That's a mega result even at this stage. Got me thinking back in the day, the 16v c20xe with fuel injection was 150hp and held in massive regard. The best thing about x-flows is the bottom end torque anyway, the sound with 40's or 45's is like nothing else for me.
Hanging to hear my 1700 build nothing but dramas, I found an issue with my wossner K9390D250 pistons, these were the 2017 series but still brand new in box ,during the build everything was checked twice, first run on the Dyno wasn't happy and was very hard on the hand crank, seemed fine on key start so stopped the session, and pulled it apart and have slight piston valves contact, couldn't understand why, investigation found my exhaust valve relief in the Pistons were all different.... Piston 1/ 6.35.....p2 6.70...p3 6.05 p4 6.00. inlets were all 6.05 so make sure you check and not assume brand new is correct 😭
@@PenguinMotors Unfortunately we got sad news today. Ken Block passed away. He was driving Escort cosworth Donegal international rally 2019. one hero of them.
Stonking torque Graham cracking result. Choke wise as we know bigger is not always best airflow speed is the key. If anything it might change were it makes the power or torque but im feeling it might benefit from a nice 4.2.1 manifold. I use to see @ 125 hp and 115+ torque from a 1.7 on 40's 👍
No air fuel ratio display on the dyno monitor. What is going on at the top of the dyno run with the fuel vapor kicking out of the carbs. Is the collector length past the primaries too short to handle scavenging at that rpm. Or is it leaning out. I totally agree that idle jet and main jet numbers vary from every combination. I use a mirror and timing light to look into the carb bore while bringing up the idle rpms to the point the primary boosters start to flow. I drop back below that point and look at the air fuel ratio. Is it lean or rich. Changing the idle jets. Then i look at the main jetting at around 4000 rpm to see if its rich or lean. To change the main jets. Then run the engine up slowly while watching the air fuel ratio to know what to do with the idle and high speed air bleeds.
Unfortunately the version of windyn i use isn't compatible with the dyno console in terms of measuring AFR, unless i make physical changes to the circuit boards, which i dont want to do, BUT I do measure AFR , i use a standalone unit. Fuel standoff is nothing unusual at high rpm, that's nothing to do with a lean mixture. its an intake or an exhaust length not suiting that particular rpm, a change of ram pipe length would probably stop it, but as the engine is going onto 45mm carbs it was pointless trying to tune it to perfection
they need surprisingly little, as long as you have the ignition timing and AFR in the ball park after around half an hours running at light/medium loads you can start to do power runs. the first few i do are only short, part throttle and from just 2500 to around 4000, work up to full throttle, then start increasing rpm, until you are working upto somewhere near where the engine will be revved to. so the first proper full power run might occur after only 50 mins to an hours run time. In years gone by piston/bore seizure was a worry, but with modern oils and materials glazed bores are more of a concern.
Many have talked about it, but I’ve near any evidence, maybe if you totally re engineer the engine maybe, trouble is whatever you do the head simply does not support the airflow required to make that amount of power
First the Kent-Cams ( ? ) 244 is to much for this application. the 234 would be more suitable and most for it. 32 chokes would then perform on this engine. 33's could do a tad better. Maybe more to look at jetting and ignition and exhaust. Inductionside. This engine does not make the rpm's for a good value to a 244 cam i'd say. to have a lot more from that camshaft and even larger carburettors. I would stick to the dcoe 40 and have good pickup from lower down, like i said the 234 grind cam would have been better choice.
The large capacity tames a cam, the bigger the engine the lower rpm the cam will work. The client chose the cam, he had a 244 in his previous 1700 engine so decided to use the same cam it makes sense, he has more power and torque at a lower rpm so it’s win win. Who says 32 chokes are not performing? This engine is making more torque than quite a few bigger pintos I’ve had on the dyno
@@PenguinMotors it maybe so, but then consider the 234 grind, wouldnt that be more for the buck on roadgoing even it is like you said, and then i did not say 32 mm chokes are not performing 😉?
@@guidorollard2944 why would a 234 be more bang for buck? it costs the same and wont give more torque, the client liked the 244 in his old engine he just wanted a bit more power everywhere which is what the bigger capacity does.
@@PenguinMotors just my Thoughts, although larger capacity, can take "more cam" if this 1900 could do 7200 rpm, it would ( the 244 as i think ) be more of a benefit. Not to pretend being a wiseguy , just thinking about, road performance and what is enough for its purpose. Just my opinion. I would have this made revvin up to 7200 on a 244, but i am not that owner of engine 😄good luck, im looking forward to more results
the reason it doesn't run to 7200 is because a bigger engine needs more cam to rev further, @ 6000 its already drawing more air than a 1600 or 1700 @ 7000. if i installed a 234 it would probably peak @5800 rpm
The exhaust note on that thing is beastly, half Detroit Diesel half Subaru and then Honda b18 up top!
That's a mega result even at this stage. Got me thinking back in the day, the 16v c20xe with fuel injection was 150hp and held in massive regard.
The best thing about x-flows is the bottom end torque anyway, the sound with 40's or 45's is like nothing else for me.
Hanging to hear my 1700 build nothing but dramas, I found an issue with my wossner K9390D250 pistons, these were the 2017 series but still brand new in box ,during the build everything was checked twice, first run on the Dyno wasn't happy and was very hard on the hand crank, seemed fine on key start so stopped the session, and pulled it apart and have slight piston valves contact, couldn't understand why, investigation found my exhaust valve relief in the Pistons were all different.... Piston 1/ 6.35.....p2 6.70...p3 6.05 p4 6.00. inlets were all 6.05 so make sure you check and not assume brand new is correct 😭
Looking forward to next video
love it love it ,keep them comming . love the joiners hammer🤣😂🤪🥰😍
Happy new Year
Nice 👍
Thank you Graham
Brilliant build. Looking forward to next run on the 45’s
They using 48 Ida weber with holbay manifold 998cc crossflow 105 engine that put out 130hp. Little screamer!
@@fraud3647 yes and completely useless in a fully trimmed road car which needs to be able to cruse at high speed low rpm!
@@PenguinMotors Unfortunately we got sad news today. Ken Block passed away. He was driving Escort cosworth Donegal international rally 2019. one hero of them.
45 mm DCOE's are too big.
Ive got 42 mm AT Power throttle bodies on my 86mm x 86mm x-flow.
Flow testing told us 43 mm would have been optimum.
What type/brand is the header?
Stonking torque Graham cracking result. Choke wise as we know bigger is not always best airflow speed is the key. If anything it might change were it makes the power or torque but im feeling it might benefit from a nice 4.2.1 manifold. I use to see @ 125 hp and 115+ torque from a 1.7 on 40's 👍
ive now run it on a 4,2,1 manifold, very interesting results, and probably not what anyone would expect!
No air fuel ratio display on the dyno monitor.
What is going on at the top of the dyno run with the fuel vapor kicking out of the carbs. Is the collector length past the primaries too short to handle scavenging at that rpm. Or is it leaning out.
I totally agree that idle jet and main jet numbers vary from every combination.
I use a mirror and timing light to look into the carb bore while bringing up the idle rpms to the point the primary boosters start to flow. I drop back below that point and look at the air fuel ratio. Is it lean or rich. Changing the idle jets. Then i look at the main jetting at around 4000 rpm to see if its rich or lean. To change the main jets. Then run the engine up slowly while watching the air fuel ratio to know what to do with the idle and high speed air bleeds.
Unfortunately the version of windyn i use isn't compatible with the dyno console in terms of measuring AFR, unless i make physical changes to the circuit boards, which i dont want to do, BUT I do measure AFR , i use a standalone unit. Fuel standoff is nothing unusual at high rpm, that's nothing to do with a lean mixture. its an intake or an exhaust length not suiting that particular rpm, a change of ram pipe length would probably stop it, but as the engine is going onto 45mm carbs it was pointless trying to tune it to perfection
happy new year
how long was the bedding in process before its first power run
they need surprisingly little, as long as you have the ignition timing and AFR in the ball park after around half an hours running at light/medium loads you can start to do power runs. the first few i do are only short, part throttle and from just 2500 to around 4000, work up to full throttle, then start increasing rpm, until you are working upto somewhere near where the engine will be revved to. so the first proper full power run might occur after only 50 mins to an hours run time.
In years gone by piston/bore seizure was a worry, but with modern oils and materials glazed bores are more of a concern.
I was thinking the other day could you use or convert a ford ka 1.3 inlet manifold ECU etc to run on a 1.6 cross flow.
only trouble is the KA engine is based on the Valenica fiesta engine not the x/flow, so inlet port size shape and spacing is very different
Hi Graham, I had a 1066 xflow in my mk1 escort but I’m not familiar with reaching 1900cc. Can you tell me a bit about it please?
You need a big bore and a long stroke crank
The '244 ' cam, is it a regrind ? is it cast iron or steel ? ta
its a new blank, most likely chill cast iron
Is there such a thing as a 200 bhp xflow few people have claimed this but is it possible
Many have talked about it, but I’ve near any evidence, maybe if you totally re engineer the engine maybe, trouble is whatever you do the head simply does not support the airflow required to make that amount of power
Dellorto's flow more than DCOE Webbers..... Thats from David Vizard
not surprised Dellorto aux vents only have one leg where weber have two
Is the reversion from the webers indicating a jet change?
No not a jet change, it would probably benefit from a difference length ram pipe
First the Kent-Cams ( ? ) 244 is to much for this application. the 234 would be more suitable and most for it. 32 chokes would then perform on this engine. 33's could do a tad better.
Maybe more to look at jetting and ignition and exhaust. Inductionside. This engine does not make the rpm's for a good value to a 244 cam i'd say.
to have a lot more from that camshaft and even larger carburettors. I would stick to the dcoe 40 and have good pickup from lower down, like i said the 234 grind cam
would have been better choice.
The large capacity tames a cam, the bigger the engine the lower rpm the cam will work. The client chose the cam, he had a 244 in his previous 1700 engine so decided to use the same cam it makes sense, he has more power and torque at a lower rpm so it’s win win. Who says 32 chokes are not performing? This engine is making more torque than quite a few bigger pintos I’ve had on the dyno
@@PenguinMotors it maybe so, but then consider the 234 grind, wouldnt that be more for the buck on roadgoing even it is like you said, and then i did not say 32 mm chokes are not performing 😉?
@@guidorollard2944 why would a 234 be more bang for buck? it costs the same and wont give more torque, the client liked the 244 in his old engine he just wanted a bit more power everywhere which is what the bigger capacity does.
@@PenguinMotors just my Thoughts, although larger capacity, can take "more cam" if this 1900 could do 7200 rpm, it would ( the 244 as i think ) be more of a benefit. Not to pretend being a wiseguy , just thinking about, road performance and what is enough for its purpose. Just my opinion. I would have this made revvin up to 7200 on a 244, but i am not that owner of engine 😄good luck, im looking forward to more results
the reason it doesn't run to 7200 is because a bigger engine needs more cam to rev further, @ 6000 its already drawing more air than a 1600 or 1700 @ 7000. if i installed a 234 it would probably peak @5800 rpm