Friction Free

Been speaking to a team last week, who run in F3 schoolarship class
.Thought you might be intrested to know a few things
They all seam to be trying to reduce friction to an absolute minimum the most notable
Remove seals from wheelbearings and shim to prevent binding. no grease only light oil to lubricate
Caliper piston seals changed after 2 racers ,they then start to make pads bind slightly ( I have never seen wheels on a car spin so free and for so long .it was as if no pads were fitted) Data logging traces have proved its worth
I have always said that the disc, knocks the pads out on the bend you just braked for with all the flexing it does .
After Ratio change in hewland box ,gears lubed with an oil can only no additional oil added ( they use some purple Stuff thats fully synthetic and expensive ) cant remember what make it is ,does anyone know ??
Engine oil changed for the start of season only, Engine Hired of Mugen Honda for £30k+ and given back -- They dont touch it !
Anyone know any more tricks that they do and we dont ( I am assuming not many of us do the above )
I am sure Ian_W "MUST HAVE A LOT HE CAN TELL US" ( unless he will have to kill us afterwards) come on Ian "Spill the Beans " where are we going wrong?????
Regards Martin

I would say the oil is ATF as used in Cosworth boxes (from memory please correct me if wrong). As for the brake calipers/pads, well mine on my Chevy were well and truely sticking and I have just changed them so maybe I can be expected to pick up a few tenths or so :-)

I have never seen wheels on a car spin so free and for so long .it was as if no pads were fitted

Are we talking about wheels and bearings at full racing temperature? The drag in my bearings is very temperature dependent because of the type of grease I use. Just because you need a long bar to turn them cold doesn't mean there's a lot of friction on track ;)

As for getting better top speed, it's well worth a read up on what the Bugatti engineers had to do to get the Vyron up to Vmax. Taking in the rear spoiler is only the visible bit. Did you know they have to fit special low friction tyres for example? :eek:

most of these tricks are due to the need to gain every little tiny advanage within a set of tightly controlled rules which everyone is already making full use of, and as such long term reliability and cost come second.

these tweeks are all along similar lines to running an engine on the absolute min oil level to save a bit of drag, a dubious practise unless you can afford to risk your engine every time out for a very small gain.

not many, if any of us clubmen are in the position to need to be looking for such tiny little gains as we all have other bigger and more effective ones open to us should we wish to explore them.

although its interesting non the less

Lets see what Ian_W says if he reads this thread
.I am supprised at your comments !
This" is" what they do! I thought it was interesting to learn what teams are doing to squeeze a litre out of a pint pot
I know what happens when you warm grease up and it thins out but they are using thin oil in the bearing - bugger the wear . Thought some of you might have been able to tells us and me some other tricks. Not to bang on about what you do and think ,after all they are winning and right at the cutting edge of design and technolgy.I to poo pooed the brake seal idea but they prooved it on lap times and data logging .
Al, they just change the seals in the calipers nothing else ,the idea is to make them stick on the piston and pull it back rather than letting it self adjust as we all know they do ,thiers dont they just spin free
Graham, they did say they run minimum oil level as well but I didn't think that was worth mentioning as it appears to be common place
No one mentioned lack of gearbox oil! to me it shows just how good modern lubricants are I was shocked
These gains are for nothing it made me think ! particularly as we have run in ff where mods are strictly limited and works teams are usualy a second quicker on lap times it cant all be down to the driver or dont any of you agree

Blimey chill Maddog its a forum and we discuss things on a forum thats the idea, we do bang on about what we do and think thats the whole idea is'nt it? If not why are we bothering, I don't think anyone has been out of order at all, sorry.

with you on that one Al

Blimey chill Maddog its a forum and we discuss things on a forum thats the idea, we do bang on about what we do and think thats the whole idea is'nt it? If not why are we bothering, I don't think anyone has been out of order at all, sorry.
Didn' meant to tell you or give the impression that you were out of order I just thought it was dead interesting what they do to squeeze avery bit out of a race car not let every one know how tight our wheels get at the end of a race perhaps thats why we dont win very often I used to shake the car at the end of a race to free calipers off ( makes it easier to push ) but i am sure you dont want to hear that -- see what I'm getting at this is Racing Technolgy or am I wrong

OK the old forum problem, easy to get the wrong end of the stick, I thought the topic quite interesting as it goes so back to that, what about the tyres do they do any thing on those to reduce rolling friction?

Interesting about the calipers... I guess they have no pad knock off through flexing.. as for the no oil gearbox, I used to run a type9 with ATF only to try to loose some frictional losses, and they normally broke before any wear was apparent, so with a better box and modern lubes that stick to parts it seems it works.
As for what other tricks people do... isnt that hard to get out of people.

OK the old forum problem, easy to get the wrong end of the stick, I thought the topic quite interesting as it goes so back to that, what about the tyres do they do any thing on those to reduce rolling friction?
Control tyres --Avon radials
didn't mention anything but did offer us a set of slicks said put tyre softener liquid on and use them The rally boys do !!!!!
Did say ( the engineer) that they did spray kart tyres with wd40 and lifted them up and spun them made them sticky ( dont know if that legal or not)
They were more interested on traction corner speed and aero dynamics not top speed .as you would have guessed in f3 not much real power . but plenty of cornering power
Dallara have quoted 2400 lbs of down thrust from rear wing makes you think . By the way we bought last years chassis off them minus engine

Interesting about the calipers... I guess they have no pad knock off through flexing.. as for the no oil gearbox, I used to run a type9 with ATF only to try to loose some frictional losses, and they normally broke before any wear was apparent, so with a better box and modern lubes that stick to parts it seems it works.
As for what other tricks people do... isnt that hard to get out of people.
They use the same gears as in mk 9 but f3 dont have a mass of power going through the slicks drive, shafts break but not many gear boxes we allways used atf until we got free synthetic gerabox oil so used that instead its downto money at the end of the day

I used to shake the car at the end of a race to free calipers off ( makes it easier to push )

Yeh, well maybe you should get a set of brakes like my mate. They have internal springs in the caliper pistons that pull them back off the disc as soon as the brake fluid pressure is released... its a 1966 E-type :p

Oh, and the pads are positively locked onto the pistons to make sure that they come back too ;)

Control tyres --Avon radials
didn't mention anything but did offer us a set of slicks said put tyre softener liquid on and use them The rally boys do !!!!!
Did say ( the engineer) that they did spray kart tyres with wd40 and lifted them up and spun them made them sticky ( dont know if that legal or not)



slightly off topic but in 2006 blue book section E it specifically prohibits the use of tyre softener.

i by accedent one day descovered that getting petrol on my soft compound slicks made them really soft and sticky

They use the same gears as in mk 9 but f3 dont have a mass of power going through the slicks drive, shafts break but not many gear boxes we allways used atf until we got free synthetic gerabox oil so used that instead its downto money at the end of the day

Type 9 as in the Ford Sierra 5speed box... slung into an old escort.. nothing as flash as a transaxle :D

Yeh, well maybe you should get a set of brakes like my mate. They have internal springs in the caliper pistons that pull them back off the disc as soon as the brake fluid pressure is released... its a 1966 E-type :p

Oh, and the pads are positively locked onto the pistons to make sure that they come back too ;)
I wonder why they scrapped that idea then .
Seemed to remember all e-type brakes were crap or was it that they didn't handle and had to have exceptional brakes to pull you out of the s..t
wern't rear disc pads and hand brake pads diabolical or is my alltzimers getting to me
We seem to be getting off subject
How do we make upto date race cars faster and the tricks used

its not commonly realised, but it should be the caliper seal itself that pulls the piston away from the pad and therefore the pad off the disc, it does this as the seal deforms slightly when the piston moves out the tiny fraction that takes to push the pad on the disc, as soon as the brakes are realised the seal returns to its normal square shape

slightly off topic but in 2006 blue book section E it specifically prohibits the use of tyre softener.

i by accedent one day descovered that getting petrol on my soft compound slicks made them really soft and sticky

you just happened to spill it all the way round and on all 4 tyres did you?

Big spill that Graham, you should take more care

nope, i did think about it though, then remembered the cost of the slicks and decided against it just in case

How do we make upto date race cars faster and the tricks used

short answer?

dunno! trouble is with F3 your talking expensive quite high tech single seater, and your talking to a bunch of guys that love and race, 60's 70's and early 80's saloon and sports cars ;)

I wonder why they scrapped that idea then. For the same reason Leonardo scrapped his ideas for a helicopter. The materials and manufacturing techniques of the time weren't good enough to make it work. Doesn't mean it can't be done though. :p

How do we make upto date race cars faster and the tricks used

I'm slightly confused as to whether you want to hold a general discussion on this subject or if you want specific advice for a particular series. Your original post seemed to be directed at a specific series and a specific person Ian_W. If you want his advice why don't you just ask him directly? If you are wanting to introduce this subject hoping he will read it... why?

A number of contributors have tried to make general comments, but you appear to resent these, and you seem to know more about it than anyone else currently on the forum anyway.

I completely agree that, of anywhere on the site, this is the forum that should address this sort of question. It would be nice to think that there are experts who would feel they could contribute their knowledge and experience for the benefit of the rest of us. Unfortunately, I think that taking a combatorial style to getting that information is not only going to fail, but is going to put genuine experts off from contributing.

i, and i would say most on this forum see it as a place to discuss, technology full stop, rather than purely what the pros are doing and what the latest new thing is.

you will find lots of us happy to talk about most things, but you highly unlikely to find any real pro's here giving away real secrets, mostly just a bunch of normal guys who love talking cars and motorsport stuff, so please dont take it all so seriously

its not commonly realised, but it should be the caliper seal itself that pulls the piston away from the pad and therefore the pad off the disc, it does this as the seal deforms slightly when the piston moves out the tiny fraction that takes to push the pad on the disc, as soon as the brakes are realised the seal returns to its normal square shape

Beat me to it! The difference with the old Dunlop calipers used on 1960s Jaguars, etc., is that they gave a positive pad pull-back whereas modern calipers just release the pressure from the pads. Very little difference in real life, though, so the extra complication wasn't worth it - & the pads were a swine to make!

Any idea what make of loil they use on the wheel bearings and how often they re-lube them, how long do the bearings last?

not intending to tread on anyone's toes so forgive me if I do but i wonder whether the friction thing is a bit of a red herring??

am sure the race engineers know better than me but i read an article years ago by David Vizard who advised that when installing a crank the bearing shells should be trial fitted over and over again until the crank spins as freely as possible (a straight crank is a given, of course)

so that's what we did on our twin cam and sure enough only oil drag on the shells seemed to slow the crank from spinning

but then we thought perhaps this might only help when you start the engine - once it's rotating will it really make a difference??

our conclusion was that it's a good policy to follow but of dubious real benefit

wonder if it's the same with the wheel bearings to be honest...

not trying to pooh pooh anyone's ideas or suggestions but interested in peoples' views

perhaps i'll get my coat anyway...

We rebuilt the bottom end of a Lancia twincam engine and reduced the torque needed to turn it from 17 ft/lb to 8.5 ft/lb - thats 13bhp at 8200 rpm - so I think it's worth it! Very cheap HP anyway, whatever way you look at it.

Reducing the torque required to operate the valve gear - by not having triple springs if double springs are good enough for example - will also end up at the wheels.

The same is true for friction in the wheel bearings and drag from pads - I don't know how much can be gained and it will vary from car to car, but every little helps. Greases become more liquid as temperatures rise. They don't get as liquid as oil, which is why grease stays in the hub bearings. I am sure oil could be made to work, but you would need oil seals to keep the oil in, and oil seals create their own drag. Only experimentation will give the answer - and then durability testing, which may see you in the Armco with a seized wheel if you get it wrong!

Low viscocity engine oil in the gearbox of FF1600 was a common trick in the old days as this reduced drag, but I would be reluctant on a clubmans racing budget to do that with my gearbox as engine oils are not designed to tolerate the kinds of loads generated on gear teeth, so the gears would essentially run 'dry'. I am sure that gearbox bearings would be fine with just engine oil.

All the above is my humble but informed opinion, of course

Any idea what make of loil they use on the wheel bearings and how often they re-lube them, how long do the bearings last?
Hi Tim
They all seem to be ganging up on me!!!! telling me not to be so serious
When has motor racing not been serious. We might do it for fun but its still serious I still think what the pros are doing is dead interesting specialy for paddock bull**** .
Its very hard to be specific when you are given information like the above ,but the car is stripped after every outing and cleaned including bearings and gearbox is stripped for the next ratio change got the impession light oil was being used .how long do they last ? they dont care.
If you rear the thread about Renault rear suspension Ian_W has explained in great detail how modern thinking is going on suspension and the like ," Believe me He Knows" Makes a change to get asked a question . Should see the info I got to set the Stack up ,the one on the Mono shock I'm not spilling the beans on that though.
regards Martin

engine oils are not designed to tolerate the kinds of loads generated on gear teeth, so the gears would essentially run 'dry'.

Engine oils can be used to lubricate gearboxes - millions of Minis, etc., & most modern motorcycles, use it! However, they have lubrication systems designed to use engine oil. It is also necessary to use an oil designed for the purpose; modern oils designed for car engines use can create problems in bikes - most motorcycle-specific oils only meet the, now-obsolete for car oils, API SG spec.

Any thoughts on what to use in MK9 Hewland in FF1600, EP80/90 is recomended but I
I am sure thiner oil is possible?

And then, is there any benefit in adding 'friction eliminating magic potions' to your gearbox? And if there is, why don't Castrol just blend it in to start with?

13bhp free at 8200rpm - you must be joking...

...the point I was making is that the torque required to make the crank turn is an entirely different matter to the energy required to keep it turning

optimising everything is always the best policy but there's always confusion on this point

drag is an issue but it doesn't equate with the torque required to start something moving from rest

13bhp free at 8200rpm - you must be joking...


I'm not joking

half that figure i'd go with but it does seem a lot, did you get this figure from back to back power testing without any other tuning or reconditioning work?

the torque required to make the crank turn is an entirely different matter to the energy required to keep it turning

That's true - but I was referring to the CONTINUOUS torque required to turn over an engine; that does not reduce - in fact it may well increase with speed.

half that figure i'd go with but it does seem a lot, did you get this figure from back to back power testing without any other tuning or reconditioning work?

Back to back - this was just a bottom end overhaul - no change in any performance giving parts, no machining, nothing whatsoever. Just a routine change of bearings and careful re-assembly. Even humidty and temperature were within 2% of the previous dyno session - and yes it was on the same rollers.

If you do the maths, it also checks out....

ok accepted, but i'd say then that the earlier inital torque figure if it was a continual rather than a starting one was too high

hmm - might just have to take your word for it but am still very sceptical - don't mean to give offense

am no engineer and am not even particularly mathematically minded but how do the maths check out? On the nose or give or take a bit?? Surely general losses have an effect on the gain?

thinking about it 17lbs ft to turn the crank was an awful lot - makes me wonder whether this is a rogue result since there was clearly something wrong in the first place...

any other views?? am interetsed in this because free torque/hp is always welcome...

it always was fairly universal to grind performance cranks on or just below the bottom size limit to make them nice and loose
i've also read about swapping yank V8 cranks and blocks around, thus using a big main journal crank ground down in a small main journal block to save friction.

anyone seriously into x/flows or BDA's will know that cranks and rods can be bought for them with narrower big end journals to save friction.

when bmw introduced there ETA ecomony 2.7 straight six, they ran the cam in only 4 cam bearings rather than 7 as in the rest of that engines range to cut down on friction. this made me wonder about shortening tha jack shaft in a twin cam or BDA to do away with the rear bearing.

back in the 60's bill blydstien used to lower the oil pressure in his 2.3 slant 4's to save parasitic losses from the oil pump.

There's something in that, I think. In the Triumph engines there are two different journal sizes (we call them large bearing and small bearing cranks, clever eh?).

Anyway, you can never get as much power out of the large bearing cranks, the current thinking (which probably is the same as it was in the 60s) is that due to the larger areas involved with the large bearing cranks the surface speeds are higher and therefore friction losses are greater. It's probably no coincidence that the large bearing cranks also have a reputation for knackering bearings.

ok accepted, but i'd say then that the earlier inital torque figure if it was a continual rather than a starting one was too high

Yes, the initial rate was a little too high - but the net gain was still as I said. The engine had previously been built by a HUGELY repected - and published - engine builder, but even he got it wrong. So such potential gains should always be considered. I also mentioned valve springs. The previous engine builder had used triples. We found doubles were absolutely fine for our cam. Not prepared to disclose details, but the improvement in torque and bhp from this change, was also significant.

There's something in that, I think. In the Triumph engines there are two different journal sizes (we call them large bearing and small bearing cranks, clever eh?).

Anyway, you can never get as much power out of the large bearing cranks, the current thinking (which probably is the same as it was in the 60s) is that due to the larger areas involved with the large bearing cranks the surface speeds are higher and therefore friction losses are greater. It's probably no coincidence that the large bearing cranks also have a reputation for knackering bearings.

Spot on. Larger bearing surfaces will have higher frictional losses. There are other threads in which tyre width/diameter/contact patches are discussed and it is clear that a larger contact patch has greater grip - i.e. more friction.

Yep and guess which one I use :bag:

Does that mean my 7 main bearing crank with 1"+ wide journals might be a bit draggy then? :(

yes, however before we get too carried away we should remember rpm, all these savings were talking about only really start to add up at very high revs, pheonix might of found 13brake @ 8,200 but i bet at 6,000 the gain is only half that, and probably only a quarter at 4,000rpm, i think your find frictional losses are like aerodynamic drag, they go up at the square of speed.

The fitting of a low friction full roller cam with roller rockers and followers is reconed to be worth 40bhp in a small block over a a similiar spec flat tappet cam, in fact this is one of the reasons Chevrolet wento over to roller followers to improve fuel economy on the 5.7 small block, this then allowed them to mate it with a manual gearbox on the 4th gen Camaros where as the 3rd gen 5.7 only was available with a computer controlled (read too quick upshifting) auto box so they could meet CAFE fuel economy figures.

knife edged crankshafts and scraper plates help save a little power although once again only at high revs.

So, if I machined my bearings to clearance. 0.25 of an inch from both sides and left the middle at running clearance, my engine would last more than 5 mins?? :D intresting idea, but I dont think I want to risk it,
But on a similar thread, has anyone looked at the journal size on a F1 engine, best described as rediculous, , but as they are only designed to run about a max of 5 hours, I dont suppose it matters too much, also given a chance have a look at the rings, or what there is of them, again, designed for min drag and a limited life.
Has anyone ever wondered where all these Hi spec low friction light weight alloys and composites have materialised from in the last few years, My theory is; since the end of the cold war the aero and weapons industry has been a little strapped for trade and are looking for any outlet to sell their Hi Tec materials, and F1 teams will pay the earth just for that sort of advantage over the other teams.
Ian :) :)
Just an afterthought, as roller rockers may liberate another 40 g-geees has anyone got any for a rover v8 laying about, just a thought.

But on a similar thread, has anyone looked at the journal size on a F1 engine, best described as rediculous, , but as they are only designed to run about a max of 5 hours, I dont suppose it matters too much.... I haven't seen one, but I guess from that they're quite small. That isn't necessarily a problem though. The ability of the oil film in the bearing to support the load is proportional (can't remember if its a power of not) to the speed the crank is rotating, so at 17-18000rpm a narrow bearing can support more load than a much wider bearing at half those revs. Also, the life expectancy of the bearing if probably much more down to the condition of the oil than the size of the bearing. If the bearing is even slightly too small for the max load, surface to surface contact will occur, however momentarily, then its goodbye engine ;)

After Ratio change in hewland box ,gears lubed with an oil can only no additional oil added ( they use some purple Stuff thats fully synthetic and expensive ) cant remember what make it is ,does anyone know ??
Royal Purple.

I'm not joking

I don't think you're joking either.

There's a lot of other tricks. Turning oil pressure down to 25psi for qualifying. Running juuuussst enough valve spring to just keep it under valve float (and replacing them every 200km rebuild). All worth little bits.

Royal Purple.
" THANK YOU VERY MUCH " Cheers thats the one ,I new it was a stupid name"

Just an afterthought, as roller rockers may liberate another 40 g-geees has anyone got any for a rover v8 laying about, just a thought No no Ian the rockers will not liberate that power if any unless like a Chevy you are replacing the original Vauxhall Viva type high friction ball rockers. The gains are when you use ROLLER FOLLOWERS as that is where the real friction in the valve train is, the cam literally directly rubbing on the surface of a flat tappet. Did you know that a chevy engine running roller rockers and followers run at a noticible cooler oil temprature (thus also engine temprature) than one running the flat tappet and roller ball rockers. The downside is you also have to have a special steel billet roller cam and special distrubutor gears (chevy) to get the most out of it and the whole set up with the rockers aint cheap (£1000 plus). I did just buy a mint roller cam off ebay though and paid under 50 quid and it had only been dyno run, I already have the followers and rockers however.

Incidently re your original request, I lent Gerry Cain a roller rocker for his Rover engine and I understand you can use chevy ones in the rover engine. Have a look on ebay for a cheap set, I may have a spare set once I have built this spare engine.

Of course there is always the 6 ft of wire and a cheap toggle switch connected so you can turn the alternator field coil off and on and release another 7 or 8bhp for a cost of what £3 or £4, but lets not have that alternator on/off debate again. :p

Al Weyman - sponsored by eBay ;)

Al
Have you ever seen a Roller Cam for a Rover??, what ratio are your rockers, 1.7?? I really need 1.6,
Ian :) :)

Just an afterthought, as roller rockers may liberate another 40 g-geees has anyone got any for a rover v8 laying about, just a thought.

I dunno about 40 but probably 15-20 in a Rover. Try Yella Terra in Melbourne, Australia.

yes, however before we get too carried away we should remember rpm, all these savings were talking about only really start to add up at very high revs, pheonix might of found 13brake @ 8,200 but i bet at 6,000 the gain is only half that, and probably only a quarter at 4,000rpm, i think your find frictional losses are like aerodynamic drag, they go up at the square of speed.

Naturally the bhp gain was not constant, though the increase in torque was. @ 6000 rpm the gain was just under 10 bhp. @ 4000rpm it was only 6.5 bhp. As bhp is so important to top speed performance (i.e. max revs in top gear) the gain was clearly measurable on the stopwatch - what else matters? Oh, gaining a place, of course: edging past someone on the straight who edged past you at the last race - that's nice! And the 'How did you do that?' in the paddock afterwards!

I'm slightly confused as to whether you want to hold a general discussion on this subject or if you want specific advice for a particular series. Your original post seemed to be directed at a specific series and a specific person Ian_W. If you want his advice why don't you just ask him directly? If you are wanting to introduce this subject hoping he will read it... why?

A number of contributors have tried to make general comments, but you appear to resent these, and you seem to know more about it than anyone else currently on the forum anyway.

I completely agree that, of anywhere on the site, this is the forum that should address this sort of question. It would be nice to think that there are experts who would feel they could contribute their knowledge and experience for the benefit of the rest of us. Unfortunately, I think that taking a combatorial style to getting that information is not only going to fail, but is going to put genuine experts off from contributing.

That's a bit harsh Dtype! I've read MaddogF3's comments that begun this thread, they appeared to be accurate comments as to the efforts current F3 teams were taking to reduce friction, without any 'black art' mythology that sometimes surfaces. That these were easy and cheap fixes that work, were, I believe, merely helpful tips that club racers could follow.

Of course, racers with older cars have to firstly struggle with just keeping thier cars reliable (as I know myself), before they can address the more effective issues Maddog was talking about. Later in this thread it seems that, rather than telling Maddog that his tips were too fancy and the old ways still work, people are now discussing exactly what he first said.

As for the 'genuine experts' that you hoped may contribute, well, I think they already have, or perhaps you didn't notice!

Ian ... your cars all over Classic Ford this week .. feature and on Daves rollers

Naturally the bhp gain was not constant, though the increase in torque was. @ 6000 rpm the gain was just under 10 bhp. @ 4000rpm it was only 6.5 bhp. As bhp is so important to top speed performance (i.e. max revs in top gear) the gain was clearly measurable on the stopwatch - what else matters? Oh, gaining a place, of course: edging past someone on the straight who edged past you at the last race - that's nice! And the 'How did you do that?' in the paddock afterwards!

phoenix, i wasn't knocking your achivement, but refering to your gain at the sort of rpm which d type's jag engine can only dream about ;)

rings are well worth a look at they are a major producer of friction in an engine,i knew one engine builder who built lots of grass tracker mini engines, the rules for that particular championship stated that the engine had to use the origonal 3 compression ring pistons (great for low rpm slogging but pointless at high revs) and have all the rings fitted although any normal production oversize piston could be used, so what did he do?

he used +0.060 pistons but the bottom compression ring was STD size, so it barely touched the bore! it worked and was legal as it had the correct no of rings fitted.

he used +0.060 pistons but the bottom compression ring was STD size, so it barely touched the bore! it worked and was legal as it had the correct no of rings fitted.

Don't try that on a turbo engine, Graham!

Chuck is right I have seen Rover rockers from that company and they looked very stout pieces, may be a little over the top in fact but looked bullet proof. I may have a set of 1.6's secondhand when and if I can get the spare off Gerry I will ask him.

Yes Chris I have found some good stuff off ebay for my car. So far the roller cam, a complete MSD ingnition and coil, the best pair of F5000 heads you are ever likely to see, a complete Camaro I am breaking (any one want a completely and I mean completely from water pump to clutch rebuilt and unrun 305 V8 and 4 speed manual see me, excellent for a kit car project!), a Chevy V8 bolt set, Piston rings, my Chevy Blazer tow car, my Brian James Tri-Axle Trailer etc etc etc, I love it!

1.Anyone find electric water pump running off the battery only[ie not alternator] gives a power advantage?

2.Main bearings I guess are like a little brake on the crank. As with a disc brake the larger the diameter the better the mechanical advantage.A six clinder in line is always better off with 7 bearing crank due to 6300 rpm wobble period,but I was amazed once[ please pardon me talking street cars here] driving in the "outback" with no oil pressure,rattling hydraulic tappets etc,after 200km reached a garage,added oil,no further problems for years.Thus I can believe minimal lube on short sprint light weight expensive component cars is a goer.

3. What are the losses through universal joints etc especially if for example the tailshaft is statically off parallel with the crankshaft?

johnny in answer to your questions,

1. about 4 bhp on a 1600-2000 4 cyl @7,000 rpm.

2. smaller dia and narrower bearing will absorb less power, so will increaseing the bearing clearances a little, oil pressure, you want the minium needed to keep the crank and bearings apart, for years a ran an engin ewith a mere 40psi oil pressure in competition to no detrement

3. dunno the answer to that one, probably not much as they dont move through much of an angle anyway, U/J's as opposed to Cv's should not run perfectly straight or it shortens there lifespan

for years a ran an engin ewith a mere 40psi oil pressure in competition to no detrement


:rofl: I'd love to see 40psi oil pressure on my engine once it is hot.

At the risk of sounding like one of the four Yorkshiremen,ah ewse ta drearm of havin forrty poonds of oil pressure!!