Club 80-90 Forums

31.5 kg-m is 227.84 ft-lbf

Best sfc on that 3000 rpm plateau: 200 g /HP/hour

Presumably @ 120 HP full throttle (you need a set of what are called sfc polars to see the full picture against throttle opening)

That is definately the best engine for a syncro. No'2 is a DJ.
Now all that is needed is a Porsche gearbox, unless you have a DJ.

Think Pete would say the EJ22 is the second best, 2/3 of what he's got now!

..and the 'ticking time' bombs that his (Bwana John) and I have got, come a close last

Haven't got a graph but ELSAWIN gives torque for an ARL code engine (diesel PD, 1896cc displacement) as 320Nm at 1900rpm and output as 110Kw at 4000rpm - I'll let Clive convert to Imperial or whatever.
Fuel consumption is pretty good too.

Just use the known figures 180 and 132 for wheel nut torques, so that's 132/180 or 0.7333 or lets say a rule of thumb 3/4

3/4 of 320 = 960/4 = 240 ft-lbf (236 true figure) as good as the same!


===== ===

So as you run through 1900 rpm and Pete runs through 3000 rpm you will be accelerating at the same rate - at the same overall gear ratio. (ignoring the actual speed dependent drag)

However, at that same overall gear ratio

1) You will start decelerating and need another gear quite a bit sooner

2) SVX will be going 50% faster (wherever you are on the road doesn't matter, just comparing max accelerations)

3) You will run out of 'power' at the higher speeds earlier than the SVX, of course.

In fact, I imagine the SVX will not run out of power before the vehicle or driver runs out of capability

Gearbox reliability...

Both have same torque...

Peak-to-mean torque fluctuations..

Doug - has dual-mass flywheel to damp out torque fluctuations

Pete - has a smooth six-cylinder engine to do same, and its running 50% faster at max torque speed, both meaning individual impulses are much lower

I'd still fancy the SVX to win on that count actually, but cannot be sure.

Pete stands to heat gearbox oil up more, due to overall lower gearing and likelihood of putting more long term heat into oil (higher input shaft rpm) (and knowing how he drives

A draw?

I think dougs will win on fuel consumption!

> In fact, I imagine the SVX will not run out of power before the vehicle or driver runs out of capability

That was certainly my feeling yesterday as I was piloting it down the back road ! Number one for me would be a suspension rebuild and new tyres, followed by new brakes. Then I'd have to start thinking about the transmission...

Ah, wandering about a bit was it Andy ?

Lower the front an inch or so

Was the crane and generator still in the back

I definitely liked the sound it made... yummy sound that

I think dougs will win on fuel consumption!

I suppose that's a possibility

But then, good music doesn't come cheap, will save you a lot on ICE...

syncrosimon wrote:And why is it people want diesel???

For a perfect torque curve which no petrol will EVER match with same cc, the engine in doug's is about as good as diesel gets and is outstanding.

but you cant put it in the water.
Russel

Russel at Syncro-Nutz wrote:but you cant put it in the water.
Russel

That'll be the difference between diesel and petrol, but then I don't think this conversion isn't intending on seeing much deep water.

But then I prefer someone else to test the the water.
Seriously though, I admit there are potential limitations with the PD engine mixing it with the wet stuff.
I have tried to minimise the ingress if water by siting components high up , where possible, and waterproofing when not.
So far I have no problems with wading, probably the deepest so far were encountered during our laning weekend last month
The engine and gearbox are now out of the truck so Aidan can breathe longevity into the gearbox and for me to do a few jobs.

Wouldn't have thought you'd have much to fear with water Doug... what's still lowdown?

Should think judging by WBX's that the Subaru should burble on through up to a reasanable depth... perhaps we shall see!

Make a helluva bow wave if you booted it though