Free Shipping

800-946-2642
Shop by Car
   Forum Width:     Forum Type: 

Found 26 Messages

Previous Set of Pages 1 | 2

 Posted: Jul 20, 2017 03:06PM
 Edited:  Jul 20, 2017 03:36PM
Total posts: 1379
Last post: Jul 20, 2017
Member since:Mar 10, 1999
2009. Not many race weekends on it but the last weekend before getting on the dyno I tried my new super handmade intake manifold which did not work, leaned it out to >16:1 so I had to back off just to finish the session.  Hoped I hadn't damaged the motor.  1293.  MED prepped block, crank, rods, pistons.  Ancient Longman inclined valve head.  Kent or Boffo cam, can't remember which, I think Kent.  Remote change early BMC SCCR box.  I think I had the 3.97 welded diff in it.  LCB with a muffler.  Electramotive crank trigger ignition. 

Got it on the dyno with the old single 45 Weber on a port-matched Warneford manifold and baselined it at 91hp and was very pleased with that.  Then put the splits on and made 90hp.  Dyno time is expensive and I wanted to know what was up my new manifold so that went back on and we started learning.  Over the next 90 minutes we made a bunch of jetting changes and finally figured out what the manifold wanted from the carb.  I ended up making 89 with the new manifold just before bangdadangdadangdadingbadadadadadada the #1 piston cracked.  Oh well, must have hurt it running too lean for too long.  But that manifold showed promise, it accelerated the dyno load from 4500 to 7500 in 4th faster than the other setups.

edit ... forgot to mention this was on Peter Shadowen's dyno.  All I did was sit in the car and try to put the throttle pedal through the floor, Peter did all the jetting changes.

 Posted: Jul 19, 2017 08:22PM
Total posts: 775
Last post: Jul 19, 2017
Member since:Jul 15, 2008
US
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheleker
In general, the more power you get out of a Mini engine with the usual changes (hot cams, for instance) the less drive-able it is. Great for a race track, but not something you'd want to hop into and drive to the grocery store.
I've got a hot cam and a bunch of other stuff that makes going to the grocery store a bit of a challenge. Low revs and big torque sounds pretty appealing. That being said, I'm impressed with the amount of low-end torque I do have. I've had a number of early turbo cars & a few bikes that had nothing until 5k RPM. I never knew what I was missing. Torque is good. I'm liking it!

 

Michael, Santa Barbara, CA

. . . the sled, not the flower

      Poser MotorSports

 Posted: Jul 19, 2017 07:59PM
Total posts: 9957
Last post: Jul 21, 2017
Member since:Dec 3, 2002
US
In general, the more power you get out of a Mini engine with the usual changes (hot cams, for instance) the less drive-able it is. Great for a race track, but not something you'd want to hop into and drive to the grocery store.

Add a good supercharger and back off on the compression (I was running 8:1) and you get an easy car to drive as well as one with LOTS of torque starting at low revs and lots of hp. The hard part is the "good supercharger" bit.

 Posted: Jul 19, 2017 06:47PM
Total posts: 775
Last post: Jul 19, 2017
Member since:Jul 15, 2008
US
Good thread going on here. This has been enlightening as my "butt dyno" is not well calibrated. Personally, I've ridden in only three classic Minis, including my own. So I have no idea what to expect from a given build. And I suppose it matters if for no other reason than from a cost/performance perspective. Dollar$ equal horsepower and I'd like to think that I'm getting my money's worth. So, thanks for the lively discussion. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheleker

...when it had the 1360cc engine with the supercharger running 8 psi. Taken in 84F degree weather. At the wheels. 110 whp at 6500 rpm (still climbing a little, but we backed off). 102 lb ft torque ~5100 rpm. (70 lb ft already at 1500 rpm)

That's BIG power. I was interested in supercharging my motor until I heard a couple of stories from fellows who were disappointed in the power gains they saw. The manufacturer claimed a 40+% increase in HP & torque. The consensus from these fellows was more like an 15-18% gain. Seemed like a lot of money for an additional 7 or 8 HP. Could'a been a tuning issue I suppose. Cheleker's numbers sound more like what I would expect.

I've been talking with a former Moss Motors employee at my local Cars & Coffee who, along with a "well known" parts manufacturer has developed a dedicated A-series blower that they claim produces big power without the usual reliability issues. He says it'll be on the market in a few months. Of course, he's been saying that since last August.

 

Michael, Santa Barbara, CA

. . . the sled, not the flower

      Poser MotorSports

 Posted: Jul 19, 2017 01:54PM
Total posts: 9957
Last post: Jul 21, 2017
Member since:Dec 3, 2002
US
Right, Jemal. Different dynos, but listing two car on the same dyno does give a hint. I have information from maybe 15 or more runs on that same dyno, but I thought the two opposites were more than enough for what this thread is about.

 Posted: Jul 19, 2017 10:46AM
Total posts: 1036
Last post: Jul 19, 2017
Member since:Nov 3, 2011
US
Just to be clear, those two were run on the same dyno, but not THIS one in the Sacramento area, right Chuck?

And yes, the 850 is the kind of engine that almost can't hurt itself.  Remember the Chrysler Slant Six?  Many decades ago my brother and I used to frequent the junkyards in East Palo Alto.  Back then wasn't too uncommon to drive a used-up car to the junkyard for beer money... those that knew the area then probably know what I mean  This old fellow was trying to junk a late 60s Dodge Dart and found a yard that gave him 10 bucks!  But he had to wait while they unloaded a truck of crushed cars.  He was antsy for his beer so we gave him $9.  Our auto-shop teacher loved the slant six! Used to say it was so bulletproof that you could put a brick on the gas pedal and it would just keep running.  Here was our chance to try it, right outside the junkyard gate!  We were sure it would either seize up dramatically, or (we hoped) blow up even more dramatically!  We got it running, jammed the gas pedal and "looked busy" a short distance away under the hood of our GTO.  We waited for the inevitable with baited breath.  A few guys looked out the gate, as did some passers-by, but they just shrugged and went about their business.  The 4-door Dart just made sort of a hissing sound at full throttle, among a slew of abandoned cars. 

We were impressed- and disappointed!  15, 20 minutes went by, but finally..... it ran out of gas!!  Later that day, we got the $10, and the yard-man poured some gas from a jar into the carb, and drove it in to it's grave.

Jemal

Yes you can reach me at

CooperRoadMini.com

 

 Posted: Jul 18, 2017 07:13AM
Total posts: 9957
Last post: Jul 21, 2017
Member since:Dec 3, 2002
US
The two I ran were done on the same dyno in slightly different weather. I've edited the post.

 Posted: Jul 18, 2017 05:50AM
Total posts: 95
Last post: Jul 18, 2017
Member since:Jul 24, 2014
As Jamal say's with "this dyno" torque and horsepower numbers vary greatly with temp, humidity, barometric pressure, altitude, even latitude is taken into account for some reason with SAE correction factors. Still to read these numbers from a little tractor engine is amazing!

 Posted: Jul 17, 2017 07:34PM
Total posts: 1036
Last post: Jul 19, 2017
Member since:Nov 3, 2011
US
It's really only a comparison on a given Dyno, and I'm careful to say on THIS dyno.   I did notice the readout on my old run says "Flywheel Power", but that was the very same setup from the guys at Driving Ambition, and it does measure at the wheels.  The Unit connects to the drive flanges in place of your wheels.   A couple of years ago, our good friend Bruce Blair of Bruce's Morris Garage brought his absolutely stunning lavender '59 commemorative edition Minor, yes one of the "One Million" serial number cars.  Featuring a rebuilt 998 (rear wheel drive of course), this car was like going back in time, and he'd just driven it over the Sierra Nevadas so it was running perfect.  It huffed and puffed it's way to 22.5 HP on THIS dyno.

The day we ran mine was hot. Over 100 degrees, and the dyno area smelled like coolant from all the expansion overflow.  Other classic Minis that day included some 1380s I had built to the Mini Mania specifications. Those showed about 60 WHP on THIS dyno.  I always counseled AGAINST claiming HP numbers as MM does.  Certainly the claim of 113 or 120 HP from a 10 to 1 engine running standardish valve sizes is fiction!  These numbers make an interesting comparison, sometimes just to confirm what the "Butt dyno" tells us.

Jemal

Yes you can reach me at

CooperRoadMini.com

 

 Posted: Jul 17, 2017 05:38PM
Total posts: 522
Last post: Jul 17, 2017
Member since:May 18, 2002
US
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRiley
The only dyno my car will ever be on is the Butt Dyno. I couldn't care less how my car compares with anyone else's, or how many HP it's got. As long as it puts a smile on my face when I drive it, that's what it's all about.
I'm with RedRiley on this my 1293 does an honest GPS measured 103mph, how much HP does it make? 80?  Who cares it keeps up with traffic 

 

 

 Posted: Jul 17, 2017 08:28AM
Total posts: 6284
Last post: Jul 21, 2017
Member since:Nov 2, 2006
CA
I'm reaching into the recesses of time here...back in 2003, before we tore the Mini 1000 apart for rebuild with 1380 install, I went to Bergman Bros. (lots of race & hi-performance experience) and got the 1st iteration of POOH up on their 1,500 hp Mustang dyno.  Bloody drum was 5 feet in diameter.  Mini looked like it would be eaten by the machine.

The Mini 1000's 998 had an MG Metro cam, 12G295 head (can't recall ccs & CR), Pertronix Ignition, Hitachi 1'1/2" on Sportex intake with medium bore LCB & single box exhaust.

Power at the wheels maxed out at just over 39 hp, torque a lovely flat curve 44-45 ft. lbs. from 2,000 on to 5,000.  Operators said there was a bit more but did not push it.  Lowest output the dyno had measured at that time.

The idea was to go back with the 1380...did not happen as Bergman Bros. stopped using the dyno.  All I know about the 1380 is I could break an inner pot joint cage putting down the power.

 

 Posted: Jul 17, 2017 08:05AM
 Edited:  Jul 18, 2017 07:09AM
Total posts: 9957
Last post: Jul 21, 2017
Member since:Dec 3, 2002
US
OK, here's one. Tired 848cc Traveller. At the wheels. 27 whp at 5000 rpm. (We didn't run it any higher!) 33 lb ft torque at ~3100 rpm. Although I don't own the car any more it is still on the road with the same, not rebuilt engine. 848 engines seem to last for ever.

And another. MOKE when it had the 1360cc engine with the supercharger running 8 psi. Taken in 84F degree weather. At the wheels. 110 whp at 6500 rpm (still climbing a little, but we backed off). 102 lb ft torque ~5100 rpm. (70 lb ft already at 1500 rpm)

Both done on the same dyno; although, the 848 was run on a cooler day than MOKE.

 Posted: Jul 17, 2017 07:30AM
Total posts: 9371
Last post: Jul 21, 2017
Member since:Mar 24, 1999
GB
I can't find the dyno sheet for Tigger as Suzy has stashed it away somewhere.  In place of a scan, here is a photo of the graph printed in Mini Mag in about 2013.  Comparable to Jemal's 1380 as both are measured at the flywheel, this is only a 1310 with an SW5 cam and a decent head, running 10.1:1 compression and regular 95 octane unleaded (wasn't allowed to use 98) hich is the same as your 87 I believe.

Power was down due to a burnt valve seat.  We went back a month later after recutting the seat and got 89 bhp.

Metric is for people who can't do fractions...

 Posted: Jul 16, 2017 01:02PM
Total posts: 1036
Last post: Jul 19, 2017
Member since:Nov 3, 2011
US
That sounds about right for the Vette... remember the HP numbers of the "first" muscle car era were usually inflated, and lots of liberties were taken with 'gross' vs SAE net (much more realistic at the wheels), as dictated by the 1970s.  When that change took place, NOBODY wanted to quote HP numbers! Yes there were political and insurance reasons, but with the change of scale, Z28s, Trans-Ams, Mustangs, and what was left of Mopar  "lost" nearly half their power!  Those were the dark ages when most "performance" divisions were neutered!  I recently saw a "Mustang-II" from about 1974... remember those hideous things?

Thankfully, today they are right back at it!  Have you seen some of the advertising for the Hellcats and such? You can be sure your insurance agent has!

As to the build.... and by the way I missed the 998 making 86!  I AM building a BIG A+ small bore with a 3 inch stroke, using parts and experience from Graham Russell... I'll be VERY happy with about 60 at the wheels, and that one will be to go some distance.  But the 1380 in the graph is the one I built for myself about 10 years ago now.  Even at the time it was more "proof of concept" nearer the ragged edge than I would recommend.  It's an A+ bored to 1380 with a standard re-ground crank, ARP bolts on A+ rods,  286SP cam, lightweight lifters and timing set, standard oil pump... really quite ordinary.  But then, some musclecar tricks: Flat top "MEGA" pistons right up to the deck, an alloy head (Pierce, with my special porting and mods to run 1.464" intake and 1.22"), very careful cam timing with about 13.5 : 1 compression.  An old set of the forged Keith Dodd rocker arms set up to clear the pushrods with the bigger valve spacing of the head (as much to allow room for seats as big valves.... none of the cast iron heads allow side by side seats for big valves). The big Weber looks and sounds great and rounds out the old fashioned hot rod.... big displacement, big compression, big cam, valves, carb and exhaust -  I built a stainless system using BINI leftover parts minimum 2 inch ID, same as the collector on the big bore header.

Not exactly engine, but important for the way in runs is gearing.  Final Drive is 3.76, same as most standard Minis with an 850.  The rod change box contains a set of Cooper S close ratio gears, so rules out a tall final drive.  The car is beautiful to drive (yes with 13 inch wheels!) up to about 60 or 65, but sustaining 70 or more gets tiresome.  You know, like most classic Minis!

I updated my signature a little!  Many of you have found me since I left Mini Mania.  I'm just one of you now!  Looks like they'll have to manually change my email as there is no button for it!
Jemal@CooperRoadMini.com 

Jemal

Yes you can reach me at

CooperRoadMini.com

 

 Posted: Jul 16, 2017 12:13PM
Total posts: 1610
Last post: Jul 21, 2017
Member since:May 1, 2007
US
The only dyno my car will ever be on is the Butt Dyno. I couldn't care less how my car compares with anyone else's, or how many HP it's got. As long as it puts a smile on my face when I drive it, that's what it's all about.

 Posted: Jul 16, 2017 08:07AM
Total posts: 111
Last post: Jul 16, 2017
Member since:Sep 6, 2015
Jemal
The Corvette showed 250 Hp and 300 ft/lbs of torque.  I finally found the engine specs on the net.  From the serial number it came from a 57 Imperial that made 320 Hp and 430 ft/lbs of torque with one 4 barrel where I have two and that was at the flywheel.

 Posted: Jul 16, 2017 04:58AM
Total posts: 9371
Last post: Jul 21, 2017
Member since:Mar 24, 1999
GB

There was a very interesting article in Cooper World a few years ago, written by one of the MCR members who'd done a back-to-back comparison of dyno vs rolling road.

The engine was a Swiftune one, which had naturally been started and set up on their engine dyno and was supplied with the power and torque figures.  Some while later, with the engine installed in the car and run-in according to instructions, he visited Slarks rolling road - one of the UK ones disparaged by DRMINI - and had it checked...

When a clever state-of-the-art rolling road gets to within 1 bhp of Swiftune's engine dyno, I'd say it's pretty accurate !
Now, that could of course be down to the luck of the day, but having seen Neil Slark in action he's one of the two people I trust to tune my engines, the other being Steve Harris.

Back to the graphs posted, we kinda need engine specs gentlemen !

It's all well and good showing 86bhp, but if that's from a 1380 then it's pretty poor compared to 86 from a 998...

Metric is for people who can't do fractions...

 Posted: Jul 15, 2017 01:20PM
Total posts: 1036
Last post: Jul 19, 2017
Member since:Nov 3, 2011
US
It was a pleasure to meet you Rosebud!  I was very impressed with your car and your journey to Nevada City!  I was hoping to swap rides with you but had to take another good friend and his bicycle back up to his airplane. Advantage MOKE! No way to stuff a road bike into the S.  By the time I returned, you'd left.  I'm sorry there wasn't more time to spend with many people at the event!
And thanks for the link to that steering bracket....  Your column is the nicest I've seen, but that level of fabrication is more than most can do!

Here's my run from 2008 on that same dyno.  The photo has been on this website for years and is used in articles and promotions for the dyno-day. This is with the 48IDA that it still has, but it had only run on the test stand (at the previous year NCA, I demo'd for the crowd, including once with open collector big-bore header - very briefly, and with ample warning).  I finally installed it in the car (which still looked more barn-find than Resto-mod hot rod), and drove it the 9 miles or so to Mini Mania.  We flogged it on the dyno to 7000 RPM over and over trying to get rid of that dip at the top of the HP graph. Even Don was shaking his head about it staying together!  But it did, and it has!

But like Chuck says, this is NOT an engine for long distance travel, or even short distance!  I really only take the car out for a little shock and awe now and again, or to give someone a ride.  Most of it's use has been for short tire-shredding bursts of fun... I put up that video of some minor parking lot stunts a while back. 

Kolsen - What did your Hemi Corvette do on the dyno?  And oh yes, the A-series is terribly inefficient between the crank and the wheels.  Most 850s less than 20 WHP,  most 998s low 20s....  on THIS dyno!  

Jemal

Yes you can reach me at

CooperRoadMini.com

 

 Posted: Jul 14, 2017 08:34AM
Total posts: 111
Last post: Jul 16, 2017
Member since:Sep 6, 2015
I also took my 65 Corvette with a 57 392 Hemi to the dyno as well.  Based on the production specs on it I would be losing 23% thru the drive train or maybe more since my engine has dual 4 barrel carbs and the production engine only had one.  Chassis dyno's are helpful but probably better for tuning vs real numbers.

When I built my 3.0L engine for the Porsche we ran the engine on an engine dyno in an air conditioned sealed room for two days.  That was crankshaft horsepower.  Even the Porsche we use 15% drivetrain loses.

 Posted: Jul 14, 2017 07:33AM
Total posts: 775
Last post: Jul 19, 2017
Member since:Jul 15, 2008
US
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spank

51hp 57ftlbs on our 998 built with used parts for $500


Current leader: HP per dollar award!

 

Michael, Santa Barbara, CA

. . . the sled, not the flower

      Poser MotorSports

Found 26 Messages

Previous Set of Pages 1 | 2