Turbo Cars

Not bad at all. Do you have any drag strip reliability issues?

The chaps with 2.0 ZVH turbo Kas run high 13s, but every so often they break a driveshaft / gearbox / clutch*

The only reliability issues is paying for the fuel the thing eats. At full throttle its around 1litre a minute (440cc injectors @56% duty cycle) Ok granted, I dont go full throttle everywhere, but even so it cost me £100 in fuel to do a 520 mile journey to cornwall and back.

Ed

That's excellent news.

Okay, about the reliability. £100 for 520 miles? Bloody hell. Okay so our engine will probably run on 91 RON :) I'd be looking at one third of that. Give or take a bit.

Do you have a rolling road print out? The concept of a highly blown :)

To bore you with some detail, and to once again highlight how much I dislike the turbocharged CVH engine when a monkey drives it, one of the RST converted Kas used to average around 11 mpg. Now on a run that might go up to 12. When "impressing" everybody (else)* with the 1.6 turbo (claimed 250 bhp, hehehehe)** it might drop to 10. The reason? It wasn't set up right. Muppet didn't want to pay £x to have it set up, but whinged about the price of fuel / high consumption / blah blah.

Impressing everybody else? Slowing down to 40 on dual carriageways just to zoom past a convoy of Kas got pretty boring the third time around and just annoying after fifteen times.

The claim of 250 bhp was an infamous owner estimate because it once overtook a 240 bhp (claimed I'm sure) Subaru. Of course it couldn't put much more than half of that down under 30 mph and such was the boosty peaky nature of the engine it was easy to squirt off the line quicker in something slow, rather than sit there wheelspinning.

Blinkin eck, if the mapping is that far off, you'll be back here within the month complaining of oval bores and shattered rings from washing all the oil off on that hideously rich mixture.

Tim..

Its not that far off! You will just have to trust me that I know what I'm doing. :) Its mapped for power, and power only, so yes fuel economey isnt great. I have an economey map but im not going to use that at santapod am I :)

Have a look at this:

Ed

Yes, these are a bit old now. I have not had any updated ones recently.

When I was sensible even on the old map I could get nearly 30mpg. The problem when I did that long drive that time is I had not had time to map the ecu properly, infact I had only fitted it before, and although the AFR was ok/bit rich the ignition was wayyy out.

That sounds like jelousy ;)

Hahahaha. sounds like a fool. :)

Yeah reading back it does. But I don't try to sell the car giving a detailed breakdown of the £6,000 worth of subwoofer, amp, DVD and blah in it, then kick off a stuff because somebody broke into the car and nicked the £6,000 of ICE **clearly on display for prospective buyers**.

Oh, heh, if I'm going to get 10 mpg it had better be a V8 or bigger, not some rancid CVH. :)

Aye. Could have been a nicely prepared car rather than running it on 19s ("to prevent the wheelspin") with poxy standard rear drums... ;)

File not found. :-(

omg

oops my bad:

Hahahahahah!

So, a 5000 quid ka, with 20k of mods.

A wife and a kid, or one hell of a holiday. Ya more money than sense.

I mean, twelve grand on a blown CVH...? The 2.0 ZVH conversion, still uses CVH bits heh, is only a little bit more...

MORE???

Next you'll be telling me someone's fitted a mustang V8 in a Ka.

Yes, but then the ZVH produces stacks more torque.

You have more of the same problems, but it hits the limiter in fifth with a jolt whereas the 1.6 runs out of puff too.

If only.