Re: Cub 172's Flamer Project
Right, update time. Apologies - this is likely to be a long one, with quite a few ups and downs.
Since having the cage and seats put in, I started to plan a 'season' of trackdays to get the best out of the flamer and to improve my own track skills somewhat
I aimed to do 6 to 8 trackdays between Feb and Oct, and with this in mind at the tail end of last year I booked both Bedford GT circuit on Feb 16th (Chips PassionFord day) and Burpspeed's third Llandow day on March 7th. The intention was then to book Anglesey, Mallory, Cadwell, Castle Combe and Silverstone or Bedford again. However, just after christmas the problems started.
The Flamer has always used a small amount of oil, ever since I bought it from JMS. When I say small, I mean small enough not to worry, topping it up say 0.75l every 4000 or so miles. It also ran strong at K-Tecs rolling road (174bhp and 157 lb ft) so for a car with 80k miles on and one engine rebuilt under its belt, it wasn't overly concerning me. After christmas and early January it started using alot of oil, and on a cold day I could see noticeable puffs of white smoke coming out of the exhaust on down shifts or when taking it high in the rev range. The rate at which it ate oil began to increase, worryingly.
It also felt down on power, still pulling when on cam, but not as punchy as it was when the cams first went in. So, the Surrey Rolling Road day on the 9th Feb rolled up. Was great to meet some new faces, see old ones and watch Budgie's ineptness with the baller beemer
. Unsurprisingly the flamer did not run good figures. It ran 184 bhp (can't remember lb ft off the top of my head). Considering it ran 197bhp and 167lb ft at K-Tec, which Charlie said should translate to 190ish on his rollers, it was clear the flamer was poorly. This is where the fun starts.
I had bedford booked, so ran the flamer anyway. Epically it ran all day, with 3 others driving it in addition to myself, it was constantly on track. The flamer was like a ring-taxi, lol. Really enjoyed Bedford, first time there and I loved it. Was great to have a strong clio contingent out, and catch up with people off here. The only problem was it boiled its brake fluid - big thanks to Mike from MWM for an impromptu fluid change in the pits. Oh, and it ate 2.5 litres of oil, in one day on track
Anyway, I spoke to Mike (MWM) whilst at Bedford and agreed to get it booked in with him to do a compression test, leak down and map check. So, I took it down to Mike and my worst fears were confirmed. It ran 140,150,150,155 on the compression test. It was also pushing oil out of itself at every opportunity. So, onto the map test. I don't want to spend a lot of time or effort arguing on a forum, so i'll keep it brief and people can read into it what they want. The AFR showed the map was lean from 0 to 6k pretty much, ranging from slightly lean, to not so slightly lean. Not so lean that it was causing cold start issues, or any noticeable problems, but at one point it was in the 15's. Mike will know more, as he has the data log. I think its fair to say, there have been a few 'interesting' threads of late, in relation to 438's and their mapping. I know of at least 4 cars that have now had problems with maps on their 438'd cars.
In the interests of fairness, I took it back to K-Tec (i've used them for everything since I bought the car, so it hasn't been in anyone elses hands). They had it for half a day, did their own compression, leak down and map check. The compression was low but slightly higher than when Mike did it, 155 - 160 across the board, and they then told me the leak down came back fine. They were as surprised about this as I was, and I still struggle to grasp how an engine that seems to push oil out of itself at a rate of knots, has low compression and is down on power, comes back as fine on a leak down. Anyway, onto the map. They checked the map and I was told they put a bit of fueling back in but it wasn't lean enough to cause problems. So.....read into it what you will, I am amazed it still ran 184bhp at SRR a few weeks earlier if I'm honest.
Please don't turn this project thread into an 'anti k-tec' abuse thread, as I don't want it locked. I'll know more when the dead engine comes out. At the moment, it could have been a number of things (the engine itself is Guppy's old ITB'd 182 one) and I don't have any categorical evidence to the contrary. When I take the engine apart, i'll update you all accordingly
So...I then decided if it was dying, I might aswell run the car at Llandow, which I did. And despite it eating oil again, it performed well and was still great fun. The gripper diff once again delivered its value, and I feel is by far the best mod to the clio. Luke shared the driving with me, and seemed to enjoy himself
. Hopefully it has persuaded him to get back into a clio. Tony and Jay took it out also, and commented on how it was clearly both 'poorly' and also quite vague on the steering. I need to investigate this, as the day progressed I also felt the steering got worse. It may be the Bilsteins as they've done 18k with no refurb yet. Either way, I think a full refresh of the steering bits and bobs at the front may be on the agenda. First though, the engine.
Its bad timing, as I'm moving house, so every spare bit of cash is going into that. Short term, i'm hoping to get the dying one out, and put a standard engine in and sell the cams to raise funds. This means I can run it, enjoy it on track, whilst saving for the longer term options. The longer term options i'm considering are;
- Forge it, then ITB it with lairy cams.
- Forge it, then turbo it.
- Forge it, then supercharge it.
Do any of the above, not forging it. So...what do the masses think?
Here are some pics of it in action at llandow;
