k

If you REALLY want an easy life, get a crashed MX5, and take engine, gearbox, diff and everything, then fit a turbo kit. Job done!

Mk3_MX5_breaking

Show_Me_The_Boost

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 15th March 19:17

[227bhp]

Max_Torque said:

The question for me is why bother?

Sure you can make a K series reliable, and if you need to use a K series for some reason (original car used one and you want originality, or racing regs force you to use an original engine block for example), then great, use one.

But there are now plenty of turbo engines, that'll make 250bhp all day long with OE levels of durability with just a swap onto an aftermarket EMS. Use a Megaquirt or similar, and get a nice low miles engine from a "one careless owner" car at the breakers, and for the price of just the K series strengthened liners you'd have the whole lot! I mean, you can buy a brand new, complete duratec from Power products for less than £2k

If you REALLY want an easy life, get a crashed MX5, and take engine, gearbox, diff and everything, then fit a turbo kit. Job done!

Mk3_MX5_breaking

Show_Me_The_Boost

Edited by Max_Torque on Thursday 15th March 19:17

Who is 'Power products'? Not Burton Power?

[s91]

Max_Torque said:

The question for me is why bother?

Sure you can make a K series reliable, and if you need to use a K series for some reason (original car used one and you want originality, then great, use one.

That's partly the reason, and I'm well aware of other engines being a better base to work from and I'm much more familiar with them than I am with the K series hence the question, if it can be made reliable then a lightly boosted K series will be fine for what I want.

[Ive]

s91 said:

I'm interested to know what sort of power a totally standard bottom end could handle, wouldn't need to make a huge amount of power somewhere around 230-250 would be fine, on a smallish turbo, something like a T28R or GT2554R.

A totally std 120Hp or 145HP VVC bottom end will probably take 160HP.
I was using std pistons at 230HP and it lasted less than 5000km before the first piston gave up. Ring land broke. This happens wis as little as a tad over 160HP NA.

If you run Trophy (VVC160) pistons, it will take way more than that.

If you want to do it right, you need forged pistons, proper liners etc.
It costs some money.
An other route would be a set of real Rover 75 turbo rod/piston combos. These combine the stronger 160 pistons with 2mm shorter rods to reduce the CR.
They are rather hard to get these days.
If you find a Rover75 1.8T t the breakers, fix the engine up, strap on a bigger turbo and off you go. It won't get any cheaper.
I'd still recommend extending the crank breather breather capabilities and for an electric water pump to help the OEM one at low revs.

[turbotoaster]

s91 said:

I'm interested to know what sort of power a totally standard bottom end could handle, wouldn't need to make a huge amount of power somewhere around 230-250 would be fine, on a smallish turbo, something like a T28R or GT2554R.

stock bottom end



286bhp/236ftlbs@14psi
382bhp/341ftlbs@25psi

if you tune properly as set the clearances correctly for the application you can make alot of power

keeping the torque out of low rpm also helps keep them alive

[turbotoaster]

Max_Torque said:

The question for me is why bother?

Sure you can make a K series reliable, and if you need to use a K series for some reason (original car used one and you want originality, or racing regs force you to use an original engine block for example), then great, use one.

But there are now plenty of turbo engines, that'll make 250bhp all day long with OE levels of durability with just a swap onto an aftermarket EMS. Use a Megaquirt or similar, and get a nice low miles engine from a "one careless owner" car at the breakers, and for the price of just the K series strengthened liners you'd have the whole lot! I mean, you can buy a brand new, complete duratec from Power products for less than £2k

If you REALLY want an easy life, get a crashed MX5, and take engine, gearbox, diff and everything, then fit a turbo kit. Job done!

Mk3_MX5_breaking

Show_Me_The_Boost

Edited by Max_Torque on Thursday 15th March 19:17

depends on the power level and the vehicle your using, if you have a car that came with it from factory for example, it makes life alot easier.

Would i suggest this is the ultimate 4 cylinder engine, nope, not by a long shot, probably the honda k series or 4g63 for power output, but for a very lightweight engine and gearbox that you can get very cheap its an option, ideal for a lightweight car, not something i would put into a saloon car though

[s91]

turbotoaster said:

stock bottom end



286bhp/236ftlbs@14psi
382bhp/341ftlbs@25psi

if you tune properly as set the clearances correctly for the application you can make alot of power

keeping the torque out of low rpm also helps keep them alive

Is that on OEM pistons rods and liners from a totally standard 1.8 turbo bottom end or some other combination of OEM parts?

[turbotoaster]

s91 said:

Is that on OEM pistons rods and liners from a totally standard 1.8 turbo bottom end or some other combination of OEM parts?

all oem components from a 1.8 turbo bottom end, including stock liners, mutliple track days.

0.5/0.6mm ring gaps 0.05mm bearing clearances, old style oil ladder, payen bw5750 head gasket, payen hbs005 head bolts, freelander flywheel and clutch....nothing fancy, you can even see where it dropped a valve from reving it to 8000rpm via miss shift, didnt bother changing it





Engine is still alive with no issue, its sitting in my garage waiting for another project(i was thinking of building a 400bhp freelander or a 400bhp metro)

I build K turbo engines for people in my spare time as i think its a market that noone seems to be in

[s91]

That's impressive, what turbo and supporting mods was it running, something like a GT28/30 I'm guessing?

I'd be interested to know how repeatable that reliability is, you say yours has been through multiple track days at that sort of power and yet other people go on as if the blocks are made of chocolate, how many of these engines have you actually built then, do they ever come back with problems related to too much power? What sort of ECU did you have on it, I'd imagine mapping plays a huge part in keeping these things reliable, well that goes for any engine but the general opinion seems to be that uprated liners and pistons are a must for these engines.

[turbotoaster]

s91 said:

That's impressive, what turbo and supporting mods was it running, something like a GT28/30 I'm guessing?

I'd be interested to know how repeatable that reliability is, you say yours has been through multiple track days at that sort of power and yet other people go on as if the blocks are made of chocolate, how many of these engines have you actually built then, do they ever come back with problems related to too much power? What sort of ECU did you have on it, I'd imagine mapping plays a huge part in keeping these things reliable, well that goes for any engine but the general opinion seems to be that uprated liners and pistons are a must for these engines.

the turbo was a bit of a mix of parts, 49/60mm compressor wheel, 55/65mm turbine wheel, cosworth t3 0.48 turbine housing.....basically the little turbine housing held it back as it would have done over 400bhp with the 0.63 larger version.

For reference its been over 300bhp for 3yrs and been on 4 dynos in that time, running on an old emerald ecu that i map myself.

Im actually using my forged engine that i built as a test bed to see how far certain components can go, the main one at the moment is head gasket sealing being limited by the head bolts via head lift under high controlled cylinder pressures.

In april we will be back on the dyno with coolant pressure monitoring and will be turning the cylinder pressure(and hence torque) up until we either reach a knock threshold or a coolant pressure spike, that will then tell us how much the bolts can hold, then it will be a simple case of holding that torque level for as long as possible as rpm rises from a combination of ignition and boost, will the head lift at 400ftlb, 500ftlbs, 600ftlbs.....I dont know(its fine at 370ftlbs) and thats what testing is for.

The 2 biggest problems I have seen with other people trying to get power out of k series turbos,

Is lack of piston ring clearance for the application, they simply buy a stock engine, turn the boost up and wonder why either the liner cracks or the ringlands fail......they arnt failing from lack of strength, they are failing because there is not enough ring gap, they expand, butt together and take a piston out or crack a liner.

The second is inproper mapping, unfortunately alot of rover owners arnt prepared to spend the money on an aftermarket ecu to properly control the engine and would rather spend £200 on an unlocked factory ecu designed for a completely stock engine/exhaust/intercooler etc, so then when running on their engine with a bigger intercooler/exhaust run lean(been shown on multiple examples of 13:1 AFR in boost) and hence get the pistons hot in an engine they havent added extra ring clearance and pop goes the liner or piston.

My forged engine runs on an Adaptronic ecu as it has alot more features and inputs which when your really pushing the engine is useful(aiming for 600bhp)

I think forged pistons and westwood ductile liners are useful, more for mapping errors than anything actual need for strength(assuming you pull the stock pistons out, regap the rings then put them back in)

overall it seems lack of knowledge on the engine and mapping that causes most issues which is a shame as even when you tell them these things they would rather kill 4 stock engines than get an ecu to actually control the engine(you can pick up a used emerald for £300 for example)

[DVandrews]

I think your engine has been ‘lucky’ I have a bucket full of failed turbo and TF160 pistons here from standard engines running stock boost / RPM / mapping, so I wouldn’t want to bet on any tweaked engine being immune.

I always recommend Omega pistons with a light skim on the crowns with Westwood ductile liners and Mahle rod bearings togther with either the shorter turbo rods bushed at the small end or custom steel rods at the same length.

Dave

Edited by DVandrews on Sunday 18th March 18:40

[turbotoaster]

DVandrews said:

I think your engine has been ‘lucky’ I have a bucket full of failed turbo and TF160 pistons here from standard engines running stock boost / RPM / mapping, so I wouldn’t want to bet on any tweaked engine being immune.

I always recommend Omega pistons with a light skim on the crowns with Westwood ductile liners and Mahle rod bearings togther with either the shorter turbo rods bushed at the small end or custom steel rods at the same length.

Dave

Edited by DVandrews on Sunday 18th March 18:40

Well generally as you know ringlands fail on turbo engines due to incorrect clearances for the conditions or running to lean.

Unfortuately even after all the years i have explained my setup, noone seems to actually make decent power with them, either from being scared or just using the wrong components, even with full forged engines they arnt turning them up, only person i know of who has made ok power was steveb at 350bhp but being capacity limited obviously hurts engine potential.

Speaking of Omega I recently worked with them to develop these k turbo pistons with extra meat in the ringlands, ive found the williams turbo forged rods good value at £290, thats what i run on my latest build.

[anonymous-user]

turbotoaster said:

Unfortuately even after all the years i have explained my setup, noone seems to actually make decent power with them, either from being scared or just using the wrong components, even with full forged engines they arnt turning them up, only person i know of who has made ok power was steveb at 350bhp but being capacity limited obviously hurts engine potential.

So either:

a) your engine makes "good" power, and EVERYONE else doesn't or can't for some unexplained reason.

or

b) You're, er, fibbing a bit ;-)



Hmm, now lets see, which is more probable?

[Ive]

I only did not go higher than 1 bar of boost on my Rover K as I was maxing out my Rotrex C30-94.
It's map shows it won't deliver more boost at the flows I was running. For more power, my engine would have to flow more air.
But here the next steps would again be very expensive as I was already running a VVC160 head with solid cams, 2.5" muffler etc.

This was plenty of fast for me in my Elise.

But you have point. Even running "just" 1 bar of boost on a Rover K is extremely uncommon.
the chap who bought my Rotrex C30-94 supercharger runs it slightly slower than me in his Rover engined Elise and is more than happy with the performance.

The real challenge is to make the entire set-up beginning from the alternator to the last tiny hose to last even on track despite the immense heat generated in the rather small engine bay of a S1 Elise. When my left wheel arch started to melt, it got me thinking. Still, no real damage and no prematurely ended track days.

Adapting ring gaps to the power levels is always a good idea.

The liners and pistons are not only there for mapping errors. More things can go wrong such like a fuel surge in a corner, bad fuel, broken sensor or electrical interference, a bad spark plug, a short circuit dropping power leading to a misfire due to weak spark etc.

This is why I was also running a J&S safeguard knock control system. It just takes the mechanical edge out of the system during such events.

Edited by Ive on Sunday 18th March 22:27

[turbotoaster]

Max_Torque said:

So either:

a) your engine makes "good" power, and EVERYONE else doesn't or can't for some unexplained reason.

or

b) You're, er, fibbing a bit ;-)



Hmm, now lets see, which is more probable?

I wouldnt be fibbing about 382bhp, its not exactly something to shock and awe people as its not really much power for a 1800cc twin cam engine.
The main issue is ring gaps and tuning i believe as it cant be cylinder pressure else my old engine should have died long ago, especially on circuit where the time at WOT is much higher.

Chatting to the main tuner at Emerald who deal with alot of k series including turbo engines and hes never cracked a liner on the dyno on turbo engines, including tuning stock bottom end ones with high 200s power

So its not some explained reason.....just not many are prepared to run a decent ecu and have built their engines with plenty of clearance.....and even then if they have got that far they wont turn the power up because the internet tells them it will break, i will admit it took me a bit of time to get up to 25psi of boost as for a while i had issues getting the clutch to hold more than about 290ftlbs of torque.

The new forged engine ive built I hope will be breaking new ground as the record is 477bhp for a k series and my target is close to 600bhp, whether i get there is all about testing of course

[DVandrews]

The ring lands break because the ring belt is very narrow, the material is just regular cast aluminium, the thrust loadings on the piston side are high because the piston is short and the rod angle acute and of course piston speed and acceleration/decelleration are all high due to the 89mm stroke.

Rover recognised this when the later VVC engines started to eat their pistons in standard trim under test and widened the ring lands of the pistons and added buttressing under the crown to reduce distortion and improve heat paths. These are better but not indestructible, the slightest flaw in the land due to occlusions / ash or hydrogen bubbles and the land will fail with ring gaps good or bad.

Dave

Edited by DVandrews on Monday 19th March 09:06

[anonymous-user]

turbotoaster said:

I wouldnt be fibbing about 382bhp, its not exactly something to shock and awe people as its not really much power for a 1800cc twin cam engine.

For an engine designed in the late 1980's making a maximum of just 89 bhp/litre in production trim, sorry, but i'd suggest that making 212 bhp/litre is a SIGNIFICANT increase!

[turbotoaster]

Max_Torque said:

For an engine designed in the late 1980's making a maximum of just 89 bhp/litre in production trim, sorry, but i'd suggest that making 212 bhp/litre is a SIGNIFICANT increase!

I borrowed a local dyno for an hour(im the one tuning) and they filmed a bit of it....i know its not definete proof but there isnt really much more i can do.

i think these particular video was when i got up to 360bhp, so not the final run


listen from about 1minute
https://www.facebook.com/MUTANTtuning/videos/26511...

listen from about 35secs
https://www.facebook.com/MUTANTtuning/videos/26512...