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.

Worthwhile to upgrde cams on a Clio 172





Hi,

I was reading the threads on upgrading the cams for the Clio.

I was wondering whether the Clio 172 can accept upgraded cams without further mods to the head,inlet manifold and exhaust manifold? I understand the engine in a Clio 172 is already in a high state of tune - so theoretically it should be able to support cams with higher lift right?

BenR - you seem to be the Clio engine guru, any advice??

Greetings to Konahead and KKChan! Glad to see more buddies from Singapore in this forum! Wuz quite lonely at the beginning.
 

GR7

  Shiny red R32


I think that clever Ben has gone to France in his new/old XR2 for a couple of days.
 


lol at Ben. I asked this before. You do get good gains from what I saw on DEJANs car. But many tuners in france have destroyed engines doing this. I was going to go for cams and head work. But headwork will only give you 5 bhp at most, and cams about 7bhp. Might as well save that money and go for a turbo 172 when the conversion comes out

Chun.
 


Thanks Chun,

Thats Scary....

If tuners in France itself, home of the Clio - can destroy engines on a 172 trying to upgrade the cams.... I wonder what could tuners in Singapore do.... blow up the whole car??

Renault Clio 172 Turbo..... yeah thats the promised land.

Do you know anyone who is developing such a conversion? How are they gonna fit everything under the bonnet anyway? Our engine bay is already cramped enough...
 


I think GTtuning is developing one in the uk. If you look behind the engine this is where the exhaust manifold comes out of the engine, and there should be enough space for some sort of turbo. Not really sure ont his tho.

Chun.
 


Colombo & Bariani do Cams for the Clio 172

Clio 2000 RS Spec as follows:

Inlet Cam Lift:
5.7
Exhaust Cam Lift:
5.5
Duration Inlet/Exhaust:
282o/280o
Lobe Centre Angle:
124o
Duration:
17o-85o / 68o-32o
Inlet Valve Lift ASP/SCA T.D.C.
0.5 / 1.3
Clearance Inlet/Exhaust (1/100 mm)
P.I.

Cost:
Road Profile (S) 578,94 euros
Race Profile (C) 684,30 euros


Cheers,

Simon
 


yo strike...glad to be here...was actually lurking for a while since i was still fairly clueless at the beginning re the clio...

the guru f5 has the extractors for both the 8v and 16v already...jarrod has it on his 8v...

i think overall speaking, to do the cams here in singapore would be a bit dicey as the expertise may not be there...id stay clear of it...but then thats me!


kona
www.renaultcarclub.com
 


I have spoken to Hillpowr power about cams. Piper in the UK do some for the 172, but he did mention about cams snapping or something on the lines. Looks dodgy to me, up to you if you think you wanna risk it

Chun.
 


Kona,

Well I did ask the guru abt upgrading the cams. He said to give him the specs of the new cams and he would see if they were suitable.

But I agree it is a very risky proposition to mess with the cams.... I think a turbo kit would even be a safer bet! (when it comes out)
 


strike, i gibe up on the cams thingie...$$$ matters unfortunately...will wait and get the ms designs stuff done and chuck the exhaust in by july/aug and next jan/feb will be konai coilovers...then i stop...*sob*


kona
www.renaultcarclib.com
 


hiya all, back from france now. Regarding the cams in the 172, i wouldnt bother, there isnt much more power you can get out of the F4R engine without spending thousands of pounds. If you wnted more power you would need the whole lot, cams with higher lift as the main priority, larger vavles (very important!!!!), if you can find someone to work on your head with a proper flow bench, lightened and ba;anced crand, flywheel, pistons, conrods...the lot...basically a race engine.
Even the standard exhaust is so efficient that after market ones would do very little, contrary to belief....the cat is capable of up to 230 odd bhp.
i would concentrate on the chassis, with top knotch shocks etc. maybe nitros (like me) for a quick fix,
 


nah, not a turbo,it would riun the drivability of the clio, sa the sudden boost of power will unsettle the chassis round a bend as is quite twitchy.....like the other post, asuperchager might be the answer. Because of the VVt and other electronic gizmos, its harder to get power out of the F4R. However, the F7R that they have in the williams, is easy to get 220bhp, as these are what i use in the formula renault and sport spider classes.
 


BenR - You mentioned the standard exhaust on the 172 being really good compared to after market ones. Do you know if I had a Magnex 6x4 oval backbox fitted whether this would REDUCE the cars power. I am not interested in performance gains, just the look and noise of the backbox...have heard that it can reduce the back pressure and the low down torque, I really dont want to affect my low down acceleration at all. I have a mk1 172 by the way....
 


All I can say is Ive got BMC induction kit and Magnex oval cat back system and my car knocked out 160 BHP @ wheels. This was with loads of other Clios and the road seemed fairly accurate when a Std. 16v put out what was expected.

So I doubt the BMC kit was responsible on its own for the power increase.
 


youll be surprise what decent induction can do. As a general rule, the exhaust can only gain power when it becomes one of the limiting factors. So until you over load the exhaust, it will be more than fine.
The magnex wont casue you to loose power. and back pressure is very misundrstood by most people. Its not where the gasses meet atmospheric pressure, but how the pressure changes inside the haxhast system. So, if you had a 2" system, then added a 2.5" section, where they meet, the back pressure would be reduced. And fitting a back box could do this, if its much marger than teh standard system. However, lower back pressure would only lose power on an engine without VVT where they cant change the amount of valve overlap whilst the engine is running. So at low rpm, where valve overlap occured, the exhaust valve would actually stay partially open during the intake stroke. The reason for this is at high rpm, when exhaust gasses are expelled and pushed out, they creaste an area of lower or nagative pressure behind teh echaust valve. This would help the engine "suck" in more combustion mixture at high rpms cause of the lower pressure zone, just in the begining of the exhaust manifold.
but at low rpm, becasue there is more time for the mixture to enter the cylinder, some unburnt mixture would therefore actually excape through the exhaust valve......and VE would be lowere than nesissary. Basically, lots of valve overlap is for high end power, little for low end torque. back pressure can be used in the same way. Little back pressure for max power, the right amount for torque.
 


oh, and for rhte RR results, since a standard car went on the rolers first, they would fiddle the settings so that it would get close to standard stated power. However, when you car goes on, all you haev to do is change one parameter on the machine, i.e. inlet temp.....increasing this make the computer compensate for high ambient temps and adjust the equation for the power result.
So, i really dont trust RR operators.....the only thing i would trust is the torque reading from the wheels, then calculate your power from there.
 


Top