Pete Lewis Posted September 18, 2014 Report Share Posted September 18, 2014 Robin , if i can remember to pack it along with all the stuff we need duxford I will endever to fit it in , and get some batteries , its a small unit but my brain capacity has been duxfuddled this month Pete My 2000 saloon has the low spec cam and Im thinking of fitting one of CW recomended ones when we add the power steering ,over the next few months Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Posted October 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 7, 2014 A quick update - I took the car to Peter Baldwin's rolling road at Wilshers garages near Royston last week and the peak power showed 99bhp at 4200 rpm. Does this sound correct for a standard 2000 mk 2 engine or does sound as though it could have been modded at some point? A mk 2 vitesse had 104 bhp at 5500 rpm so I don't know how this relates to my figures . Any thoughts? Peter was really good and the car runs better now after he adjusted the carbs and timing. Would recommend him. Robin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted October 7, 2014 Report Share Posted October 7, 2014 Sounds about right. I wonder why the difference from cck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Posted October 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 7, 2014 Sorry Clive - do you mean it sounds right for a standard 2000 mk2? If so why do most references give this engine as 84 bhp? Also , what's cck? Thanks Robin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescrapman Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 Sorry Clive - do you mean it sounds right for a standard 2000 mk2? If so why do most references give this engine as 84 bhp? Also , what's cck? Thanks Robin That 99 sounds very good for a big saloon engine, they were about 85 (new bhp) as standard. Also, the 104 for a Vitesse is "old" bhp, so is about 95 in "new" bhp. You have a very good engine there! So stop fiddling and get out there and enjoy it... ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted October 10, 2014 Report Share Posted October 10, 2014 Sorry Clive - do you mean it sounds right for a standard 2000 mk2? If so why do most references give this engine as 84 bhp? Also , what's cck? Thanks Robin Brainfade. There was somebody who had a car on the rollers at CCK and it gave a low result, maybe I am just getting too old! As to the power output, you can fiddle RR results all sorts of ways, high tyre pressures or the way the "drag" part is done. More important is how the car drives, a tune should make the car feel much better. lso, in a mk2 I think it used a thin air filter, they are VERY restrictive so vitesse type filters will give a nice bit of extra. As long as the needles are change/reprofiled to stop it running lean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Posted October 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 Brainfade. There was somebody who had a car on the rollers at CCK and it gave a low result, maybe I am just getting too old! As to the power output, you can fiddle RR results all sorts of ways, high tyre pressures or the way the "drag" part is done. More important is how the car drives, a tune should make the car feel much better. lso, in a mk2 I think it used a thin air filter, they are VERY restrictive so vitesse type filters will give a nice bit of extra. As long as the needles are change/reprofiled to stop it running lean. Thanks again Clive - think I'll take your advice and just enjoy it. Roll on next summer! Robin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now