Any suggestion on who to modify my K Head?
Turbo Mini Forums

This is my thinking. I seem to see 600+bhp evo's getting strocked to 2.5 or something, 1000+bhp skylines to 2.8 (with decom plates) and aload of other top, TOP tuned turbo cars going this route and I just couldnt see the reason why I couldnt. Even if the 73.5 bores weren't practicle, i would still have strocked it. Either short or long. A short stroke for shit loads of boost and revs, a long for not as much boost and less revs.

Edited by Oldskoolbaby on 7th Oct, 2008.

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

WWW.TURBO-MINI.COM

Easy mate, I'm fully aware this is a 55 year old engine. Thats the reason I'm not going to rev it to 9k as Im only too aware of it having 3 bearings on the crank.I

I don't give a shit about the age of it if I'm honest though. The reason you and everyone else is on the forum instead of other forums is because we are all pushing the boundries of the A seires that little bit more year by year. If we all thought "Oh its 20 years old now, theres not much more to improve it lets just fit a 1.8 B Seires", we would all still be marveling at 100bhp A series motors. Cant for the life of me remember an engine that was fitted with a very effiecient twin cam head, modern type rods and pistons 50 odd years ago. But many have now been fitted with them and that why years ago 150 bhp was unbeleivable and now 250+ is.

Edited by Oldskoolbaby on 7th Oct, 2008.

I think the point Paul was trying to make was it is not a great Idea to compare an EVO or a scoby with an A -Series as the engine technology is quite a bit different, I am certainly not an expert on turbo design but it would seem to me from studies which I have undertaken that a smaller bore with a modist valve size works very well for turbo, With turbo the concern is to try make your engine as rigid and tough as possable, This will alow the engine take a lot more boost which in turn will yeald a lot more power as a posed to big pistons, masive over bore and extream crank stroke all thes factors lead to block flex, los of rigidity and masive torsional forces,
Now dont get me rong Im not trying to talk you out of your idea, but if ultmate power is you gole I think you would be far better keeping every thing stiff and strong and turning up the boost

lets just take a look a displacment here IMO 1330 is the ultmate Turbo bore for an A series now lets look at the figures you are thinking of 1460 that is a mear 32.5 cc per cylinder more than 1330, if you where to run a K head and some 20cc pistons on a 1330 your efective CC would only be some 10 cc +/- per cylinder off you 1460 , what does that mean well if you have that much extra space in a smaller bore fill it with more mixture at a higher presure and hey presto lots more power, a very wise turbo engine tuner once told me when you build a turbo motor take every thing you know about N/A and do the opposite and you will have a super turbo and tbh is a very true statment,
best regards,
Paul.

I can see exactly what your saying. Strength wise the only thing that has decreased is the wall thickness which like you say could be a problem but then again I wont be running the same level of boost to create 200bhp as a 1293 has to. I think its very much swings and round abouts lol There's just a fair few ways of doing things to get different results.

Back once again like a renegade master

Crumbs this topic is getting a bit heated

Can we all calm down and admire this nugget of gold from jimster:

trust you Nic!

Its the same words, But when Nic quotes them, it just puts a whole other spin on things

as you seem to have thrown away all the advice people have given you, go for a 8000000hp engine and come back to us when its done and on the road :)
as you dont seem to mind about cost ect get a custom gearbox made to handle the power as well :)

Drives
-Ford S-max Mk2 Ecoboost
-Rover 100 VVC #2 - track project

Searching is all you need on TurboMinis

Who's advise have I thrown away?? Purely because I haven't changed my mind and kept with my original idea of 1460 i'm getting a hard time. Ive took everybodies advise on board and haven't called or said its a load of bollocks either. I aggree with 98% of it but I personaly think that there's some gain in going for 1460 for what im after. If it spits its guts out a mile down the road or doesnt do want i want it to do, what the hell. Ive at least tried and gave it ago. Truth is, unless somebody comes up to me with a pretty similar speced engine and say "Brett, its fucking wank, I wouldn't bother" then theres a slim chance im going to change my mind.

Why did you go 1293 with your motor? No doubt it was because loads and loads of people have done it before and it was fine.

If everybody thought like that Sproket wouldnt have thought of putting a BMW head on a 50 year old engine, miniwilliams wouldn't have produced the 320bhp he got and forget sccr boxes!!!! They are just weak!! The teeth just fall off.

Theres nothing wrong with thinking outside the box occasionaly. Just cause some of us have balls to do it doesnt mean we are being arrogant or wrong.

I still think that once you start reving it you'd wish you'd gone for a shorter stroke, but you'll never know if you don't try something new!

So I say go for it, takes balls to try something new especially when large amounts of money are involved.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Fusion-Fabri..._homepage_panel

www.fusionfabs.co.uk



1/4mile in 13.2sec @ 111 terminal on 15psi

blimey!!!!! im lost for words .

heres somebody suggesting going further in the power production stakes following other than the normally trodden path .

yes it may or may nor be good theory ,but he didnt ask for thoeretical advice ,just someone to port his head advice... thats all.

what hes actually received is a fair amount of insulting abusive comment ...

being polite ,and civilized costs nothing.
the necessity to load nasty abrasive put downs on people seems a bit strange to me ,

who gains from it ? ,

the forum gets a rep for attitude ,and less subscibers ,for absolutley no benefit .

think about how you'd like to be spoken to?

Medusa + injection = too much torque for the dyno ..https://youtu.be/qg5o0_tJxYM

What he said ^^^^

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Fusion-Fabri..._homepage_panel

www.fusionfabs.co.uk



1/4mile in 13.2sec @ 111 terminal on 15psi

^^^
^^^
What he said

What I said was ' All in the best possible taste'

sorry for before going abit mentalist as for going 1293 its all i can afored not due to many other people doing it. i was planning on a 1310 but due to funds its only going to be a 1293. i really wanted to do a +20 long stroke i dont know of anyone who has done one before but i cant aforde it simple as :)

Drives
-Ford S-max Mk2 Ecoboost
-Rover 100 VVC #2 - track project

Searching is all you need on TurboMinis

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

How do I deserve any flack if any? Did I say you were talking crap?? I dont seem to think so.

Now this is a genuine question. Have you or anybody for that matter, properly turbocharged anything with this much capacity?

No, I haven't.

I also haven't had a bone in this discussion as (to be blunt) a lot of folks come and ask for advice to go along with their big ideas, and we never see anything of it.

Hey - it's you time, your money, and if you are keen to spend, then spend away. I'm al for seeing what is the ultimate build. I don;t have the 'effort' to do this (time, money, etc) but I sure would like to have.

Yep, if you think it's the right way to go, then go for it.

WWW.TURBO-MINI.COM

Hi,
I think from reading this post you know what the pitfalls are, you know there's a good chance it could all go horribly wrong.
But if you want to try it then go for it.
Time gone by people said a 1380 turbo wouldn't work due to bore flex. Jukka? and Benross have both proved that one wrong, and I'm sure Wolfie's motor is/was stroked.
Stroking is the best thing for a turbo engine as it's all about torque, whether you rev the nuts off it as well is up to you, just stand well back on the dyno run!
Cheers,
Gavin :)

VEMs Authorised Installer / Re-seller. K head kits now available!

WB/EGT gauges. Click here for customers write-up

Visit www.doyouneedabrain.co.uk

My Mini build diary

No I haven't.

I wish I was because it must be a lot easier.

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

genuine suggestion here. if you are going big bore, long straoke alot of the torque will be mid range/ low down and you obviously wont be reving the tits off it.

for that reason would an 8V K not be more suited to your application? because i owuld have thought to see the full benifits of the 16V revs will be needed which with long stroke you wont be able (theoretically) to give.

also the heat from high boost would be able to disperse into the Chamber abit better with the being more surface area there without the extra valves. less chance off dropping a valve in that case?

i await responses to my theory??