ClioSport.net

Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.

LAD again! lmfao!!





Just read a copy of Car Conversions in Smiths!

battle of the tuned monsters!!! about 30 cars in all, all tuned versions of the norm hot hatch/beast.

They narrowed in down to the finallists, a modded evo, that (waspy) elise, Some companies RS focus, a CTR, alfa 147 with turbo conversion, and one other i think!

The funniest part was readin the stats...... all figures were produced, power, torque, the usual, then came 0-60 times, the standard then after tuned. They all gave some impressive gains, spesh the 147, 0-60 in 10-11secs b4 and 7sec after!!!!

But good old LAD! The clio cup 200, (standard) 0-60= 6.5secs, (Tuned) 0-60=7.05secs!!!! lol! it was the only car that didnt improve! figures speak for themselve lads!!!!
 


Yeah Ive heard a lot about their supposed gains not being up to much.

Think a lot of saxo owners are particularly unimpressed.

Thing is you never know what that individual car was performing like before the work was done.
 


Tuned 240BHP Type R Civic won- THE CUP STILL CAME SECOND beating the lancer Evo - They claimed the torque and midrange pull was impressive over the standard cup but the 0-60 time I wouldnt read into that -it was probably a bad timing run or something. But yeah LAD arent doing themselves any favors - I can only conclude that it ashould really have read 6.05 seconds - which would be good ?
 


The CTR is a great motor - remember its only 3 miles an hour down top speed on the New V6...............
 
  Mazda 2, MX5 Mk2.5 Sport


Quote: Originally posted by RSTDL on 08 August 2003

The CTR is a great motor - remember its only 3 miles an hour down top speed on the New V6...............
yeah but i know which one Id rather have! and its not the bread van
 


My brother has a saxo, and has been very unimpressed with LAD himself, and knows a lot of other saxo/106 owners that werent happy with their work.
 


Sorry to hear about those 106/saxo owners. I got lucky and had a go in one of their demo cars that a local dealer had a few years back. Straight away I could tell there wasnt much in it (if anything) so never took my 106 to them.

Close shave!?!
 


Quote: Originally posted by paddymph on 08 August 2003

howcome theres companies thatll tune the CTR to 240bhp yet were struggling to get past 185?! :confused:
because the MKT will pay for it.

172 owers wont really do anything, only a few hardcore people.

You can easily get the clio 16V to 200bhp, part are available, yet i dont see anybody doing it, if its not bolt on people wont do it.

Ive offered headwork on the 172s for ages, great gains to be had, but not one person asking seriously for work, not that its expensive. Somethign scary about taking a head off or something?

I dunno, maybe honda owners are more in the know. :confused:
 


Ben the reason being is that no companies have released tuning packges for the 172, for a CTR you can get loads of stuff:



Cams

Manifolds

VTEC controller

Full exhaust systems

de-cats

etc etc
 


Quote: Originally posted by Neil82cup on 09 August 2003


Ben the reason being is that no companies have released tuning packges for the 172, for a CTR you can get loads of stuff:
Thats not an answer, thats a question...........sheesh.

The reason should be an answer to WHY havent they........because there is no money in it, if there was they would be jumping all over us. Not that the engine cant make it, but the owners arent the sort to dish out teh money neccesary for the power they want........catch 22, you want 220bhp, but you dont want the car to be out fo your hands for 3 weeks and you dont want them to take it apart and you dont want to pay 3K+...............erm, why whinge then.
 


Quote: Originally posted by BenR on 09 August 2003


Ive offered headwork on the 172s for ages, great gains to be had, but not one person asking seriously for work, not that its expensive. Somethign scary about taking a head off or something?
How expensive? How long would it take?
 


bout 400-450 quid and take about a week or 2 including postal time.

i dont rush my work so i tend to take a few days longer than others do, but teh pre season rush is long gone and i dont have any other heads to do at the moment so it might be quicker.
 


Are you able to do it on an exchange basis? Only got the one car now and we both need it. Would be willing and able to pay £400 for the work though. I could easily come down to Bristol (as I probably mentioned before).

Rhys
 


I dont have a spare F4R head lying about im afraid, and me sourcing one and doing it on an exhange basis would leave me out of pocket including the money i get for your work.

You could come to bristol, but i dunno what you would do for a week +, bristolgets pretty boring pretty quickly.

Ill see what i can do about sourcing a spare head.
 


well, he can have one if he wants one, but i have no idea why he would want a head from a different engine. lol
 


Not much good on an F4R engine though :confused:

If youve still got your cup, Ill buy the head off that for £25. you bung the F7R head on it and sell it like that, everyones a winner ;)
 


whos got a cup!? lol

There is a spare head in the workshop here, but i have no idea how i would get it back to HK in my luggage, probably think it was a bomb or something!
 


Ben how much would a head cost brand new from renault? I would get this done but if i stuck a modded head on the car with the ECU mods would it not totally f**k up? Or owuld it still run sweet but just now make as much gains.
 


£1.3k for a new head :eek: I wonder how much it would cost to build a 172 out of parts purchased from Renault?!
 


ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

why of course!

i have 2 F7P heads (P & R are the same casting bar different inlet valves) at home. Only problem being the 32mm inlets instead of 30mm, which would mean additional cost to buy the 32mm inlets and recut the seats to fit.

400 quid is your basic price and includes.

Chemical dip clean, bead blast, all port work, all labour on disasembly and assemby including consumable parts like stem seals, checking of springs/valves/tappets, cleaning up of water and oilways, multi angle valveseats, face skim.

But there is an additional cost for parts which arent covered, i always replace the valve guides and typically the collets unless they look brand new.

So roughly 450 quid all in

You can also ask for anything extra or different you want done or changed, and prices can get fairly high when you start talking oversizes valves, fancy valve seat angles, ground down guides etc etc etc.

Price can be made less but would mean less work to the ports or less cleaning/machining or me working on a bare casting that you send with valves for me to cut and lap.
 
C

Cupster



BenR I been trying to find an old thread of yours (I think) where you mentioned getting 210 hp from head work on a 172(May be wrong or dreaming) Im guessing this would make quite a difference in performance especially to a Cup. Whats the price you can do this for? and what kind of torque increases would this bring I could be completely wrong about all this sorry if im rambling:oops:
 


That was with the use of throttle bodies.

ANyway, the inlet manifold on isnt very helpfull and combined with headwork some rather decent gains are available. Im not able to quote a figure as the rest of your engines condition and a whole host of other variables will affect power and torque gains. But i would generally say a 7-10% increase maybe more.

Basic head price is posted above and to do the manifolds aswell itll cost about 50-80 quid extra as they are monster big and would require me to cut the top of the plenham off, work the runners then tig weld it back on and smooth it. You wont really notice it, but its essential so that i can get to the runner mouths at the top or there is no real point.
 


Top