View Full Version : Power run today, especially of interest to anyone with a 2e2
To start with, I got my 1.4 NV tested today to give me a benchmark for whether to look at twin 40s and so on.
A few years ago when i actually got the 2nd barrel on my SR going I couldn't believe the difference. The 2nd barrels on the 2e2s usually don't work and this was the first time ever in an SR that it did, was brilliant.
So when I got my 1.4 track car going, the webers weren't running great so I put on a 2e2.
Today for the first few runs the car was done with no vacuum to the 2nd barrel therefore running as a single carb.
Here is the engine spec,
1.4NV, 1.6 head, 2e3 carb (slightly modified), kent 051 cam (apparent;y mild not wild), 4-1 unkn own manifld and stainless 2" magnex exhaust.
Bearing in mind the first 1.3SRs on single carns according to vauxhall gave out 70 bhp and 101 Nm torque......this was the results from the single barrel run today.
56.8 bhp @ 5781rpm
87.1 Nm @ 4256rpm
I was really dissapointed, the 1.4 is supposed to make 72hp in standard form and although I am sure vauxhall were sometimes perhaps optimistic, 57 bhp was pretty low.
The guy testing it did say the equipment is conservative with the figures and the only reasons he could think that it was so low were either ignition timing or the 1.6 head is almost starved being fed by just the single pierberg barrel.
Then we did it with the second barrel as I run it using the distributor vacuum, i told him I get a boost at 3500rpm but it may only be a few percent.....
Well the graph followed the first runs till 3500 and then it just took off, he couldn't beleive the difference at first anmd had to check it, he said he felt it in the car the speed of engine increase.
Here are the results
81.2 bhp 6721 rpm
105.5 NM @ 4541 rpm
That's right...an increase of 43%!!!!!!!
I'll put the graph up now.
you can see the 2nd run take off, I don't understand it all too well but, for those that do, hope you enjoy.
http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af5/69marc/Photo446.jpg
Obviously the head and cam set up really benfits from the extra fuel and air. Using the distributor vacuum advance for the 2nd barrel garuntees it actually works and also is far stronger so instead of opening gradually it flips fully open at 3500 and the pipe produces the fuel immediately. Obviously in my stabndard SR I wouldn't get as large a boost but you can tell that when driving this car.
He also said that only loose approx 20% between the flywheel and transmission is good? Again lack of knowledge on my part, what is the normal loss os power?
For anyone with the 2e2, do invest time and effort to get it to work as here is proof of how effective it can be.
I realise for most people 81 bhp form a 1.4 is not that high, but for me having set the cam timing by trial and error, ignition timing by ear and the whole project has been done on a tiny budget as it is for fun, I am very pleased, thats 13% up on what vauxhall claimed a brand new 1.4 SR should have produced although my torque is 3 Nm lower but if it is a trade of for the increase in bhp, no worries!
With the 2e2 giving such an increase as I run it, I am not convinced I would get mush more benefit fitting twin 40s, especially considering the expense to get them set up etc.
Are there any other ways of a bit more power without much cash investment....or am I about as far as I can go without serious cash and time?
2.5" exhaust isa bit big for that spec is it not?
yes, I think the previous owner put it on for the noise, I'll check what he says it is on the sheet he gave me. Magnex stainless steel.
Do I just measure the diameter to actually find what size of exhaust it actually is?
Did you see the difference on the graph with and without the 2nd barrel?
chimp007_uk
26-07-12, 12:44 PM
2.5" exhaust isa bit big for that spec is it not?
I was going to add the same thing. Is that 2.5" tailpipe? or actual exhaust bore through the entire system? I'd go for a 2" system. There used to be a guy on ebay who replicates the Ashley 2 box system for £100 posted. I had one on my road rally 1600 GTE and was a good fit and build quality was tip top!
I do like these sorts of threads though, where you can actually quanitfy what effects on performance things have... I bet there's some SR owners reading this, and running to their car's to open the bonnet and get tinkering.
Magnex didnt do a 2.5" for a Nova. I think they only did a 2"
turbojolt
26-07-12, 01:23 PM
oooooh a power graph! ibtl lol
thats amazing mate, no wonder you could feel the diffrence when driving the other one got to be the cheapest performance gain ever lol
It probably is a 2", I'll have a wee look later
Had a look today and measured the diameter, 2".
I dont undertand why you are surprised!
43% is a huge difference....that's why i was so surprised, especially after the poor first runs on the single barrel which were dissapointing. I expected a 10% maybe even 20% improvement but even the guy at the garage was amazed at a 2e2 making such a difference, he commented initially that these never work anyway.
Also my knowledge is pretty limited so I didn't really expect the knock on effect of cam/head etc only giving benefit with fuel and air increase.
Royston
26-07-12, 10:28 PM
Just as a comparison/comment, many years ago I had my 1.3SR RR tuned, many many years ago
Std Pieburg 1B1 carb, K & N air filter, 4 branch manifold and system produced 62hp at the wheels,
I DIY polished and ported the head and she achieved 66hp at the wheels
that's brilliant results, if that is 66hp at the wheels, what would that be giving at the flywheel?
Before the head work it looks as though your SR was giving out more than expected?
Royston
26-07-12, 10:32 PM
that's brilliant results, if that is 66hp at the wheels, what would that be giving at the flywheel?
I never knew but assumed @ 85hp, which stacks up with your figures!
I never knew but assumed @ 85hp, which stacks up with your figures!
It asks the question, is the single barrel on the 2e2 nowhere near as good as a 1b1? I thought it was the same but then the 2e2 has the 2nd barrel for a boost?
It would be interesting to see what other SRs have gotten to know whether yours and mine (with all the work) are a little above average or was yours a particularily good one in the first place?
Royston
26-07-12, 11:34 PM
She always went well
I need to get the SR RR'd again and see where she's at now, but she is now 1.3 big valve head, lightened/balanced, Irmscher multipoint injection, Holbay 270 cam, 4 branch and Magnex system
a little more than 85 I guess!!!
lol @ 'good ones'
I think what i meant was an otherwise standard 1.3 on a single 1b1 carb, kand n filter and 4 to 1 manifold giving out the best part of 80 bhp, unusuallly good don't you think?
Whats a 2e2, i thought the SR's used a pierburg 2e3?
Whats a 2e2, i thought the SR's used a pierburg 2e3?
my mistake, it will be a 2e3, shows the true level off my knowledge...apologies!
I think you be better off with a x14xe tbh, can be picked for peanuts and no carbs to tune etc
Interesting what you've found out though
16xe_chris
27-07-12, 10:13 PM
Above and a cheap power box/bolt on manifold
I think you be better off with a x14xe tbh, can be picked for peanuts and no carbs to tune etc
Interesting what you've found out though
I know what you mean, if I want more power without a lot of cash investment for tuning then it would have to be another engine. Although the good thing about the little engine is the handling is really good for a novice like me to handle and no electronics. And I suppose I am pleased that the little engine has been stressed to the limit on two track days and still got me home. I do need to think about it seriously, on one hand it is still cheap fun as it is, on the other hand it is not very competitive!
The 1.4 16v, my mum's corsa is 1.4 16v and is pretty slow, it's supposed to deliver 100hp....
I had a 1.4 corsa and thought it was nippy tbh, one in a nova should be decent
They rev better than the 1.6 because they came with lighter flywheels as standard
I had a 1.4 corsa and thought it was nippy tbh, one in a nova should be decent
They rev better than the 1.6 because they came with lighter flywheels as standard
Have you had your 1.6 Rolling Roaded? You looked pretty fast on the track.
16xe_chris
27-07-12, 10:27 PM
As standard the inlets on the 14xe and 16xe are very restrictive, slap a inlet box on there and then you'll feel the difference.
Then still think about that 4.5 cwp ;-)
16xe_chris
27-07-12, 10:29 PM
I had a 1.4 corsa and thought it was nippy tbh, one in a nova should be decent
They rev better than the 1.6 because they came with liughter flywheels as standard
Put the flywheel and clutch on from the 8v engine :wink:
As standard the inlets on the 14xe and 16xe are very restrictive, slap a inlet box on there and then you'll feel the difference.
Then still think about that 4.5 cwp ;-)
Lack of technical knowledge here.....slap in an inlet box? Is this a type of inlet manifold?
What is a 4.5 cwp? do you mean the gearbox final drive thing?
Have you had your 1.6 Rolling Roaded? You looked pretty fast on the track.
Not been on a rolling road, but yeah 1.6 16v Novas go very well, I would say on same pace as Corsa C20XE, maybe a little slower top end.
Put the flywheel and clutch on from the 8v engine :wink:
The x14xe came with 8v flywheel as standard ;)
16xe_chris
27-07-12, 10:39 PM
Yes it like a square box that replaces most of the standard inlet tracks on the baby xe engines, gives them a good 10-15hp more iirc.
4.5 is the crown wheel and pinion gearbox changes can have a really good effect on track cars.
16xe_chris
27-07-12, 10:42 PM
Not been on a rolling road, but yeah 1.6 16v Novas go very well, I would say on same pace as Corsa C20XE, maybe a little slower top end.
The x14xe came with 8v flywheel as standard ;)
In a little Britain voice ( yeah I know )
I meant put the 8v flywheel on the 16xe, I had a billet one made at 2.5kg :thumb:
On my 1.6 I've got one of them inlet boxes, 8v flywheel and 4 branch manifold. Revs very freely and quickly compared to a bog standard 1.6
you did mention the crown wheel and pinion with me before, we worked out mine is a 4.18.
I will have to look into what gearboxes have the gear components to put in my box.
I did look carefully at the revs on the track and found that 3rd to 4th (going up to 7000rpm max) only looses 900rpm but 2nd to 3rd is nearly double, s changing down from 4000rpm in 3rd to 2nd is a waste of time, not enough revs left in 2nd but going uphill the lack of torque in 3rd (especially if I'm below the 3500 for 2nd barrel) is also a pain, never happy!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.