Small powerhouses and old school

[Lee.C]

Love this car/engine!!!

[Eddie DVK]

Oh my goodness! That is awesome. With the Hewland and the rear suspension, it's really pushing the envelope. It's still going to be a street car tho, isn't it?

Of course.......but it'll take Pete all winter to get the fanshroud to fit....he like's to take his time with the files and hammers. 

Is he driving it home from Sweden..

[andy M.]

11 grand would beWAAAAAARP! then

[andy198712]

Those throttle valves are beautiful!

[dive!dive!]

Well, if that isn't inspirational , I don't know what is. It already sounds demented! I love these smaller motors and Pete's efforts are a big reason I'm keeping developing my 1776 - but I am miles from this...
Yes, the big CC motors are powerful and fast but there is something compelling about doing more with less. Great stuff!
Steve

[andy198712]

Well, if that isn't inspirational , I don't know what is. It already sounds demented! I love these smaller motors and Pete's efforts are a big reason I'm keeping developing my 1776 - but I am miles from this...
Yes, the big CC motors are powerful and fast but there is something compelling about doing more with less. Great stuff!
Steve

totally agree!

[Pas]

Well, if that isn't inspirational , I don't know what is. It already sounds demented! I love these smaller motors and Pete's efforts are a big reason I'm keeping developing my 1776 - but I am miles from this...
Yes, the big CC motors are powerful and fast but there is something compelling about doing more with less. Great stuff!
Steve

totally agree!

Me too!

[Ian Brown]

No quite 11,000rpm but here's the latest onboard of my 1300cc pulling a measly 8000rpm....enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNWTt_NPWcg&list=UUcjAhwWO65zKiIzhOncRjdg

[spanners]

Looked and sounded ok Ian, Did it throw the belt at the end ? Red light lit, We are also a gear higher round the Indy, third at Druids, top at paddock and surtees,  just snick down to third for Clark curve, big motor tho, a gear higher than ideal is often far quicker as it keeps the car settled, you can then left foot brake which helps keeps pitch under control. Looked fun with all that history about the track, apart from the near cannon into the pocket off the lights!

[Ian Brown]

Looked and sounded ok Ian, Did it throw the belt at the end ? Red light lit, We are also a gear higher round the Indy, third at Druids, top at paddock and surtees,  just snick down to third for Clark curve, big motor tho, a gear higher than ideal is often far quicker as it keeps the car settled, you can then left foot brake which helps keeps pitch under control. Looked fun with all that history about the track, apart from the near cannon into the pocket off the lights!

I only got 2 laps in qualifying due to the belt coming off so the other drivers had already had 17 more laps than me, so I wasn't really up to speed at the start of the race. I got quicker each lap and as you'll see, at the end of the movie I tried 2nd through Surtees and it threw the belt again, hence the generator light came on. As it turned out 2nd was too low for Surtees but it was worth trying as my engine does need to be kept buzzing as it has no torque.

At a previous race I removed the front anti-roll bar for wet qualifying and the front grip was staggering, then the track quickly dried and I had to run in the dry with no anti-roll bar. As it turned out the handling was better in the dry too so i've left it off ever since. The car is light so the extra body roll doesn't upset the car even if I throw it around. At brands though it was causing issues as the car is now unloading the inside rear tyre when I try and power out of tight corners (as you can probably hear on the movie)...My Beetle is just as quick in a straight line as the two red Imps ahead of me so I should be in the top 10, but I couldn't get the power down (especially out of Druids and Clearways) plus they are much better drivers so I was losing ground though paddock especially (haven't mastered paddock yet)

Next round is this Saturday (Silverstone National) so if its dry, for a quick fix I'll fit a stock anti roll bar back on the front (softer than my adjustable one) and lengthen the rods on the Z-bar which combined should stop the rear from unloading with any luck.

I'll let you know next week whether its worked or not

ian

[spanners]

Yes, Belt throwing was a problem on the BBT cup cars using only 6000, i went Over to a wee dry sump pully to slow the fan speed and controlled the extra oil temp with 2 huge coolers, the Vee on the pulley was machined deeper also to contain the belt, it cured the problem, Your also going the right way with a z bar shimmed to work full time, but only with the stock 22mm torsions, two things happen, traction is better as the inside wheel is made to work harder, and power understeer will increase, oddly, you may need more front AR bar on to keep front camber angle from body rolling into positive, we 're set' the top torsion arms for LOTS more negative, then we found 26mm torsion bars were just plain quicker and the way to keep it balanced and reduce under steer,  then we were able to abandon the z bars for less weight and it was so much more chuck able,  good balance in the rain too, but the inside wheel lifting came back but not as badly as with the skinny torsions.
Ahh yes Paddock, so many corner entry lines, generally, don't use the single seater wide entry out by the gravel trap turn in point, it's so under steery out there, for a bug anyway, mid track to maybe 2/3 rds track width is about right, more favourable track camber and less bumps lol. The trick is to just let just the car run, the steering feedback before the compression tells your brain to remove steering angle which you must resist,,,,lol , or it goes squirrely when you hit it. And a Low front ARB CAN LIFT THE FRONT OFF THE GROUND if you straddle that kerbing....Good luck at Silverstone.. Johnny.

[Eddie DVK]

JPM Ultimate 1776cc VW Aircooled
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/hgsjzTOm4EE" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/hgsjzTOm4EE</a>

Guys how did it work out on the JPM Dynoday..

[Frallan]

Did not run it.
Still some ECU mapping gremlins to sort out.

[Ian Brown]

Your also going the right way with a z bar shimmed to work full time, but only with the stock 22mm torsions, two things happen, traction is better as the inside wheel is made to work harder, and power understeer will increase, oddly, you may need more front AR bar on to keep front camber angle from body rolling into positive, we 're set' the top torsion arms for LOTS more negative, then we found 26mm torsion bars were just plain quicker and the way to keep it balanced and reduce under steer,  then we were able to abandon the z bars for less weight and it was so much more chuck able,  good balance in the rain too, but the inside wheel lifting came back but not as badly as with the skinny torsions.

My best lap time with no front anti-roll bar on the Silverstone National Circuit was (1:19.0 dry track) as I couldn't get the power down on corner exit....Tried a stock front anti-roll bar in qualifying this time which helped (1:18.7 damp drying track)...re-fitted the heavy-duty adjustable front anti-roll bar for the dry race (1:15.7)

[Ian Brown]

Here you go....Last race of the season, so I gave the 1300cc some stick. (so much so I out -qualified 12 other cars including a Mustang and an E-Type!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loDjQb3DYV8

[Peter Shattock]

Just finished on the dyno with the new 1776, all loaded up now for the long trip home from JPM.

You can see a short video clip on the JPM Facebook page (I tried to put a link here but failed).  Peak power at 10k the rev limiter is at 10,700rpm.

So peak power 249.7hp at the flywheel that's 140.6hp/litre 13.2 BMEP. Not to shabby for an old floppy mag cased 2 valve per cylinder pushrod engine.

Now its down to me to try and do something with it!

Peter

[Lee.C]

Saw the video earlier dude..... AMAZING! 

[Udo]

Great results Peter - good luck with it and i hope we meet next year ....

Udo

[Jon]

Congratulations Peter! Hope you reach your goals!
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=367056256809474

[Peter Shattock]

Thought I would update this now I'm back home with the car after its longer than expected holiday in Sweden. Firstly a big thankyou to Phil West for the trailer which also had a 3 month holiday in Sweden and Ulf for looking after it all whilst Johannes sorted the new motor.
The new 1776 is a 64x94, not the usual 69x90.5, principally due to the ability to use bigger valves based on the bigger bore.
Valve train issues are what caused the delay after the initial dyno sessions back in September. We had a misfire that we originally thought was ignition related, but it turned out to be a loss of valve control. So no simple fix. This resulted in a less aggressive cam being used relative to that originally intended to keep the valves under control.
The joke to all this is that this is why it "only" makes 249hp.
Now we have proved the engine is capable producing peak power at 10,000rpm the big question now is how reliable will it be? Only time will tell, but its certainly not well proven with ACVW's. One way or another we'll know next year.
I'm actually reasonably confident about temperatures and the oil system, but obviously with the rpm valve train is the big challenge.
Other than reliability the next big challenge will be getting the car off the line successfully. There is limited rotating mass in the engine and limited torque relative to most ACVW motors making 250hp and a relatively heavy  car (compared to an all out race car).
This was a known issue though so hopefully we have enough in the plans we have made to find a solution.
Time at the rack is what the car needs now so we can try and work oout how to try and turn some decent numbers.
Little did I know what it would take when Peter Englezos and I were driving home to the airport after a trip to JPM when we agreed that this had to be done. I had been thinking about this motor for some time before this, and discussing it with a few people, but this was the moment it was actually something that was going to happen.
Plenty of jobs need doing now to get the car race ready which will start after Christmas, as I need to score a few house points with the family. The plan now is to have the car ready for its first outing at UKDD in May.
Taylor, following you question a while ago about the little CB oil pump I can say that my initial impression is that its up to the job in my engine. It has very solid oil pressure with the engine warm at idle and high rpm so it looks to have been a good choice so far.
Thanks for all the words of encouragement received which should help with the motivation for all the cold nights ahead in the garage over the winter getting it ready!
Finally I have to say thanks to Johannes.  This project has been a great experience and I've learnt an huge amount over the last 4 discussing it with him. Suffice to say its proved to be far more difficult than first thought, but a great deal of effort on his part has made this a reality. I said this after the last engine was built, but Johannes really does operate at the next level and once again the proof is right here!
This engine is a good step up in efficiency over the old engine which its self was better than most. But if the engine proves to be reliable and a solid base for development who knows where we might end up!
Peter

[dangerous]

Thanks for the updates Peter!
Does the engine use flat tappet or roller camshaft?

[Peter Shattock]

Hi Dangerous its flat tappet.

Peter

[nicolas]

very happy to hear that you have the car back home.

i know tea keeps me warm and happy when i work in my garage, but maybe the effect is slightly lower on more regular tea drinkers in the UK 

see you next year.

[dive!dive!]

Great stuff Peter. An inspiration as ever. Looking forward to seeing progress next year.
Got my 'modest' 1776 on the road again today after 4months out, it had some 'treatment' to the heads in the meantime from GAC, and now has an AEM EFI system with ITB's. Idle and WOT map points mostly sorted today , just the bits in between now :-)
Cheers
Steve

[BeetleBug]

Thanks for sharing Peter. It is very interesting to read about the camshaft. What was changed in order to get the engine to run properly @ 10k rpms? And why are you not happy with 140.7 hp/liter? If I'm not mistaken that must be a world record for a flat tappet cam, pushrods and 8 valves.

Very inspirational and just what the doctor ordered this winter to keep the momentum up. I really look forward to your race reports in 2015!

Best rgs and congrats to you and JPM!

-BB-

[andy198712]

Great stuff Peter. An inspiration as ever. Looking forward to seeing progress next year.
Got my 'modest' 1776 on the road again today after 4months out, it had some 'treatment' to the heads in the meantime from GAC, and now has an AEM EFI system with ITB's. Idle and WOT map points mostly sorted today , just the bits in between now :-)
Cheers
Steve

What ITB's did you use?
cheers

[dive!dive!]

Speedshop IDF pattern, 38mm throttles.

[Peter Shattock]

Hi BB,

The accelerations on the cam were basically to great. As it turns out the relatively small increase over what had been proven to be OK previously was to much and interestingly it was to much at a relatively low rpm (just over 8k), so we did not actually get close to the target rpm with the original cam.

On a positive note what this resulted in was Johannes digging back in his archives for a formula he was once given to determine valve spring requirement with some detailed data entry parameters and some complicated math. He found and used it and proved it to be accurate based on the cam, valve train and float rpm data he had from my engine and backed that up with some of the R&D work done to develop the off the shelf raptor cams on the single cylinder engine.

This was then used to reverse engineer the new cam based on what fixed parts we had in the valve train plus a safety margin.

I certainly did not mean to give the impression I was not happy as that could not be further from the truth. This little "gem" is dreamland for me. Back when I was first thinking about this project I was not sure raising the peak power rpm to 10k was even possible on anything other than paper, as we all know how inefficient these engines are. Particularly when you consider them relative to the sort of stable platform you get with a modern engine without even getting close to the benefits of 4 valves per cylinder central plug, direct acting cam to valve etc etc. As you know its a long list of problems we have to start with, with these old turds we try and tune.

Any hesitation on my part you may have picked up on was I suspect based on the fact that we now know given what we have seen there is potential for more subject to being able to control the valve train.

The point we have reached now is what Johannes and I have named phase 1. A this point we need to prove basic reliability before going any further, learning to walk before you try and run was the term I used.

You only have to listen to the video to know that there is a lot going on with that extra 2,000-3,000rpm above the point where most ACVW's make peak power and when you start looking at the loads the crank and case and oil system we need to be sure we have a reliable platform to build from. But as you might expect none of what we have in or around the engine has been based on guesswork. Theory, calculation, and experience has brought us to where we are today, although there are still unknowns.  

Clearly there are some who think this thing we have created is ready to throw its self all over the floor at any moment and I would be lying if I said it didn't cross my mind when I was stood behind it filming and hearing the 10,500rpm rev limiter! The truth is now that it has seen over 10,000rpm many times on the dyno and without wishing to temp fate it all looks good. The oil system and valve train have coped and at street driving rpm as I said before I'm fairly confident about general cooling. That said the CR and bore size are both greater which does ramp things up a bit so its certainly not a given.    

I've never been keen on saying what might be possible as its all to easy to get carried away when you start doing calculations and come up with a theory for impressive results. The truth is it all means nothing until it is a reality and it does the business on the dyno and track. That is not to rubbish the calculations as they are an essential tool so you know what you need to aim for in practice so you know you are on target.

What I will say is though I think both Johannes and I will both be equally disappointed if this is the end of the road in terms of hp/litre. We have a plan for phase 2 which I don't intend to elaborate on for now (sorry to carrot dangle) as its all totally academic if what we have today is not reliable. Needless to say we are hoping to prove the doubters wrong next year, but we do have a few slices of humble pie at the ready if we have it all wrong!

If nothing else I'm glad it has got you fired up for some winter tinkering of your own! I can tell you I'm not short of enthusiasm right now!

Peter          

[andy198712]

Very cool! Some serious envelope pushing going on! Seems like you have an open mind to it

So a lot has been spoken about the valve train, but what about the crank and case/bearings? That's a mighty rpm for them to handle??

Thanks for sharing

[Peter Shattock]

Hi Nicholas, as you suggest much tea will need to be consumed before this car can turn a wheel in anger next year!

Dive!dive!, always happy to see another 1776cc being tinkered with good luck with the mapping I've had my first lessons now and clearly have a lot to learn!

Andy, we are certainly trying to maximise things now and that was what this engine project and all the car modifications over the last couple of years have been all about. 2015 will be the first year when it is all in the car so as I said before track time is what is needed now to get it all sorted out and see if we can get it to all work together.

The main focus has been on the valve train because this is the first problem we had to solve, but you are right to question the bearings crank and case as they are clearly all potential problem areas. This is part of the reason for the steel plates on the case to help with rigidity and reduce the flex. The crank is a billet EN30B number which is much lighter than some of the larger cranks which are common to keep the loads down. It also has a light piston, pin, ring pack and rods with a view to keeping the loads on the crank, bearings and case to what we believe are acceptable levels. If you look back at the calc's Johannes quotes when building the 1603 mouse you will see the difference the light parts make and we have the short stroke crank on our side too. 

I think the dry sump oil system is a big improvement in this engine over the old wet sump I have been running in my engines previously. I had been avoiding it as I was not convinced all the extra weight and complication was worth it on performance grounds, but what swung it for me this time was a reliable better quality oil supply. In the old 1795 I was struggling with rod bearings and I believe this was down to either oil starvation or poor quality (aerated) oil at the pickup tube. Consequently the dry sump system became an easy choice and any small performance gain there may be is also an advantage. I appreciate the 21mm supply pump sounds very small to many, but I have heard from several people that I respect who have first hand experience with them and they have found them to be fine in applications which are actually likely to be more onerous than mine. 

There are many unproven things in this engine, but hopefully this time next year we will have more ticks than crosses against them!

Peter