Moderators: IMOC Moderators, IMOC Committee Members
(anything that uses an ECU tacho signal). The Omex may well have an option to change the signal type though, but if it doesn't then the above will work.
( not to mention the shedload of extra torque ) Watch for the box being shaken off the shelf on the 7-8k run.at the wheels! wow, whoever built/mapped that engine did a good job, looking at the torque curve, close to peak torque from fairly low rpm, not what I would expect from a highly tuned NA 4AGE! 
oh yes the noise! . . 6 . 7 . 8 5 . . . . i . . 9(Ian Kempson) gave a build brief for torque and tractability rather than out right power. It looks like Dave gave him exactly what he wanted, and we got a bargain. The old engine was a big port with 45 webers. In this case it seems that bigger isn't always better. The previous map was lacking a little mid range refinement, it was also running very rich at idle and startup but lean at low and mid range with WOT, high revs and high throttle opening was spot on although giving AFR of 14.7 as the kit car the engine came from had a cat. Our boffin at AB sorted out the idle first then spent an hour or so sorting mid range and adding some extra fuel pretty much everywhere. Looks like it worked!(quoted when buying the engine) was 193bhp at the flywheel. I hate guestimated flywheel figures but allowing for 15% transmission loss gives us a figure of 205bhp at the flywheel. Different rolling roads etc etc etc but still bloody impressive. Just fitting a mk2 rear ARB now, once sorted we'll be 99% ready just final tweeks and a spannercheck and thread lock session. (have gone for one on my car). Damn good result!tonigmr2 wrote:Really interesting what you say, I've always been told the small port engine head was better for torque etc.
But with forced induction there will be a point where the small ports become a restriction, what this is I don't know, but I'm guessing it will be high bhp figurescogboy wrote:Make sure to come over again this year at the North West Stages and say hello, and we'll give you the tour of the new set-up.
?( is the collective noun for a group of scrutineers a scrotum ? 
)MartG wrote:
(or 175bhp at the wheels) from a 1.6NA 4AGE that is only revving at 8000rpm?at the wheels (graph) at maybe 3000rpm? JMR_AW11 wrote:I'm slightly confused by the graph.
I don't see how you can get 200bhp at the flywheel
Especially if it also delivers over 60bhp
Also the torque scaling seems way off.
Am I misreading the scaling or something somewhere?
Even if the graph is flywheel BHP then it's still very impressive
the actual torque being put to the rollers from the rear wheels, this figure has not been corrected for gearing hence the huge numbers (obviously it doesn't make 400ft/lb at the fly!.from all accounts the rolling road at AB is pretty accurate, the boffins there have been building a hidden injection setup on a very nice Aston Martin DB5 for the last month, it was putting out 215bhp at the wheels on their rollers. The same engine was putting out 240bhp at the fly on an engine dyno (on carbs therefore about 10% less than now) when it was last rebuilt.MartG wrote:cogboy wrote:Make sure to come over again this year at the North West Stages and say hello, and we'll give you the tour of the new set-up.
Any idea what time you're due in scrutineering
(geographically), they are generally called willys.(if it isn't flooded, its on the lower prom and the weather looks a bit nasty).cartledge_uk wrote:tonigmr2 wrote:Really interesting what you say, I've always been told the small port engine head was better for torque etc.
For most n/a's, small port is better.
One day! 
aw11rally wrote:I think our slot is at about 4pm, we will be aiming to get to the service area at about lunch time
Look forward to seeing you there, hoperfull we'll have time for more of a chat this year.
- got to collect #1 son from school about 4 
- it's blowing a gale here now ( I'm about 4 miles inland from Blackpool sea front ) and I believe rain is also forecast for the next few days - typical UK rally weather then 
