Why are there not more Speed 6 engined Chims?
Discussion
With people chasing big power I am just wondering why more people are not fitting Speed 6 engines in Chimaeras? Looking at the price of built 5l and 5.4l engines, and the fact that complete speed 6 can be had for less than £3k (and rebuilds cost about the same as a new V8), it seems like an interesting and fairly easy way to 350 - 400bhp?
They are also designed to fit the T5, so should bolt up fairly easily, and engine mounts shouldn't be too hard to figure out.
Obviously the exhaust would be an expensive part, but could a modified Tuscan or Tamora exhaust be made to fit? Are there any big drawbacks that I am missing or is it more a case of people just being loyal to the ol' Rover V8?
They are also designed to fit the T5, so should bolt up fairly easily, and engine mounts shouldn't be too hard to figure out.
Obviously the exhaust would be an expensive part, but could a modified Tuscan or Tamora exhaust be made to fit? Are there any big drawbacks that I am missing or is it more a case of people just being loyal to the ol' Rover V8?
Engineer1949 said:
To long in standard chassis.
John
Good answer but not the right answer John
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10151649...
it's a puzzler alright 900T-R said:
The rub is that Speed Six engined TVRs are available at not much more money than Griffs and Chims, so if a S6 tickles your fancy why not get one of those?
For most, the RV8 will be integral to the Chim experience - it's not all about the numbers...
I think that this is the real reason. Say £8K for a nice Chim plus £15K for the conversion = £23K which buys a nice T car. However that explains why there are not lots of them but not the OP's question. Some people spend £30K on a Chim to achieve a car with the 400bhp that the S6 develops.For most, the RV8 will be integral to the Chim experience - it's not all about the numbers...
Zippee said:
Hoofa said:
Yeah right, why would i want one, less torque , less noise, and you have rev it to make power. Less face it i cannot see anyone going for itt
Nah V8 evertime
Rubbish on all accounts Nah V8 evertime
Both engines are epic in their own way.
Alun450 said:
If the speed six is heavier and must put some weight forward as its longer wont that upset the balance!
If the speed six is lighter then it might rock!
It's a fair bit heavier than an AJP8, but against an RV8 I'm not sure. It's definitely longer though, whether a Chim with it in would still have the same fore/aft balance is up to debate.If the speed six is lighter then it might rock!
A S6 giving a true 400 bhp will have had a bit of a fettle, too - at a cost.
900T-R said:
Alun450 said:
If the speed six is heavier and must put some weight forward as its longer wont that upset the balance!
If the speed six is lighter then it might rock!
It's a fair bit heavier than an AJP8, but against an RV8 I'm not sure. It's definitely longer though, whether a Chim with it in would still have the same fore/aft balance is up to debate. If the speed six is lighter then it might rock!
Marquis Rex said:
I'm tired of the hype surrounding the RV8 engine. Man, I've heard figures as low as 130 Kgs being banded about for its weight. It's a widely used readily available engine- and there's a lot of tuning knowledge out there for it (some of the tuning is questionable).
But lets put things into perspective here:
These are the true weights of a late Disco 4 litre engine, compliant with all the modern emissions and refinement criteria.
Accessory Drive Belt - (1) 0.341kg
Air Cleaner Body 0.977kg
Air Cleaner Element 0.299kg
Air Cleaner Top 0.467kg
Air Flow Meter 0.226kg
Air Hose/Duct - (1) 0.325kg
Alternator 7.196kg
Engine Complete 177.000kg
Engine Management - E.C.U. 0.390kg
Starter Motor 4.060kg
Viscous Coupling 2.942kg
Engine Oil 5.676kg
The above comes to 200 kgs. Now an earlier vehicle will probably NOT have the reduction gear starter motor fitted and so you can expect that to weigh about 8 kgs, the accessory drive won't be poly belt driven but individually driven So that will weigh quite a bit more. The above also does NOT include the flywheel, which on the Rover is very very heavy compared to it's contemporaries. So we're already looking at way over 220 Kgs. The extra capacity over the 3.5 litre will lose some in the crank area, but because the RV8 doesn't have a fully counterweighted crankshaft- not as much as you might imagine. The block has been reinforced since the early days, but I can't see that adding much more then about 5-6 kgs. So these silly figures of around 140Kgs are Science Fiction.
Other points of note are the fact that the valve timing does its own thing about about 4000 rpm due to the flex in the pushrods and rocker shaft location-this has a HUGE effect on top end power, an area where the undervalved Rover V8 struggles already- enlargening the capacity further will just boost low speed torque with little effect on peak power due to the restrictive nature of the cylinder heads- you’ll end up having to go to specially made Wildcat heads to get the top end back unless you’re particularly fond of the feel of a “diesel-esque” torque curve. Now don't get me wrong, the RV8 is a great "working class hero" of an engine- readily available. I TOTALLY understand the emotional reasons behind choosing this legendary stalwart powerplant, or retaining it for a sense of originality- fair play. But when biased folk start to pitch this motor, on function, against the Chevy C5 motor or a twin cam Jag, BMW, or Porsche V8s spending thousands upon thousands and seriously believing all the hype, they're on shaky ground.
and in this case Dom has moved it backwards to maintain the f/r balance.But lets put things into perspective here:
These are the true weights of a late Disco 4 litre engine, compliant with all the modern emissions and refinement criteria.
Accessory Drive Belt - (1) 0.341kg
Air Cleaner Body 0.977kg
Air Cleaner Element 0.299kg
Air Cleaner Top 0.467kg
Air Flow Meter 0.226kg
Air Hose/Duct - (1) 0.325kg
Alternator 7.196kg
Engine Complete 177.000kg
Engine Management - E.C.U. 0.390kg
Starter Motor 4.060kg
Viscous Coupling 2.942kg
Engine Oil 5.676kg
The above comes to 200 kgs. Now an earlier vehicle will probably NOT have the reduction gear starter motor fitted and so you can expect that to weigh about 8 kgs, the accessory drive won't be poly belt driven but individually driven So that will weigh quite a bit more. The above also does NOT include the flywheel, which on the Rover is very very heavy compared to it's contemporaries. So we're already looking at way over 220 Kgs. The extra capacity over the 3.5 litre will lose some in the crank area, but because the RV8 doesn't have a fully counterweighted crankshaft- not as much as you might imagine. The block has been reinforced since the early days, but I can't see that adding much more then about 5-6 kgs. So these silly figures of around 140Kgs are Science Fiction.
Other points of note are the fact that the valve timing does its own thing about about 4000 rpm due to the flex in the pushrods and rocker shaft location-this has a HUGE effect on top end power, an area where the undervalved Rover V8 struggles already- enlargening the capacity further will just boost low speed torque with little effect on peak power due to the restrictive nature of the cylinder heads- you’ll end up having to go to specially made Wildcat heads to get the top end back unless you’re particularly fond of the feel of a “diesel-esque” torque curve. Now don't get me wrong, the RV8 is a great "working class hero" of an engine- readily available. I TOTALLY understand the emotional reasons behind choosing this legendary stalwart powerplant, or retaining it for a sense of originality- fair play. But when biased folk start to pitch this motor, on function, against the Chevy C5 motor or a twin cam Jag, BMW, or Porsche V8s spending thousands upon thousands and seriously believing all the hype, they're on shaky ground.
The Marquis made some good points there - especially the limited value of increasing swept capacity - but I seriously doubt the serpentine front end is lighter than the V-belt one, at least on cars that just have one belt driving water pump and alternator.
He's got the starter motor weight spot on though, didn't know late Disco ones have a geared starter; anyone knows whether the ring gear/starter mountings changed over time? I've got an aftermarket lightweight starter but whether it's a good 'un is up for debate...
He's got the starter motor weight spot on though, didn't know late Disco ones have a geared starter; anyone knows whether the ring gear/starter mountings changed over time? I've got an aftermarket lightweight starter but whether it's a good 'un is up for debate...
So the gearbox has been mounted further back and a be spoke prop made for the one Dom built I'm assuming?
Sounds great then!
You can't argue with weights and measures, the 6 is def more race orientated.
If your going to such expense then you put an LS in and be done with it!!!!
I'm not trying to be controversial, it just makes sense.
Question
Speed 6 revs higher so would you need to adjust gearbox/ dif ratios.
Sounds great then!
You can't argue with weights and measures, the 6 is def more race orientated.
If your going to such expense then you put an LS in and be done with it!!!!
I'm not trying to be controversial, it just makes sense.
Question
Speed 6 revs higher so would you need to adjust gearbox/ dif ratios.
Alun450 said:
So the gearbox has been mounted further back and a be spoke prop made for the one Dom built I'm assuming?
Sounds great then!
You can't argue with weights and measures, the 6 is def more race orientated.
If your going to such expense then you put an LS in and be done with it!!!!
.
No doubting the ls is a fantastic engine but let's face it the ls is the ultimate kit car engine (nowt wrong with that) but some owners might want something that bit more special/different so I can see why owners go for the Tvr S6.Sounds great then!
You can't argue with weights and measures, the 6 is def more race orientated.
If your going to such expense then you put an LS in and be done with it!!!!
.
Gassing Station | Chimaera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff