Engine woes

[Highside43]

Further to my thread about lack of power in my 1.8 K series SS, and taking it back to the garage I bought it from for them to look at and them not finding anything, I had it dyno'd the other week and it came back with a record breaking 77bhp...I was pleased in one way as I knew all along it wasn't running correctly - plugs were right colour, nothing in the oil or coolant which shouldn't be, even checked the stoke length (in a Heath Robinson way with some threaded bar and metal rule, but it worked) and the only conclusion is that it wasn't breathing right.  The car drove fine, no hiccups, splutters or any untoward noises, it just lacked power when you went for the overtake.  Diesel L200 trucks pulled away from you slowly when having a play....I'd never driven one before to compare, and everyone was saying that I was being too harsh coming from a superbike background, but it just didn't feel right.

Just performed a compression test and the two middle cylinders failed big style - no wonder it's running at half power and feels gutless.

So....

A new engine it is.  Looking at chucking a VVC lump in there with the idea of tuning it in the future.  As I've been used to running about with 77bhp, 160 should be a little perkier and make it move a little more.

Any thoughts on where to go for engine / refresh / builds...etc?

I'm thinking of getting one for 500 odd quid and then refreshing it by a specialist with all new internals.  I want a stock one to start with to keep the cost down (budgeting £2K as a ball park figure) - I'm no mechanic and will have to pay someone to install / build it for me.

Thoughts please.

[Jonathan Kay]

Where are you?

Have you found DVA's pages on the K: the engine, upgrades?

I'm no mechanic and will have to pay someone to install / build it for me.

Could we persuade you to do the installation yourself... I managed!

Jonathan

PS: I had my 1800 K rebuilt by Ratrace.

[Highside43]

Yes spoken to Dave and looked at his page extensively.  At the minute it has the 1.8 with the hot cams, according to Caterham(I e-mailed them to check on what power it was meant to have as it was a factory built one) and they confirmed 140bhp.

If I wanted to tune up the engine as it is, then it would be a couple of grand to get and extra 10 to 20bhp.  I might as well spend that on putting in a VVC engine and I've got the extra power there, with more scope for tuning without spending half as much as the car again.

I'd be happy with a genuine 180bhp in it, which is acheivable (I gather) with the VVC engine - the engine I have at the minute would take a lot more money and effort to do that.

Self build?  No thanks.  I've had my time fiddling with engines 20 years ago and know my way roughly round them, but would now rather pay someone to do it.  If I fixed all the toys myself I would never have time to play on them - now if one is broke someone else can fix it for me and I go out to play on another one.  If I didn't, then all my spare time would be spent fixing the bloody things instead of having fun on them. I'm not getting any younger so want to enjoy them while I can.

I'm in Aberdovey.

 

[nickh7]

I'd suggest going the DVA route for a few reasons

1) You cant just drop another k into the 7 its needs a few mods to make it fit , loom, ECU  , sump etc

2) how do you know the VVC you are dropping in has all the ponies in the paddock ? It might be like your current engine, if you are going to have it rebuilt you may as well rebuild yours to the ideal spec. bare in mind the VVC doesn't rev like the standard 1.8k SS  and has a few more issues with oil flow etc.

3) By the time you've paid to have all the work on the VVC done and fitted you'd still not have much more than 160bhp. Get Dave to rebuild yours add throttle bodies and some head work and you'll get to your 180bhp for similar cost I'd wager.

 

Nick h

[tangomikeromeo]

Only snag might be DVA's queue....

But it's good when you get to the front

[Tazio]

If you scroll down here you can find a n 1800 k series race engine rated at over 200bhp for sale.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/403110953197008

[Highside43]

Thanks for the replies to all, I'm not too bothered about revs as it is a road car, so the few times it will be up the top end will be far and few between.  Whichever engine I get will be re-built, I think the vvc route is the one to go for future proofing it but yes, any engine has issues whichever variant it is.

 

 

[John Vine]

...future proofing...

I don't quite follow that. Could you elaborate?  It seems to me that both the standard K and the VVC are old engines now.

JV

[Highside43]

 

I want to keep it K Series as it came from the factory with one, and want to keep it as standard / original as possible.  I did toy with the idea of a bike engine or upgrading to the Ford lump (or even the Honda unit), but in my mind it would decrease in value with a different engine in it.  Just my head and the way it works.

The VVC is slightly newer than what is in there, and a little better for tuning.  It is and will be a road car and I may do the odd trackday, but these will be once or maybe twice a year max, if at all.  I bought it for touring and a bit more comfort.

[Roadsport06]

Are you planning on keeping the vv mechanism or blanking? Keeping it will require more work and so more money.

[F355GTS]

Confused by teh VVC is better for tuning comment, maybe something changed over time but I was always led to believe they were less tunable due to the VVC element

[revilla]

If you blank off the VVC mechanism to fit solid cams, the VVC head has bigger valves and better port geometry allowing better flow. In fact the casting is pretty much identical to the VHPD head other than for the VVC systems (I read that to produce the VHPD head they quite literally used the lower half of the VVC mould and the upper half of the standard head mould, to make a head with the same porting as the VVC but with standard cam fittings).

[Highside43]

"Confused by teh VVC is better for tuning comment, maybe something changed over time but I was always led to believe they were less tunable due to the VVC element"

Reading the DVA website, and other sites, my understanding is that the VVC engine is a better engine for tuning.  To cut and paste from Dave's website:-

http://kengine.dvapower.com/

The VVC head is a superior casting which as well as containing the VVC mechanisms also has larger valves (31.5mm inlet, 27mm exhaust) and revised port geometry. The inlet ports are larger by a mm or two and the port angle is higher by 1.5mm giving a straighter shot into the cylinder. The cam followers are also an improved design and are a little lighter than the normal K16 ones, they also hold less oil when charged.

Having 160bhp as a base line has got to be better than 140bhp base line from a non-vvc / current engine?

It would cost a couple of thousand at least to get to 160bhp in my engine, and I would reach a limit of power before I have to spend some serious money to go up again - for the same price as going up on a non VVC engine I can get to 185bhp (according to DVA) with some bolt on goodies and a couple of grand - the same spend as on my engine would get me to 160bhp.

Unless I'm missing a trick somewhere?

As mentioned, it will be a road car and hardly ever used on track so not chasing outright power and speed - if I want that there are other toys to give me those thrills which beat the Caterham hands down.

I just want a bit more punch than the 77bhp I have had in the car since buying it.

[John Vine]

The VVC head is a superior casting...

The key word here is head.  AFAIK, DVA has never recommended keeping the VVC mechs when tuning this engine.  So, yes, the VVC engine is a good starting point, but mainly because it has a better head, not because it has VVC timing.

If your expected use is mainly road-based, and you're seeking driveability, the VVC is a good choice as it offers a wider spread of torque than the standard K (the whole point of the VVC bit).  But if you're looking for something a bit more exciting (that is, tuneable), you'll find the revability of the K assumes greater importance, and this means following DVA's general guidance (as Andrew confirms in post #12).

My original 1.8K came with the completely standard engine.  This was ok in a first Caterham, but it quickly became apparent that the engine simply ran out of breath above 5K.  CC's SS upgrade fixed this, and a further upgrade to SS-R (basically, the R300 engine) sharpened things up a good deal more.

JV

[Highside43]

OK, thanks for all the input folks - it gives me food for thought and I need to go and do some more research / thinking about which route will best suit budget and future use.

[Highside43]

Apologies for the delay in the update, but there have been quite a few challenges along the way of getting my car back on the road.

Rightly or wrongly, I decided on the VVC route (and listening to some advise from others - this was decided as I wanted driveability due to it being a road car).  I was going to keep the VVC gear until a later date (couple of years or so) when I would look then a dumping it, throttle bodies, Emerald ECU....etc....to liven things up even further.  However, I just wanted my car back without breaking the bank, and even in standard VVC form (160 ZR engine), it would be twice as powerful as the earth shattering 77bhp that the original engine was chucking out.

I commissioned I-Tech Racing in Trowbridge to carry out my brief, for a couple of reasons - they had the car already, I was working locally, it was already in bits, and he's a K-Series specialist (albeit Rover cars).  Also, he could do a full engine in / out turnkey repair to my car - not to disrespect a few of the well known tuners for these cars, and I did talk to a couple of them and weigh up possibilities / timelines, but they would only do my engine if it turned up without the car - I personally haven't got time to sort out the logistics of engine in / out, shipping...etc...so wanted somewhere where I could drop it off, get all the work done and pick it up when it was fixed.  It was already at somewhere that could do that so it stayed at I-Tech racing.

Forgive my lack of technical knowledge on the below - I was a reasonable competent garage mechanic for the 2 wheel kind (such as having stripped gearboxes several times after rounding gear dogs off and bending selector forks with cluthless gearchanges), but that was 20 years ago and nowadays I am time and space precious.  Working away all the time, if I then came home and spent the free time in the unit tinkering, I would experience levels beyond DeFcon 10 of hostility so a home re-build is just out of the question.  One day in the future I hope to return to the spanners, but for the immediate time I take a vested interest and absorb as much of the information and problems as possible through the services of others.

I bought a 160 ZR  VVC lump off the internet, and had it refreshed with new liners, pistons, rings, bearings....etc...and the head was sent ff to be skimmed, checked (or whatever it is they do).  It was all assembled (complete with the VVC mechanism) and bolted into the car.  The first problem was the nearside strut brace fouling some oil feeder pipe (or a boss on it), which then had to be re-located along the rail.

Next was the clutch cable fouling near the pedal box.

Then the needle roller bearing on the end of the gearbox input shaft was ever so slightly too big (OEM part), so had to be shaved off at some minute tolerance to get it to fit.

That was just the mechanics.  Then the new engine wouldn't talk to the car, or the car wouldn't talk to the new engine.  A VVC loom is a lot more complex than the standard one, so (the Royal we...) we were left scratching heads as to where wires go.  Solution - buy an Emerald K6 ECU.  I would need one later on anyway, and it would save a lot of head scratching.  Cue lots of wiring diagrams and belling out of wires, but eventually it worked.  It had a base map which would be suitable for running in, then smoothed out on the dyno once I had run it in.

I collected it one weekend knowing that the drive home and back would pretty much run it in, and it would be a nice drive through the spine of Wales up to Aberdyfi.  Within a few miles of driving it I was reminder of exactly the reson why I bought it in the first place.  God I missed this.  It also became alarmingly apparent that it was a totally different car.....the bloody thing just wanted to put me through the scenery backwards at the sniff of throttle - Chaz did warn me that it would be 'lairy in a good way compared to before', but boy oh boy, did it now go.  And this was just running in up to 3.5K and taking it gently!!!  I duly ran it in all the way home, taking it once through the gears up to 5K after about 300 miles on the clock, just because I couldn't resist.  Oh yes, now I see why everyone gets so excited with them - if this is what they are meant to go like, then I am suitably impressed and the 620R must be an absolute hoon, as with my little 160ish bhp it was so much more fun than before.

Back to I-tech having run it in over the weekend, ready for the dyno.  Dyno showed 145 bhp up to 5K, then it dies every time - cue faulty fuel pressure regulator.

Next Dyno run, cam sensor (or something like that - this is third hand I am relaying it by) - phone calls to Emerald and various others to try and find out why, but no avail.  Chaz is also struggling with the VVC mechanism slightly, so the latest plan is now to ditch the VVC gear, put some mild second hand Piper Cams in it, I already have the ECU so in the future (when pennies permit - it is already spiralling upwards) TB's and hotter cams, with possibly some head work?

However, the engine is now out again (we were also getting low oil pressure at warm temperature, so investigating), and the roller / needle bearing on the gearbox input shaft was shattered.  there is some play (about 1 to 2mm) on the gearbox shaft - I know this is fixed in place and can't go anywhere with regards the engine as the casings are dowled in place, but is this normal?  Does this indicate a gearbox rebuild as well (or bearings at least)?

The only other issue is that the engine is pushing the bonnet up by about 10mm - which makes it sit in a concave form when bolted down - we used the same engine mounts but do Caterham use different engine mounts for the VVC engine to make it sit lower in the chassis compared to a non - VVC lump?

Many thanks for any help anticipated, I'm having a bit of a nightmare with my first Caterham....!

 

 

[simon_h]

The vvc does use a different rh mount to let the bonnet just clear the plenum. 

[OliverSedlacek]

It sounds a bit mixed to me, but 160BHP is certainly a good amount of power to have in a Caterham! I hope you get it all sorted.

[Roadsport06]

Is there a reason for not handing back the car after the compression test revealed a problem? After all you'd raised concerns about the engine already.

Get the gearbox off to Steve Perks (SPC) in Redditch and you'll then have a very nice combination.

Oil pressure - how accurate is that? Is it from an electric gauge? If so it may not be accurate.

[garybee]

Highside - Sorry to hear of your engine woes, I hope you finally have the car you want by the time the weather is nice.  

Do you have a picture of the car with the bonnet removed?  I have a 160 engine to drop in my seven at some point and I'm interested to know exactly where the manifold touches.  I'm thinking about altering the manifold slightly (by skimming the mating faces) to avoid losing ground clearance with a lower R/H mount.  If the VVC actuator fouls then this isn't an option but if it's just the manifold I may be able to find a better solution than Caterham's.

[Mark Durrant]

Caterham do not use the standard Rover spigot bearing and you need a Spacer Sleeve which might need linishing to fit the end of the crankshaft and this Spigot Bearing. The spacer sleeve is shown as out of stock so try Redline.

[revilla]

Ditching the ECU, going to an Emerald and then ditching the VVC mechs seems a fairly extreme solution to a bit of missing wiring! I've made up a couple of VVC looms from scratch and converted a couple of non-VVC looms to VVC. It's probably a bit late now but if you want any help with that let me know, drop me a PM or whatever. I even wrote up a comprehensive step by step guide to doing it, it's in the guides section somewhere, can look it up when not in the office. Setting up the VVC mechs isn't hard either and personally I think a well sorted VVC 160 is a lovely engine.

[oilyhands]

Or you could buy the bearing here .. www.burtonpower.com/crank-spigot-bearing-21x15mm-fp347.html

Oily

[revilla]

Here you go: https://www.lotus7.club/guides/how-guides/adding-vvc-eu3-k-series-engine-wiring-loom

[Highside43]

Folks,

Many thanks for the messages and advice - it is appreciated and taken on board.  I think part of the trouble is me rushing head first into the purchase, without doing proper research.  I haven't driven a car like it before to use as a benckmark / base line as to how they are meant to go, I should have got an independent inspection before handing over the readies (but it was bought from a bona fide car dealer, and the car has had one owner from new in it's 18 year history - to all intent and purposes - and the dealer knew the owner personally, the extensive service history was carried out at a local garage who service older vehicles, so the sums stacked up in my favour I thought...plus when driving the car there were no noises / smoke / any other issues to say it was knackered other than feeling a little gutless – but not having driven another I wasn’t to know at the time and a test drive isn't long enough to fully understand the car).

I did take it back to the garage it was bought from twice, on separate occasions, but this meant taking a day off work each time to drop it off, and a separate day off to collect it – so that’s almost a weeks wages lost as self employed.  After the second time, and being told again that nothing was wrong with the car, to then seeing that after a simple compression test it’s running on 2 cylinders, I lost faith in returning it back all the way up to Derby as they (now) obviously didn’t know what they were doing with the car.  Hindsight is the greatest retrospect-o-scope….

The reason for buying an Emerald now is to future proof it, and trying to help get the car back on the road sooner than later – again, hindsight and all that.  But at least I now have it.

I still love the car – it’s the colour and shape (clam wings) that I have always wanted and have already cosmetically tweeked it a bit more – it was bought for pure driving pleasure instead of an outright performance machine, I am no car driver and when they go out of shape on me I let go of the steering wheel and cry – there are far too many wheels to control in a tin box and unlike the bike, there is no way I will be chasing 10th’s of a second off lap times. I just want it to be right and have a bit more punch than when I first bought it – if I had known then 14 months ago what I know now, I would have dug my heels in / got an AA inspection / test drove others for comparison (that would have opened my eyes for sure) / looked for another, but I didn’t and that’s my bad.  I will get there though – or rather, poor old Chaz at I-Tech will get there…I pass on all the messages and advice which I know he is also grateful for – he knows his way competently round the K Series engine but this is his first Caterham and it’s been a steep learning curve for him too but think he’s (sometimes) enjoyed the challenge of this conversion.

I’ll keep you updated but hope now that we are on the penultimate lap, and rounding the final corner to start last lap of this saga.

Many thanks again everyone for your support, I hope to repay it over my future years of ownership with any advice I can impart.