|
Post by martiny on Feb 17, 2017 11:48:15 GMT
Quick question about that Mondeo inlet manifold: it has both a long and short runner going to each cylinder. There doesn't appear to be any kind of mechanism for valves to choose which is used (unless that's part of the lower intake manifold) so are both runners open all the time?
|
|
|
Post by thruxton on Feb 17, 2017 14:37:45 GMT
Hi there. Yes, the upper inlet manifold runners are always open. As indeed are the lower ones. Pictured here. The task here was to transition from circular ports of the upper inlet manifold to the oval ports of the lower inlet manifold. This problem has now been addressed and resolved. The improvement from here would be to use the Ford ST200 manifold. Which I may well do after the initial "shake-down" and data collection from the first build. The ST manifold has a better flow rate than the one I am using. I would still retain the same throttle body however as that is sized for a 3.0 litre engine. As for the exhaust. I will not pass judgement on that until I have used it. But I see no reason for it failing. It is built onto a flange and not running high turbo temperatures so the capacity for fatigue is all but eliminated. Regards. Rich.
|
|
|
Post by howardb66 on Feb 18, 2017 13:57:54 GMT
This build looks flipping great. The guys at Mech Repairs in Cheltenham really rate these 3.0 Jag engines as they've got good bits in them.Should be able to get some good power.
|
|
|
Post by thruxton on Feb 18, 2017 16:17:40 GMT
Thanks for the encouragement. I wasn't going to do anything to it today, but it's getting sort of addictive.
I had a quick look at the engine in the engine bay. It's sitting in there blocked up into sort of position. Anyway, I was thinking about the bonnet again. Putting the bonnet on it and looking at things I'm back to an earlier thought.
Maybe using the Jaguar X-type 3.0 litre intake manifold with the in this case rear facing and turning at 90 degrees to the near side throttle body, then a bonnet bulge would be acceptable. I will have a good look at this next week.
I have a polished aluminium bonnet, which I love. If I was to rework this with a seamless welded bulge in it I could then make a mould and produce glass fibre bonnets. I don't think they would be much more expensive than sourcing the ST200 inlet manifold and doing the machining to create the interface plates and so on. Maybe about another £100.00. It sure would be a nice solution to the issue. Anyway it's just ideas at the moment.
Regards. Rich.
|
|
|
Post by thruxton on Feb 21, 2017 17:52:25 GMT
Hello all.
UPDATE.
Today has been a good day, a very good day. Placing the Jaguar engine into the MX-5 engine bay with the standard subframe in place and blocking the engine to where I want it, working from the datum point, that being the standard MX-5 gearstick, I found this out.
It looks like I may not have to modify the sub-frame at all. That is amazing if it is so.
Also, I have found a way of interfacing the Jaguar engine drive power to the MX-5 gearbox input shaft. This is trickier than you might think. By chance I managed to buy on e-bay an amazingly rare, like hens teeth rare, piece of Ford equipment. No, I'm not telling you what it is. But it means that I can now have CNC replicas made.
Not only does this really make life easier for me but it means that I can throw away the nasty massively heavy Jaguar dual mass flywheel, but use the Jaguar clutch driven plate which is way cheaper than an upgraded MX-5 turbo style clutch and I don't have to have a custom built flywheel made. All I have to find now is a company the refurbishes clutch driven plates and get them to put the MX-5 splining into the centre of the Jaguar driven plate.
Also, I can retain the Jaguar water pump and still have plenty of radiator clearance. So far this is looking easier than I thought.
I've also solved the bonnet shutting problem by using a Mondeo 3.0 litre V6 ST220 upper inlet manifold and a custom throttle body, happy days.
Problems to solve next. The sump. It's just a question of designing and then building one to work with the subframe. That is not rocket science at all though.
Well that's it for a few days I've bits to buy and await their delivery.
Regards. Rich.
|
|
|
Post by Rickster on Feb 21, 2017 17:57:32 GMT
I'm already thinking about this for my next winter project I will have to visit you one day!!
|
|
|
Post by atlex on Feb 21, 2017 18:36:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by thruxton on Feb 21, 2017 18:53:01 GMT
Hi there Atlex. Yes you are right of course. But so far there's very little to show. Here is one I took today but it's very lame..... sorry. And the lower one is of an ST220 upper manifold. Rich.
|
|
pewe
Chats A Bit
Posts: 157
|
Post by pewe on Feb 22, 2017 10:14:47 GMT
Given your background I'm sure you're aware that when designing your sump it's a good idea to ensure sufficient baffling etc. On my kit-car the engine was being run 90degrees from its original orientation so it was necessary to change the whole baffling set-up. This involved a different crucifix layout to concentrate the oil around the scavenge pump, flap valves in the vertical baffles to speed return and a windage tray to stop the oil climbing up the sides of the sump/crankcase during fast cornering. Also dipstick recalibration is a must - when BL launched the pile of sh*t they called the Maxi early cars suffered catastrophic engine seizures after extended periods on motorways.Turns out some numpty hadn't calibrated the dipstick properly leading to excess oil levels meaning the oil was thrashed into a useless foam - not a lot of people know (or remember that!). Apologies if I'm trying to teach my grandmother to suck eggs but it would be a shame if your pride and joy suffered a similar fate. Cheers, Pewe
|
|
|
Post by martiny on Feb 22, 2017 14:22:49 GMT
Just Googling around, I saw that the Ford Maverick/Escape/Mazda Tribute also seems to have used a version of the Duratec 30 V6, which had a plastic (lighter?) inlet manifold in what looks at first glance like the same fitting as that ST220 one. I wondered if it might be more restrictive since the first generation was rated at 200hp but the revised '08 model was 240hp. looks like North America only, but still... <edit> Actually, I might have been overoptimistic. Comparison of the 2006 (200hp) vs 2010 (240hp) engines in a (US) Ford Fusion here: www.fordfusionclub.com/434-v6-engine-discussion/381118-adapting-new-3-0-intake-manifold-old-3-0-a.htmlThe bolt pattern isn't quite right. On the '06 version you can see the staggered pattern of bolts which matches the lower manifold pic Thruxton posted before, but the '10 version has the bolts in a line, so looks like a no-go unless a matching lower manifold could be fitted too.
|
|
|
Post by thruxton on Feb 22, 2017 17:12:10 GMT
Hello. The inlet manifold situation.
Kit 1 as it where. This will use the ST220 manifold which has been shown on the RR to work well with the AJ-30 engine, delivering the factory numbers of 240Bhp at the flywheel and 220ft/Lbs of torque when coupled to a free flowing exhaust system.
Kit 2. A tad more work required, but not much, will offer the Jaguar AJ-30 standard manifold. Figures as above but further enhanced by way of a broader torque spread and an increase in both torque and HP due to a free flowing exhaust system.
Having brought some kits to market before I want to keep this simple, affordable and offer just two power versions. As regards to performance increase by way of camshafts blah blah.... I respectfully suggest that if it's not enough then your not driving the car right and money would be better spent of tuition. I honestly believe that the above figures or close to them are the "sweet-spot" for our amazing little cars.
Total reliability is the aim. A madly powerful broken car is just a broken car. The Internet forums are rife with super powered MX-5's that are broken. Not much fun in my book.
Regards. Rich.
|
|
|
Post by martiny on Feb 22, 2017 18:50:20 GMT
I like your thinking.
If people need more than 240hp they can do that right now with a turbo.
|
|
|
Post by minty on Feb 23, 2017 8:53:52 GMT
Fascinating stuff - and yes agree 240 with smooth delivery is really all anyone would need.
|
|
pewe
Chats A Bit
Posts: 157
|
Post by pewe on Feb 23, 2017 9:16:26 GMT
Rich, there's a company advertising clutch re-manufacture in MX5OC magazine called Precision Clutch Components Might be worth a call re-your clutch requirements? HTH. Cheers, Pewe
|
|
|
Post by howardb66 on Feb 23, 2017 9:40:12 GMT
Just had a thought, TVR Cerberas use silicon hoses to throttle bodies. 8-|So.... Silicon hoses to bike throttle bodies? Would sound epic!!
|
|