|
|
Post by Steve on Mar 8, 2005 4:14:08 GMT -5
Whilst still collecting the parts. I came across the following on Mike Satur's site. "ENGINE LIFE SAVER KIT
Due to the number of engines we have seen suffer major damage to the cam bolts either coming loose or breaking we have developed an upgraded bolt replacement kit that replaces the two cam bolts on the 1.8i and the 4 bolts on the VVC. These inexpensive kits could save you thousands of pounds if the standard bolts fail. These are quickly changed and we recommend they are installed at your next service interval or sooner if you don't feel lucky. The price of the kits are £9.53 for the VVC and £6.83 for the 1.8i. Prices are plus vat and delivery. "
Thoughts?
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob Bell on Mar 8, 2005 5:58:24 GMT -5
Erm - you know, I don't know what to make of this. It probably will do no harm, but is it the necessity that Mike's sales speak would suggest? Not sure. Certainly, there have been a number of failures of VVC cam bolts (related to mis-torquing at the factory and resulting in the later recall) - but I am not aware of any problems with the standard 16v engine.
What's your thoughts Steve?
|
|
|
|
Post by ScarletFever on Mar 8, 2005 11:59:28 GMT -5
I have spoken to Mike about these cam bolts, here's what he told me.
He said that after coming across this problem a number of times he sourced the bolt supplier in an effort to get his own spec versions made up. The bolt supplier didn't know what they were being used for by MGR (why would they, they just make bolts and stuff) and were surprised to find that the MGF recommended torque settings were right on the upper limit of what the bolts were designed to take. It's no wonder they have been failing, it only takes a slight miscalculation and they are torqued too far. Basically when torqued to MGRs recommendations there is no margin for safety.
Mike's bolts come from the same manufacturer and are identical other than they have a higher permissable torque setting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob Bell on Mar 9, 2005 13:16:04 GMT -5
Yes, I remember reading that too Andrew. However, there are some very clever folks at Powertrain, folks who probably don't make fundamental errors when specifying parts like this. Is the existing cam bolt so specified for a reason other than cost - or is cost the be-all and end-all of this conundrum?
I think that my take on this is going to be along the lines that fit the 'life saver' bolts by all means, but ensure that they are correctly torqued. But on a standard 1.8i head with solid cams, the standard bolts are probably adequate for the job.
|
|
|
|
Post by ScarletFever on Mar 10, 2005 6:45:12 GMT -5
Sounds like a reasonable approach to take to me. Personally i had mine changed to Mike's version when i had the HGF and head work done - seemed like a good opportunity to do a bit of preventative maintenance.  |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Bell on Mar 11, 2005 10:03:33 GMT -5
Personally i had mine changed to Mike's version when i had the HGF and head work done - seemed like a good opportunity to do a bit of preventative maintenance. You're right! An opportunity too good to miss!  |
|
|
|
Post by ScarletFever on Mar 21, 2005 10:41:10 GMT -5
Actually mate, that's been my philosophy all along. Somthing happens, rather than look on it in a pessimistic way, i regard it as an opportunity and then look into other options. Thus when my HGF happened i sorted out the following items... Stage 1 head matched to inlet manifold Life saver cam bolts Uprated gasket Steel dowels Aluminium underbody coolant pipes MS large capacity ali radiator I also had the ITG Maxogen that was sitting in a box in my gagrage fitted at the same time. No problems, only opportunities... Although i admit my resolve in this regard was severly tested following the accident in 2003! Still it all worked out for the best i reckon |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Regens on Apr 7, 2005 3:50:45 GMT -5
As my VVC has just clocked 125000km and with some competition work comming up, I thought the kit would be a good idea as she often hits 7100rpm and about the the only original parts not replaced are the pistons bearings and cams.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob Bell on Apr 7, 2005 9:06:11 GMT -5
That sounds like a sensible precaution Andrew Certainly, competition cars do get more than their fair share of thrashing! In case anyone is reading this and is wondering what ever happened to my plans for a cam swap - well, they're still on, just waiting to get time to do the job!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on May 24, 2005 9:41:20 GMT -5
Is there any reason why a pair of Piper re-profiled VVC exhaust cams could not be fitted to a 1.8i head. (One as exhaust the other on the inlet). With a duration of 264 and a lift of 9.86 they would appear to be a good choice  If they can be obtained for a good price i.e. cheap! |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Bell on May 26, 2005 10:31:56 GMT -5
Yes, these would be a cracking choice of cams Steve - basically you are buying BP270H cams I am sure that a fellow knitter would be prepared to buy the TF135s off you  |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Bell on May 26, 2005 10:37:11 GMT -5
Just a reminder of what the Piper cams 'look' like: | MGF 1.8i | TF 115/135 | VVC & 160 | Piper
BP255H | Piper
BP270H
629/623 |
[/center][/tr] [tr][td] Inlet[/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][/tr] [tr][td]Opens [/td] [td]12o BTDC [/td][td]11 o BTDC [/td][td]0 o BTDC [/td][td]14 o BTDC [/td][td]20 o BTDC/ 24 o BTDC [/td][/center][/tr] [tr][td]Closes [/td] [td]52o ABDC [/td][td]61 o ABDC [/td][td]40 o ABDC [/td][td]54 o ABDC [/td][td]60 o ABDC/ 64 o ABDC [/td][/center][/tr] [tr][td] Exhaust[/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td] [td][/td] [/tr] [tr][td]Opens [/td] [td]52o BBDC [/td][td]51 o BBDC [/td][td]51 o BBDC [/td][td]54 oÊBBDC [/td][td]64 o BBDC/ 68 o BBDC [/td][/center][/tr] [tr][td]Closes [/td] [td]12o ATDC [/td][td]21 o ATDC [/td][td]21 o ATDC [/td][td]14 o ATDC [/td][td]16 o ATDC/ 20 o ATDC [/td][/tr] [tr][/center][/tr] [tr][td] Valve Open
Period
[/td] [td]244o [/td][td]252 o [/td][td]220-295 o [/td][td] 248 o [/td][td] 260 o/268 o [/td][/center][/tr] [tr][td] Valve Lift[/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td] [td][/td] [/tr] [tr][td]Inlet [/td] [td]8.8mm [/td][td]9.5mm [/td][td]9.5mm [/td][td] 8.8mm [/td][td] 9.7mm/9.3mm [/td][/center][/tr] [tr][td]Exhaust [/td] [td]8.8mm [/td][td]9.5mm [/td][td]9.2mm [/td][td] 8.8mm [/td][td] 9.7mm/9.3mm [/td][/center][/tr] [/table] So, in fact, the reground VVC cam actually looks somewhat more aggressive than the original grind 270 cam... Do we know what lift the 633 cam has? My only anxiety would be coil-binding the standard valve springs (unless your head was upgraded in this respect when it was ported Steve?). The Piper 633 is apparently on that limit of coil binding, so I would most definitely not exceed the lift of these cams. Remember that the VVC uses a different valve spring to the MPi head - it was designed to make use of higher lift cams from the outset. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on May 27, 2005 3:10:41 GMT -5
The 633 grind has 10mm lift and 264 duration. So I would be under than.
Re: the RaceSpeed/Janspeed head has std cams and springs etc.
I might drop a note to DVA just to check.
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob Bell on May 27, 2005 8:52:13 GMT -5
Yes, it sounds as though you will be safe there, thank goodness Steve - but checking with DVA seems like a very sensible move. |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Bell on May 31, 2005 10:24:34 GMT -5
Any news from DVA Steve?
Also - in case anyone's missed it - the cam swap has been postponed as we're off to Emerald on Sunday to check out the performance of this lovely new 4-2-1 manifold! ;D
|
|
