Volvo 4.4L 60 degree V8 32 valve for TVR's????

Volvo 4.4L 60 degree V8 32 valve for TVR's????

Author
Discussion

knighty

Original Poster:

181 posts

241 months

Monday 5th November 2007
quotequote all
Apologies if this engine has been discussed already?

Just heard Lee Nobel is going to use this engine, a 4.4 Litre Volvo V8 for the new M15 Nobel, but he will be turbocharging for 650bhp, I hadnt heard of it before so just googled it and found this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamaha_V8_engine

its transverse (east-west) in the Volvo, probably for the Nobel too I'm guessing?

please correct me if I'm wrong but isnt this the dream engine for a TVR conversion, but in longitudinal layout (north-south), it was designed in conjunction with Yamaha, who really know what they are doing with engines, all alloy so sensible weight (I'm guessing)......but most important of all, the 60 degree bank angle will make the exhaust packaging a dream, which is always a real problem on TVR's with 90 degree V8's

Its made by Ford at their Welsh Bridgeend plant.....so you could call it a ford..... if Volvo dosent do the pub bragging wrights any good!

standard power is 311bhp with 325Lb/ft (441Nm).....which are respectable figures in my book, aparrently its similar to the duratec?......if so I'm thinking even with mild head work, 100bhp/litre should bepossible......therefore 440bhp

bore = 3.7" (93.98mm)
stroke = 3.13" (79.5)
CR = 10.4:1

quite over square with a big bore, so rev potential will be good, ripe for stroker kits too!.......wadyareckon?

chuntington101

5,733 posts

243 months

Tuesday 6th November 2007
quotequote all
im not too sure. dont think many people on here will like it as its not a rover or a LS!

its got potencial and it will be nice to see how it compears in the weight department to the LS2.

as we are talking about volvo engines in TVRs how about a someone swaps the six cylinder for a Volvo 'whiteblock' six cylinder?? 2.9ltr and turbo, they are supposed to be bombproof standard. i read a recent articale in PPC where one guy was making around 600bhp on the stock engine. or there is the 5cylinder vesions as used in the 850/V70 T5 and the new focus ST.

thanks Chris.

knighty

Original Poster:

181 posts

241 months

Tuesday 6th November 2007
quotequote all
to be honest, although its all alloy, like the BMW-V8, I dont think it will be as light as an LS engine, the non-cam nature of the push rod heads makes them about 10 Kg lighter than their twin cam equipped equivalents, which on a V8 is an instant 20 Kg weight save......not to be sniffed at.

just spoke to a friend who works for Mountune, they stripped a 4.4 Volvo/ford V8 with a view to converting it to a full race motor, but the general consensus was it would take way too much work.......by that I interpret it has a crankshaft with split big end journals (yuk), possibly the heads are a tad messy too.....but I havent seen one myself yet, so I'm only going by what I'm told.

on that note I'll shut up!

350Matt

3,766 posts

286 months

Tuesday 6th November 2007
quotequote all
The main problem I'd imagine is that will it fit into a TVR engine bay?

Most modern V8's will not as they are huge over the heads and so will not fit between the chassis rails

Matt

knighty

Original Poster:

181 posts

241 months

Tuesday 6th November 2007
quotequote all
yeah, I agree, what you gain in reduction of width from the narrow 60 degree bank angle, is probably gained in height from the twin cam heads, and again the 60 degree vee will make the engine a tad more taller.....but as the AJP8 motors were twin cam heads, I dont think it will be a mile off

Hilti

299 posts

246 months

Tuesday 6th November 2007
quotequote all
Thought the AJP8 was non twin cam head design?

JR

12,746 posts

265 months

Wednesday 7th November 2007
quotequote all
A few years ago (3?)it was reported on here that this engine was considered by the factory as an alternative to their own engines.

350Matt

3,766 posts

286 months

Wednesday 7th November 2007
quotequote all
knighty said:
but as the AJP8 motors were twin cam heads, I dont think it will be a mile off
Sorry but no

The AJP8's are 2 valve single overhead cam /head and its extremely compact as an engine, its just a shame TVR didn't use it more I think

Matt

Ffirg 005

2,013 posts

258 months

Wednesday 7th November 2007
quotequote all
350Matt said:
...and its extremely compact as an engine
yes and only 130Kg!

rev-erend

21,536 posts

291 months

Thursday 8th November 2007
quotequote all
Hilti said:
Thought the AJP8 was non twin cam head design?
Sure - it's a twin cam

One on each bank of the V ..

The inlet arrangement of the Volvo engine looks restrictive very - possibly to facilate a low bonnet or passenger impact bonnet stuff .. this will compremise power output - just like the Rover V8 manifold does.

Like Matt says the main issue is the heads / chassis rail clearance problem - hence why the AJP was fitted to TVR's.

Edited by rev-erend on Monday 12th November 09:13

Daftlad

3,324 posts

248 months

Friday 9th November 2007
quotequote all
rev-erend said:
Hilti said:
Thought the AJP8 was non twin cam head design?
Sure - it's a twin cam

One on each bank of the V ..

The inlet arrangement of the Volvo engine looks very - possibly to facilate a low bonnet or passenger impact bonnet stuff .. this will compremise power output - just like the Rover V8 manifold does.

Like Matt says the main issue is the heads / chassis rail clearance problem - hence why the AJP was fitted to TVR's.
Rev, I think the main reason the AJP was fitted to TVRs is...that its a TVR engine. wink

On a more sensible note, I think Hilti was suggesting a quad cam V8

900T-R

20,405 posts

264 months

Saturday 10th November 2007
quotequote all
Daftlad said:
On a more sensible note, I think Hilti was suggesting a quad cam V8
Although engines like the AJP are generally referred to as 'single overhead cam (SOHC)' as there's only one cam for both intake and exhaust valves - the fact that it's a Vee engine with overhead cams automatically implies the number of cams has to be understood as 'per cylinder bank'.

rev-erend

21,536 posts

291 months

Monday 12th November 2007
quotequote all
Daftlad said:
rev-erend said:
Hilti said:
Thought the AJP8 was non twin cam head design?
Sure - it's a twin cam

One on each bank of the V ..

The inlet arrangement of the Volvo engine looks very - possibly to facilate a low bonnet or passenger impact bonnet stuff .. this will compremise power output - just like the Rover V8 manifold does.

Like Matt says the main issue is the heads / chassis rail clearance problem - hence why the AJP was fitted to TVR's.
Rev, I think the main reason the AJP was fitted to TVRs is...that its a TVR engine. wink

On a more sensible note, I think Hilti was suggesting a quad cam V8
Re the AJP - well I have heard thru sources that the design was around before TVR got involved. It just happened to be exactly what tVR needed at the time in terms of power and packaging. What it was not was clean - which is why they needed a 4 valve head design and with the cars only needing around 350 bhp they did not really need 8 cylinders. Less cylinders = less conponents which equals cheaper unit costs.

A long time ago - the car magazines said making their own engines was a very big adventure - and it sure was.

Untimately it cost them their reputation and their business IMHO.

350Matt

3,766 posts

286 months

Monday 12th November 2007
quotequote all
I'm in agreement Rev, the six cylinder effectively killed off TVR, however the V8 could have been kept going I think as there's still plenty of 2 valve engines being sold today. LS1 /6 /7 for example.

If they'd offered the AJPV8 as an option to six (with a decent engine management system) then perhaps TVR may still have been around.


Matt

rev-erend

21,536 posts

291 months

Tuesday 13th November 2007
quotequote all
Totally agree ..

Zumbruk

7,848 posts

267 months

Tuesday 13th November 2007
quotequote all
The engine situation at TVR was bonkers, even had the Speed 6 not been made of chocolate. A company that size offering 2.5 engines? Insanity.

Lone Granger

801 posts

250 months

Thursday 20th December 2007
quotequote all
Zumbruk said:
The engine situation at TVR was bonkers, even had the Speed 6 not been made of chocolate. A company that size offering 2.5 engines? Insanity.
lotus seem to have done ok over the years... - not that it is to my taste!

chuntington101

5,733 posts

243 months

Friday 21st December 2007
quotequote all
Lone Granger said:
Zumbruk said:
The engine situation at TVR was bonkers, even had the Speed 6 not been made of chocolate. A company that size offering 2.5 engines? Insanity.
lotus seem to have done ok over the years... - not that it is to my taste!
also i dont think its fround upon for using someone elses engine. infact marcos happily say they are using the engine out the corvette. you only have to look at the more exsotic companies and what they use. koenigsegg use a ford racing block, Zonda use a Merc engine and the new bread of US hyper cars all have either V8s or V10s from production stock.

for a small company like TVR it seems much more logical to use tried and test engines rather than paying alot more to delope something that is not as good!

just my opinion.

Chris.

Lone Granger

801 posts

250 months

Thursday 27th December 2007
quotequote all
I have to say that Marcos was coming together to be a lovely package - for them to pull the plug after losing TVR, their main competitor, was unthinkable - what a waste - I was looking forward to trying that..