Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel

[fueltheburn]

if you want torque, get an electric motor peak torque 0rpm...

I nearly did this to Ethel as the cost of the electric motor would have been close to that of the 2.5.
The only problem was range and I travel a lot. What would be the point in a car that can only travel approx 100 to 120 miles.

If I ever sell Ethel, this will be my next project.....and cover every panel in P.V panels to recharge it on the move and whilst parked up. The electronics for this set-up would been been challenging

[Pete Boole]

That's a really great link angus. Thanks.

Pete

[dunc]

We've reviewed this link before and I think Mat Grant and I discussed it on the old forum.

The author has tried to collate engine weights drawn from magazine and manufacturer sources, which is great, but they are a mixture of dry weights, with others being wet and drawn from a mixture of sources. Nobody measures engine weight by standard formula - some have anciliaries and a full sump, others are stripped and dry, some don't even have induction. There are also lots of different weights quoted for the same engine elsewhere on the net.

The only way to weigh, is to lift them both and put them on the scales. The fully dressed rover is marginally heavier than the fully dressed 907, which weighs 165kg. A rover V8 is a VERY light V8 that was years ahead of its time, to the point that its design and construction formed the starting point for the Repco Formula 1 V8 engine (admittedly, all that was left the same when the Repco design was finished were the dimensions..)

In the same way as the Porsche 911 has been around for 30 odd years, the Rover V8 has been significantly revised, to the point that the later 10 bolt cross-bolted 4 and 4.6 litre versions were super strong, light, and modern (for 1993) design, and to be fair the older engines were pretty damn good anyway. A trip to santa pod shows what can be achieved.

A TVR griffith 500 weighs 1060kg and has a rover V8. That's broadly similar to a V8 engined eclat/excel. Anybody fancy going toe to toe with a griffith 500 with a 912 engined Lotus? Why do people think a Lotus eclat/excel with a rover V8 will perform differently from a 1050kg TVR with a rover V8?

There are down sides from fitting a Rover V8. Weight, handling and performance aren't any of them... anybody that thinks a rover V8 engined car will handle or perform worse than a 907/912 engined car is just wrong.. (Passenger seat ride offered for non-believers).

[Lotus-e-Clan]

.......

A TVR griffith 500 weighs 1060kg and has a rover V8. That's broadly similar to a V8 engined eclat/excel. Anybody fancy going toe to toe with a griffith 500 with a 912 engined Lotus? Why do people think a Lotus eclat/excel with a rover V8 will perform differently from a 1050kg TVR with a rover V8?

There are down sides from fitting a Rover V8. Weight, handling and performance aren't any of them... anybody that thinks a rover V8 engined car will handle or perform worse than a 907/912 engined car is just wrong.. (Passenger seat ride offered for non-believers).

I have!

Travelling from Cornwall (bodmin to exeter) many many years ago. Me and the wife plus luggage v TVR Griff containing two Lads in their late thirties plus luggage and they over took us on empty roads and were up for it!

Vmax 140 (kph ) . .. for 60 miles they tried to drop us and they couldn't ... to the point that I was comfortable enough to let them go and reel them in at will. They gave up and let us by eventually with a thumbs up and a big grin. A lot of respect gained for the the Excel on that day ...even the wife enjoyed it ..mainly because the Excel (a fully sorted one sans PAS' AC and water pump) felt very accelerative, safe and stable at speed ...and that's maybe why the Lads gave-up ... it would seem that road-going TVR chassis are a known to be a tad flexible...perhaps they were feeling less secure and a little weary.

And so in real world driving I'd say there's not a lot in it ..on paper yes.

[Ozzy_UK]

interesting to see bare 907 lotus lump at 120ish kgs, and fully dressed jag 4.4 v8 at 200kgs...

pretty sure my v8 lump (4.0 ally v8) is only 150kgs, so not a massive difference to the stock 912

[Ozzy_UK]

.......

A TVR griffith 500 weighs 1060kg and has a rover V8. That's broadly similar to a V8 engined eclat/excel. Anybody fancy going toe to toe with a griffith 500 with a 912 engined Lotus? Why do people think a Lotus eclat/excel with a rover V8 will perform differently from a 1050kg TVR with a rover V8?

There are down sides from fitting a Rover V8. Weight, handling and performance aren't any of them... anybody that thinks a rover V8 engined car will handle or perform worse than a 907/912 engined car is just wrong.. (Passenger seat ride offered for non-believers).

I have!

Travelling from Cornwall (bodmin to exeter) many many years ago. Me and the wife plus luggage v TVR Griff containing two Lads in their late thirties plus luggage and they over took us on empty roads and were up for it!

Vmax 140 (kph ) . .. for 60 miles they tried to drop us and they couldn't ... to the point that I was comfortable enough to let them go and reel them in at will. They gave up and let us by eventually with a thumbs up and a big grin. A lot of respect gained for the the Excel on that day ...even the wife enjoyed it ..mainly because the Excel (a fully sorted one sans PAS' AC and water pump) felt very accelerative, safe and stable at speed ...and that's maybe why the Lads gave-up ... it would seem that road-going TVR chassis are a known to be a tad flexible...perhaps they were feeling less secure and a little weary.

And so in real world driving I'd say there's not a lot in it ..on paper yes.

spent a day lapping brands hatch indy circuit faster than a modern ford GT (who eventually binned it)... caught and over took him on the back section, he pulled away on the straight at clearways but that was the only time he pulled away... Excel is a great car, and my 912 engine wasnt exactly "fresh"

[dunc]

A fully dressed 912 with a w58 box on it weighs 200kg (the toyota w58 box weighs 35kg).

the 907/912 engine alone is 165kg with carbs, manifold, oil, and clutch. These figures come from the scales.

Cars only go as fast as the driver asks them to, so it is difficult to say "I was able to keep up with Car X" and get a feeling for which car is truly faster. The other drivers lack of ability/confidence on a country road makes a huge difference.

I've only been in the passenger seat of a griff 500, but I would say it was considerably faster than any 907/912 lotus that I've been in (dozens). Driven a boggo 4L chimera, and that was a lot faster than my eclat.

My first eclat with the Lotus twin cam was on the rollers at 156bhp, and was in excellent health.

Our cars are brisk sporty cars, and great fun. We are on this forum because we love them.

But anyone who thinks an excel with a 912 will keep up with an excel fitted with a RV8 is kidding themselves..

[Lotus-e-Clan]

Drivers do make a difference and for sure you can only go as fast as conditions allow. And that's a point worth considering when doing a time consuming power/torque upgrade engine transplant into an Excel for road use.

Yes with a V8 Excel you may be able to intimidate by a sudden burst of acceleration defined mainly by superior torque... But if the opposition isn't intimidated, those in a good 912 SE with a mind to select the right gear, will soon be in your mirror and you'll have to do it all over again until someone gets bored.

I've also found this is the case when up against modern hi torque diesels. Yes, there is a big push, and then they run out of revs!

[bash]

Ive had the following TVR's over the years, a vixen, 3000m, two 2.8 wedge hardtops, a 350, and a 390se. Of those the only two I should have kept were the vixen ( great car, excellent handling and values that over the last couple of years have gone thro the roof ) and the 390se. The 390 was a fantastic car, I had it for a couple of years and it had a quoted 275bhp, which many pudits have said was overquoted. But I can tell you from experience that the 390 was MUCH quicker than the Excel ( 0 to 60 in 4.7 seconds and 0 to 100 in 11.7 seconds ). I stayed in the tvr club for quite a few years when I bought the Excel about 17 years ago and went on many runs etc with them. Even now I still hang out with some of the TVR crowd even though I have been comprehensively blown off by big griffiths and chimeras ( the newer TVRs are in a different league altogether ). When it comes to the driver, Ive was a traffic police officer for 17 years and anyone who thinks that they are used to driving at high speed dont forget that traffic officers do it all the time every working shift, so its not down to the driver, they are just quicker..................... in a straight line. The Excel is the best handling car Ive ever had, which is why Ive kept it for so long.

Bash

[fueltheburn]

This is funny!!!
It's like watching a boxing match without having to buy a ticket.

If only I could add fuel the fire, just going to have to wait until I get my torque monster 2.5 912 back from mike.

Can you re-name the thread handbags at dawn?

"Ladies, take three paces, turn and swipe!"

[bash]

Ohh you are awful.
Bash

[Lotus-e-Clan]

Bum. I forgot Bash wuz a coppa!

Exactly. There are more variables at play in a real world comparison test than acceleration in a straight line, and they interact with the psychology of the driver. On American highways it's no contest of course.

[bash]

Was is the operative word. Im now a leisure consultant for my back garden ( retired ). But you are right, the only reason traffic cops catch much faster cars is that they are used to pushing theirs to the limit all the time on public roads whereas most other people are not. Its what Terry Pratcett calls 'headology'.

[257spring]

I'm gonna print all this out

would this one be any good?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/140905404909?ss ... 1423.l2649

[bash]

Try this site if you are keen.
http://www.lextreme.com/1uzfe_info.html
But its not a cheap route !
Bash