Show whole topic
Jan 27, 2008 11:33 pm
Jan 27, 2008 11:33 pm
Subject: Re: 2L engine problem
Thanks for the interesting post from Oakley. I completely agree with you observations….my car sparkles with the downdraft head!
Thanks Phil Ridout! To those who do not know the late Phil Ridout, he was a long term 2 Litre owner and telecommunications researcher. I used to work with. His retirement project was to design the downdraft 2 Litre head and we spent many happy hours over beer discussing the project. Wessex Workshops took his design into production and their product is a great credit to them. I have had one on my car since 1994. Phil passed away a few years ago aged about 83.
I agree with Oakley that 3100 revs in fourth gear gives wonderful relaxed cruising and you can belt along with all the law abiding drivers in the middle lane on the motorway. This is quite fast enough for me as well! In fact I get scared going much faster because fools cut you up and I feel very vulnerable with excellent but still 1920’s brakes. Much more fun is that the car is GREAT at 2800 rpm because you can put your foot down and roar past lorries with plenty in reserve in top – up to 3500 rpm - and then relax back to 2800 rpm when the road is clear.
What makes the downdraft head spectacular is the effect it has on hills. The classic 2 Litre problem is that an unmodified car runs out of puff up a gradient. Not with mine; drop into third, snick into second - spin the engine to 3500 rpm - and as the car speeds up, go into third again when it will happily accelerate to 3500 rpm and maybe a touch more. While still going up the hill, having picked up speed, my car will want to go back into top and positively sparkles when it drops down to say 2500 rpm, and you say to yourself … that was fun!
I agree with Oakley that sustained high engine revving on the road is generally unnecessary, though having more revs in reserve makes the car more useful in modern road conditions without straining it too badly. With valve timing, I have done the usual 15 degree overlap but have not got round to changing my camshafts. The main difference is that generally I only get 19 mpg which is a bit disappointing with the 25 mpg I used to get. I might change it back and see if I get back the MPG without loss of useability.
So why did Lagonda not put the downdraft head into production? Phil reckoned that in 1930 it was more fashionable to add a blower, and transforming the unblown car would have confused buyers. Then later it must have been very much cheaper to buy-in the Crossley engine than continue with making the 2 litre engine, and of course by 1932, 6 cylinder engines were more fashionable than 4 cylinder ones.
The 16/80 engine loves to rev but this should be a topic for a later posting.
Regards to all Colin Mallett M34
Thanks for the interesting post from Oakley. I completely agree with you observations….my car sparkles with the downdraft head!
Thanks Phil Ridout! To those who do not know the late Phil Ridout, he was a long term 2 Litre owner and telecommunications researcher. I used to work with. His retirement project was to design the downdraft 2 Litre head and we spent many happy hours over beer discussing the project. Wessex Workshops took his design into production and their product is a great credit to them. I have had one on my car since 1994. Phil passed away a few years ago aged about 83.
I agree with Oakley that 3100 revs in fourth gear gives wonderful relaxed cruising and you can belt along with all the law abiding drivers in the middle lane on the motorway. This is quite fast enough for me as well! In fact I get scared going much faster because fools cut you up and I feel very vulnerable with excellent but still 1920’s brakes. Much more fun is that the car is GREAT at 2800 rpm because you can put your foot down and roar past lorries with plenty in reserve in top – up to 3500 rpm - and then relax back to 2800 rpm when the road is clear.
What makes the downdraft head spectacular is the effect it has on hills. The classic 2 Litre problem is that an unmodified car runs out of puff up a gradient. Not with mine; drop into third, snick into second - spin the engine to 3500 rpm - and as the car speeds up, go into third again when it will happily accelerate to 3500 rpm and maybe a touch more. While still going up the hill, having picked up speed, my car will want to go back into top and positively sparkles when it drops down to say 2500 rpm, and you say to yourself … that was fun!
I agree with Oakley that sustained high engine revving on the road is generally unnecessary, though having more revs in reserve makes the car more useful in modern road conditions without straining it too badly. With valve timing, I have done the usual 15 degree overlap but have not got round to changing my camshafts. The main difference is that generally I only get 19 mpg which is a bit disappointing with the 25 mpg I used to get. I might change it back and see if I get back the MPG without loss of useability.
So why did Lagonda not put the downdraft head into production? Phil reckoned that in 1930 it was more fashionable to add a blower, and transforming the unblown car would have confused buyers. Then later it must have been very much cheaper to buy-in the Crossley engine than continue with making the 2 litre engine, and of course by 1932, 6 cylinder engines were more fashionable than 4 cylinder ones.
The 16/80 engine loves to rev but this should be a topic for a later posting.
Regards to all Colin Mallett M34