LY200 - too loud or blow up again, taking bets!

[litchy]

I made 210bhp standard engine with Schricks at RST. If I mapped it with the supersprint, might have seen 213bhp. 215bhp is good but that's a lot of work and a crazy amount of money for not a lot of gains. In fact Schricks alone in your 200 I recon would have seen 215bhp. Regarding the ecu's, my mobile phone has more capability. These cars, Renault blew the budget on the suspension and then had to 'make do' with everything else including the engine and gearbox. To get any power out these NA is a labour of love and I'd sooner get a divorce than try it.

I guess once your happy with it, that's the main thing and hats off to you for trying something different.

 

[TB Rich]

Cheers and yes it is a lot, it is disproportionate vs costs for sure. But it's not far from the point where I didn't give a rats on the costs (220). As if I could have squeezed 220+ it would have been a real triumph. As it stands, I'm mildly miffed on the costs.

Interestingly the Schricks are 288/280 degree and 11.42mm lift, they are closer in profile to 404's (which I should have fitted - 403's actually have less lift on the exh cam than the 402 ffs! 403 is a pointless profile) so potentially I could do a bit more with Schricks and unquestionably 404's which would yield the sort of results I expected all along.....
Heck potentially the fact I fitted valve springs when I didn't need to could be costing a few bhp (they're not needed until 404's), but I have to accept for now it is what it is. The piggy bank has had a hog roasting of late, time to beast around with only 215bhp for a bit

 

[litchy]

Cheers and yes it is a lot, it is disproportionate vs costs for sure. But it's not far from the point where I didn't give a rats on the costs (220). As if I could have squeezed 220+ it would have been a real triumph. As it stands, I'm mildly miffed on the costs.

Interestingly the Schricks are 288/280 degree and 11.42mm lift, they are closer in profile to 404's (which I should have fitted - 403's actually have less lift on the exh cam than the 402 ffs! 403 is a pointless profile) so potentially I could do a bit more with Schricks and unquestionably 404's which would yield the sort of results I expected all along.....
Heck potentially the fact I fitted valve springs when I didn't need to could be costing a few bhp (they're not needed until 404's), but I have to accept for now it is what it is. The piggy bank has had a hog roasting of late, time to beast around with only 215bhp for a bit

Fair enough. I remember about 10 years ago buying an E46 330 for 15k cause I couldnt afford an M3. Joined e46 fanatics forum and got this idea about supercharging the 330. I was warned by members don't bother, save my money and buy an M3. 20k later my 330 made less power than a standard M3!!! I learnt knowledge is power (or the lack of it) in car terms. Also learnt some tuners will be more than happy taking your money off you and sell you things, knowing what your bolting to your car will be worse than the standard part your taking off it.

I spent maybe 3k on my car NA, but it drove better standard. That includes the brakes and suspension. Have you seen what the serious track day Meg guys run, £70 HC discs. I love the 330's but they are made out of tissue paper if you run anything slightly abrasive with them.

 

[Chris]

Pleased that you got some numbers, even if they were not the exact ones you wanted. I'm sure you will reach it at some point!

 

[Raptor6767]

Anyway, next step was timing. So RST removed the cam cover etc to measure, turns out my 403's are basically indexed perfectly by Catcams. I.e once setup with a dial gauge the standard Renault timing horseshoe fits the horizontal groves. Good to know, almost 'wasted' labour - but I was at the point where it had to be known if they were correct or not.

I can't use standard Renault timing tool anymore with the 402's because of the cam positions.

Glad you're pleased with the way the car drives!

 

[jacool]

I made 210bhp standard engine with Schricks at RST. If I mapped it with the supersprint, might have seen 213bhp. 215bhp is good but that's a lot of work and a crazy amount of money for not a lot of gains. In fact Schricks alone in your 200 I recon would have seen 215bhp. Regarding the ecu's, my mobile phone has more capability. These cars, Renault blew the budget on the suspension and then had to 'make do' with everything else including the engine and gearbox. To get any power out these NA is a labour of love and I'd sooner get a divorce than try it.

I guess once your happy with it, that's the main thing and hats off to you for trying something different.

litchy, do You remember if your Schricks were set up using standard Renault timing tool? thanks in advance

 

[litchy]

litchy, do You remember if your Schricks were set up using standard Renault timing tool? thanks in advance

Interesting story. A garage I used for years (before SC) said they could fit them. Said timing tool was fine. This garage does work on all kinds of high performance stuff. To cut a long story short, I had to pay RST to put right this garages mess and fit them properly. Whoever fits them needs to know their onions. Fitting performance cams in these cars is a potential banana skin if you've not done it before with really mixed results and potential disasters. I wouldn't go anywhere near cat cams cause the difference from car to car is crazy. Schricks consistent 13-15bhp.

 

[Rogue]

Good to hear Rich. Glad you're keeping it.

Not sure what you mean about the ticking noise?

 

[jacool]

Interesting story. A garage I used for years (before SC) said they could fit them. Said timing tool was fine. This garage does work on all kinds of high performance stuff. To cut a long story short, I had to pay RST to put right this garages mess and fit them properly. Whoever fits them needs to know their onions. Fitting performance cams in these cars is a potential banana skin if you've not done it before with really mixed results and potential disasters. I wouldn't go anywhere near cat cams cause the difference from car to car is crazy. Schricks consistent 13-15bhp.

I've already decided to go for Schricks, just not sure if I should let Renault fit them, they have necessary tools and knowledge (at least they should have) how to fit original cams and wonder if they fit Schricks within OEM specs, will it work just fine.

 

[TB Rich]

Fair enough. I remember about 10 years ago buying an E46 330 for 15k cause I couldnt afford an M3. Joined e46 fanatics forum and got this idea about supercharging the 330. I was warned by members don't bother, save my money and buy an M3. 20k later my 330 made less power than a standard M3!!! I learnt knowledge is power (or the lack of it) in car terms. Also learnt some tuners will be more than happy taking your money off you and sell you things, knowing what your bolting to your car will be worse than the standard part your taking off it.

I spent maybe 3k on my car NA, but it drove better standard. That includes the brakes and suspension. Have you seen what the serious track day Meg guys run, £70 HC discs. I love the 330's but they are made out of tissue paper if you run anything slightly abrasive with them.

Oops, that's a hard lesson to learn especialy with residuals factored in! At least I can say my car goes much better than standard and stops much better than standard (albeit much more noisily on both accounts!)

Pleased that you got some numbers, even if they were not the exact ones you wanted. I'm sure you will reach it at some point!

Cheers bud, I am now accepting donations to help fund the some point aspect!

I can't use standard Renault timing tool anymore with the 402's because of the cam positions.

Glad you're pleased with the way the car drives!

This is the problem with catcams and probably (speculating) why there is such a variance on 402's (200-210bhp on RST's rollers with 402's). I am not a fan of Catcams any more, and it does pain me to say that (I've had 3 engines now running Catcams). I believe their QC is not good enough and so many cams are not indexed correctly. Yours being the case in point, when set with a dial gauge to deliver the correct lift at TDC, the grooves in yours do not have the cam ends in a horizontal position to fit the timing tool - there is no excuse for that. Luckily mine were, but it cost me hundreds to confirm it. If they were properly and consistently machined this would not be a problem.

Good to hear Rich. Glad you're keeping it.

Not sure what you mean about the ticking noise?

It's awful, a strange ticking type noise is there all the time and then the pitch changes when you get on the brakes. Sounds slightly like a kid with a clicker in his spokes!! Might be pad movement, might be the J-hook's, but I've spoken to at least 2 people with them and no noise. Will have to resort to trial and error of changing bits. I paid to have the brakes fitted, but luckily all the seals are fine and everything cleaned now - so it'll be easy enough to swap stuff. I'm too broke to carry on paying for stuff I can do but just can't be ****ed to do!!


Oh, and here is the graph...

 

[TB Rich]

I need to do a quick excel plot comparing my first RR run at SRR (dyno dynamics) vs now (RST dyno dynamics). I have 35ft/lb more at 4700rpm!!!

 

[Raptor6767]

It's tricky comparing 2 different rollers.

 

[TB Rich]

Indeed, I will be back at SRR for sure to get some closure (lol!), but until then it's the best I can do.

For what it's worth RST and SRR typically read about the same, both places are known in the UK to provide accurate figures.

 

[Yiannis197]

Nice one Rich, glad you found your lost power! Very good info regarding the 403s as well. So are you now keeping then?

 

[mark_1873]

Glad it's worked out for you Rich, I've been keeping a lurking eye on your thread for while now and love your commitment.

The knee jerk sale made have been a knee jerk purchase had we not just bought a new car (I miss my wee RB Cup)

Do the forged internals not allow for a rev increase or was the power tailing off and a pointless exercise ?

I can obviously see the torque dropping

 

[TB Rich]

Yeah keeping now, I think the result is decent and speaking to RST that off the top of his head he couldn't recall a single throttle mk3 with more power on his rollers, is affirmation all is well! (exhaust will always niggle but that's something for winter I think!). Will still be checking out the Mustang, but it'll probably be alongside the Clio, too much invested to sell it really. It would have been out of spite and hatred were it not to have made at least what it did!

Commitment, yep I'll take that. Could very easily be labled lunacy!!
Yes I could rev higher but as you say no point, however after that run the limit was upped to 7600.
It just means the rods, valves and springs etc are all operating very very comfortably within spec. Other than the hydraulics it would take 8.5k. Anymore than that mind and you want the maxi evo steel crank and 144mm rod geometry to reduce piston speed. Man I do want to hear it at 8k though as thatsbwhat I thought it would do. I just under specced the cams for that. I honestly thought 403's needed valves springs but was mistaken.

 

[shakey_hand_man]

Oops, that's a hard lesson to learn especialy with residuals factored in! At least I can say my car goes much better than standard and stops much better than standard (albeit much more noisily on both accounts!)



Cheers bud, I am now accepting donations to help fund the some point aspect!



This is the problem with catcams and probably (speculating) why there is such a variance on 402's (200-210bhp on RST's rollers with 402's). I am not a fan of Catcams any more, and it does pain me to say that (I've had 3 engines now running Catcams). I believe their QC is not good enough and so many cams are not indexed correctly. Yours being the case in point, when set with a dial gauge to deliver the correct lift at TDC, the grooves in yours do not have the cam ends in a horizontal position to fit the timing tool - there is no excuse for that. Luckily mine were, but it cost me hundreds to confirm it. If they were properly and consistently machined this would not be a problem.



It's awful, a strange ticking type noise is there all the time and then the pitch changes when you get on the brakes. Sounds slightly like a kid with a clicker in his spokes!! Might be pad movement, might be the J-hook's, but I've spoken to at least 2 people with them and no noise. Will have to resort to trial and error of changing bits. I paid to have the brakes fitted, but luckily all the seals are fine and everything cleaned now - so it'll be easy enough to swap stuff. I'm too broke to carry on paying for stuff I can do but just can't be ****ed to do!!


Oh, and here is the graph...

Nice result.

Regarding the noise -check the two countersunk retaining screws are sub flush on the disks.

Andy

 

[TB Rich]

Nice result.

Regarding the noise -check the two countersunk retaining screws are sub flush on the disks.

Andy

Thanks, I'll check them this weekend mate.

I'm residing to the fact it may be the rotors and I'm getting used to the noise. Probably just beat the **** out of them on track and replace with grooved ones later on.

 

[Chris_200CUP]

Can we swap engines? Lol


thats nice amount of power! Least got there in the end!

 

[TB Rich]

Cheers, can't swap engines but I can swap my engine for money Actually scrap that, I'm enjoying the car now so it's earnt its place on my driveway!!!

In related driveway news though, turns out there is a massive waiting list on the Mustang, I read on Pistonheads that orders for Nov16 are currently being taken!! Given I'd never buy a car without driving it and the first demonstrators will be sept/oct 15, I doubt I'd get behind a Mustang before Q2/2017... **** that!!