bike vs car engine - experiences required
Discussion
I'm about to embark on a locost (7 type car) project and can't for the life of me make a final decision on the engine between car and bike engines and I could really do with some help.
I've had a westy with a 1700 xflow engine in and liked that and have been in Justin's zetec 2.0l westy and that was certainly pretty quick *but* I keep hearing how good bike engines are.
The blade engine in my blade is certainly potent enough but I can't quite get my head around how the engine in a 400-500kg car can be as blisteringly quick compared to a 2.0l car engined car. I understand that they are significantly lighter and that given they have 140-150bhp are certainly going to be quick but with a lot less torque. However I can see that if geared to top out at 130 ish rather than 190 it'll help quite a bit.
Someone is bound to ask what I want out of a car and it's difficult to quantify that in numbers but if I'm going to spend 1-2 years building it I want the resulting car to be really special performance wise... basically I was it to feel bloody quick. I don't care about top speed I just want it to fly on a & b roads and really go well on an airfield or a track.
The worst thing I could feel after building a car would be... "this is great but really could do with more power". I felt that with my zx6r bike and my westfield but the blade never ever feels underpowered. I'm a bit concerned my blade engined car will feel underpowered and then have no upgrade route except for bunging a turbo in and I really don't like turbos.
So how do they actually compare?
Thanks,
Mark
>>> Edited by dern on Sunday 3rd October 12:18
I've had a westy with a 1700 xflow engine in and liked that and have been in Justin's zetec 2.0l westy and that was certainly pretty quick *but* I keep hearing how good bike engines are.
The blade engine in my blade is certainly potent enough but I can't quite get my head around how the engine in a 400-500kg car can be as blisteringly quick compared to a 2.0l car engined car. I understand that they are significantly lighter and that given they have 140-150bhp are certainly going to be quick but with a lot less torque. However I can see that if geared to top out at 130 ish rather than 190 it'll help quite a bit.
Someone is bound to ask what I want out of a car and it's difficult to quantify that in numbers but if I'm going to spend 1-2 years building it I want the resulting car to be really special performance wise... basically I was it to feel bloody quick. I don't care about top speed I just want it to fly on a & b roads and really go well on an airfield or a track.
The worst thing I could feel after building a car would be... "this is great but really could do with more power". I felt that with my zx6r bike and my westfield but the blade never ever feels underpowered. I'm a bit concerned my blade engined car will feel underpowered and then have no upgrade route except for bunging a turbo in and I really don't like turbos.
So how do they actually compare?
Thanks,
Mark
>>> Edited by dern on Sunday 3rd October 12:18
dern said:
I keep hearing how good bike engines are.
Bike engines in lightweight cars are undoubtedly quick, and will give you a real adrenaline rush.
They are also likely to give you earache due to the screaming noise.
If hooning around the country roads without a helmet for long periods is your bag, I would imagine a bike engine will start to grate on you after a while.
Just my personal opinion mind.....
meeja said:I'm not fitting a screen and will be wearing a lid. I'll also be wearing earplugs as I do on the bike.
I keep hearing how good bike engines are.
Bike engines in lightweight cars are undoubtedly quick, and will give you a real adrenaline rush.
They are also likely to give you earache due to the screaming noise.
If hooning around the country roads without a helmet for long periods is your bag, I would imagine a bike engine will start to grate on you after a while.
Just my personal opinion mind.....
Cheers,
Mark
Gotta be a bike engine 
Had my Locost Blade for nearly 2 months now and i'm still every time i drive it.
7krpm @ 70mph can be a pain for a period but is this really a car for the motorway? Its for blatting in lanes etc
You would need a serious car engine to come near in the performance stakes plus you have the bonus of sequential shift, no reverse isnt too much of a problem as the car is so light if its on the flat i can lean over the side and push it!
Do it
Mike
Had my Locost Blade for nearly 2 months now and i'm still
every time i drive it. 7krpm @ 70mph can be a pain for a period but is this really a car for the motorway? Its for blatting in lanes etc
You would need a serious car engine to come near in the performance stakes plus you have the bonus of sequential shift, no reverse isnt too much of a problem as the car is so light if its on the flat i can lean over the side and push it!
Do it
Mike
I'd personally stick to a car engine in a car and a bike engine in a bike. I have been in a bike engined car (1100 blackbird powered Tiger B6) and it was undoubtly very quick but I have my doubts about them on a track. They just don't seem to be as quick as a car engined car. This is partilary true for the smaller bike engines (i.e. under 1000cc). Perhaps it's just the drivers but for me there ain't no replacement for displacement
I've recently switched from a Vx powered Caterham (albeit with only 100bhp), which I used to race, to a 'blade engined Fury for trackdays. Having been on track a few times now in the Fury, I'm completely sold on the bike engine.
As well as the lightness meaning power to weight is a very respectable 300ish bhp/ton, the 6 speed sequential box really helps, allowing quicker upshifts that with a normal car 'box - and being particularly helpful when going down 3 or 4 cogs under braking. Add the extra agility for direction changes, and 80kg or so less to brake, and it's usually one of the quickest (if not the quickest) car on track. Tyre wear is also lower than I'd expected.
Only downsides are that the 'box is perhaps a bit more fragile, and the noise means that quieter trackdays are out of bounds.
As well as the lightness meaning power to weight is a very respectable 300ish bhp/ton, the 6 speed sequential box really helps, allowing quicker upshifts that with a normal car 'box - and being particularly helpful when going down 3 or 4 cogs under braking. Add the extra agility for direction changes, and 80kg or so less to brake, and it's usually one of the quickest (if not the quickest) car on track. Tyre wear is also lower than I'd expected.
Only downsides are that the 'box is perhaps a bit more fragile, and the noise means that quieter trackdays are out of bounds.
Justin S said:Evening. Either I haven't reached that age in life where I require such a degree of cosseting or maybe I've cruised past that age and now feel I have to prove my youthful outlook by freezing my nuts off in a poorly appointed open car wearing bi-focal aviation goggles
and Mark,don't forget for those cold winter evenings like last Tuesday night,a car engine can afford the extra weight on a heater and comfy leather seats!!!
evening Mark.
Mark
Martin Hayter said:Thinking about it, it probably seems a lot more fragile than it is. Honda boxes are notoriously notchy... my 2001 blade is clunky as hell, especially going into 1st and the changing from 1st to 2nd.
Only downsides are that the 'box is perhaps a bit more fragile
You probably know this but I found the way to get a blade to change sweetly was to exert pressure in the direction to change up while full on the throttle and then ease off the throttle momentarily which will cause the box to slip into the next gear and then on full throttle again. I use this technique regardless of whether I use the clutch of not and it seems to work well.
Mark
BTW if anyone has a bike-engined car in the Newbury area and would like to demonstrate it to me (bearing in mind I do have kids and don't want to die) I would be most interested in either trading the experience for a similar but faster experience on the back on my fireblade or a pint or two 
Cheers,
Mark
Cheers,
Mark
Mark,
Before parting with your hard earned, blag a ride in one. Have a search around to see if there is a local club near you - there's almost certainly a WSCC one - you may be able to blag that way. I'd offer, but it's a bit of a trek...
PS they're great, but I would say that wouldn't I?
moomin
Before parting with your hard earned, blag a ride in one. Have a search around to see if there is a local club near you - there's almost certainly a WSCC one - you may be able to blag that way. I'd offer, but it's a bit of a trek...
PS they're great, but I would say that wouldn't I?
moomin
Mark - I'm near Newbury, so you're welcome to come and see my Fury 'blade - just drop me a mail.
Agree with you on the 'box side - as I understand it (I'm no mechanic), the "clunkiness" of a BEC gearchange into first & second shouldn't is more down to the lack of a synchro 'box than a fragile box. However, the potential fragility is more likely to be down to the stress of extra weight through the drivetrain that the bike wasn't designed to handle.
I had a complete gearbox rebuild costing about £1k, with most of the cogs changed (some of them as a precaution only). Bear in mind that might be around the same cost as a basic engine "refesh" for a K series car engine for example. Alternatively, a replacement engine would be around £800 for a 'blade. I didn't go that route as my engine had recently been rebuilt, and fixing the 'box means I now have a recently rebuilt complete engine and box that should run for some time now without needing much attention.
>> Edited by Martin Hayter on Tuesday 5th October 19:34
Agree with you on the 'box side - as I understand it (I'm no mechanic), the "clunkiness" of a BEC gearchange into first & second shouldn't is more down to the lack of a synchro 'box than a fragile box. However, the potential fragility is more likely to be down to the stress of extra weight through the drivetrain that the bike wasn't designed to handle.
I had a complete gearbox rebuild costing about £1k, with most of the cogs changed (some of them as a precaution only). Bear in mind that might be around the same cost as a basic engine "refesh" for a K series car engine for example. Alternatively, a replacement engine would be around £800 for a 'blade. I didn't go that route as my engine had recently been rebuilt, and fixing the 'box means I now have a recently rebuilt complete engine and box that should run for some time now without needing much attention.
>> Edited by Martin Hayter on Tuesday 5th October 19:34
i had this problem when i bought my tiger, i went for a car engined one. Someone made a good point to me.
u take a pinto lump out of a big heavy sierra and put it into a small light kit car its going to reduce stress. sounds like a valid point.
so i concluded that reversing that cycle and taking an engine out of a bike thats weighs sweet FA and putting it into something heavier it might stress it.
If this is a load of cack please tell me and ill trade mine in for a bike engined one!!!haha
u take a pinto lump out of a big heavy sierra and put it into a small light kit car its going to reduce stress. sounds like a valid point.
so i concluded that reversing that cycle and taking an engine out of a bike thats weighs sweet FA and putting it into something heavier it might stress it.
If this is a load of cack please tell me and ill trade mine in for a bike engined one!!!haha
I have no experience of cars like this, but I'd have thought it depends on how you like to drive. Obviously being a biker you're used to changing gear a lot and giving it plenty of revs - something that you'd have to do even more in a heavier car. I feel that in a road car you'd want more low down grunt from a car engine as you're often having to accelerate from low speeds and slow down more for corners that you would on a track. I prefer having a lower reving, torquey engine than a high reving one that you need to work to get the performance out of - it just seems more effortless and faster
Certainly on a track you can maintain higher speeds through corners, keeping the revs up and the lower weight of the bike engine would also be an advantage here.
Certainly on a track you can maintain higher speeds through corners, keeping the revs up and the lower weight of the bike engine would also be an advantage here.
richie_few said:Dunno in all honesty, it mirrors my thought process though.
If this is a load of cack please tell me and ill trade mine in for a bike engined one!!!haha
Martin is taking me out in his blade powered fury on sunday so I'll let you know how it compares with Justin's zetec westy.
All the best,
Mark
Gassing Station | Kit Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff