RAOC Proving Day 2 - Confirmed 30/11/07

That is a valid question, but on the flip side, if someone said, I want 500bhp from a PRV and it will cost them 10k to do it, excluding that the box needs upgrading, and that the engine will hardly be reliable or run nicely (point in fact than none of the Venturi 500/600s that were raced ever came anywhere and regularly had failures) versus the fact for half the cost you could fit say another more modern engine and box, that can do that power with ease if not more, then thats when you have to look at things logically.

Well my little corner of the PRV world understands very well that keeping it "in the family" is far more important than power-to-£ Whether that"family" be PRV or simply something from the same stable that bolts up to the same gearbox.

I've got a mate who's dropped an Omega V6 into his DeLorean, which he's also converted to right hand drive, all for tuppence ha'penny scrounging whatever he could get. It'll probably keep pace with my current GTA engine-in-a-D project that's cost several thousand, but that's not the point really, is it? Should I now abandon my Z7U stash and start buying up omega engines?

Hope they work, they were taken off a mobile phone.

http://rapidshare.com/files/74115394/30-11-07_1144.3gp.html

http://rapidshare.com/files/74115677/30-11-07_1540.3gp.html

http://rapidshare.com/files/74115784/30-11-07_1542.3gp.html

Scroll down to the bottom of the first page, click 'free', scroll half way down the second page and type in the validation code and click 'download'.

Hope they work, they were taken off a mobile phone.

This may help

http://www.brothersoft.com/3gp-player-2 ... 55891.html

the very end of the last one made me laugh!!

If anyone wants to retry feel free. This is the only way i could figure it out
I will work on the video camera tomorrow

Keith

why did they p1ss arround bolting a turbo to a 172/182 lump..... seems a bit silly when there is an F4RT just sitting there already which will do the same job

Because the F4RT engine is not even near the same spec..

The 182 engine has far better inlet manifold, stronger pistons, better flowing head, better profile camshafts, bigger throttle body that the F4RT Megane engine.

On the turbo conversion it also has a proper tubular manifold versus the cast small flow on on the F4RT, and the turbo is a much higher spec versus the small blower on the F4RT.

His engine is only 1.8L, Yours is 2.0. His makes 320bhp at a bar, yours makes 240odd at a bar. Thats 60bhp difference.

So...thats...why.

bullocks as usual..... you never know what you're talking about do you dave my engine made over 260 bhp at 1 bar boost you didn't know because it's not in any books or on any website for you to quote from as usual.... we detuned it for drivability and to stop the massive amount of torque it made at 1 bar from shredding the gearbox, during the build we had factory support from Renault sport technologies in france ( the actual people who deveoped the engine and gearbox in the first place) not a bolt on bling monkey from down the road in chav land..... i'm not going to give true figures out as you might copy any phots photshop em and stick on your website saying you offer a 400 bhp conversion for a spider.....

and mine is standard...... if i uprated the the internals and the exhaust manifold to the same spec as the clio lump i'm sure we'd kick 320 bhp into oblivion.... it's only at it's first benchmark stage anyway

before you start criticising anymore ...... try building a car to shut us all up.... all we've seen from you in the last year was some real sheddy gta with a 21 lump in it what happened to that then?? you still working out how to fit that adaptronic ecu to it?

The only person that criticises everyone elses cars is you Andy...

How do you like it?

Did Renaultsport fit the shoddy chunks of welded together boost hoses, and welded them direct to the turbohousing, instead of rotating the turbo housing and doing it properly.... Did they advise you to use some s/h intercooler in a poor position instead of using a chargecooler and have tight, poorly thought out piping going in odd directions. Did they advise you to use a cheap bit of hoover hose from the front of the turbo, doing a merry dance around the engine, and watch it get sucked flat as the turbo comes on boost...

Did they advise you to put your cold air intake right next to the scorching hot downpipe, or maybe thats why youve wrapped it in some cheap bacofoil Is that 'motorsport' grade Bacofoil, or ponse around on lots of trackdays Bacofoil?

Did they advise you to lie and fib to the German site that your car made 280+ bhp for bragging rights and when I mentioned it, you made out you knew nothing about it, even though the article was penned by yourself with your contact details on it....

http://renault-sport-spider.de/Member/HotspotStart.html

So what is it, 284, or 260, or 240 as you told Steve Dell it is. And anyway, stick a dyno plot up to shut me up.

Did they not figure out how not to shred the gearbox, when somebody else is running more power and more torque, and faster times and is not doing so...

Could they not use a decent spec of ECU instead of something that just happens to be in their language..?

And as for your car being in its first stages, and if you fit the same bits as ol 5 boy matey, you can get the same power etc...So what your saying is if you COPY him, you can get the same power. Well done, lots of intuition there....Im sure you just called him a bling boy, bolt on crap...Make your mind up...

Lol, and your again only at the 'first stages'. You just said that the gearbox can't handle anymore power, and I know full well there are no upgrades for the JB\JC boxes to handle anymore power, so what next stages are you thinking about? Or are you trying not to lose face and make out you always must have the best....

Go an ask your friend at RenaultSport, which is a more advanced engine, the 172/182/192 or the 225 (seeing as one only runs 25bhp less and doesnt have a turbo)

The 225 engine is the equivalent of our GTA Turbo engine against the Atmo..

Stop being so jealous and childish all the time, and have respect for other peoples work where credit is due.

Lol, 9 edits, I was on a roll...

But ....................It's no longer the car it was .So saying it's the bestest whatever is b####ks .GET A KITCAR

So we replace brakes for better different items, suspension, wishbones, bodywork, tyres, wheels, and every single ancillary around and engine and inside it, yet we hang onto the last thing, this aging block design, a gearbox that can't be rushed and sapps energy, and it costs us half the power and reliability of a different, more modern, cheaper engine..

We change everything else, why not that? And changing the engine in a GTA would make the car dynamically better. Even Renault, after they acheived 330bhp out of the Production racer, planned to ditch the V6 and fit the 1.4 turbo engine from the Turbo2 Maxi for more performance and better handling..

If you look at a GTA logically, its worst 'trait' is its engine.

I'm with Monkey on this one It should remain a PRV worst case scenario but getting the best out of the std lump is what I want to do

I'm with Monkey on this one It should remain a PRV worst case scenario but getting the best out of the std lump is what I want to do

Well I agree depending on what power you want to go to. We all know you can do 260bhp with a turbo, exhaust, CC and correct fueling, yet to go over 300bhp, your going to need twin chargecoolers, two turbos, custom manifolds, twin custom exhausts, uprated camshafts, modified plenum, standalone management, bigger injectors, uprated clutch, and then most likely the gearbox may start to struggle with the torque from it, and youve added some more weight in the back too, and more heat etc...

Leagey at 420bhp ugraded the box to a Hewland, Renault themselves with the 21 Turbos, upgraded to a Hewland when they got to over 400bhp, Helem and Venturi too,

Both Helem and Venturi ditched the PRV and went Ferrari V8 and Mercedes Benz V8 respectively, with lower power outputs (400+) but faster than the PRV biturbo.

So the way I see it, up to 300, stick with the PRV, over 300+, for the cost and engineering involved just seem a bit nuts.

For a sore point, the highest Renault themselves used the PRV in motorsport was 280bhp in turbo form, yet with the 21 Turbo 4 cylinder 8v they ran right upto 480bhp, without failures..

Im not a PRV hater, just depending what you want out of a car, there are other more viable options.

Interestingly, Chris is going twin turbo with custom manifolds and twin chargecoolers on his "new" 610 lump, but otherwise unmodified. It'll be interesting to see how far we can push it, as we could see the ceiling on Tony's at anything over 1bar boost.

Interestingly, Chris is going twin turbo with custom manifolds and twin chargecoolers on his "new" 610 lump, but otherwise unmodified. It'll be interesting to see how far we can push it, as we could see the ceiling on Tony's at anything over 1bar boost.

Probably be about 350bhp on a bar.

Its not built for quarter miles (whatever that means) Its simply a nicely put together car, with a decent engine.

Handling and 1/4 mile not possible Simon..?

Im sure Andy Cooke pulled an 11.5 out of the bag, oh and happened to hold the lap record at Curborough sprint course too

In have spent some time at Avon and the Pod and have seen some cars where the front track is almost doubled and I was wondering if this car was one of those, with the wheels sticking out by 10" each side if so does it go round corners? Does it still handle with that lump in the front?

In all honesty though put a big capacity engine in any small car it gonna shift.With as much power as a modern 4 WD japanese mobile its gotta shift what ever way you look at it. Well done to the guy for shoe horning it in to that size bay.Yes its extremely rapid, i am not trying to take any credit away.

Most cars get set up for what ever disapline they are doing different tyres different suspension rates and settings and different settings wet or dry.
so this car could well be set up for quarter mile and not really handle. Lets face it the 1.9 pug 205 was quicker than the 1.6, but it was a well known fact that for handling the 1.6 was preferred.

So does that lump at the front spoil the handling, maybe not if it holds course record at Curboro' or maybe its just si quick in a straight line it does not need to handle?

I was just wondering to what lengths the constructor went to to make it pull 11 seconds for the 1/4 and if there were any trade offs for getting that time .

@the end of the day you put a powerful enough engine in any car that ways nothing it gone shift. In all honesty lets see how quick a 5 is with power plant that Reno gave it???

My 21 is a great reliable road car, I just happen to think I should drive it like stole it. Its got nothing special done to it less than some of the more modified GTA's. At the end of the day terminal speed at the Qtr mile being similar to bigger engined turbo charged vehicles who are rear wheel drive purpose built sports cars just shows how dam quick my car is once it has grip and with 0.2 cd MORE than a GTA

Zorst filter and Chip AND ONLY 4 psi not a racing car does that make. So to take a formula1 of a Renault 5 and go see I told you so is not impressive in my book. Bring a road going 5 down with modest mods and lets see. A R5 with a reliable 170BHP (Guestimated) LOL and see what times that does ........???? in the real world I would be interested to see.

All of the GTAs that have been timed are not producing more than my 21 Turbo even with or without Stand alone the most this going to do is optimise the standard specification.

We have yet to see a PRV in a GTA in turbo format with proper engine mods liners, pistons heads cams or any kind of improved manifolding.

The Venturis have the Modern answer how ever cost a fortune to maintain and rebuild and thats if you can get hold of one. But at the end makes massive twin turbo'd power.

Again to dump a big turbo'd engined into a Renault roller skate and then go look at what a 5 can do by comparison makes me larf

I am not disputing the fact that the 5 is quick but you dont compare a touring car with a purpose built single seater do you?

Dave man Keep the Colchester Massive real innit All the cars are just tweeked road cars with the exception of Andy Holts road spider.

Si21:lol:

To cover the points..

Even if you run larger wheels on the front of a FWD car, they are no wider than 205/215. So narrower than anything else everyone else is running..

Does the car handle with the 172 engine in the front? Well a Clio 16v handles well with it, a 172 handles well with it....hold on, im sure these two cars were mentioned as two of the best handling hot hatches of all time...

3. 1,8 16v is hardly big capacity. It is well done, when you consider only something this side of a McLaren F1 is going to beat it down the 1/4 mile, and last time I looked that was 6 litre V12...

4. The car has the engine, with a normal gearbox with a modified Volvo 440 clutch, running on Adaptronic Management, all mapped by himself. Runs like a normal road car.

Would you like to see a Renault 5 with the original 1.4 pushrod engine and carburettor do an 11.4 second quarter mile?

http://www.rtoc.org/library/fileroot%5C ... QKPKZQ.wmv


Your 21 'tuned' isnt as quick as even a standard Renault 5 Turbo, so lets stop there....

The Venturi's are not the modern answer. They still have the same flawed engine, but you do whats best with what you've got.

You do compare a touring car with a single seater, if they are lined up at a drag strip to go head to head with eachother. You don't win any prizes for saying 'oh I lost, but I have this old engine, so Im better, or I have more weight, what do you expect.' Racing is racing, no excuses.

I have not said a 5 is or isnt quicker I just asked to see what a 5 could do reasonably modified, put it on a normal piece of road not a super sticky pod or Avon and see what times I am not interested in a car that is built and designed to race. I was interested in modified road cars thats all, but then the five will do upto 120 and run out wont it oh well except if it does not have the engine that it was fitted with silly me
I have not slagged 5s off just wanted to see the real deal so on the 2 mile runaway at Bruntingthorpe who will win 5 or 21 ?? Horses for Courses mate

Dave you keep refering to the qtr like its the only form of racing I asked questions out of interest not to slag anything off but you seem so defesive over a car thats not even yours PMSL In other types of motor sport I think you'll find they run in classes; like I said whats the chances of an F1 car getting plotted up against a R21 Only in run what you brung and then you'd be silly in thinking your going to beat it, what you might be racing for though, is your own personal best against the clock!!!???

So dont get so Touchy

Si21

I have not said a 5 is or isnt quicker I just asked to see what a 5 could do reasonably modified, put it on a normal piece of road not a super sticky pod or Avon and see what times I am not interested in a car that is built and designed to race. I was interested in modified road cars thats all, but then the five will do upto 120 and run out wont it oh well except if it does not have the engine that it was fitted with silly me
I have not slagged 5s off just wanted to see the real deal so on the 2 mile runaway at Bruntingthorpe who will win 5 or 21 ?? Horses for Courses mate

Dave you keep refering to the qtr like its the only form of racing I asked questions out of interest not to slag anything off but you seem so defesive over a car thats not even yours PMSL In other types of motor sport I think you'll find they run in classes; like I said whats the chances of an F1 car getting plotted up against a R21 Only in run what you brung and then you'd be silly in thinking your going to beat it, what you might be racing for though, is your own personal best against the clock!!!???

:

No, I refer the the quartmile as it is the only true reference of what power output a car makes. I makes no difference what power somebody says their car is, plot it over 1/4 mile, logging 60ft, 1/8th mile speed and time, and 1/4mile time and terminal, and you can work out what is the true power..

And you talk about classes? Thats the whole point of drag racing isnt it. Why wouldnt you put a R21 up against a F1 Car. Do you think a F1 car is quick over the 1/4 mile? It is, but it still pulls high 9 second quarters. I can show you many road cars that can beat that...

For instance, heres an old Holden (Vauxhall Carlton) running its 3.0 engine, turbo'd, on Adaptronic management.

http://www.chargecooler.co.uk/bigpsi.wmv

End of the day, drag strip, or wet asphalt, a car that does a 125mph terminal, will still do a 125 terminal (or more).

And on a two mile course of Brunters who will win? Well not the person with the highest speed, the person who gets there first, which is a completely different kettle of fish. You might cross the line with a higher speed, doesnt mean your going to be in front though does it...

Velocity v Distance v Time .......................

http://www.dan-dare.org/FreeFun/Games/C ... Coyote.htm


Oppps no sorry Try this one ,it's less technical


http://www.1728.com/velocity.htm

Surely a car with lower gearing will cover 1/4 mile quicker than one with higher gearing. Take two identical A610's for example, one with a standard, one with a 3.88:1 final drive. I know which one will cross the line first, but I also know they both as powerful as each other.

I'm with Monkey on this one It should remain a PRV worst case scenario but getting the best out of the std lump is what I want to do

300 bhp or near should be obtainable once you get round the crappy mainfolds senario can it be that difficult if 360 from the 24 valver is possible then 300 should not be a prob from the 12 valver ?

Si21