MGB - K-Series engines

[therealpigdog]

what are people's thoughts about k-series engine conversions? any experiences regarding cost, or would i be better off going down the v8 route.

[wildoliver]

Hmmm tricky one, nice small engine, fits nicely in a midget, can get 160 brake out of a vvc, but really I don't think it is suited to an MGB, you need something a bit torquier.

I was thinking about the zetec route and offering it as a regular conversion, I'm very off the rover v8 route, the rover o/t/m series make a nice installation, but the route I'm taking on my personal car is the saab engine and omega box with emerald ecu.

[Mr2Mike]

An MGB GT (1.8 B-Series) weighs less than a Rover 25, and after you remove the boat anchor and fit a K series it will weigh even less.

[mgtony]

What are the advantages of a k-Series/Zetec engine opposed to a 2 or 2.1 litre balanced or stage 2 MGB engine?

[JP_Midget]

mgtony said:

What are the advantages of a k-Series/Zetec engine opposed to a 2 or 2.1 litre balanced or stage 2 MGB engine?

Boring the block out to that kind of size doesn't leave much strength is what I've heard. It doesn't seem to be recommended for everyday use.

I expect that the advantages mainly centre around having a modern engine with I suspect more power at a lower state of tune (and therefore keep reliability and costs down). They're also usually lighter.

My preference in a MGB would be the V8 option, but it always depends on how you want to use the car, and what you know about or have access to as to which is the easiest option to get you what you're after.

[bigbadbikercats]

mgtony said:

What are the advantages of a k-Series/Zetec engine opposed to a 2 or 2.1 litre balanced or stage 2 MGB engine?

Lighter, more compact (hence can sit further back in the chassis for better weight distribution), and up to ~160 BHP from a completely standard engine.

For all it's shortcomings (real and/or alleged) the K really is an absolute humdinger of an engine...

[1] I'm guessing that to get Ye Olde BMC 'B' series lump up to that sort of output is going to require a good deal of work, result in something that's a bit of a handful in a road car, and require careful maintenance.

--
JG

[wildoliver]

Mr2Mike said:

An MGB GT (1.8 B-Series) weighs less than a Rover 25, and after you remove the boat anchor and fit a K series it will weigh even less.

Don't know what figures your looking at but everything I have disagrees.

However my advice stands it would not be an engine I considered for a B, awesome for a midget, mainly as it is a very compact engine, but there are better engines out there for Bs. That said if you fancy trying it it would certainly be quicker than a B engine in anything but high state of tune, but I really don't think it has the right torque characteristics at all.

[Mr2Mike]

Parkers suggests a 1.8 GTi, iS and iL Rover 25 weighs 1150kg and all the specs I could find on the MGBGT suggested it weighs between 1080 and 1100kg.

The Rover 200/25 was a heavy for a small car, the 400/45 is barely any heavier.

[OJ]

I'm actually going to do this to mine at some point. At the moment its rusting in my garage with no MOT while I sort out other things, but I'm hoping to crack on with it next year with a brand new shell and the drivetrain out of a Caterham, possibly with Hoyle Suspension.

Benefits I can see are

- over 50kg weight saving in the nose
- classic looking sports car that goes like a modern one
- less maintenance
- better fuel economy
- better reliability (if done properly)

I know it lacks purist appeal, but for me it perfectly blends the appeal of driving my old car without the hardship of it handling like a pig and needing to stick my head under its bonnet every other weekend

Apparently, the front crossmember needs to be modified to clear the sump, but I'd probably rather look into dry sump systems which are affordable and common for the K. There's also some metal that needs cutting away at the back of the engine bay, including some of the passenger footwell to clear the exhaust, but nothing too horrific.

If you decide to go ahead with this I would be very keen to hear how you get on!

[Stephw1]

I'm following the theme of the B by putting in an O series, similar style torque characteristics but with an S OHC. Should make life more bearable for the motorway cruising!

[Flatsix]

wildoliver said:

Mr2Mike said:

An MGB GT (1.8 B-Series) weighs less than a Rover 25, and after you remove the boat anchor and fit a K series it will weigh even less.

Don't know what figures your looking at but everything I have disagrees.

However my advice stands it would not be an engine I considered for a B, awesome for a midget, mainly as it is a very compact engine, but there are better engines out there for Bs. That said if you fancy trying it it would certainly be quicker than a B engine in anything but high state of tune, but I really don't think it has the right torque characteristics at all.

Actually I have a MGB (1974 model) fitted with a (much modified) K-Series engine and it's an abolute hoot to hoon around in! Plenty of torque and plenty of speed - I've certainly surprised a number of other drivers with it in the past. I personaly think my application suits the car well.

[esselte]

There was someone racing a 'B with a K series in around Cadwell Park a fortnight ago in the MGCC racing meet....finished 2nd or 3rd I think...

[edmason]

I have an MGB Roadster with the 2 litre Ford Twin cam engine, which does everything claimed above. Its lighter than the B series engine & sits further back in the car, so the steering is lighter and the car is better balanced overall. With the 5 speed Ford box and a twin choke weber the performance and handling are way better than any B I've driven, and its a pretty straightforward conversion, which doesn't require any major modifications to the MG.

Some details on the spec:
Ford I4 DOHC 4-cylinder inline engine with twin overhead camshafts. 2.0 litre 8-valve version, and a "square" 86x86mm bore and stroke, the I4 unit was launched in the Ford Sierra and Ford Scorpio, mated to the newly designed all-synchromesh MT-75 5 speed manual transmission, it powered various Ford models during this time, but was most well known in the rear wheel drive "Twin Cam" variants of the Ford Sierra, and Ford Scorpio

8v engine Specifications
• Two valves per cylinder with hydraulic valve lifters
• Twin camshafts driving by a timing chain
• Stroke and bore were both 86 mm (3.4 in)
• Compression was 10.3:1
• Five main crankshaft bearings
N8A
Carbureted
• Power: 107 hp (80 kW) at 5600 rpm.
• Torque: 174 N•m (128 ft•lbf) at 3000 rpm.
• Redline: 6050 rpm

The 16 valve injected version of this engine is more readily available, and would no doubt be interesting, but I prefer the idea of sticking with a fairly traditional set up, - one that BL could have come up with with a little more imagination!

I'll try to attach a picture of the engine bay - its very tidy, and if anyone is interested I have a spare engine and box in my garage which was destined for a BGT conversion that probably won't happen now. Open to offers!

Edited by edmason on Wednesday 10th September 23:30

[oneaves2005]

That was us!

We race a Red K-series MGB race car. Brilliant fun. I would be happy to answer any questions.

Ollie

(Team Neaves)

[Sway]

Ed Bracklik did a beautiful BGT K series conversion, with the help of Tim Fenna at Frontline Costello (As Frontline Spridget they offer conversion kits for the Midget). Last I heard it was having independent throttle bodies added. Car is a bit of an attention we, I've read about it in at least three different publications! Very well thought out and finished though, lead loaded seamed shell, Aston paint, lovely interior, really is stunning.

I've just read that Frontline are now offering the kit for the B, and Ed has become their sales and marketing guy...

Was personally thinking of a S2000 lump, and Hoyle front/IRS rear suspension, now seriously considering just giving the car to Frontline for K series, uprated front and 5 link rear suspension....hmm, can a LSD be fitted to the B axle?

Must have sebring rear arches, flared fronts, and smooth valences though!

Sam

ETA - 5000th post on this forum!! :woot:

Edited by Sway on Sunday 28th September 19:36

[littlemidgetgem]

wildoliver said:

Hmmm tricky one, nice small engine, fits nicely in a midget, can get 160 brake out of a vvc, but really I don't think it is suited to an MGB, you need something a bit torquier.

Just seen this! 160VVC sounds very fun in a Midget, what sort of performance figures would you expect?

[wildoliver]

Well I know when I was chatting with the guys at frontline they were claiming insane power from the tuned vvc engines (interestingly with the vvc removed) however it seems long term reliability is hit badly when you start going over 160-180 brake.

In terms of performance it is an incredible conversion in a midge, I run a very quick triumph lump in my autotest cars and if a well set up K series car turns up with a decent driver I can pretty much forget winning unless they make a mistake, serious acceleration and I assume good top speed (although I would want to do some mods to the car before going for top speed, having pulled 125 out of a midget I can say top speed is not their comfortable forte!

[Flatsix]

wildoliver said:

... tuned vvc engines (interestingly with the vvc removed) however it seems long term reliability is hit badly when you start going over 160-180 brake....

Mmmh, why go the VVC route just to remove it? When I got my engine done it was based on a non-vvc lump - apparently easier to tune. It uses individual TBs and is controlled by GEMS. If memory serves it uses some form of piper cams and the head had some work done as well. The engine broadly follows what laid out here http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/DVandrews/kengine.htm

I think the output is just shy of 160bhp and about 150lb ft

[wadgebeast]

When Caterham used K series in their cars, the main engine was the standard non-VVC lump even the supersport versions. For some reason, they marketed the vvc version as being more of a cruiser..... if there's such a thing in the caterham. Whatever, the vvc was supposed to be the less extreme version.

0-60 in about 5 seconds from a tuned 1.6 K series in a Caterham is still more than good enough for the extra 250kg that a midget weighs.

[wildoliver]

Apparently the head casting on the vvc is substantially better in terms of flow. There's plenty of info on the engine on the net.