Not much talk of working RCS? Why is this?
  • Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 2 12 Last
Results 1 to 25 of 35
  1. #1
    Tadpole
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    18

    Icon5 Not much talk of working RCS? Why is this?

    I'm kind of surprised at this.

    Mini has the Works mods (even with warranty: drool).
    Various others are at it.

    Advertisement


    These forums have lots of people working various cars.

    I'm curious why there is so little talk in general about working an RCS.
    Surely more beast = better.

  2. #2
    Fellow Frogger! lucin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    inner E melbourne
    Posts
    453

    Default

    hmmm ...

    newish car = still under warranty

    not many would want to void their warranty. Also i think there is a lack of people knowledgeable with tuning VVT engines as well as a lack of aftermarket parts here in Australia.
    Then - 2001 206 Gti
    Now - 2000 306 Gti6
    Now - 1974 GS 1220 Club

  3. #3
    Fellow Frogger! Jason20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    439

  4. #4
    who? when? huh? GTI124's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gordon, NSW
    Posts
    4,527

    Default

    Because there isn't that much you can do to a car putting out 127kw out of a 2L NA engine.

  5. #5
    Fellow Frogger! Jason20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GTI124
    Because there isn't that much you can do to a car putting out 127kw out of a 2L NA engine.
    Hmmmm, are you so sure about that?

  6. #6
    who? when? huh? GTI124's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gordon, NSW
    Posts
    4,527

    Default

    Don't see what's so funny. The balance between 196Nm or torque and 127kw of power is about it when it comes to 2L NA engines. You can get fractionally more, but not THAT much. Honda has done it at ther sacrifice of low end torque.

    Mini can do it because the base Chrysler block was already a peice of rubbish, and because it's supercharged, it's a relatively easy car to mod. Modifying a NA car and keeping it NA isn't easy to do on a car that is already so highly tuned.

    But if you prefer to add something valueable to this debate, please feel free.

  7. #7
    Fellow Frogger! Jason20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GTI124
    Don't see what's so funny. The balance between 196Nm or torque and 127kw of power is about it when it comes to 2L NA engines. You can get fractionally more, but not THAT much. Honda has done it at ther sacrifice of low end torque.

    Mini can do it because the base Chrysler block was already a peice of rubbish, and because it's supercharged, it's a relatively easy car to mod. Modifying a NA car and keeping it NA isn't easy to do on a car that is already so highly tuned.

    But if you prefer to add something valueable to this debate, please feel free.
    Integra type-r is a 1.8L engine (older model), 147kw, 200nm torque. bags of low end torque. far more advanced variable valve timing system then a clio sport.

  8. #8
    1000+ Posts Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GTI124
    Don't see what's so funny. The balance between 196Nm or torque and 127kw of power is about it when it comes to 2L NA engines. You can get fractionally more, but not THAT much. Honda has done it at ther sacrifice of low end torque.

    Mini can do it because the base Chrysler block was already a peice of rubbish, and because it's supercharged, it's a relatively easy car to mod. Modifying a NA car and keeping it NA isn't easy to do on a car that is already so highly tuned.

    But if you prefer to add something valueable to this debate, please feel free.
    I completely agree with this, with engines like this one and the GTI180 engine so much work has been put into them to get a good balance of drivability and power, that it is not worth losing that for an extra 10 or 20 hp. Engines like the 205Gti have relatively low compression and pretty ugly combustion chambers and are fairly simple (no vct etc) so it is worth having a play as you can pick up 40 hp, but then compare this to the newer engine and all the things you have done like upping the compression and getting more cam timing come as standard on the newer engine. The development has been done for you and unless it is a track car you should just enjoy it how it is.
    On a car like this i would be looking at improving the suspension and buying the best tyres i could afford.

    Dave


  9. #9
    1000+ Posts Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jason20
    Integra type-r is a 1.8L engine (older model), 147kw, 200nm torque. bags of low end torque. far more advanced variable valve timing system then a clio sport.
    The integra was designed to rev 1000rpm higher than the clio motors it makes its power at 7400 rpm and its max torque at 6000 rpm which is really only 192nm.
    The Clio engine on the other makes only 12kw less at 6500rpm and has more torque with 200nm at 5250rpm. I'm sure the renault engine is much more drivable on a dailiy basis and would probably be quicker than the honda in real world situations as you dont need the vtec to kick in before you see that torque.

    Also the next integra only has 178Nm @ 6300rpm and 141kw @ 7900 rpm. I think i would much rather have ~130kW @ 6500 rpm. So comparing current technology at similar prices under the same emmission laws i know what i think is a more practical engine.

    Finally the current integra has only 118kw @6500rpm but 191nm @ 4000rpm. So it looks like your friends at honda finally realised that torque is your friend.
    Now get with the times and dont just quote the only figure you know off the top of your head.
    Dave
    Last edited by Dave; 14th July 2004 at 02:33 PM.


  10. #10
    Fellow Frogger! Jason20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    439

    Default

    Also the current integra only has 178Nm @ 6300rpm and 141kw @ 7900 rpm. I think i would much rather have ~130kW @ 6500 rpm. So comparing current technology at similar prices under the same emmission laws i know what i think is a more practical engine.
    Dave


    Our current type-r is an Integra Rsx, the true jap spec type-r's punch out heaps more power than that.

  11. #11
    Fellow Frogger! matt205's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    498

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jason20
    Integra type-r is a 1.8L engine (older model), 147kw, 200nm torque. bags of low end torque. far more advanced variable valve timing system then a clio sport.
    Bags of low end torque? Compared to what? Clio craps all over the old Type-R down low, I speak from experience.

    How much more advanced is the VVT of the Honda, can it be much different? I know the new Type-R engine is quite a nice thing, in Jap Domestic form it's 220hp. Jeez they make lovely engines shame there cars are so bland.

    I'm sure I'll get shot down in flames but to be honest, and again speaking from experience, the Clio is at it's HP limit with standard suspension and diff. You can probably squeeze a couple more HP with an overpriced induction kit but diff, suspension and rubber will be the secret to make it perform seriously. Serious HP will probably only come from aftermarket ECU, cams and professional tuning.
    Regards,
    Matt
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Imagine watching the entire French Air-Force crash into a fireworks factory. That's how much fun this car is."

    Jeremy Clarkson - talking about the V6 Clio
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  12. #12
    Fellow Frogger! Jason20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    439

    Default

    The Type R's 1.8 litre dual overhead cam 16-valve VTEC inline 4-cylinder engine is one of the world's highest-rated normally aspirated mass-produced engines in terms of horsepower per litre (108 horsepower per litre). The engine develops 195 horsepower at 8000 rpm, and 130 ft-lb. of torque at 7300 rpm.

    The Type R has 25 more horsepower than the 170-horsepower Integra GS-R, the result of high-compression low-friction pistons (compression ratio is 10.6:1), high-performance camshafts and valve gear, larger throttle body and single-port intake manifold, hand-polished intake and exhaust ports, and high-volume induction and exhaust system.

    Its Variable Valve Timing and Lift Electronic Control (VTEC) system was pioneered in the Acura NSX sports car. The VTEC system uses three cam lobes and three corresponding rocker arms for each pair of valves and operates on both the intake and exhaust valves. The two outer cam lobes have a profile that optimizes low-speed torque and response while the middle lobe has a high-lift, longer-duration profile that is designed to optimize high-end horsepower. The changeover point between low lift and high lift in the Type R is at 5700 rpm. At high engine speeds, valve lift on the intake side is increased by 0.9 mm, and on the exhaust side by 1.1 mm. The valve timing is extended an additional 10 degrees on the intake side and 8 degrees on the exhaust side.

  13. #13
    1000+ Posts Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,340

    Default

    Yep your right the newest honda type R are now making 147kw again, but its still at 1000rpm higher than the clio and the torque is still only about 190 but its all above 6000rpm.
    See what we are trying to say is if you mod the clio engine you are basically going to end up with exactly what the honda is; revvy and lots of go above 6000rpm but not as drivable.
    The only problem is that the clio engine was designed for the revs it is using to not only would modifying it wreck its nice torque curve but most likely kill it if your going to rev it a whole lot more to make the power.

    Notice that in the late 90's all the cits and pugs used square 86x86mm 2L engines, well guess what hondas new 2L integra engine is

    Dave


  14. #14
    Fellow Frogger! Jason20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    439

    Default

    Im not trying to prove which engine is better.
    Just saying that 130kw is pushing the limit for a 2 litre engine is total bs. period.

  15. #15
    who? when? huh? GTI124's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gordon, NSW
    Posts
    4,527

    Default

    I'm talking about flexibility here, a combination of torque and power. I should have made my first post clear, but my subsequent post was crystal.

    I still fail to see your point. The Clio engine can't be turned into a 147kw torque-less Honda engine. So, we come back to the first point, what mods can do to an engine of this kind?

  16. #16
    Fellow Frogger! matt205's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    498

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jason20
    Im not trying to prove which engine is better.
    Just saying that 130kw is pushing the limit for a 2 litre engine is total bs. period.
    I agree but I really do think that major problem will be reliabilty. I know of a NA 1.8 that was pumping out 240hp, not the most reliable thing though. Like I said in my post though it's all for naught if the chassis isn't up to it. I think the Clio is standard form is at the limit here.

    How does the Renault VVT compare to the Honda one, is the Renault a 2 lobe deal. I guess I should know this as a I own one but never really taken much notice. One things for sure the Renault one is a lot more subtle than any honda one i've driven.

    I'm actually looking at dropping one of these new Honda RS-X engines into a Lotus Elise, so I find this thread quite interesting.

    I've driven quite a few cars where the chassis just isn't up to the HP, they are, at best, tiring or just downright scary.
    Regards,
    Matt
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Imagine watching the entire French Air-Force crash into a fireworks factory. That's how much fun this car is."

    Jeremy Clarkson - talking about the V6 Clio
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  17. #17
    1000+ Posts Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,340

    Default

    Well i agree with that mate. The point i'm trying to make though is that for a nice drivable engine that you dont need to rev its nuts off to get the best out of i think 130-135kw is about the max with current technology.
    Of course that is not the full potential of the engine, there are plenty more ponies there for the taking, but to reach them you need more revs which in turn means less reliability and less bottom end.
    Remeber too that the jap spec engines are tuned to run on 100ron and over fuel, which is why we dont get the same versions here sometimes.

    Dave


  18. #18
    1000+ Posts Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by matt205

    I'm actually looking at dropping one of these new Honda RS-X engines into a Lotus Elise, so I find this thread quite interesting.
    Just look at the new ones mate (111R and exige), they come with the Toyota 1.8L with 141kW so the hard work is done for you already. I'd love on of them, 730kilos with 140 odd kw...great handling...i think i would kill myself within an hour of ownership!!


    Dave


  19. #19
    Fellow Frogger! matt205's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    498

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave
    Just look at the new ones mate (111R and exige), they come with the Toyota 1.8L with 141kW so the hard work is done for you already. I'd love on of them, 730kilos with 140 odd kw...great handling...i think i would kill myself within an hour of ownership!!


    Dave
    Yeah, I've driven the new one, I actually prefer the older shape and it's handling is more my style too. Plan is to buy a clapped out series 1 and drop the Honda in it, much cheaper option and lighter as well! These things are in another world altogether when it comes to going around corners.
    Regards,
    Matt
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Imagine watching the entire French Air-Force crash into a fireworks factory. That's how much fun this car is."

    Jeremy Clarkson - talking about the V6 Clio
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  20. #20
    who? when? huh? GTI124's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gordon, NSW
    Posts
    4,527

    Default

    I would've thought the old engine would be more enjoyable in day to day driving that the Toyota 141 engine. The Toyota engine lacks a fair bit of low end torque and the engine is quite peaky. Perhaps the lower negates this?

    Matt, your project sounds awesome. What timeframe are you looking at for this?

  21. #21
    Fellow Frogger! matt205's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    498

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GTI124
    I would've thought the old engine would be more enjoyable in day to day driving that the Toyota 141 engine. The Toyota engine lacks a fair bit of low end torque and the engine is quite peaky. Perhaps the lower negates this?

    Matt, your project sounds awesome. What timeframe are you looking at for this?
    The old K-Series Rover engine was always the achillies heel of the Elise, mind you I've driven a Sport 190 which made me believe the K-Series wasn't so bad after all, of course the problem is reliabilty. The weight does really help to negate the torque issue. They're funny things to drive and actually don't feel like they accelerate that fast, I assume it's because of the lack of weight and therefore weight transfer.

    Well if I can sell my Clio and my 16v 205 (anyone? ) it'll happen pretty quickly, if some can help me sell these things I'll promise a drive of the Elise. This is actually becoming quite a common conversion in the UK, ooohhh DeJaVu.....
    Regards,
    Matt
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Imagine watching the entire French Air-Force crash into a fireworks factory. That's how much fun this car is."

    Jeremy Clarkson - talking about the V6 Clio
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  22. #22
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,160

    Default

    Why no mods...

    my point of view (an owner)...

    It doesnt really need any more performance...
    i'm happy where it is at the moment, balance etc
    My general point of view is that the further you go from stock the less reliable it becomes (unless you spend LOADS of $, & even then... hmmm questionable)

    and you're probably best spending your first grand or two on driving courses & track days!

  23. #23
    1000+ Posts Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,340

    Default

    I dont think there is any problem with lack of torque in the toyota powered elises as they are only pushing 730kg or so.

    Dave


  24. #24
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,160

    Default

    forgot to mention the S2000...

    176kW 2L NA...
    though the power & torque curves are pretty damned steep! somethingl like: nothing => 7,000 => everything

    120hp/litre, think its still the best from a production car...
    then the ferrari's @ 108hp/l, 105hp/l (forget the models...)

  25. #25
    Fellow Frogger! RXE 2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Australia, Sydney
    Posts
    136

    Icon12

    BMW's VAVLETRONIC and Double VANOS systems are probably the best varialbe valve timing and lift controling systems out in a production. Their systems makes VTEC look like childs play. Its great because it is infinitely variable.
    Has anyone seen the new e60 M5 it prouced 507Bhp with 520 nm @ 6100 rpm

    BMW also has the cool infinitely variable intake manifold. I love German engineering

    http://www.supercars.net/cars/[email protected][email protected]$M5g.html
    http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/frame...ar.mv&num=2018
    Last edited by RXE 2.0; 17th July 2004 at 12:03 AM.
    Renault Sport Clio 172.

Page 1 of 2 12 Last

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •