spitfires
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: BHP ?

To: "Spit-LIST" <spitfires@autox.team.net>,
Subject: Re: BHP ?
From: "Peter S." <alfapete@pacbell.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 18:32:19 -0700
The issue here is more about what equipment is allowed/required than if it
will pass the sniffer machine test.  Dumb, but thats the way it is in Calif.
Do you still have an EGR valve?  Its required as well.  Complete functional
testing is done as well as visual and sniffer.
Peter S

----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Altomare <MTAltomare@Prodigy.net>
To: Peter S. <alfapete@pacbell.net>; Laura Gharazeddine <Laura.G@141.com>;
Craig Smith <CraigS@iewc.com>; Terry L. Thompson <tlt@digex.net>;
<spitfires@autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 6:21 PM
Subject: Re: BHP ?


> I don't necessarily agree about not passing the smog test with a Weber.  I
> rebuilt my 1500 using a standard cam (the hi-lift cam made the engine too
> "lumpy" at idle), dual valve springs, high compression pistons, 32/36 DGV
> Weber, Mallory Unilite distributor, headers, Monza exhaust, and free flow
> catalytic converter.  I added a crankcase breather using the mechanical
fuel
> pump opening and connected it through a hose to a PCV valve that is
threaded
> into the Canon manifold.  I get about 10.4:1 compression (172 psig) since
> the head was milled.  I passed the Georgia test with no problem.  The test
> standard was 6% CO, the engine spec was 1.5% +/- 1%, and the engine put
out
> 2.5% at idle and 1.9% at 2500 rpm.  I don't know what the horsepower is,
but
> I've increased it a noticable amount while keeping a smooth idle.
>
> You probably won't pass with a DCOE (racing) Weber, but the dual downdraft
> DGV gives good performance and is much easier to keep tuned than the
Zenith
> Stromberg.
>
> Michael Altomare
> '77 Spitfire 1500
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter S. <alfapete@pacbell.net>
> To: Laura Gharazeddine <Laura.G@141.com>; Craig Smith <CraigS@iewc.com>;
> Terry L. Thompson <tlt@digex.net>; spitfires@autox.team.net
> <spitfires@autox.team.net>
> Date: Thursday, July 29, 1999 1:14 PM
> Subject: Re: BHP ?
>
>
> >
> >But unlike you're arrangement, most of us have to pass some sort of Smog
> >test - which wouldn't pass with a Weber.
> >PS
> >
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Laura Gharazeddine <Laura.G@141.com>
> >To: Craig Smith <CraigS@iewc.com>; Terry L. Thompson <tlt@digex.net>;
> ><spitfires@autox.team.net>
> >Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 8:43 AM
> >Subject: Re: BHP ?
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Get rid of the Strom-it's slowin' you down, man! (besides-they're
> >> such a pain!)
> >>
> >> Really, my other spittys had the stock strom-I hated those!@#$ things!
> >> The Weber is so much easier to live with!
> >>
> >> LG and Nigel
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Craig Smith <CraigS@iewc.com>
> >> To: <Laura.G@141.com>; Terry L. Thompson <tlt@digex.net>;
> >> <spitfires@autox.team.net>
> >> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 8:36 AM
> >> Subject: RE: BHP ?
> >>
> >>
> >> > Ok, I believe...
> >> > I have a question.
> >> > A stock MKIV
> >> > Head shaved .020
> >> > Valve job new rings, bearings
> >> > Long Flow header
> >> > Balanced Crank and Pistons
> >> > Stock Strom.
> >> > HP ???
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Laura.G@141.com [mailto:Laura.G@141.com]
> >> > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 10:25 AM
> >> > To: Terry L. Thompson; spitfires@autox.team.net
> >> > Subject: Re: BHP ?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > has anyone heard of a 1500cc Spit engine being brought above 100
hp?
> >> > > (I know a twin SU equiped spit is rated at 71 bhp without
catalyst.)
> >> >
> >> > Yes. When the engine on my car was being rebuilt, the PO had the
> >intention
> >> > of
> >> > racing it-so....it was tweaked. Remember-F1 engines used to be
> 1500-it's
> >> > not the size-it's the skill of the mechanic!
> >> >
> >> > The engine was completely taken apart. A lot of time and effort was
put
> >> into
> >> > putting it back together. (Remember-he does this for a living-and he
> >used
> >> to
> >> > build
> >> > race cars-) Combined with the headers and side draft Weber...Oil
> >> cooler...I
> >> > mean
> >> > every little detail. It's a very fast car. And there haven't been any
> >> engine
> >> > problems-
> >> > and I drive it hard. But, he and his son took it out to test it when
> >they
> >> > finished-to see if
> >> > he could "break" it-and he couldn't (and he drove it REALLY hard!)-it
> >> > redlines up
> >> > around 9500.
> >> >
> >> > I know that no one on the list believes me-so, I won't even go into
the
> >> > datails-
> >> > the answer to your question is emphatically YES-given the time, skill
> >and
> >> > money-
> >> > YES!
> >> >
> >> > Laura G. and Nigel
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > The reason I'm asking is that since an engine swap for another
engine
> >> > (289?
> >> > > 302?)
> >> > > is a very daunting task, requiring mods for frame, body,
drive-train
> >and
> >> > > suspension,
> >> > > I'm wondering how effective it would be to have another Spit engine
> >> built
> >> > > up with
> >> > > performance cam, dual point distributor, roller rocker, tubular
push
> >> rods,
> >> > > competition valves, dual valve springs, etc. (I'm specing the cost,
> >and
> >> it
> >> > > seems
> >> > > a lot more reasonable to do than to modify the car with a larger
> >foreign
> >> > > block and
> >> > > drive train.)
> >> > >
> >> > > Terry L. Thompson
> >> > > '76 Spit 1500
> >> > > Maryland
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>