An interesting link, mainly about the K series but mentions other engines including the F20C.

P.S if you thought the F20C was a far superior engine think again, i already knew about the K series engines stroke etc (IMO bloody good engines!) and why they are a good engine but when it comes to reliability...

http://www.sandsmuseum.com/cars/elise/thec...gine/kingk.html

 

As I read it, it's a good engine IF (and it's a BIG IF) it's been tuned properly and using good components, relevant adjustments made (relocating the thermostat etc., upgrading the hg too I think?).

Even in standard tune, it still needs these modifications (as I understand it, Rover did *finally* make these mods - but too late, damage was done to the reputation).

From a customer perspective, their car breaks down due to something to do with the engine thus it has been and unreliable engine. Of course it can be made to work properly and reliably but that doesn't help joe blogs in his current Rover/MG as they don't have this magical modified engine in their car.

Whereas the Honda (and others) engine just works out the box straight from the manufacturer, no mods required.

I may be wrong but that's how I read it.

 

As far as i know the engineers did have a solution but didnt get the money at a crucial time to implement whilst the managers were pissing about with MG Z power or whatever it was wasting money on that. IMO most of the car were 'sundays dinner reheated' look at the 25 etc .

To me a big shame

I know a few lads who have owned cars with them in and they are not bad but 2 of them had HG failures, one at 25k miles.

You get alot of them with cam's on, one came into my mates tuning spot with cams, it was a kitcar.

 

slightly biased article by the looks of it. comparing a rwd setup engine with manifolds etc against a fwd with a lot less power and smaller clutch, tiny exhaust manifold etc

i know which i'd want in my car

 

What a complete load of b0ll0cks.

First off they start comparing the narrow bearings to that of a Formula 1 car. Which apparently is good.

Then they say that longer stroke is better than shorter stroke. He doesn't mention that this is completely backwards to an F1 car.

Oh, and when that article was 'revised' an F1 engine needed a rebuild every 200 miles.

And then his trump card - weight.

Yes the K-Series is light.

Well done

However, light is no good if you need a rebuild every 5 minutes.

Yes, there are effective measures to prolong engine life of the K, but these are all going to add weight, something the writer fails to mention - he keeps harking back to the 'Standard 1.6 K'.

Here is my conclusion:

The K-Series had great ideas, but was never a great engine.

The F20C was, and is, an amazing engine - Power, revs, reliability, driveability, and Euro IV emmissions compliant.

 

Whats this flatline crank or whatever its called?

I believe its used in Yahama motorbikes?

 

Flat Plane Crank AJ. Not laughing it you BTW, just flat line = dead and it was kind of funny in a sad nerdy engineering way...

Under the bikes section, some people on this very forum were badgering on about the new Flat Plane crank used in the R1 and how it makes the difference.

Unfortunately, they were talking bull5h1t - the new R1 has a Cross Plane crank which, IMHO on a Road bike, is a gimmic.

Afore mentioned people then told me I was wrong even though they didn't really know what a Flat/Cross plane crank was and the differences between them

To answer your question AJ, a flat plane crank is a crank shaft that operates on only 1 plane. If you look at the crank side on, it will look like a solid bar (up/down strokes are 180 degrees apart). A cross plane crank will not look flat side on - you will see the protrusions at multiple angles.

All 4 cylinder engines that I know of, bar the yamaha, adopt this method.

 

The guy that sits next to me has a an Elise with a K series.

In the 9 months I've been here he has replaced his engine twice

Need I say more

 

i try to put in humour sometimes.

So whats the score with lower down torque and upper power??

 

and he states that larger bearing area means increased friction.

I was taught that friction is independent of area.