Nothing beats good old aluminium V8 aproach nor do sound!:) Of course if you wanna go very fast around track.....bike engines or something thats started life as one(almost) are way to go......not for the street though. I dont know much about thoose bolted together 4R bike engines who forming V8 apart from they cost stupid money with right gearbox and they do go fast in car....but normal bike engine isnt designed for 450kg-600kg car to live much long.
Interesting. I thought everyone these days opts for the cycle fenders. I prefer the clam shells and have them on my Seven as well. What chassis (year & type please) is this engine in as depicted here? How well would Caterham's 6 speed's ratios match the torque curves of this engine? I have an '86 "Big Tube" De Dion. Thanks.
With maximum torque coming in at well over 7kRPM, getting a dismal 20mpg or less and costing as much as a decent new car this engine is both less impressive than the BHP figures would have you think and also not practical for any street machine, especially one weighing more than 2000LBs I feel.
I say this because you can get 200-280 HP from a Ford Duratec 2.3 for a couple grand and it would only weight a little bit more than this H1.
Bottom line: I think this is a track engine. . . for that $
@zapwatt Yes, you can get 200-280hp from a Duratec. This engine is lighter, smaller and can make up to 500hp. It is not meant to be an everyday motor, but a high hp sport motor. Racing is the best use, but for those who have a small, light car and want a lot of power, this is perfect.
@zapwatt The point is, it makes more sense than being just a "track engine". If you have the right car, this engine is perfect. That is anything, track or street, that is light and fast. Many people uses motorcycle engines in cars; minis, 7's, westfields, etc. If you want lots of power but retain the light weight, this is a perfect solution. So it doesn't have to be a track car. It won't be the greatest daily driver, but good enough on the road, light and powerful.
@zapwatt People drive cars with 4-cylinder, 1000cc sportbike engines in them on the street. This is easily a much more streetable engine. It has over double the torque as those engines. It isn't a Chevy LS3 but while that engine makes almost as much power it weighs 3 times as much. For anything like a 7, Elise, Ariel, etc this will be streetable.
As far as price, people buy $250,000 Ferraris for the street. So a $30k car + $20k engine isn't that much. That is $50k for a Ferrari killer.
@zapwatt Ferraris shouldn't be considered street cars to you then. They have little torque and high rpm power. They may have double the torque of this engine but they weight up to 3 times as much as a car you would put this in. So it works out. 200lb-ft is more torque than your average car.
And again, you can have an insane car for $50-100k that will smoke cars costing $100-500k or more.
@TheOfficialKC You should get your head examined. Any Ferrari engine will easily and smoothly pull away at 2000 RPM with no drama and deliver excellent torque at low speed. There's a word for that: it's called 'tractability'. This H1 is not tractable for a street car.
@TheOfficialKC Wrong. Show me the engine dyno graph from 2000-4500RPM. Are we really having this argument? get a dictionary or something. Jesus jumped up Christ.
@TheOfficialKC Once again you just agreed with me and made my point. The dyno graph doesn't show anything below 3K for a reason, duh. All of those numbers prove my point that the Ferrari engine is much more tractable and much more streetable than the H1. Hell, even a motorcycle doesn't HAVE to cruise at 5-7K RPM. Please shut up now.
@zapwatt Seeing how the torque curve from 3000rpm to 6000rpm is a flat 200lb-ft, do you really think it will drop off that much to 2000? What would it have to be to have the weight/torque ratio of the ferrari?
At 2k the Ferrari is 13.6lb/lb-ft
In a 1600lb car the H1 would have to be making 117lb-ft. In a 1000lb car the H1 would have to make 73lb-ft.
Now, do you really think it will be producing that little torque? NO.
I awoke with a fierce case of the runs. I made a mad dash for the water closet, but I'm afraid I didn't quite make it and ended up shitting in the middle of the hallway. Then I went back to sleep...my mum is going to be pissed.
@2jzgtejza80 Moto Guzzi had a 500cc V8 Grand Prix bike in the 60s... Can only imagine what they must have sounded like at full noise.. Honda had a 5 cylinder 125... and 6 cylinder 250 and 300 racing bikes in the same era
Alfa made a 2.0 liter V8 back in the 60s for the model 33 Stradale. Ferrari also had an optional 1.991 liter engine for the Italian market where cars whose engines displace more than 2 liters are more heavily taxed.
one turbo busa engine turned up can make 700whp on c-16, they are 220lbs a piece with fluids and everything installed, kinda like dynamite , the sr8 radical has 2 engines fused together for 2.6 liter and they are working on one that will have a total of 3 liters, but stroker busa's shake themselves apart
@HighCardWins I don't imagine its going to last long but its always in the tune , the moment something runs lean boom , keep good fuel and good fuel pressure and it will last a season or 2, there are people who put years on turbo bikes though, just depends on how hard you are on them
I understand. It still seems that the V8 has much more potential than the standard Busa motor. I read about this motor six years ago and thought, "Man, the things you could put that in." I would like to get a Civic and do a RWD conversion with this motor. Many people have put big V8's in them. This motor is so light, I think it would be awesome.
@HighCardWins potential, of course it does, I argue this was numb nutz on the internet all the time, they always want to argue hp/liter, for which I could give 2 shits about. I see it all the time in nature small things having a better power to weight ratio but when it comes down to it usually the most powerful engine is very large, but ya these run nice.
a civic? why would u spend 70k to build a rwd civic that is not gonna be able to hook, handle, or look good? sorry but civics are crap economy cars and thats the way they should stay.
know nothing?ur the one that wants to make a rwd civic. that would make the car worse than they already are. put together ten times the cars u have kid. ill take ur shit civic and shove it in ur ass.
Awesome! And only $28,500 (that's the engine alone). Nice for what it is but definitely for the high rollers. You can buy a Crate LS-7 with accessories and computer for about $18k, but I know I know, it wouldn't weigh 200lbs. I'm not bashing, just wishing I had enough money!
a 2.6 liter V8? Where'd y ou pick this motor up from and for how much? I have a 2.7 liter V6 in my Concorde. Id love to drop this mini-V8 in my car for some added power and sound.
its made by a us company, harley enterprises. Its two 1.4 litre straight 4 hayabusa engines combined into a V 8. there is a 2.8 litre big bore version with 400 bhp, and because its made from a busa engine, it is compatible for turbo charging, if your crazy enough that is.....
All I need now is a lottery win... then I'll pick up either a Gen2 Toyota MR2 or Gen2 Mazda Miata and be on the phone to you for its replacement engine.
The idea of having an innocuous little mass-produced Japanese sportscar with armageddon under the bonnet... that's too much for me to pass up.
Is this the cast block engine or the machined block?
Also, I have to ask (and am in no way putting down the awesome accomplishment of the V8) how difficult would it be to go from take your V8 design to a V12? Seems to me that the improved balance of the V12 would give you some major benefits in terms of smoothness and throttle-response... and the sound of a 3.9 liter V12 (or even a 4.2 based on the bore/stroke of the 2.8 liter version) bellowing at 10,000 revs... Yikes!
obviously building a custom as you did gas mpg was not an issue, but I would really like to know how it does on fuel? Thank you and thats an awesome machine!
@Gwynne66 , cant change it to a v12 lol its using hyabusa cylinder heads which are designed to wor with 4 cylinders, having a v12 would be impossible and pointless as it would only add weight , and if powers the issue with the right crank rods n pistons and turbo set up you could probably put 600 bhp through that engine
I think if he made a custom block and custom crankshaft, it would be a relatively simple matter to make custom heads and a custom ECU to handle the 12 cylinders.
And turbocharging this engine would be a crime. Normal aspiration is the way to go - especially with small-displacement engines. Turbocharging screws with throttle response and creates reliability issues.
@Gwynne66 Every heard the Evo? 4b11t and 4g63 ,2L turbo inline 4 . extremely robust motors. no reliability issues what so ever in stock form. there also are many turbo 1.3 Hayabusas with no problems. problems come from improper tuning by dumbasses.
@Gwynne66 I think ur confusing throttle response with turbo lag. With proper tuning a turbo hardly screws up a motor. Not every motor can accommodate one though.
Ever heard of Novitech? They make superchargers for Ferrari.
Turbo-lag screws up throttle-response. There's no way to avoid it. Clever engineering can reduce turbo-lag to levels some consider tolerable but it can’t be eliminated. The perception of turbo-lag can be further reduced by the increased weight of modern cars – e.g. Bentley, Audi and Nissan… note that their turbocharged cars weigh well in excess of 3,500lb.
In a lightweight car like this, any turbo-lag would be VERY noticeable.
No, you can't avoid lag. You can reduce it but you can't avoid it. Porsche and Nissan don't have as much trouble with lag because they produce heavy vehicles and weight disguises lag. A lightweight car like the Caterham would show the lag with a vengeance. Besides, there's no earthly reason to turbocharge this engine for installation in a Caterham... the engine already produces more power than the driver can easily use.
Variable Geometry Turbochargers produce 20-30% more power and reduce lag to 10% using this technology. Average turbocharger have 25 % less power on same boost and lag 30%. GT2 have so FLAT power/torque curve that some cars with turbos can only dream about it. With high technology experience you can reduce lag to very low %.
VGTs will *reduce* the problem of lag but won't eliminate it. Lag is inevitable in a turbocharged engine.
Also a flat torque curve isn't always a good thing - particularly in a lightweight sports car.
You can't do anything with forced induction that you couldn't do by increasing the displacement of the engine.
Forced induction only really makes sense in applications where displacement is restricted by arbitrary rules. Normal aspiration is simpler and more reliable.
I respect pure natural power more than T/C or S/C, but also modern cars are more efficient if put out 200bhp from 1.4 liter engine. Rising the Displacement is useless, you need than huge not economic engines and they are finally too expensive. Natural power from engines like this in video is pure power and you don't need rise displacement to make power. Only stupid americans thinks that displacement is root of power, yes before, today, not anymore. Technology beat root.
More displacement in an engine is *far* from useless - either in terms of power or efficiency (as Mr. Harley found when he stroked the engine from 2.6 to 2.8 liters and then to 3.0)
My car has a 4L V8 and it not only makes more power in the rev-range most people use (1k-4k) but I can cruise on the freeway with the top down and get 28mpg.
Mr. Hartley's engine is an awesome achievement but it is neither the most powerful nor the most efficient V8 on the market.
U dont understand, some engines are more for anyday, some for MPG, some for racing, and they all have advantages and disadvantages. Mr. Hartley engines can rav to 10,000 even more, so it's more racing engines for light cars like Radicals, Ariel Atom, Caterhams, etc.. Wat car are u driving and getting 28mpg?
Yes, and because the Hartley engine is designed for lightweight racing applications, turbocharging it would be a mistake.
I drive a Jaguar XK8. 300bhp and around 300 lb/ft of torque. Plenty of power even for a car that weighs almost 4,000lbs and can do the 0-60 dash in five seconds and a bit.
Yeah, I've heard of Novitec. You know they don't use turbocharging, right? Why? Because it wouldn't be suitable for a car like a Ferrari. If forced induction is required, a belt-driven supercharger is nearly always preferably to an exhaust-gas-driven turbocharger.
@Gwynne66 since the engine can only be built in multiples of four per side, they would have to build a v16 unless they wanted to make their own cylinder bank. (where would they put the last four cylinders?) they could do a W12 but that is some seriously tight stuff to pull off and there may not be the clearance needed.
Personally, I would like to see a v8 boxer, though I imagine that the horizontal room it would take up would be considerable. Imagine the low center of gravity on that, though.
@leloodallasmultipass You are definitely right about the V12. Unless they made their own cylinder banks it isn't possible. Then what is the point of using Hyabusa parts. Might as well design a better engine from the start.
But a W12 is even worse off (if you are referring to the Bugatti style at least, I don't know much about real W). That requires a custom bank and completely different bottom end.
All in all it would be very expensive, hard, and weigh a lot more. With little benefit.
@leloodallasmultipass A 8-cylinder boxer is not a good engine. They have terrible balance. Ruf was going to make one for their (Porsche)RGT-8 but went with a V8 for balance reasons.
It could create good CG results, but only if you can fit it in the car and if it lays flat.
This V8 will fit in most places a 4-cylinder bike engine will. A flat-8 won't.
@TheOfficialKC I agree. the engine would fit in very few places but where it did fit, it would have a super-low CG potential. It may have some inherent flaws, though I am just taking your word for it, but I imagine they could be worked through. Ruf may have made a biz decision that was part engineering based and part "we don't have time for this" based.
@leloodallasmultipass RUF decided against the Flat-8 because of engineering. Not "we don't have time for this". They had plenty of time, they designed a whole new V8. It is just the inherent problem of a Flat-8 that they didn't do it. This is why there has never been a Porsche Flat-8, but they have made F-6 and F-12.You would have to do a flat-6 or flat-12.
@TheOfficialKC there have been a few flat-8s for porsche. the 907 and 908. maybe more. I think they did a few prototypes for 914s. I don't have time to look it up. every company has to decide whether they can devote resources to something. even Ruf. very few companies have plenty of time for anything. overhead has to be paid and brand needs to be maintained. they had to decide whether they could devote themselves to one thing or another- nothing is impossible.
@leloodallasmultipass It could have a very low CG. But still the cars that will fit it. What would you put it in? It would have to be a custom frame. Or a Porsche, that already has a fine engine with enough HP capability. The market would be too small to justify it.
@TheOfficialKC Anyway, I am just responding to the guy who asked for a v-12. I am not trying to make a case for a flat 8, though it might be a fun engine to play with.
Nothing beats good old aluminium V8 aproach nor do sound!:) Of course if you wanna go very fast around track.....bike engines or something thats started life as one(almost) are way to go......not for the street though. I dont know much about thoose bolted together 4R bike engines who forming V8 apart from they cost stupid money with right gearbox and they do go fast in car....but normal bike engine isnt designed for 450kg-600kg car to live much long.
Easytiger007 1 month ago
Interesting. I thought everyone these days opts for the cycle fenders. I prefer the clam shells and have them on my Seven as well. What chassis (year & type please) is this engine in as depicted here? How well would Caterham's 6 speed's ratios match the torque curves of this engine? I have an '86 "Big Tube" De Dion. Thanks.
paullubliner 7 months ago
Sounds awesome
rambo1685 8 months ago
With maximum torque coming in at well over 7kRPM, getting a dismal 20mpg or less and costing as much as a decent new car this engine is both less impressive than the BHP figures would have you think and also not practical for any street machine, especially one weighing more than 2000LBs I feel.
I say this because you can get 200-280 HP from a Ford Duratec 2.3 for a couple grand and it would only weight a little bit more than this H1.
Bottom line: I think this is a track engine. . . for that $
zapwatt 10 months ago
@zapwatt Yes, you can get 200-280hp from a Duratec. This engine is lighter, smaller and can make up to 500hp. It is not meant to be an everyday motor, but a high hp sport motor. Racing is the best use, but for those who have a small, light car and want a lot of power, this is perfect.
TheOfficialKC 9 months ago
@TheOfficialKC I don't know why you took the time to type all of that out. You just paraphrased everything I already stated right before you.
Thanks for agreeing with me. . . I guess.
zapwatt 9 months ago
@zapwatt The point is, it makes more sense than being just a "track engine". If you have the right car, this engine is perfect. That is anything, track or street, that is light and fast. Many people uses motorcycle engines in cars; minis, 7's, westfields, etc. If you want lots of power but retain the light weight, this is a perfect solution. So it doesn't have to be a track car. It won't be the greatest daily driver, but good enough on the road, light and powerful.
TheOfficialKC 9 months ago
@TheOfficialKC
Get real, man. For TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS, and unimpressive streetability, that is a track engine. Plain and simple.
zapwatt 9 months ago
@zapwatt People drive cars with 4-cylinder, 1000cc sportbike engines in them on the street. This is easily a much more streetable engine. It has over double the torque as those engines. It isn't a Chevy LS3 but while that engine makes almost as much power it weighs 3 times as much. For anything like a 7, Elise, Ariel, etc this will be streetable.
As far as price, people buy $250,000 Ferraris for the street. So a $30k car + $20k engine isn't that much. That is $50k for a Ferrari killer.
TheOfficialKC 9 months ago
@zapwatt Ferraris shouldn't be considered street cars to you then. They have little torque and high rpm power. They may have double the torque of this engine but they weight up to 3 times as much as a car you would put this in. So it works out. 200lb-ft is more torque than your average car.
And again, you can have an insane car for $50-100k that will smoke cars costing $100-500k or more.
TheOfficialKC 9 months ago
@TheOfficialKC You should get your head examined. Any Ferrari engine will easily and smoothly pull away at 2000 RPM with no drama and deliver excellent torque at low speed. There's a word for that: it's called 'tractability'. This H1 is not tractable for a street car.
zapwatt 9 months ago
@zapwatt You should use your brain. A car with the H1 has MORE torque/LB than a Ferrari. THAT is called tractability.
TheOfficialKC 9 months ago
@TheOfficialKC Wrong. Show me the engine dyno graph from 2000-4500RPM. Are we really having this argument? get a dictionary or something. Jesus jumped up Christ.
zapwatt 9 months ago
@zapwatt At 2000rpm a Ferrari makes 235lb-ft. At 4000rpm it makes its full 400lb-ft.
At 3000rpm the 2.8L H1 makes 200lb-ft (the dyno doesn't show below that). It is flat until about 6000rpm. By 7500rpm it has 350lb-ft.
At 3000rpm, a Ferrari makes 330lb-ft and weighs 3200lbs. That is 9.7lb/lb-ft
At 3k rpm the 2.8L H1 makes 200lb-ft. In a package that weighs 1600lbs that is 8lb/lb-ft. In a 1000lb car that is 5lb/lb-ft.
TheOfficialKC 9 months ago
@zapwatt It will be normal to drive a car with the H1 V8 5-7000rpm. It is a 10,000rpm+ motor.
Also there is the bigger(more torquey) 3.0L also. And older Ferraris had less torque than the new 458.
TheOfficialKC 9 months ago
@TheOfficialKC Once again you just agreed with me and made my point. The dyno graph doesn't show anything below 3K for a reason, duh. All of those numbers prove my point that the Ferrari engine is much more tractable and much more streetable than the H1. Hell, even a motorcycle doesn't HAVE to cruise at 5-7K RPM. Please shut up now.
zapwatt 9 months ago
@zapwatt Seeing how the torque curve from 3000rpm to 6000rpm is a flat 200lb-ft, do you really think it will drop off that much to 2000? What would it have to be to have the weight/torque ratio of the ferrari?
At 2k the Ferrari is 13.6lb/lb-ft
In a 1600lb car the H1 would have to be making 117lb-ft. In a 1000lb car the H1 would have to make 73lb-ft.
Now, do you really think it will be producing that little torque? NO.
TheOfficialKC 9 months ago
what are you using for the tranny and drive shaft?
OriginalDarkAardvark 11 months ago
$30k +
jhartleyjr 11 months ago
2 busa engine? may i ask u something?how much it cost you?
EVERLIVERPOOL 11 months ago
@EVERLIVERPOOL the engine is £21k from holeshot, they do other upgrades including a 1000 bhp turbo engine =]
akaAlexthekid 9 months ago
Super 7 V8: WANT
flyboyII 1 year ago
I awoke with a fierce case of the runs. I made a mad dash for the water closet, but I'm afraid I didn't quite make it and ended up shitting in the middle of the hallway. Then I went back to sleep...my mum is going to be pissed.
Tarck452 1 year ago 21
@Tarck452 You're a nasty little fucker. You should be grounded, lol!
brapboys503 3 months ago 3
Milage is 16 to 20 mpg. Probably could tune it for a bit more./John
jhartleyjr 1 year ago
Sounds amazing
SuperBeatnuts 1 year ago
I'm sorry to inform you that you're required by law to stuff this into a lotus elise.
yarahahrwe 1 year ago
Does this engine cost $ 30,000?
carmodifire 1 year ago
Does this engine cost $30,000?
carmodifire 1 year ago
Does this engine cost $30,000?
carmodifire 1 year ago
what i mean is that you can turn a v8 into a v12 it would be a totally new engine
jimikestell1 1 year ago
and yea ITB's would be enough
jimikestell1 1 year ago
Only 2.6L and it has V8? Never tought they have V8 with that small motor.
Careica 1 year ago
@Careica
Ever heard for 1.5L V16 or V12, Formula 1 using 2.4 V8, Alfa Romeo 33/2 have even smaller engine 2.0 V8.
2jzgtejza80 1 year ago
@2jzgtejza80 Moto Guzzi had a 500cc V8 Grand Prix bike in the 60s... Can only imagine what they must have sounded like at full noise.. Honda had a 5 cylinder 125... and 6 cylinder 250 and 300 racing bikes in the same era
11wombats 1 year ago
@Careica
Alfa made a 2.0 liter V8 back in the 60s for the model 33 Stradale. Ferrari also had an optional 1.991 liter engine for the Italian market where cars whose engines displace more than 2 liters are more heavily taxed.
Gwynne66 1 year ago
I need this in my MR2, wish it wasn't so damn expensive.
LLJKotaru 1 year ago
awesome car. Torque doesn't matter too much when the car ways stuff all.
privatealpha 1 year ago
Put this motor in the ariel atom. I think that would be fun.
mrl390 1 year ago
which is the engine name or reference?''I would like to know it is a good proportion liters - power, and besides the sound is very good
joskjaja 1 year ago
nice neighbourhood, nice car, boring rich guy
kosamf 2 years ago
Jesus, have you taken this little beast around a track?
mysticblade35 2 years ago
why is it left hand drive?
samr500 2 years ago
Awesome work. I'd like to see this in a 1 series BMW.
kza7 2 years ago
cross plane or flat plane?
ionsunteu 2 years ago
can u make another video with the same angle but with a view of your feetwork
denjen010 2 years ago
could have simply put a turbo on one busa engine and made 375, probably at the wheels tuned right
redhot916spd 2 years ago
You can put two on this and have 800hp in an engine that weighs 200lbs. :)
HighCardWins 2 years ago 2
one turbo busa engine turned up can make 700whp on c-16, they are 220lbs a piece with fluids and everything installed, kinda like dynamite , the sr8 radical has 2 engines fused together for 2.6 liter and they are working on one that will have a total of 3 liters, but stroker busa's shake themselves apart
redhot916spd 2 years ago
How long is a 700Whp 1.3 motor going to last? Not long I would think.
I've checked out Hartly's website. They seemed to have done quite of R%D with their engines. But there 28k!
HighCardWins 2 years ago
@HighCardWins I don't imagine its going to last long but its always in the tune , the moment something runs lean boom , keep good fuel and good fuel pressure and it will last a season or 2, there are people who put years on turbo bikes though, just depends on how hard you are on them
redhot916spd 2 years ago
I understand. It still seems that the V8 has much more potential than the standard Busa motor. I read about this motor six years ago and thought, "Man, the things you could put that in." I would like to get a Civic and do a RWD conversion with this motor. Many people have put big V8's in them. This motor is so light, I think it would be awesome.
HighCardWins 2 years ago
@HighCardWins potential, of course it does, I argue this was numb nutz on the internet all the time, they always want to argue hp/liter, for which I could give 2 shits about. I see it all the time in nature small things having a better power to weight ratio but when it comes down to it usually the most powerful engine is very large, but ya these run nice.
redhot916spd 2 years ago
a civic? why would u spend 70k to build a rwd civic that is not gonna be able to hook, handle, or look good? sorry but civics are crap economy cars and thats the way they should stay.
mkIIIsupras 2 years ago
It wouldn't cost half that. With that statement, you know nothing about cars.
HighCardWins 2 years ago
know nothing?ur the one that wants to make a rwd civic. that would make the car worse than they already are. put together ten times the cars u have kid. ill take ur shit civic and shove it in ur ass.
mkIIIsupras 2 years ago
You know nothing!
HighCardWins 2 years ago
@HighCardWins
Converting a FWD car to RWD?! Sounds like it would be easier to transplant a Civic body onto, say, a 240SX chassis...
Gwynne66 1 year ago
douchebag?
hatmcjones 2 years ago
Sounds like a straight 4 to me. BUT WHAT I KNOW!? Love the clamshells.
paullubliner 2 years ago
sweet car. love the sound.
spriggan969 2 years ago
Sounds so sweet,wish l could put one in my Super 7,but it wont fit,l need an SV chassie.
Twirly60 2 years ago 2
Awesome! And only $28,500 (that's the engine alone). Nice for what it is but definitely for the high rollers. You can buy a Crate LS-7 with accessories and computer for about $18k, but I know I know, it wouldn't weigh 200lbs. I'm not bashing, just wishing I had enough money!
SKWALKER26 2 years ago
for reference,ls-1's weigh 440lbs
redhot916spd 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
you have 375 hp, and you only uses 50hp
you are a duchback
adrianforjan 2 years ago
pussay, put the pedal to the medal.
misterdeuce15 2 years ago
first, he is on the open road, second, maybe he wants his engine to last longer then one day..
k0ent 2 years ago
And he does put his foot down on the straight, when the back end slides out.
drummingjames 2 years ago
a 2.6 liter V8? Where'd y ou pick this motor up from and for how much? I have a 2.7 liter V6 in my Concorde. Id love to drop this mini-V8 in my car for some added power and sound.
6V92TA 2 years ago
its made by a us company, harley enterprises. Its two 1.4 litre straight 4 hayabusa engines combined into a V 8. there is a 2.8 litre big bore version with 400 bhp, and because its made from a busa engine, it is compatible for turbo charging, if your crazy enough that is.....
firebladenut 2 years ago
nope, originaly its two 1.3 litre hayabusa engines combined to a v8 (there is no 1.4 busa), and afterwards, they bored it up to a 2.8
k0ent 2 years ago
All I need now is a lottery win... then I'll pick up either a Gen2 Toyota MR2 or Gen2 Mazda Miata and be on the phone to you for its replacement engine.
The idea of having an innocuous little mass-produced Japanese sportscar with armageddon under the bonnet... that's too much for me to pass up.
Gwynne66 3 years ago
Well done!
Is this the cast block engine or the machined block?
Also, I have to ask (and am in no way putting down the awesome accomplishment of the V8) how difficult would it be to go from take your V8 design to a V12? Seems to me that the improved balance of the V12 would give you some major benefits in terms of smoothness and throttle-response... and the sound of a 3.9 liter V12 (or even a 4.2 based on the bore/stroke of the 2.8 liter version) bellowing at 10,000 revs... Yikes!
Gwynne66 3 years ago
The case was machined from billet. Yes V12 would be nice as they sound great, but vibration or throttle response is not a problem!
jhartleyjr 3 years ago
obviously building a custom as you did gas mpg was not an issue, but I would really like to know how it does on fuel? Thank you and thats an awesome machine!
airbourne84 1 year ago
@jhartleyjr Nice engine. I'm planning on a block machined for 2387cc for 255HP on a 4 cyl minimum.
gbowne1 1 year ago
@Gwynne66 , cant change it to a v12 lol its using hyabusa cylinder heads which are designed to wor with 4 cylinders, having a v12 would be impossible and pointless as it would only add weight , and if powers the issue with the right crank rods n pistons and turbo set up you could probably put 600 bhp through that engine
jimikestell1 1 year ago
@jimikestell1
I think if he made a custom block and custom crankshaft, it would be a relatively simple matter to make custom heads and a custom ECU to handle the 12 cylinders.
And turbocharging this engine would be a crime. Normal aspiration is the way to go - especially with small-displacement engines. Turbocharging screws with throttle response and creates reliability issues.
Gwynne66 1 year ago
@Gwynne66 Every heard the Evo? 4b11t and 4g63 ,2L turbo inline 4 . extremely robust motors. no reliability issues what so ever in stock form. there also are many turbo 1.3 Hayabusas with no problems. problems come from improper tuning by dumbasses.
HighCardWins 1 year ago
@HighCardWins
Yes, I've heart of the Evos... rotten throttle-response and they're reliable only as long as you stick to the 4500 mile (!) service intervals...
I'm not saying you *can't* turbocharge a hayabusa engine, I'm saying it would be a shame to screw it up with a turbocharger.
After all, it isn't as though this engine is short on power.
Gwynne66 1 year ago
@Gwynne66 I think ur confusing throttle response with turbo lag. With proper tuning a turbo hardly screws up a motor. Not every motor can accommodate one though.
Ever heard of Novitech? They make superchargers for Ferrari.
HighCardWins 1 year ago
@HighCardWins
Turbo-lag screws up throttle-response. There's no way to avoid it. Clever engineering can reduce turbo-lag to levels some consider tolerable but it can’t be eliminated. The perception of turbo-lag can be further reduced by the increased weight of modern cars – e.g. Bentley, Audi and Nissan… note that their turbocharged cars weigh well in excess of 3,500lb.
In a lightweight car like this, any turbo-lag would be VERY noticeable.
Gwynne66 1 year ago
@Gwynne66
You can avoid a ''LAG'' if you have technology, and that's what Porsche and Nissan doing.
2jzgtejza80 1 year ago
@2jzgtejza80
No, you can't avoid lag. You can reduce it but you can't avoid it. Porsche and Nissan don't have as much trouble with lag because they produce heavy vehicles and weight disguises lag. A lightweight car like the Caterham would show the lag with a vengeance. Besides, there's no earthly reason to turbocharge this engine for installation in a Caterham... the engine already produces more power than the driver can easily use.
Gwynne66 1 year ago
@Gwynne66
Variable Geometry Turbochargers produce 20-30% more power and reduce lag to 10% using this technology. Average turbocharger have 25 % less power on same boost and lag 30%. GT2 have so FLAT power/torque curve that some cars with turbos can only dream about it. With high technology experience you can reduce lag to very low %.
2jzgtejza80 1 year ago
@2jzgtejza80
VGTs will *reduce* the problem of lag but won't eliminate it. Lag is inevitable in a turbocharged engine.
Also a flat torque curve isn't always a good thing - particularly in a lightweight sports car.
You can't do anything with forced induction that you couldn't do by increasing the displacement of the engine.
Forced induction only really makes sense in applications where displacement is restricted by arbitrary rules. Normal aspiration is simpler and more reliable.
Gwynne66 1 year ago
@Gwynne66
I respect pure natural power more than T/C or S/C, but also modern cars are more efficient if put out 200bhp from 1.4 liter engine. Rising the Displacement is useless, you need than huge not economic engines and they are finally too expensive. Natural power from engines like this in video is pure power and you don't need rise displacement to make power. Only stupid americans thinks that displacement is root of power, yes before, today, not anymore. Technology beat root.
2jzgtejza80 1 year ago
@2jzgtejza80
More displacement in an engine is *far* from useless - either in terms of power or efficiency (as Mr. Harley found when he stroked the engine from 2.6 to 2.8 liters and then to 3.0)
My car has a 4L V8 and it not only makes more power in the rev-range most people use (1k-4k) but I can cruise on the freeway with the top down and get 28mpg.
Mr. Hartley's engine is an awesome achievement but it is neither the most powerful nor the most efficient V8 on the market.
Gwynne66 1 year ago
@Gwynne66
U dont understand, some engines are more for anyday, some for MPG, some for racing, and they all have advantages and disadvantages. Mr. Hartley engines can rav to 10,000 even more, so it's more racing engines for light cars like Radicals, Ariel Atom, Caterhams, etc.. Wat car are u driving and getting 28mpg?
2jzgtejza80 1 year ago
@2jzgtejza80
Yes, and because the Hartley engine is designed for lightweight racing applications, turbocharging it would be a mistake.
I drive a Jaguar XK8. 300bhp and around 300 lb/ft of torque. Plenty of power even for a car that weighs almost 4,000lbs and can do the 0-60 dash in five seconds and a bit.
Gwynne66 1 year ago
@Gwynne66
I always think that 400bhp SC XKR doing 5.2 secs, you probably using 6-spd automatic transs, when you getting 28mpg extra urban/highway.
2jzgtejza80 1 year ago
@HighCardWins
Yeah, I've heard of Novitec. You know they don't use turbocharging, right? Why? Because it wouldn't be suitable for a car like a Ferrari. If forced induction is required, a belt-driven supercharger is nearly always preferably to an exhaust-gas-driven turbocharger.
Gwynne66 1 year ago
There are plenty of turbo makers for Ferrari and Lambos. I think it just what the they wanted to do. They both have different advantages.
HighCardWins 1 year ago
@Gwynne66 since the engine can only be built in multiples of four per side, they would have to build a v16 unless they wanted to make their own cylinder bank. (where would they put the last four cylinders?) they could do a W12 but that is some seriously tight stuff to pull off and there may not be the clearance needed.
Personally, I would like to see a v8 boxer, though I imagine that the horizontal room it would take up would be considerable. Imagine the low center of gravity on that, though.
leloodallasmultipass 1 year ago
@leloodallasmultipass You are definitely right about the V12. Unless they made their own cylinder banks it isn't possible. Then what is the point of using Hyabusa parts. Might as well design a better engine from the start.
But a W12 is even worse off (if you are referring to the Bugatti style at least, I don't know much about real W). That requires a custom bank and completely different bottom end.
All in all it would be very expensive, hard, and weigh a lot more. With little benefit.
TheOfficialKC 9 months ago
@leloodallasmultipass A 8-cylinder boxer is not a good engine. They have terrible balance. Ruf was going to make one for their (Porsche)RGT-8 but went with a V8 for balance reasons.
It could create good CG results, but only if you can fit it in the car and if it lays flat.
This V8 will fit in most places a 4-cylinder bike engine will. A flat-8 won't.
TheOfficialKC 9 months ago
@TheOfficialKC I agree. the engine would fit in very few places but where it did fit, it would have a super-low CG potential. It may have some inherent flaws, though I am just taking your word for it, but I imagine they could be worked through. Ruf may have made a biz decision that was part engineering based and part "we don't have time for this" based.
leloodallasmultipass 9 months ago
@leloodallasmultipass RUF decided against the Flat-8 because of engineering. Not "we don't have time for this". They had plenty of time, they designed a whole new V8. It is just the inherent problem of a Flat-8 that they didn't do it. This is why there has never been a Porsche Flat-8, but they have made F-6 and F-12.You would have to do a flat-6 or flat-12.
TheOfficialKC 9 months ago
@TheOfficialKC there have been a few flat-8s for porsche. the 907 and 908. maybe more. I think they did a few prototypes for 914s. I don't have time to look it up. every company has to decide whether they can devote resources to something. even Ruf. very few companies have plenty of time for anything. overhead has to be paid and brand needs to be maintained. they had to decide whether they could devote themselves to one thing or another- nothing is impossible.
leloodallasmultipass 9 months ago
@leloodallasmultipass It could have a very low CG. But still the cars that will fit it. What would you put it in? It would have to be a custom frame. Or a Porsche, that already has a fine engine with enough HP capability. The market would be too small to justify it.
TheOfficialKC 9 months ago
@TheOfficialKC Anyway, I am just responding to the guy who asked for a v-12. I am not trying to make a case for a flat 8, though it might be a fun engine to play with.
leloodallasmultipass 9 months ago
Very smart car!
Andy
adcatman 3 years ago