Martin Hadland sets new 0-60, 0-100, 1/4, and TopSpeed records, all today!
12 June 2003, 10:14 AM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 1999
Location: SSO2003 2nd, SSO2005 1st, SSO2006 2nd, TACC Rd4 5th 4wd: In my car ;-)
Posts: 2,637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's fantastic. 10.6 with 620bhp (or less on 1.8bar) 
Norris 10.9 with 771bhp 
Martins engine bares very little resemblence to a Cossie engine though !!!
As for handling, maybe some people should take a look at TOTB 1's results ! http://www.trackdayplus.com/
Won by Gareth Lloyds Escort Cosworth in 31.84. Best Subaru was John Felstead in 34.25, backwards
The course was VERY twisty !!
Mark.
Norris 10.9 with 771bhp Martins engine bares very little resemblence to a Cossie engine though !!!
As for handling, maybe some people should take a look at TOTB 1's results ! http://www.trackdayplus.com/
Won by Gareth Lloyds Escort Cosworth in 31.84. Best Subaru was John Felstead in 34.25, backwards
The course was VERY twisty !!Mark.
12 June 2003, 11:33 AM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
is there any way of finding out engine specs etc? cars weight, gear ratios?
that is an incredible time.
For me the most impressive by far is 0-100 in 6 secs.
mclaren F1 was 6.3 and that time has never been repeated officially
Incredible achievement, and from one of my favourite cars!
that is an incredible time.
For me the most impressive by far is 0-100 in 6 secs.
mclaren F1 was 6.3 and that time has never been repeated officially
Incredible achievement, and from one of my favourite cars!
12 June 2003, 11:42 AM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if this is the same car that was on the track at jap fest ( blow out took his wing off )...then it has to been seen....
did any of you guys see him nail it straight out of the paddock....jesus christ.......he had over taken 3 cars befor the apex of the hill...and was way out in front after the first bloodie lap....add to that he started a good 4-6 seconds after the lead car.........Amazing car....nice bloke too...took the time to explain what had happened with the car.......many would not even give you the time of day........
Norris should run and hide.....or he could just "PAY" JUN to build him another engine and badge it up as NORRIS again...hehhehehe.
"Puts on his Flame hat...with special air cooled beer holders"
great car...hope he kills em all
all the best
jay
did any of you guys see him nail it straight out of the paddock....jesus christ.......he had over taken 3 cars befor the apex of the hill...and was way out in front after the first bloodie lap....add to that he started a good 4-6 seconds after the lead car.........Amazing car....nice bloke too...took the time to explain what had happened with the car.......many would not even give you the time of day........
Norris should run and hide.....or he could just "PAY" JUN to build him another engine and badge it up as NORRIS again...hehhehehe.
"Puts on his Flame hat...with special air cooled beer holders"
great car...hope he kills em all
all the best
jay
12 June 2003, 11:49 AM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Must admit, I thought norris' claims were fairly bold given the boost rpm, engine capacity and even the fuel he was using, especially given the official rating of the turbo, but I don't disbelieve him. Is there a massive difference between car specs as with those figures, i would expect there to be nothing in it between the evo and the cosworth which is the subject of this trhead.
I would like to know why the engine failed though. Mike rainbird said on the mlr that it was something to do with incylinder temperatures climbing due to successive full bore runs without a break for cooling.
Was not satisfied with this due to the fact that these cars would surely take a massive consistent hammering on track.
I would expect sustained heat to cause intake temps to rise, causing the mixture to lean out due to lower air density preventing as much oxygen getting in, but equally I would expect the ecu to compensate for this.
No one has explained to me why sustained power runs get egts to go above 300 degrees more than they should.
if that was the case then how are ful bore engine dynos done without waiting half an hour inbetween mapping zones?
I would like to know why the engine failed though. Mike rainbird said on the mlr that it was something to do with incylinder temperatures climbing due to successive full bore runs without a break for cooling.
Was not satisfied with this due to the fact that these cars would surely take a massive consistent hammering on track.
I would expect sustained heat to cause intake temps to rise, causing the mixture to lean out due to lower air density preventing as much oxygen getting in, but equally I would expect the ecu to compensate for this.
No one has explained to me why sustained power runs get egts to go above 300 degrees more than they should.
if that was the case then how are ful bore engine dynos done without waiting half an hour inbetween mapping zones?
12 June 2003, 12:21 PM
#42
Adam,
The hammering taken towing a carravan is higher than that seen on track.
Mainly due to the very high load but reduced speed, and therefor airflow.
Engine dyno has very controlled conditions.
Also worth pointing out, before yet another person says the Norris EVO should get better 1/4 mile times with the power advantage it's supposed to have. That only 1.5bar is used in 1st and 2nd gear, but this low boost setting, and the changeover point has not been optimised. As far as a 1/4 goes, it may be better to run less boost (less than the 2.5 bar max) and just run straight through, who knows.
Martin's cossie engine is really a cossie head casting with a lot of other parts bolted to it!
Paul
The hammering taken towing a carravan is higher than that seen on track.
Mainly due to the very high load but reduced speed, and therefor airflow.
Engine dyno has very controlled conditions.
Also worth pointing out, before yet another person says the Norris EVO should get better 1/4 mile times with the power advantage it's supposed to have. That only 1.5bar is used in 1st and 2nd gear, but this low boost setting, and the changeover point has not been optimised. As far as a 1/4 goes, it may be better to run less boost (less than the 2.5 bar max) and just run straight through, who knows.
Martin's cossie engine is really a cossie head casting with a lot of other parts bolted to it!
Paul
12 June 2003, 12:27 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
didnt know about low boost limits in lower gears, that is fair enough.
As for max load due to caravan pulling, that is a fair point, but I would like someone to explain why this increased load specifically leads to it leaning out enough to yield 1250 degrees of egt.
As for max load due to caravan pulling, that is a fair point, but I would like someone to explain why this increased load specifically leads to it leaning out enough to yield 1250 degrees of egt.
12 June 2003, 12:41 PM
#44
it's not leaning out Adam, it's heating up, which may be because of reduced fuel, not necessarily.
Decreased fuel density due to fuel heating.
Poor temperature compensation.
Heat soak in the engine as a whole.
Heatsoak in the intake pipes and plenum.
Heatsoak in the turbo compressor.
High temp exhaust manifold/turbo leading to high EGT and EGBP leading to increase cylinder polution of hot gas.
Sustained high power dissipation overloading the primary engine cooling.
I think there are enough potential causes there, but bound to be more.
Paul
Decreased fuel density due to fuel heating.
Poor temperature compensation.
Heat soak in the engine as a whole.
Heatsoak in the intake pipes and plenum.
Heatsoak in the turbo compressor.
High temp exhaust manifold/turbo leading to high EGT and EGBP leading to increase cylinder polution of hot gas.
Sustained high power dissipation overloading the primary engine cooling.
I think there are enough potential causes there, but bound to be more.
Paul
12 June 2003, 04:00 PM
#47
or get a westfield cossie turbo, mine was 2nd fastest 0-60 at the RS owners club day at donington, beaten by an RS200 (AWD traction) by 0.01s.
Gareths top speed was that figure because that was its top speed gearing as specced for UK circuits, he didnt do anything to the car to allow it to compete for the top speed at TOTB.
The interesting thing for me is how it will perform in putting the power down on a handling track, it will have to be very special to be able to match Gareths car, which is the fastest Escort Cossie to date in that respect IMHO, having a specially developed 7 speed works gearbox with 65/35 split (they were all 50/50) and very well developed suspension, plus an engine design aimed at tractable power delivery, top power means very little when it comes to corners.
Looking forward to seeing the car run in anger, its sounds fabulous so far.
Gareths top speed was that figure because that was its top speed gearing as specced for UK circuits, he didnt do anything to the car to allow it to compete for the top speed at TOTB.
The interesting thing for me is how it will perform in putting the power down on a handling track, it will have to be very special to be able to match Gareths car, which is the fastest Escort Cossie to date in that respect IMHO, having a specially developed 7 speed works gearbox with 65/35 split (they were all 50/50) and very well developed suspension, plus an engine design aimed at tractable power delivery, top power means very little when it comes to corners.
Looking forward to seeing the car run in anger, its sounds fabulous so far.
12 June 2003, 04:11 PM
#48
Subaru Tuning Specialist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 7.74 @179 mph 1/4 mile - road legal
Posts: 6,654
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Or put a scooby engine in a go kart
Top result for a 2.0 tin top
Wonder what it would launch like on a sticky prepared suface like Santa Pod 
Top result for a 2.0 tin top
Wonder what it would launch like on a sticky prepared suface like Santa Pod
12 June 2003, 09:33 PM
#50
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Palvo 2.2 mate 
, 2.4 cossie engines were the worst idea ever, proper un revving crap.
Hyabusa was mentioned- Theyve been tested at brunters, cannot get anywhere near that top speed in that amount of space. And what are their 0-100 n 1/4 times? Then again a bike IS the performance bargain, but itys not a car, so besides the point i guess.
At Japfest he was only running 23psi too.
No way is the Norris EVO the power thats quoted, it fat, but not that power. Like mentioned, you can see it CANT be purely on the turbo spec.
Oh and cheers for making the vid links clicky! I always forget how.
Cheers, Steve
, 2.4 cossie engines were the worst idea ever, proper un revving crap.Hyabusa was mentioned- Theyve been tested at brunters, cannot get anywhere near that top speed in that amount of space. And what are their 0-100 n 1/4 times? Then again a bike IS the performance bargain, but itys not a car, so besides the point i guess.
At Japfest he was only running 23psi too.
No way is the Norris EVO the power thats quoted, it fat, but not that power. Like mentioned, you can see it CANT be purely on the turbo spec.
Oh and cheers for making the vid links clicky! I always forget how.
Cheers, Steve
14 June 2003, 08:01 AM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
deleted because it has all been said before...sorry!
respect to Martin though, and shame about the possible head to head with the Norris Evo ( my money was on Martin, that car has to be seen to be believed )
[Edited by fastka - 6/14/2003 8:10:23 AM]
respect to Martin though, and shame about the possible head to head with the Norris Evo ( my money was on Martin, that car has to be seen to be believed )
[Edited by fastka - 6/14/2003 8:10:23 AM]
15 June 2003, 01:00 AM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi peeps
the reason why martins engine costs a few quid is ,for the simple fact is... that he had to go through trail and error in development the was the hardest part he could do another engine now with his eyes closed
some people say why didn't he go 700+bhp .. he didn't want to go 700 + bhp for the simple fact is all that lagg with the turbo that you use for this spec ......
all he wanted was a good engine to pull low down with lots of power and torque because he wants the car for trackdays really and trackdays only........whats the point of having 700/800+bhp on a 4 pot engine if it's not going to come on boost untill 5.5/6k theres no point it would be crap coming out of bends too much lagg
don't get me wrong when it comes on boost it would be fooking awesome no dowt but why wait
one thing i'll say about Martin really he will try anything to make his car good regradless of trail or error
fooking hats of to him
i still thing his car is a snail tho lol
Cheers marco
the reason why martins engine costs a few quid is ,for the simple fact is... that he had to go through trail and error in development the was the hardest part he could do another engine now with his eyes closed
some people say why didn't he go 700+bhp .. he didn't want to go 700 + bhp for the simple fact is all that lagg with the turbo that you use for this spec ......
all he wanted was a good engine to pull low down with lots of power and torque because he wants the car for trackdays really and trackdays only........whats the point of having 700/800+bhp on a 4 pot engine if it's not going to come on boost untill 5.5/6k theres no point it would be crap coming out of bends too much lagg
don't get me wrong when it comes on boost it would be fooking awesome no dowt but why wait
one thing i'll say about Martin really he will try anything to make his car good regradless of trail or error
fooking hats of to him
i still thing his car is a snail tho
lol Cheers marco
06 December 2003, 12:15 AM
#60
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jon- Well Gareth Lloyds engine is RS500 spec, whereas Martins has NO RS500 parts on it at all. It has incredible low down power (450lb/ft@3500 and still rising) but still over 600bhp. So Martins is quite a long way ahead of Gareths, were talking millenium tech rather than 80s tech.
Talizman- a lot! Tho it seems a LOT less than Norris EVO engine, or project X engine, would cost you, and were talking McF1 performance and more in some respects! AND its a track car, it handles amazingly, which is nice.
You can get 700+bhp (a 100bhp more) for a LOT less money (i have dyno graphs from sweeden of 730bhp), but they really dont have much in the way of power (like std or stg1 cossie power) until 5200rpm, then all hell breaks loose. but peak power is always around 7300, so its not like you have to rev too hard (tho they stay over 600bhp till gone 9000rpm!). Martins engine on the other hand is stupidly powerful low down, its crazy really.
For pure performance tho it doesnt matter if you dont have low down power as the revs is constantly high, and this week there was an escort cossie in sweeden, not stripped out, with 580bhp (i have dyno sheet) that managed a 10.8 on road tyres.
In Oz its the same sort of thing with scoobies in some countries isnt it. Got a vid of a scoob doing a 10.0 quarter! On slicks, wouldnt last 5 mins on a track and wont handle, and prob not road legal (and poss autobox), but still, bloody mad from a small capacity 4cyl.
And there that road legal EVO in Oz that does 9s (got vids of that too, lol).
[Edited by Steve3drALS - 6/12/2003 12:16:37 AM]
Talizman- a lot! Tho it seems a LOT less than Norris EVO engine, or project X engine, would cost you, and were talking McF1 performance and more in some respects! AND its a track car, it handles amazingly, which is nice.
You can get 700+bhp (a 100bhp more) for a LOT less money (i have dyno graphs from sweeden of 730bhp), but they really dont have much in the way of power (like std or stg1 cossie power) until 5200rpm, then all hell breaks loose. but peak power is always around 7300, so its not like you have to rev too hard (tho they stay over 600bhp till gone 9000rpm!). Martins engine on the other hand is stupidly powerful low down, its crazy really.
For pure performance tho it doesnt matter if you dont have low down power as the revs is constantly high, and this week there was an escort cossie in sweeden, not stripped out, with 580bhp (i have dyno sheet) that managed a 10.8 on road tyres.
In Oz its the same sort of thing with scoobies in some countries isnt it. Got a vid of a scoob doing a 10.0 quarter! On slicks, wouldnt last 5 mins on a track and wont handle, and prob not road legal (and poss autobox), but still, bloody mad from a small capacity 4cyl.
And there that road legal EVO in Oz that does 9s (got vids of that too, lol).
[Edited by Steve3drALS - 6/12/2003 12:16:37 AM]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
