Tell me about the FFF
Discussion
Ok so i've been reading the threads on rg's fff but i'm a little confused. I'm not the greatest with technical stuff and dont know a huge amount about engines. It's easy for me to grasp tvr power upgrading to 4.2 or 4.5. Or lsx conversions. However i'm struggling to grasp what the fff is all about 
Thanks pascal, i've read it alright but i thought it may be better to start a new thread as it seems to have gone off course a bit!
So is it still considered a 4 litre engine?
I just thought i can't be the only one slightly confused about it! Perhaps i am though, that has been known to happen
So is it still considered a 4 litre engine?
I just thought i can't be the only one slightly confused about it! Perhaps i am though, that has been known to happen
A brief overview, from what I have learnt in the TVR community over the last few years (please correct where necessary) 
There are two standard sizes of original Speed6 engine - 3.6L and 4.0L - both the same basic design, using Finger Followers as a lever between the cam lobe and the valve stem to open the valve. I think both engines are the same bore size, but the 4.0L had a longer stroke than the 3.6L.
To my knowledge, there is no design fault per say in a Finger Follower engine - many races won by Finger Follower engines (incl Formula One I believe).
TVR skimped on part quality and many engines failed due to finger follower wear. Engines also failed for other reasons (mine was a crank/half time bearing problem)
TVR Power rebuilt engines with many improvements, especially part quality, but using the same Finger Follower design. TVR Power then offered 4.3L upgrades by increasing the stroke further, and then 4.5L upgrades by increasing the bore.
Racing Green decided to walk a different path and re-designed the cylinder head to use Buckets instead of Finger Followers - each valve has an upturned bucket sitting on top of it and the cam lobe pushes the bucket down to open the valve. They also increased the air flow capability of the head and currently only offer a 4.0L version. It's branded as the Finger Follower Free engine (FFF). Racing Green are developing Variable Valve Timing to work with their FFF head to produce maximum power without losing driveability.
TVR Power & Racing Green rebuilds use the standard TVR/MBE Ecu unless the customer upgrades. Typical upgrades seem to be the Syvvecs Ecu due to the increased functionality it offers.
I have no affinity with either company - my Sagaris has it's original factory issued TVR 4.0S engine - just hoping to help a 'newbie', if that's what you are.
Best Regards
Spike
There are two standard sizes of original Speed6 engine - 3.6L and 4.0L - both the same basic design, using Finger Followers as a lever between the cam lobe and the valve stem to open the valve. I think both engines are the same bore size, but the 4.0L had a longer stroke than the 3.6L.
To my knowledge, there is no design fault per say in a Finger Follower engine - many races won by Finger Follower engines (incl Formula One I believe).
TVR skimped on part quality and many engines failed due to finger follower wear. Engines also failed for other reasons (mine was a crank/half time bearing problem)
TVR Power rebuilt engines with many improvements, especially part quality, but using the same Finger Follower design. TVR Power then offered 4.3L upgrades by increasing the stroke further, and then 4.5L upgrades by increasing the bore.
Racing Green decided to walk a different path and re-designed the cylinder head to use Buckets instead of Finger Followers - each valve has an upturned bucket sitting on top of it and the cam lobe pushes the bucket down to open the valve. They also increased the air flow capability of the head and currently only offer a 4.0L version. It's branded as the Finger Follower Free engine (FFF). Racing Green are developing Variable Valve Timing to work with their FFF head to produce maximum power without losing driveability.
TVR Power & Racing Green rebuilds use the standard TVR/MBE Ecu unless the customer upgrades. Typical upgrades seem to be the Syvvecs Ecu due to the increased functionality it offers.
I have no affinity with either company - my Sagaris has it's original factory issued TVR 4.0S engine - just hoping to help a 'newbie', if that's what you are.
Best Regards
Spike
Funky said:
Thanks pascal, i've read it alright but i thought it may be better to start a new thread as it seems to have gone off course a bit!
So is it still considered a 4 litre engine?
I just thought i can't be the only one slightly confused about it! Perhaps i am though, that has been known to happen
Well done Funky.It's like being back at school - thank you for putting your hand up & asking the question that I was too scared to ask.lol.So is it still considered a 4 litre engine?
I just thought i can't be the only one slightly confused about it! Perhaps i am though, that has been known to happen
(now ask how much it costs coz I don't know that either!) :-)
And a hat suitably doifed to Red spike as well.Thank you squire.
Probably the best thread: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
I'd say a good RR 3.6 will achieve 360bhp, which others have claimed. That's 100bhp/l. You'd do very well to get that from a 4.5 V8, close but just behind.If there are flow increases then it will be from the FFF1 to the FFF2 designs.
I don't think that either were ever done as exercises to increase power, but as marketing exercises to attract S6 owners at the height of the chocolate FF episode. I think they were handed an opportunity to build an S6 head with buckets and decided this was a good opportunity.
The FFF1 production came to a halt with the demise of the firm that made the heads and so they went looking for another company. During that search they found Simon who when he studied the project was of the view that he could not only make the heads but introduce some improvements to eek out more power and so the FFF2 came about.
So, if there are genuine power increases from a conventional 4.0 S6 head it will be from there. I don't think there is any logic in argueing that a bucket design is more powerful than a FF. If anything, I always thought it was the other way around. Likewise, the build process. The tollerances are finer and the process is genuinely 21st century but that isn't going to make any performance change other than smoothness and longevity, I would assume. So if there is any increase, which there does seem to be unless SRR are fudging the figures then the logical bet is that it is from the redesign and an increase in air flow.
DonkeyApple said:
JR said:
DonkeyApple said:
Simon has re-designed/engineered parts of te head using his career knowledge from Ilmor and F1. So the FFF2 head has some design changes from the FFF1 and these are related to flow. The equipment used to build the heads is also state of the art and uses the most modern techniques so the tolerances etc are much finer.
I have no doubt that Simon has worked hard. Are the flow increases over the FFF1 design, over the S6 FF design or over the AJP FF design? I suspect the former. To a certain extent Simon has been restricted by the RG marriage to the FFF idea. I think that it also gets lost that the S6 was designed to be easier to drive than the V8 with less low down torque to avoid spins in the road etc. The early problems which owners experienced that turned out to be very expensive for some owners were largely FF based so RG introduced the FFF alternative as a reliability option to avoid rebuilds. That it is now being touted as a power option is quite astounding.DonkeyApple said:
I think the one remaining question over the FFF2 is how much of the bhp increase is from the cam used and how much is from the head design. I think the torque numbers suggest that it is in the favour of the head flow.
DonkeyApple said:
The oomph per cc of the 3.6 is on par with the AJP4.5 roughly. But it falls away steadily as cc is increased so that when you get to a 4.5 S6 it isn't matching an AJP at all.
Sometimes I think that you overstate the case for the S6 and sometimes the opposite. As you mentioned earlier the tolerances are also an important factor and by that I think you mean (I do) clearances and tolerances; easy numbers 1.2mm +/- 0.5 to 1.2mm +/- 0.1 will give a more consistant engine but won't be as good as the few original sopecs which happen to have all of the variences in their favour - 0.5mm +/- 0.1 will give you consistantly great results. This stuff is boring but very significant and together with other details is described as blue printing (although pedants point out that we haven't had lbue prints for twenty years. So that's cam, head and clearances. Or put another way if you fitted a Str8six head on a RG engine would you lose any power?I'd say a good RR 3.6 will achieve 360bhp, which others have claimed. That's 100bhp/l. You'd do very well to get that from a 4.5 V8, close but just behind.
I don't think that either were ever done as exercises to increase power, but as marketing exercises to attract S6 owners at the height of the chocolate FF episode. I think they were handed an opportunity to build an S6 head with buckets and decided this was a good opportunity.
The FFF1 production came to a halt with the demise of the firm that made the heads and so they went looking for another company. During that search they found Simon who when he studied the project was of the view that he could not only make the heads but introduce some improvements to eek out more power and so the FFF2 came about.
So, if there are genuine power increases from a conventional 4.0 S6 head it will be from there. I don't think there is any logic in argueing that a bucket design is more powerful than a FF. If anything, I always thought it was the other way around. Likewise, the build process. The tollerances are finer and the process is genuinely 21st century but that isn't going to make any performance change other than smoothness and longevity, I would assume. So if there is any increase, which there does seem to be unless SRR are fudging the figures then the logical bet is that it is from the redesign and an increase in air flow.
Genuine question. What warranty to RG offer with the fff head/engine?
For me there is plenty of power in a 4.0 S6 I would upgrade chassis and driver before going for more oomph. But I like the idea of a decent warranty for peace of mind and resale. That's one of the reasons I bought a car with a TVR power rebuild.
For me there is plenty of power in a 4.0 S6 I would upgrade chassis and driver before going for more oomph. But I like the idea of a decent warranty for peace of mind and resale. That's one of the reasons I bought a car with a TVR power rebuild.
Correct.
As for the rest.... The VCT will be properly available some time next year. We hope the engine will produce a proven 450-475 bhp from the normal 4.0 block.
Syvecs works on both the Racing Green and Power product (Ryan is on this forum).
Both the 4.3/4.5 and the FFF radically change the nature of the car, in very different ways.
This is the thread about me collecting the car after rebuild. Hope it helps. http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
As for the rest.... The VCT will be properly available some time next year. We hope the engine will produce a proven 450-475 bhp from the normal 4.0 block.
Syvecs works on both the Racing Green and Power product (Ryan is on this forum).
Both the 4.3/4.5 and the FFF radically change the nature of the car, in very different ways.
This is the thread about me collecting the car after rebuild. Hope it helps. http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
I think that this is roughly right:
Back in the days when the problems with the S6 were at their height and rebuilds were stacking up at TVR, several independents looked to offer their own solutions.
As one of the core problems at the time were finger followers breaking as well as a lack of oil pressure and lubrication in the heads, RG acquired a design for the head which used traditional buckets and better lubrication. I think this design is akin to the heads that were made for the Speed 12 engines.
Nowadays, the finger followers arent't the problem that they were but back then they were seen as the devil incarnate so this was a good marketing move to offer a solution which did not use finger followers.
The first generation FFF heads were, I believe, made by the same company that made the conventional heads for TVR. This company used older methods and technology to make them and tollerences etc were not inline with what you would find in a modern engine. This company closed down eventually and meant RG had to find another builder if they wanted to continue offering the head.
In finding the replacement they found someone who made their own improvements to breathing and lubrication and used the very latest techniques to produce a more optomised and efficient head. It is these Gen 2 heads that almost all the discussions are about.
They appear to produce much more BHP and torque than a standard 4 litre and the theory that we are tending to run with at the moment is that much of this is down to improved airflow. There is a very good thread which talks about why increasing CC on the AJP engines yields excellent power increases but doing likewise on the S6 does not yield the same kind of returns. The current view is that the AJP head flows extremely well for the block's cc whereas the S6 head which was apparently designed for a 3 litre to 3.5 litre capacity originally does not.
There are now about half a dozen FFF 2 heads on customer cars and in initial tests pre running in are all delivering over 400 bhp and 350 torque on SRR. I think we are all waiting for next summer when we can start to collect some additional figures from other RR events and start to get a more accurate idea as to what these engines are producing and how etc.
Suffice to say that the result is an engine that is very different in character to other solutions. Very revvy and racey. So I think that regardless of reliability or power people will chose for or against based on whether this is the sort of engine characteristics they want. It's very marmite.
In my experience the engine seems to pull just as well as a normal 4.0 but at 4000 rpm all hell lets loose in a way that even the 3.6 doesn't and it just keeps pulling and pulling. It is extremely quiet, all engine clatter has gone and it is immensely smooth and refined. It feels like an engine from a much, much more expensive car.
If you are a street racer then I don't think it is an engine that will meet your needs but if you are looking for something to fling between corners and keep up on the cam then I would say that by a mile there is nothing more exhilerating in the TVR line up.
Back in the days when the problems with the S6 were at their height and rebuilds were stacking up at TVR, several independents looked to offer their own solutions.
As one of the core problems at the time were finger followers breaking as well as a lack of oil pressure and lubrication in the heads, RG acquired a design for the head which used traditional buckets and better lubrication. I think this design is akin to the heads that were made for the Speed 12 engines.
Nowadays, the finger followers arent't the problem that they were but back then they were seen as the devil incarnate so this was a good marketing move to offer a solution which did not use finger followers.
The first generation FFF heads were, I believe, made by the same company that made the conventional heads for TVR. This company used older methods and technology to make them and tollerences etc were not inline with what you would find in a modern engine. This company closed down eventually and meant RG had to find another builder if they wanted to continue offering the head.
In finding the replacement they found someone who made their own improvements to breathing and lubrication and used the very latest techniques to produce a more optomised and efficient head. It is these Gen 2 heads that almost all the discussions are about.
They appear to produce much more BHP and torque than a standard 4 litre and the theory that we are tending to run with at the moment is that much of this is down to improved airflow. There is a very good thread which talks about why increasing CC on the AJP engines yields excellent power increases but doing likewise on the S6 does not yield the same kind of returns. The current view is that the AJP head flows extremely well for the block's cc whereas the S6 head which was apparently designed for a 3 litre to 3.5 litre capacity originally does not.
There are now about half a dozen FFF 2 heads on customer cars and in initial tests pre running in are all delivering over 400 bhp and 350 torque on SRR. I think we are all waiting for next summer when we can start to collect some additional figures from other RR events and start to get a more accurate idea as to what these engines are producing and how etc.
Suffice to say that the result is an engine that is very different in character to other solutions. Very revvy and racey. So I think that regardless of reliability or power people will chose for or against based on whether this is the sort of engine characteristics they want. It's very marmite.
In my experience the engine seems to pull just as well as a normal 4.0 but at 4000 rpm all hell lets loose in a way that even the 3.6 doesn't and it just keeps pulling and pulling. It is extremely quiet, all engine clatter has gone and it is immensely smooth and refined. It feels like an engine from a much, much more expensive car.
If you are a street racer then I don't think it is an engine that will meet your needs but if you are looking for something to fling between corners and keep up on the cam then I would say that by a mile there is nothing more exhilerating in the TVR line up.
blueg33 said:
JR said:
depends how you define 'full' - isn't the TVR Power warranty transferable whereas the Racing Green one is not?
Transferable is an important factor IMO. My Power warranty is 5 years, 100k miles and transferable
DonkeyApple said:
I think this design is akin to the heads that were made for the Speed 12 engines.
...They appear to produce much more BHP and torque than a standard 4 litre and the theory that we are tending to run with at the moment is that much of this is down to improved airflow.
Great post....They appear to produce much more BHP and torque than a standard 4 litre and the theory that we are tending to run with at the moment is that much of this is down to improved airflow.
On a minor point, the TVR bucket heads were the revised heads for the S12 which gave approximately a 20% power loss.
I still think that you appear to underestimate the effects of finer and more consistent tolerances in the block.
Gassing Station | Speed Six Engine | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff