engine refresh?
Discussion
My R300 spec engine has been caned pretty mercilessly for the last 15000 miles, a significant proportion of which was on track. The only maintenance was oil and filter change every 3000 miles. I've never heard of a refresh on either R300 or R400 engines and there seems to be a lot of evidence that the R500 k can go for a lot more than 3000miles without one too unless it's a race car.
The short answer to your question is no!
The short answer to your question is no!
Thanks Vlad, that is good to know looks like a caterham will be coming my way soon hopefully, looking forward to a lot more trackdays.
Not sure if I understand Colin's post, are you saying there not that reliable or that a refresh on r300 /r400 is over the top?
Anyway anyone wanting to sell a r300 - r500 let me know.
Thanks
Not sure if I understand Colin's post, are you saying there not that reliable or that a refresh on r300 /r400 is over the top?
Anyway anyone wanting to sell a r300 - r500 let me know.
Thanks
I think the concern of quite a lot of us K series owners is that MG Rover went bust in 2005 so we are now owners of an engine that is not just out of production but the product of a defunct company.
The good new is that SIAC is, in the N-series engine, making a carbon copy of the K series with some of the Land Rover designed improvements (e.g. beefed up oil rail) built in. So there should be a continuing supply of major engine castings. Unfortunately written off K series heads are not unknown and by pulling a HGF the engine may make up its own mind about when it gets refreshed
The good new is that SIAC is, in the N-series engine, making a carbon copy of the K series with some of the Land Rover designed improvements (e.g. beefed up oil rail) built in. So there should be a continuing supply of major engine castings. Unfortunately written off K series heads are not unknown and by pulling a HGF the engine may make up its own mind about when it gets refreshed
Oh goodie, it's the old wives tale of K reliability again...It just varies from 30,000 <-> 3,000.
Every engine fails when maintenance, or exceeding design criteria. The K can be more sensitive to heat, and needs oil everywhere so has to be maintained slightly more diligently than
some other Cat engines, but this is not your Gran's car -- but a car meant to go to the limits.
I for one am not known to hang around in our Se7en -- far more fun out blazing a new trail at the head of a Blat when the opportunity strikes me. Our SV has litterally (twice!) been shipped all over the world and had more ship miles than any other, and weathers and is dead nuts reliable (minus the CRB/plate failing last year).
The K series engine, when properly maintained, new oils & filters is far more reliable than 3,000 miles for almost everyone. For example we have a modified K -- a VHPD that's around 210Bhp that has 30,000 miles on it for a 8 year old car. Oils and fluids changed very regularly, oil changes after track days, other lubricants/fluids at 1/2 recommended intervals = no worries. When I had our engine out last year, then put it back in I checked the compression, etc. My compression for a higher Bhp car was less than 2% different than new, with 30,000 miles. Earlier K's (late 90's) had a slightly weaker HG so could fail, but not all the time as the rumours would suggest. Solution was simple, put in a redesigned / refined HG and problem gone. Some have changed from block-based thermostat to remote, others have done nothing, a few have dropped to lower Centigrade thermostats with higher Bhp's to "dump heat" sooner.
Some higher HP engines in someone's rumour mongered world have had a few issues but there are a fair number of DVA K's that are 240Bhp plus with no reliability issues.
Buy it -- drive the @£$% out of it, love it and care for it more than the usual uber-rep-mobile and it will reward you for a lot of years!
Every engine fails when maintenance, or exceeding design criteria. The K can be more sensitive to heat, and needs oil everywhere so has to be maintained slightly more diligently than
some other Cat engines, but this is not your Gran's car -- but a car meant to go to the limits.
I for one am not known to hang around in our Se7en -- far more fun out blazing a new trail at the head of a Blat when the opportunity strikes me. Our SV has litterally (twice!) been shipped all over the world and had more ship miles than any other, and weathers and is dead nuts reliable (minus the CRB/plate failing last year).
The K series engine, when properly maintained, new oils & filters is far more reliable than 3,000 miles for almost everyone. For example we have a modified K -- a VHPD that's around 210Bhp that has 30,000 miles on it for a 8 year old car. Oils and fluids changed very regularly, oil changes after track days, other lubricants/fluids at 1/2 recommended intervals = no worries. When I had our engine out last year, then put it back in I checked the compression, etc. My compression for a higher Bhp car was less than 2% different than new, with 30,000 miles. Earlier K's (late 90's) had a slightly weaker HG so could fail, but not all the time as the rumours would suggest. Solution was simple, put in a redesigned / refined HG and problem gone. Some have changed from block-based thermostat to remote, others have done nothing, a few have dropped to lower Centigrade thermostats with higher Bhp's to "dump heat" sooner.
Some higher HP engines in someone's rumour mongered world have had a few issues but there are a fair number of DVA K's that are 240Bhp plus with no reliability issues.
Buy it -- drive the @£$% out of it, love it and care for it more than the usual uber-rep-mobile and it will reward you for a lot of years!
Edited by Steve-B on Friday 10th September 08:45
Steve-B said:
Oh goodie, it's the old wives tale of K reliability again...It just varies from 30,000 <-> 3,000.
I think the OP is more likely referring to the information in the Caterham Owner's manual rather than any old wives tale - "Superlight R500 models have special servicing requirements..."Shouldn't that be "feed it all the petrol you can lay your hands on..."
Edited to add that the continuing production in China of the engine is good news for us and that, without that concern over cylinder head availability is reasonable given the following warning on Dave Andrew's website:-
"Due to increasing porosity problems with poor quality K series head castings which have been given to me in exchange I have revised the way I offer an exchange cylinder head service for kits which include a modified cylinder head. Customer heads will be accepted on a provisional basis, if after refacing they prove to have damage/porosity issues or are insufficiently hard then a surcharge will be made and the head will be returned to the customer."
Edited to add that the continuing production in China of the engine is good news for us and that, without that concern over cylinder head availability is reasonable given the following warning on Dave Andrew's website:-
"Due to increasing porosity problems with poor quality K series head castings which have been given to me in exchange I have revised the way I offer an exchange cylinder head service for kits which include a modified cylinder head. Customer heads will be accepted on a provisional basis, if after refacing they prove to have damage/porosity issues or are insufficiently hard then a surcharge will be made and the head will be returned to the customer."
Edited by Colin Mill on Friday 10th September 09:49
Steve-B said:
Oh goodie, it's the old wives tale of K reliability again...It just varies from 30,000 <-> 3,000.
Every engine fails when maintenance, or exceeding design criteria. The K can be more sensitive to heat, and needs oil everywhere so has to be maintained slightly more diligently than
some other Cat engines, but this is not your Gran's car -- but a car meant to go to the limits.
I for one am not known to hang around in our Se7en -- far more fun out blazing a new trail at the head of a Blat when the opportunity strikes me. Our SV has litterally (twice!) been shipped all over the world and had more ship miles than any other, and weathers and is dead nuts reliable (minus the CRB/plate failing last year).
The K series engine, when properly maintained, new oils & filters is far more reliable than 3,000 miles for almost everyone. For example we have a modified K -- a VHPD that's around 210Bhp that has 30,000 miles on it for a 8 year old car. Oils and fluids changed very regularly, oil changes after track days, other lubricants/fluids at 1/2 recommended intervals = no worries. When I had our engine out last year, then put it back in I checked the compression, etc. My compression for a higher Bhp car was less than 2% different than new, with 30,000 miles. Earlier K's (late 90's) had a slightly weaker HG so could fail, but not all the time as the rumours would suggest. Solution was simple, put in a redesigned / refined HG and problem gone. Some have changed from block-based thermostat to remote, others have done nothing, a few have dropped to lower Centigrade thermostats with higher Bhp's to "dump heat" sooner.
Some higher HP engines in someone's rumour mongered world have had a few issues but there are a fair number of DVA K's that are 240Bhp plus with no reliability issues.
Buy it -- drive the @£$% out of it, love it and care for it more than the usual uber-rep-mobile and it will reward you for a lot of years!
There's a lot in what you say. However, you can't make an argument about reliability (especially one poo-poohing the "rumour-mill" as you call it) based on a sample size of one (your own engine). Also then adding insult to injury by going on to use the same rumour-mill to try to show that the DVA k's have no reliability issues.Every engine fails when maintenance, or exceeding design criteria. The K can be more sensitive to heat, and needs oil everywhere so has to be maintained slightly more diligently than
some other Cat engines, but this is not your Gran's car -- but a car meant to go to the limits.
I for one am not known to hang around in our Se7en -- far more fun out blazing a new trail at the head of a Blat when the opportunity strikes me. Our SV has litterally (twice!) been shipped all over the world and had more ship miles than any other, and weathers and is dead nuts reliable (minus the CRB/plate failing last year).
The K series engine, when properly maintained, new oils & filters is far more reliable than 3,000 miles for almost everyone. For example we have a modified K -- a VHPD that's around 210Bhp that has 30,000 miles on it for a 8 year old car. Oils and fluids changed very regularly, oil changes after track days, other lubricants/fluids at 1/2 recommended intervals = no worries. When I had our engine out last year, then put it back in I checked the compression, etc. My compression for a higher Bhp car was less than 2% different than new, with 30,000 miles. Earlier K's (late 90's) had a slightly weaker HG so could fail, but not all the time as the rumours would suggest. Solution was simple, put in a redesigned / refined HG and problem gone. Some have changed from block-based thermostat to remote, others have done nothing, a few have dropped to lower Centigrade thermostats with higher Bhp's to "dump heat" sooner.
Some higher HP engines in someone's rumour mongered world have had a few issues but there are a fair number of DVA K's that are 240Bhp plus with no reliability issues.
Buy it -- drive the @£$% out of it, love it and care for it more than the usual uber-rep-mobile and it will reward you for a lot of years!
Edited by Steve-B on Friday 10th September 08:45
I'm not making a personal attack on your post, nor am I suggesting that DVA's engines are not reliable, just pointing out the logical fallacies in your argument!
As an example, no amount of love and care will counter a porous head nor the liner height problem. The k-issues are all very well known and certainly not old wives' tales.
Bert
All engines of the same type are not equal. My first K-series superlight covered around 70,000 track miles before finally giving up the ghost (albeit in fairly spectacular fashion). The Duratec in my R300 race car had done over 200 hours running when it set lap record at Spa-Francorchamps last September. Equally, i've seen new engines (both krap series and durabang) fail within a few hundred miles for no obvious reason.
My gut feeling (based on experiences gained trackside over the past decade) is that a sub 160bhp 1.8 K-series should be good for normal road-car mileage with nothing but routine servicing, whereas anything above 180bp (and certainly above 200bhp) is going to benefit from a rebuild every few thousand miles to ensure reliability and performance is maintained.
Edited to add, i don't think the duratecs need (or warrant) rebuilding. the 2.0 in the r300/r400 at around 200bhp is not particularly stressed in comparison to the 1.8k. It also doesn't cost as much to get 200bhp out of a durabang as is does a 1.8 krapseries.
Jonny
BaT
My gut feeling (based on experiences gained trackside over the past decade) is that a sub 160bhp 1.8 K-series should be good for normal road-car mileage with nothing but routine servicing, whereas anything above 180bp (and certainly above 200bhp) is going to benefit from a rebuild every few thousand miles to ensure reliability and performance is maintained.
Edited to add, i don't think the duratecs need (or warrant) rebuilding. the 2.0 in the r300/r400 at around 200bhp is not particularly stressed in comparison to the 1.8k. It also doesn't cost as much to get 200bhp out of a durabang as is does a 1.8 krapseries.
Jonny
BaT
Edited by jleroux on Friday 10th September 11:51
Colin Mill said:
Shouldn't that be "feed it all the petrol you can lay your hands on..."
Yeah, fair point, and the bit after....that should read "Just comes back for more.....petrol"And oil. Lots of that too. You know those spoof Intel stickers the Zetec brigade have? I've got my own......."Crossflow Inside (Oil outside)"
Hi Bert,
I'm not using my own engine other than one data point, to be fair I know a LOT of R500 and SLR's who are identical to my experience so I should have added that. Sure some will have issues, but more don't which is why when I got our SV-VHPD I never took fully onboard the R500 pages cut into it.
Perhaps you're misreading me, I'm not saying DVA's engines are any better (or worse) -- although with Dave's extensive K experience I was more saying that he's found what appears to be the reliable top end of the K. Yes there have been instances of more powerful ones, but for how long.
My point, apologies if I mis-positioned was to answer the question: 3,000 ain't right. Frankly any number ain't right, unless you've had so stupidly much fun IF something happens, you sniff-sniff for a few secs, have a laugh, and rebuild it and go on
I'm not using my own engine other than one data point, to be fair I know a LOT of R500 and SLR's who are identical to my experience so I should have added that. Sure some will have issues, but more don't which is why when I got our SV-VHPD I never took fully onboard the R500 pages cut into it.
Perhaps you're misreading me, I'm not saying DVA's engines are any better (or worse) -- although with Dave's extensive K experience I was more saying that he's found what appears to be the reliable top end of the K. Yes there have been instances of more powerful ones, but for how long.
My point, apologies if I mis-positioned was to answer the question: 3,000 ain't right. Frankly any number ain't right, unless you've had so stupidly much fun IF something happens, you sniff-sniff for a few secs, have a laugh, and rebuild it and go on
BertBert said:
There's a lot in what you say. However, you can't make an argument about reliability (especially one poo-poohing the "rumour-mill" as you call it) based on a sample size of one (your own engine). Also then adding insult to injury by going on to use the same rumour-mill to try to show that the DVA k's have no reliability issues.
Bert
Bert
Why does everyone fail to mention rev limits? Of course a 160bhp K will be more reliable than an R500 ..... it has a sensible rev limit! With higher powered engines the nature of the game is that for the same cc and same flow ability, the revs increase to gain more power. Flow better and the revs can go even higher - the work of DVA is highly credited partly because he has developed his head flowing to enable big power gains at sensible revs - the Caterham R500 originally had a 9000+ rev limit! Who would really expect a K being revved to 9000+ to last very long without regular rebuilds?
Throw into the equation high lift aggressive cams that exponentially add stresses to the drive train as revs increase and the rev limit becomes even more important - anyone who's ever tried to set the cam-timing on big cams will know the kind of forces involved!
My DVA built 1900K puts out 244bhp at 8000rpm. The graph shows 200bhp at 6000rpm, therefore in the interest of greater long term reliability and reduced maintenance, I've happily set the rev limit to 7500. It's not rocket science! I don;t race it, I don't need bar room banter, but it's got loads of torque, loads of power, and is plenty reliable to boot.
Stu.
Throw into the equation high lift aggressive cams that exponentially add stresses to the drive train as revs increase and the rev limit becomes even more important - anyone who's ever tried to set the cam-timing on big cams will know the kind of forces involved!
My DVA built 1900K puts out 244bhp at 8000rpm. The graph shows 200bhp at 6000rpm, therefore in the interest of greater long term reliability and reduced maintenance, I've happily set the rev limit to 7500. It's not rocket science! I don;t race it, I don't need bar room banter, but it's got loads of torque, loads of power, and is plenty reliable to boot.
Stu.
Edited by V7SLR on Friday 10th September 17:34
"Edited to add that the continuing production in China of the engine is good news for us and that, without that concern over cylinder head availability is reasonable given the following warning on Dave Andrew's website:-"
Ha! I've never seen anything any good come out of China!
If I were you, I wouldn't be counting my eggs, untill they're in the omlet.
Ha! I've never seen anything any good come out of China!
If I were you, I wouldn't be counting my eggs, untill they're in the omlet.
Yep! Most things these days are syte.
When was the last time you bought something, and thought Wow! What a nice quality piece of kit?
China copy things. Badly.
Now, if the rights had been sold to the Japanese..........
Japan copy ideas, and make them better.
If I had a K now, I'd be looking at what I can replace it with, when it gives up.
Shame, as I found it to be a nice light revvy unit.
When was the last time you bought something, and thought Wow! What a nice quality piece of kit?
China copy things. Badly.
Now, if the rights had been sold to the Japanese..........
Japan copy ideas, and make them better.
If I had a K now, I'd be looking at what I can replace it with, when it gives up.
Shame, as I found it to be a nice light revvy unit.
Colin Mill said:
Well, since very nearly everything you buy is either made in China or has components made in china were all doomed
Sadly cylinder heads from China can hardly be more sh!t€ than some of the ones made by Rover.
Not all the heads were crap you know.Sadly cylinder heads from China can hardly be more sh!t€ than some of the ones made by Rover.
The Duratec is a perfect engine for a 7. Torquey, yet still likes to rev. The 175bhp one in the R300 is just perfct IMHO for a mix of road and track work. As to the longevity of a K, I think that if treated right, as Steve says, and with the later mods to the head gasket, larger crank pulley, etc, etc, the faults have been ironed out. Adding in Stu's advice about rev limits (Minister reset my R500 rev limit to 8600 which I do rev it to whenever I track it) this makes for a more reliable engine than that which came in the car when released. Is a highly-tuned K more reliable than a Duratec in a mildly tuned state? Logic says it is not, but I rarely hear horror stories about higher tuned Ks any more, so perhaps there are few original ones around that haven't been sorted?
There's two streams of issues that blighted the k in this regard.
The headgasket-blowing issues that we all know, love and understand and the specific early-r500-horror period, possibly known as the Ince-dynasty! It was the R500 that had the 3k mile rebuild edict.
The early R500 problems were not HGF related of course but bottom end related. CC came up with their various mods whilst they worked out what the real problem was.
So if you have a high output k (230+) with all the issues addressed, does it need a 3k rebuild? Doubt it.
Bert
PS did I mention my theory about oil-warming and the paranoia it generates amongst Caterham and coincicentally TVR owners?
The headgasket-blowing issues that we all know, love and understand and the specific early-r500-horror period, possibly known as the Ince-dynasty! It was the R500 that had the 3k mile rebuild edict.
The early R500 problems were not HGF related of course but bottom end related. CC came up with their various mods whilst they worked out what the real problem was.
So if you have a high output k (230+) with all the issues addressed, does it need a 3k rebuild? Doubt it.
Bert
PS did I mention my theory about oil-warming and the paranoia it generates amongst Caterham and coincicentally TVR owners?
Gassing Station | Caterham | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff