What's all the fuss about with Duratec's

[edmandsd]

Had a good look at a 2lt one recently and can't say I was too impressed - I suppose this often happens when something's talked up so much to start with. Head's quite nice with the relatively large valves, semi slipper pistons were also a surprise but the rest of it looked typically cheap and mass produced to be honest - it surprised me how few parts had Ford stamped on them. I accept it's light and has a refreshing bore stroke ratio but I reckon you'd have to spend a lot of money on one of these to get a durable race engine.

 

Home of BDR700

[Dickie Normuss]

Can, worms, open

 

Seek forgiveness, not permission.

 

Rules are for the interpretation of wise men and the obedience of fools.

[se7enmad]

Why don't you complain with Cosworth? Just dont tell them you have one of theirs under your bonnet.

 

Antonella

1998 Caterham Classic

my site heremore photos here

[lancelot]

There always seems to be a lot of fuss when the factory starts using a new engine

[mic]

"but the rest of it looked typically cheap and mass produced to be honest "

 

Thats because it is!!

[edmandsd]

Yes I know it is, but the parts look even more mass produced than normal, hence my reference to the lack of Ford stamps - I guess it's produced somewhere in South East Asia ? The block assembly castings are certainly not 'coscast' quality going by the one I saw. Isn't Caterham's relationship with Cosworth purely commercial - Cosworth aren't tuning the engines for any other reason are they - I can't believe it's out of either love or respect for the unit !

 

If it makes all you Duratec owners or prospective owners feel any better I still think it's an improvement on the K series - there opens another can of worms......

 

Home of BDR700

[oilyhands]

Isnt the Duratec a rebadged Mazda unit...

 

Just compare the Duratec to the Zetec and you'll see why it has captured the imagination of many.

 

In terms of pure design it is very conventional and years behind the K in concept, however it is probably more robust because of it.

 

Oily

 

Edited by - oilyhands on 26 Apr 2005 22:37:08

[EFA]

Chinese/Japanese - all the same to me.

 

"Once you've done Asian you'll never drive a Vauxhall" just doesn't have the same ring to it..........

 

 

[Bill Shurvinton]

If you look at the design brief that was handed out I expect that a couple of things were high in the list

 

1. Able to be made in quantities exceeded 1million per annum in factories all over the world.

2. Able to meet the US 100K mile (or is it 150K now) certification

3. cheap to build

 

Possibly fraud motorsport aspirations were around 50 in the list. Bling value was probably not there at all.

[moosetestbestanden]

This is from an old press release I received from a vendor when I was researching the Duratec:

 

"The engines employ a sophisticated casting process developed for Formula One

racing by England's renowned Cosworth. The cold box process uses robots to

assemble 13 sand molds into a single core that takes 54 seconds to

construct. A robot flips the box 180 degrees to ensure the molten aluminum

fills every nook and cranny of the mold. To avoid the relatively clumsy

robots grabbing too tightly and damaging the hot and fragile molds, Mazda

attached balloons at the ends of robot arms that inflate to create just the

right grip. Mazda engineers also improved Cosworth's process, including

switching to lighter sand for the molds to reduce the box's weight from 965

to 341 pounds. This engine retains it's Cosworth influence with it's

skirted block design having the centerline of the crankshaft being above the

bottom lip of the block. The crankshaft main caps are "tied" together

similar to a ladder style frame work for strength. The twin overhead cams

are chain driven."

 

There's some more interesting (?) info here.

 

SBD have a very good article here. You have to click on the 'Fast Ford' link under the red Ford Duratec heading.

 

It's clear that the engine was designed from day one to accomodate a number of different tasks. It also seem clear that to get big racing hp out of the motor some pretty serious money has to be spent. But, uh, since when isn't that the case w/ any engine?

 

-------

Chris

I Blat, therefore I Am

[Normans_Ghost]

When I asked the Cosworth chap at Autosport "Should I change my BD for this" his reply was "No you'll never better a BD"

 

Norman Verona, 1989 BDR 220bhp, Reg: B16BDR, Mem No 2166, the full story here

[Mike Bees]

Better it in what respect? Bhp per litre? Bhp per kg of engine? Cost? Bling? Rebuild intervals? Noise? Weight?

 

I'm not stirring, just would like to know what he means!

 

Mike

[Swiss_Tony]

In terms of pure design it is very conventional and years behind the K in concept, however it is probably more robust because of it.

 

Trouble with the k is that is was designed with numerous flaws which should never have made it into production

 

To be honest I think that the designers were smoking some illegal substances when they let it loose for production

 

Either that or they did it for a laugh 😳

 

Surely being a bit forward thinking is not a good enough excuse for manufacturing a badly designed product

 

I reckon my mum could have done a better job

 

James

Su77on Se7ens

 

[AMMO]

The thing I like about the Duratec is that it is cheap. It is an affordable lump. Given time it will be making more horsepower than the BD's. VX and K's. In fact it is making more power now than the K's will ever make, and it is still in its infancy.

 

Not sure that I appreciate the K's design. In fact I can think of many flaws in it. That is not to say that in the hands of somebody like Oily it cannot be turned into a powerful unit. If I was designing an engine from scratch it would definately look more like a Duratec than a K or anything else. I am besotted with the Duratec. I have been looking inside engines for 24 years now. Haven't seen anything as good as a Duratec for the sort of money you have to shell out for one.

 

The Duratec also has a resemblance to the Nissan which genuinely made in excess of 300 bhp a few years ago. The ported Duratec head on display at the Autosport show looked almost identical to the Nissan heads I had the pleasure of doing some work on.

 

The big deal is that I can afford one rather that some of the more exotic / expensive / quirky antiques that some people crave. Because I have a very competetive nature I want to turn the Duratec into a real arse kicker.

 

The Duratec is available from £1,300.00 for a base unit (that is why the bits inside it don't look very expensive!). A Millington block is about £12.000.00 (and that is without a head). Throw a few grand at Duratec and you will be approaching Millington type power for a fraction of the cost. A Duratec head in standard form is superior to both the the K and the VX. I challenge anybody to disagree. If you could graft a Duratec head to a K or a VX they would make more power.

 

Yes it is cheap. That is the beauty of it.

 

The fuss is that, given time (not very long), it will be making more power for less money.

 

AMMO

[Mike Bees]

In fact it is making more power now than the K's will ever make, and it is still in its infancy It's a bigger engine (FFS 😬). Is it making more power per litre? Not yet, but I'm sure you're working on it and I have no doubt it will.

 

The fuss is that, given time (not very long), it will be making more power for less money. Amen to that The holy grail of 7ing!

 

Mike

 

[AMMO]

Mike

 

My 2 litre steel crank should arrive any day now 😬 😬 😬

 

AMMO

[moosetestbestanden]

On the track several weekends ago I had the pleasure(?) of following a Cossy built 2.3 around (fat chance I had of passing him to be sure). Cosworth in Torrance had a rep on-site for part of the 1st day's running because this was the 1st customer car they'd delivered. He had a number of nice things to say about the Duratec (as you might expect), but particularly about the cost / hp. A 260 HP spec engine is shown on their price list at $8500 (that's about 3 pound 70 now, and sinnking fast) as I remember it.

 

Now that the fabs are up to speed building the Duratec the aftermarket is starting to explode. I've got a 2.0L and will be following your progress w/ the crank AMMO. Please do let us know how it comes along.

 

-------

Chris

I Blat, therefore I Am

[I.Mupferit]

So that's about £4500 in real money for a Cosworth 2.3 Duratec putting out 260 bhp 🤔

 

Cripes, I'm over in the U.S. next week, I wonder if I can get a couple of them in my suitcase.

 

Brent

 

2.3 DURATEC SV NII OAW

R 417.39 😬

[Graham Perry]

The excess baggage charge probably wouldn't be that great, but I suspect that you might have problems with the metal detectors 😬

[dannylt]

£4500 seems amazingly cheap looking at the list of bits that went into mine... does that include throttle bodies, ECU, dry sump etc.?

[moosetestbestanden]

I'm at work - I'll have a look at the pricelist when I get home and reply.

 

-------

Chris

I Blat, therefore I Am

[edmandsd]

Referring back to my original post I did actually have some complimentary things to say about the Duratec aswell as the observation that it looked cheap in a lot of respects, however these seem to have been ignored.

 

This thread also contradicts itself as most accept that the Duratec is massed produced and was never intended to be used as a race engine although others then claim it will outperform all existing engines given time. I'm intrigued as to how one could come to this conclusion when modern technology has in reality such little influence on peak power output. If this was the case then power claims for older engines would just keep going up over time which they don't.

 

Others on this thread refer to F1 technology in the casting process. Get real, do you honestly believe that a Duratec block casting is in the same league as modern day F1 ! I'm sure there's some distant element of comparison in the basic process but in reality the end products are light years apart. That's the second time i've heard that the Duratec is F1 technology related - the first time was in relation to the cylinder head design - If you believe that you must be daft for I doubt whether there is any element of modern day F1 technology in any engine fitted to a Caterham belonging to anyone on this forum let alone in relation to the cylinder head.

 

The original point is that the engine is cheap which it seems nobody doubts. There is no doubt in my mind that this is the primary reason Caterham use it, just as they did with the K series. We're quoted new unit prices of £1,300 for the Duratec when a VX unit five or so years ago would have cost closer to £5k. I personally think you get what you pay for. That's not to say it isn't tuneable as it obviously is. However I think you'd need to spend a lot of money to get really competitive power out of a 2lt Duratec unit and ensure its reliability.

 

I also don't believe that we should really be comparing 1.8lt K's with 2.3lt Duratecs and other 2lt engines from a performance perspective as the capacities vary.

 

 

 

 

 

Home of BDR700

[AMMO]

Dave

 

What's a lot of money? 10K for a Duratec installation in a Caterham is less than a 12K K-Series from Minister that produces approx. 240 bhp without the installation components (OK, so you don't need tham 'cos the car is already set up to take the K). What does a 1900 K cost in comparison? A tuned Duratec without the installation costs can probably be had for around 7K. We are talking value for money here. A Millington is between 19 and 21 K.

 

What do you have to do to a Crossflow to make it go? Stick a steel crank, forged pistons, port the head etc. Just like any other production based engine. The Duratec is no different. A BDG is just a Crossflow that has a lot of money chucked at it.

 

A BDG is how much? 15K? And a Hart? At a guess 20 K? Perhaps more. I have no idea.

 

Fords sourced from Dagenham dustbins have always been used in motorsport. Probably because they were cheap. Not everybody can afford expensive engines.

 

The difference between a production Ford and a Formula 1 engine is like the difference between a £25.00 watch from Argos and a Rolex. I agree that there is nothing remotely in common with a Duratec and a Formula 1 engine (I knew there was something we could agree on).

 

The Ferrari Formula 1 engines I have seen inside of are more related to motorcycle engines than they are production engines sourced from cars. Not surprising really seeing the horsepower per litre they produce.

 

As for casting. Well, fundamentally it is just pouring molten metal. How you do it exactly and how much the machinery costs to do is almost irrelevant. I met a guy called John Britten (sadly departed) who made his own castings for a very succesful Britten motorcycle engine at home. His engine kicked ass (and our Moto Guzzi could stay with it for half the money, I have the SKY TV video footage to prove it. A Guzzi is a stupid bike to race by the way, just did it to prove a point).

 

The Duratec block casting does look rough in my opinion but it is a mass produced cheap item. It is not a jewel of engineering it is something that is made to do a job in a passenger vehicle.

 

What a Duratec looks like and how cheap it looks is not important once its under the bonnet of a car that is overtaking other stuff.

 

My intention is to build a 280 bhp + 2 litre for around 12 K and 2.4 / 2.5 variants with in excess of 300 bhp for between 12 and 14 K.

 

Considering that IES were charging 53 K for a Nissan and AER were charging 75K for the same engine a year later when they got the contract, I think you have to agree (although you probably won't 😬) that if I achieve my goals at the prices quoted then the Duratec will be good value.

 

An engine becomes a racing engine when you tune it and race it. People have raced Crossflows, Zetecs, VX's, K's etc. Even CVH's ! (yuck). Are race-tuned versions of road engines not race engines? What about the Coventry Climax? That wasn't even supposed to go in a car at all if I have got my facts straight.

 

As for capacities of engines if there was not more power to be had by making an engine bigger then manufactures would not stretch them. The K went from 1100cc to 1400cc to 1600cc, then 1800 cc, then tuners took it to 1900 cc and 2 litre. My Guzzi went from 992cc to 1105cc to 1162cc to 1288cc in a period of five years we raced it. The power always went up.

 

So if you can buy a 2.3 Duratec that makes, say, 30 more bhp and 20 ft lb more of torque with less stress for less money are you saying that you would rather go for the more stressed engine that costs more and produces less?

 

Anyway, we will probably never agree. Which is fine. If you chop me in half you will probably see "Duratec" written in me like a piece of seaside rock. You probably have "Hart" 😬

 

Take care and I hope you achieve your personal goals like I hope to achieve mine.

 

AMMO

 

Edited by - AMMO on 28 Apr 2005 07:48:31

[moosetestbestanden]

Others on this thread refer to F1 technology in the casting process. Get real, do you honestly believe that a Duratec block casting is in the same league as modern day F1 ! I'm sure there's some distant element of comparison in the basic process but in reality the end products are light years apart.

 

Nobody ever claimed that the end products were similar, or "in the same league", only that the process for making the block came from Cosworth. More info here. Scroll down to the Cosworth Casting Process. It's quite clear from the media release that the process was developed largely to prevent porosity in the solid material, for the purpose of maintaining consistency from one unit to the next. I reckon you're right that the end products are in fact light years apart, but not necessarily because of the process that actually forms the block from molten metal.

 

As for how modern day F1 engine blocks are cast, I simply don't know. But I know someone who does know and I'll ask him, out of newfound curosity. Hopefully he'll be willing to tell me something, even if only a little.

 

I've never opened my engine up so I can't say how cheaply made the components are or are not. I'm going to let Cosworth do that (possibly, maybe, eventually) and maybe they'll be kind enough to show me the difference that I'll be paying for. The engine's making plenty of beans though, and that's w/ SBD's outside-only stuff attached. And their mapping (or MBEs or whoever does it), which I have found to be excellent right out of the box.

 

Btw, the Fast Ford article from SBD's website makes the point that, yes it is cheap but that it has a really easy and inexpensive path to about 200 HP, simply by bolting parts on, mostly due to the head design. I really can't see too much wrong w/ the notion of 200 inexpensive HP from a relatively lightweight engine. If it doesn't look the greatest, well, I guess I'll just have to keep the bonnet on the car. I really didn't build the car as a fashion piece anyway, I built it to drive it on the track.

 

The Cossy price list I mentioned earlier says a "long engine assembly", which implys a built engine only (w/ Cosworth rods, pistons, cams, springs & headwork). Which means it comes sans lots of other important things, like roller throttles, headers, flywheel, clutch, dry sump etc. etc. etc. And the list says 250 spec, not the 260 I mentioned previously.

 

-------

Chris

Veni Vedi Blati

 

Edited by - moosetestbestanden on 28 Apr 2005 03:15:37

[Dobuy]

Others on this thread refer to F1 technology in the casting process. Get real

Dave, its called marketing, the fact people buy it is proof that it works. To be honest who cares.

I have to say from my perspective as an amateur assembler, who had not touched an engine in 18 years, i love it. Really easy to work on, with no special tools required to take it apart and put it back together.

You also know it has to be good when an Italian spends all his waking hours dreaming about it, instead of Ducati's & Moto Guzzi's (OK that's a really bad argument)

There is little new in the world, just refinements and improvements, this is what the Duratec is.

 

Duratec Se7en SV, built in Dubai, pics here!