Rick Morrison wrote:
> ANYTIME you up the HP output on ANY engine, it needs to be strengthened.
I don't think this is universally true on a couple of
levels.
First of all, it should be cut with the line that it needs only
to be strengthened if longevity is a concern. Most engines will
survive well about their rated specs, at least for a race or two.
As well, it has to be said that the possibility always exists
that an engine is overbuilt. I am not suggesting any models,
but it is quite likely that many engines out there are overbuilt
and could happily deliver 50% more horsepower or better. Probably
less likely in modern computer designed engines where every
component can be caracterized, but likely true.
I would actually predict that our LBC engines have a good
chance of falling in this category. For example, it's a fact
that MG's monocoques (such as the MGB and especially the Z Magnettes)
are EXTREMELY overbuilt. At the time, monocoque was not fully
caracterizable in CAD like it can be today, and many designs
erred on the side of caution.
> For a street engine, reliablility should
> be foremost in the builders mind.
Not foremost, but certainly a consideration. REASONABLE
reliability being the key.
I have a sort-of-wild MGB with aeroscreens and fiberglass
panels and some tuning and so on. It's a load of fun but
because of the practicality I seem to be lucky to get 2000
miles a year. (I have other MGs to choose from and if the
wife gets a vote it's always the Midget 1500)
A B engine might get 100,000 miles typically. If I
built it hot and could still get 20,000 miles between
rebuilds, that might be worthwhile for me. I'd get more
smiles out of the car and still only need an engine
once a decade.
--
Trevor Boicey, P. Eng.
Ottawa, Canada, tboicey@brit.ca
ICQ #17432933 http://www.brit.ca/~tboicey/
|