Only for the brave....
http://www.hangar111.com/blog/lotus-eli ... er-update/
K Series S/C kit
Re: K Series S/C kit
Only for those with more money than sense......
Dan
Re: K Series S/C kit
11.6k ex Vat, are they mad!!
They say a kit will be available to "upgrade" honda and duratec converted cars!
They say a kit will be available to "upgrade" honda and duratec converted cars!
Hairdresser at heart.
Re: K Series S/C kit
Wonder how many they will sell at £14K if any?
Compared to Honda, Audi and Duratec conversions that is just a silly price, especially as it is the existing engine.
tut
Compared to Honda, Audi and Duratec conversions that is just a silly price, especially as it is the existing engine.
tut
Re: K Series S/C kit
On track I doubt this will be any quicker than a N/A Honda unless coupled with a UCR box, in which case top speed will be 120 or whatever it is. Certainly if there was about a 3K price differential you would have to think the Honda route would be preferable to this one (logically - ignoring the religion about whether or not you should fit a Honda to your elise). Previous K-series s/c conversions have suffered from "going bang a lot" ... I guess these guys are fitting stronger internals? If not you have to think they'll suffer similarly.
Cheers,
Robin
Cheers,
Robin
I is in your loomz nibblin ur wirez
#bemoretut
#bemoretut
Re: K Series S/C kit
Sadly way over priced but I expect it is quite labour intensive and the bits soon add up
I did come across this a very long time ago and it will be either the tt190 or tt 220 (as the tt260 was only in about 7 cars total either S1 ( based on the 190 ) or exige , + a 340r )
" Finally! I got to test drive a Honda powered Elise. I awoke to a
gloriously sunny Saturday morning, just perfect for a test drive of
Maidstone Sports Cars' (MSC) converted Elise S1. They have swapped
out the original K series engine, gearbox etc and replaced these with
a Honda V-Tec engine and 6 speed gearbox.
I drove there in my Turbo Technics (TT) converted Elise S2 with
supercharged K series engine and was really looking forward to
comparing these two rockets back to back. I had previously only had
a passenger ride in one – the very first Honda conversion that Ian
Wilson brought to Folembray in summer 2003. I had been impressed by
that car, and felt it offered very similar performance to mine. Both
conversions also cost about the same.
On seeing the MSC Honda conversion, I was immediately impressed by
the quality of the workmanship. To my mind, it look much better than
the Folembray car and could pass for factory fit – just like the TT –
except that the Honda engine is much more compact, albeit a little
heavier. I've had MSC work on my car previously and can certainly
vouch for their attitude to quality of workmanship. I should also
expect the Honda engine to be reliable.
I was driven out in the Honda Elise, and as soon as we turned out of
the long driveway, the MSC driver floored it. OH MY GOD!!! This car
just took off, wailing like a banshee, kicking me in the stomach at
each gear change. Was I impressed? You bet! Impressed and awed by
the sheer speed of this beast.
Suffice to say, I've no idea why, but the MSC Honda felt a lot faster
than the Folembray one.
We then swapped over so I could drive. The first thing I noticed was
the poor gear change though. It felt vague and woolly. The car was
supremely tractable however and the engine was very easy to use even
at low revs, pulling happily in top gear.
But that's not what I came to test, and as soon as I floored it, I
realised how awesomely fast this car is. It is quick, scary quick.
It reminded me of my old Caterham Superlight R (475kg and 190bhp with
a 6 speed box). Not as quick as the Superlight R, but not too far
from it and the power delivery felt remarkably similar. A car that
can't fail to both impress and terrify passengers!
In one sense, the car was depressing, as I felt pretty sure mine
could not keep up with it.
In a nutshell the Honda Elise is very impressive, and extremely
fast. And the sheer power of the thing makes up for the gearshift,
which I'm sure any owner would get used to quite quickly.
As an aside, I have also driven the factory standard S2 111R (and S2
Exige) with a Toyota engine and quite frankly the 111R would be left
eating the Honda's dust. They are like chalk and cheese. The 111R
is more Porsche Boxster in feel, and is refined and relatively
comfortable. The Honda Elise simply feels like a racer.
We got back to MSC and decided to try a head to head, just to see how
much faster the Honda would be. Admittedly it would not be a
controlled test from a standing start, but it should be fairly
conclusive if one car was clearly faster. I was now pretty confident
the Honda would beat mine, albeit not by too much, and so hoped for a
draw. MSC were so confident in the result that they decided to send
a passenger in the Honda, and also wanted to start in front so as not
to be held up.
The Honda Elise led in front with a rolling start at about 20 mph,
with 3-4 car lengths between us as I followed waiting for him to
floor it (I was in second gear). He hit the loud pedal! I followed
a second later as I saw the Honda open the gap to 4-5 car lengths.
My senses felt obliterated by the noise and fury of these cars, as it
felt like both cars had suddenly gone to Warp! What happened next
was wholly unexpected though.
The TT gained on the Honda, faster and faster as speed increased,
until I had to brake gently to avoid running into the back of the
Honda. Terminal speed was around 120mph.
I couldn't believe it, and it took a few minutes to sink in. The TT
was faster, and more so at higher speeds.
I offered a second run, but MSC conceded that the TT would be quicker.
The factors that make the test unscientific however, were the
following:
- S1 vs S2 (weight difference favouring Honda)
- Honda had a passenger (weight difference favouring TT)
- Honda had a head start (so the TT had to catch up)
In summary, as tested, the TT car caught the Honda fairly easily and
was quite noticeably quicker. The difference in acceleration was
sufficient that we believed a controlled test (S1 Honda vs S1 TT,
with equal start) would show the TT ahead.
So, how do I explain the difference in feel between driving the two
cars? After the head to head, it is clear that the Honda feels
faster than the TT. This is due to a number of factors, key amongst
which is the very linear and constant power delivery of the TT versus
the almost turbo-like kick in the stomach offered by the Honda. The
Honda seems to develop two power surges, one at around 6000rpm and
the second immediately before the rev limiter at around 8000rpm.
This makes occupants feel it is much faster accelerating. The two
cars simply deliver their power in different ways.
The other factors were that the Honda generated more noise inside the
cabin and also offered a harder "twitchier" ride than the S2, even
with Lotus Sports suspension fitted. As configured, the S1 felt more
responsive to steering input whilst also feeling more twitchy and
nervous on the road. The S2 felt more stable. However, the reader
shouldn't set much store by that finding as I am without a doubt
infinitely more used to the S2's feel and handling, as it's my own
car.
To summarise, both cars are incredibly fast, and whilst the TT is
quicker, the Honda feels quicker.
Would I recommend the MSC Honda conversion? Yes, and without
hesitation! A truly fantastic rocket powered car that will leave the
vast majority of cars eating its dust, and a huge grin transplanted
to your face!
I did come across this a very long time ago and it will be either the tt190 or tt 220 (as the tt260 was only in about 7 cars total either S1 ( based on the 190 ) or exige , + a 340r )
" Finally! I got to test drive a Honda powered Elise. I awoke to a
gloriously sunny Saturday morning, just perfect for a test drive of
Maidstone Sports Cars' (MSC) converted Elise S1. They have swapped
out the original K series engine, gearbox etc and replaced these with
a Honda V-Tec engine and 6 speed gearbox.
I drove there in my Turbo Technics (TT) converted Elise S2 with
supercharged K series engine and was really looking forward to
comparing these two rockets back to back. I had previously only had
a passenger ride in one – the very first Honda conversion that Ian
Wilson brought to Folembray in summer 2003. I had been impressed by
that car, and felt it offered very similar performance to mine. Both
conversions also cost about the same.
On seeing the MSC Honda conversion, I was immediately impressed by
the quality of the workmanship. To my mind, it look much better than
the Folembray car and could pass for factory fit – just like the TT –
except that the Honda engine is much more compact, albeit a little
heavier. I've had MSC work on my car previously and can certainly
vouch for their attitude to quality of workmanship. I should also
expect the Honda engine to be reliable.
I was driven out in the Honda Elise, and as soon as we turned out of
the long driveway, the MSC driver floored it. OH MY GOD!!! This car
just took off, wailing like a banshee, kicking me in the stomach at
each gear change. Was I impressed? You bet! Impressed and awed by
the sheer speed of this beast.
Suffice to say, I've no idea why, but the MSC Honda felt a lot faster
than the Folembray one.
We then swapped over so I could drive. The first thing I noticed was
the poor gear change though. It felt vague and woolly. The car was
supremely tractable however and the engine was very easy to use even
at low revs, pulling happily in top gear.
But that's not what I came to test, and as soon as I floored it, I
realised how awesomely fast this car is. It is quick, scary quick.
It reminded me of my old Caterham Superlight R (475kg and 190bhp with
a 6 speed box). Not as quick as the Superlight R, but not too far
from it and the power delivery felt remarkably similar. A car that
can't fail to both impress and terrify passengers!
In one sense, the car was depressing, as I felt pretty sure mine
could not keep up with it.
In a nutshell the Honda Elise is very impressive, and extremely
fast. And the sheer power of the thing makes up for the gearshift,
which I'm sure any owner would get used to quite quickly.
As an aside, I have also driven the factory standard S2 111R (and S2
Exige) with a Toyota engine and quite frankly the 111R would be left
eating the Honda's dust. They are like chalk and cheese. The 111R
is more Porsche Boxster in feel, and is refined and relatively
comfortable. The Honda Elise simply feels like a racer.
We got back to MSC and decided to try a head to head, just to see how
much faster the Honda would be. Admittedly it would not be a
controlled test from a standing start, but it should be fairly
conclusive if one car was clearly faster. I was now pretty confident
the Honda would beat mine, albeit not by too much, and so hoped for a
draw. MSC were so confident in the result that they decided to send
a passenger in the Honda, and also wanted to start in front so as not
to be held up.
The Honda Elise led in front with a rolling start at about 20 mph,
with 3-4 car lengths between us as I followed waiting for him to
floor it (I was in second gear). He hit the loud pedal! I followed
a second later as I saw the Honda open the gap to 4-5 car lengths.
My senses felt obliterated by the noise and fury of these cars, as it
felt like both cars had suddenly gone to Warp! What happened next
was wholly unexpected though.
The TT gained on the Honda, faster and faster as speed increased,
until I had to brake gently to avoid running into the back of the
Honda. Terminal speed was around 120mph.
I couldn't believe it, and it took a few minutes to sink in. The TT
was faster, and more so at higher speeds.
I offered a second run, but MSC conceded that the TT would be quicker.
The factors that make the test unscientific however, were the
following:
- S1 vs S2 (weight difference favouring Honda)
- Honda had a passenger (weight difference favouring TT)
- Honda had a head start (so the TT had to catch up)
In summary, as tested, the TT car caught the Honda fairly easily and
was quite noticeably quicker. The difference in acceleration was
sufficient that we believed a controlled test (S1 Honda vs S1 TT,
with equal start) would show the TT ahead.
So, how do I explain the difference in feel between driving the two
cars? After the head to head, it is clear that the Honda feels
faster than the TT. This is due to a number of factors, key amongst
which is the very linear and constant power delivery of the TT versus
the almost turbo-like kick in the stomach offered by the Honda. The
Honda seems to develop two power surges, one at around 6000rpm and
the second immediately before the rev limiter at around 8000rpm.
This makes occupants feel it is much faster accelerating. The two
cars simply deliver their power in different ways.
The other factors were that the Honda generated more noise inside the
cabin and also offered a harder "twitchier" ride than the S2, even
with Lotus Sports suspension fitted. As configured, the S1 felt more
responsive to steering input whilst also feeling more twitchy and
nervous on the road. The S2 felt more stable. However, the reader
shouldn't set much store by that finding as I am without a doubt
infinitely more used to the S2's feel and handling, as it's my own
car.
To summarise, both cars are incredibly fast, and whilst the TT is
quicker, the Honda feels quicker.
Would I recommend the MSC Honda conversion? Yes, and without
hesitation! A truly fantastic rocket powered car that will leave the
vast majority of cars eating its dust, and a huge grin transplanted
to your face!
bob
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak
Re: K Series S/C kit
Robin,robin wrote:On track I doubt this will be any quicker than a N/A Honda unless coupled with a UCR box, in which case top speed will be 120 or whatever it is. Certainly if there was about a 3K price differential you would have to think the Honda route would be preferable to this one (logically - ignoring the religion about whether or not you should fit a Honda to your elise). Previous K-series s/c conversions have suffered from "going bang a lot" ... I guess these guys are fitting stronger internals? If not you have to think they'll suffer similarly.
Cheers,
Robin
I've often see it mentioned that the k versus a same power Honda will lose out because of the box. You think this is because of losses in the box and the UCR compensates this by the tighter ratios? Just wondered why the pg1 has issues, it's heavier than the Honda box so maybe has a larger rotating mass?
Hairdresser at heart.
Re: K Series S/C kit
Interesting post bob, even more looking forward to a shotty of yours now.
Hairdresser at heart.
Re: K Series S/C kit
Craig its because of the honda ratio's it gives better torque at the wheels . the box is a torque converter and the reason the tt supercharge kept up with the honda in the other post was down to the charger adding torque
the ucr will also add torque over a std box
the ucr will also add torque over a std box
bob
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak
Re: K Series S/C kit
Craig I am astounded with it , I will get it remapped in the new year and and get the bodywork sorted then I will pop down to see your10crw wrote:Interesting post bob, even more looking forward to a shotty of yours now.
bob
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak
Re: K Series S/C kit
Ignore torque it's always a red herring in these scenarios; whilst you can do calculations with it and they will yield the same results as the power calculations, the power ones are much much easier to do as you never need to worry about gear ratios, tyre diameters, etc.
Area swept under the power curve determines acceleration.
When you change up in a Honda (or the Toyota VVLti for that matter) at the redline you don't drop as far back the rev range as when you change up in a standard S1 box. With the Honda my guess is you lose 20BHP from the redline to the bottom of the next gear, so average power is 210. For the S/C power is proportional to RPM in this area of the curve so if you drop from 7,000 to 4,500 you lose about 30% of the power, i.e. you drop from 260 to 182 giving you an average power output of 221. So it will be very close and the quality of gearshift, traction, throttle response, clutch, etc. will all be relevant.
Clearly if you switch the S/C to a UCR then you'll be dropping more like 2K or less per gearchange and you'll get much higher average power.
Cheers,
Robin
Area swept under the power curve determines acceleration.
When you change up in a Honda (or the Toyota VVLti for that matter) at the redline you don't drop as far back the rev range as when you change up in a standard S1 box. With the Honda my guess is you lose 20BHP from the redline to the bottom of the next gear, so average power is 210. For the S/C power is proportional to RPM in this area of the curve so if you drop from 7,000 to 4,500 you lose about 30% of the power, i.e. you drop from 260 to 182 giving you an average power output of 221. So it will be very close and the quality of gearshift, traction, throttle response, clutch, etc. will all be relevant.
Clearly if you switch the S/C to a UCR then you'll be dropping more like 2K or less per gearchange and you'll get much higher average power.
Cheers,
Robin
I is in your loomz nibblin ur wirez
#bemoretut
#bemoretut
Re: K Series S/C kit
What I'd read on Seloc suggested the pricres included vat and started about £5.5k for the most basic/least powerful option? Will need to have a search.
Re: K Series S/C kit
On the site it's 5.6k ex vat for the charger and chargecooler as a kit but you would need to build the engine as well unless yor only looking for 180 ish. Lot of money for 180 which will be a standard engine running big power.
Don't get me wrong you could up the boost and do maybe one lap of knock hill before ordering internals.
I suppose it means you can do things in steps and only up the boost once you have a built engine.
Don't get me wrong you could up the boost and do maybe one lap of knock hill before ordering internals.
I suppose it means you can do things in steps and only up the boost once you have a built engine.
Hairdresser at heart.
-
KingK_series
- Posts: 567
- Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:10 am
Re: K Series S/C kit
r10crw wrote:11.6k ex Vat, are they mad!!
They say a kit will be available to "upgrade" honda and duratec converted cars!
I agree if the "SC pack" is 5665+vat for a non vvc engine, that means they are charging out at 6 GRAND for a set of rods, a set of forged pistons, a Sabreheads port and a set of cams [piper 270's?] , plus oe rebuild[?] of liners, bearings, seals gaskets OE longbolts and I guess the revised oil rail.
in my books that comes to £1200 for rods and cams [if they are top quality - and they do not look that in RobC's blog on seloc, 900 for valve seat insert, guides[?] and a port, 180 for valves, call it 500 for cams plus verniers, a couple hundred for the rest at most.
thats 3 grand, so that means there is a 50% profit margin [looks like that to me on the SC pack too - or am I missing something?
- and the liners are OE iron, the longbolts are OE unlike on the original TT conversion, there is no provision to alter water flow through block or use a modified water pump to nail the "HGF" issue once and for all.
plus the rods are 3mm shorter according to RobC's blog, and the pistons look animals - the pin is very low in the piston meaning it will rock, the rods are 3mm{?} shorter than OE which is unacceptable in my mind and will cause inordinately high piston skirt loads = liners knocked out of shape, rattling pistons, premature liner and skirt wear, rapidly deteriorating bore/ring seal = noise blowby, and a sour engine in short order.
The thing is that running such a short rod is totally unnecessary, careful piston and rod design can and would avoid shortening it at all - all my rods are at least 3mm longer than OE - to improve l/r, thrust loads etc. - And that is a pity because the design is not likely to last, it will gain a reputation, the K will again be labeled by the lemmings as a "crap" engine and dismissed - instead of looking at this and thinking that once again someone has designed in a flaw, unnecessarily and had just a little bit more thought or the experience of someone who understood these things, the result could have had a better likely outcome.