• Sign Up! To view all forums and unlock additional cool features

    Welcome to the #1 Fiesta ST Forum and Fiesta ST community dedicated to Fiesta ST owners and enthusiasts. Register for an account, it's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the Fiesta ST Forum today!


Kaur Motorsport 4WD Fiesta Prototype

OP
eq5

eq5

Member
Messages
52
Likes
127
Location
Tallinn, Estonia
Thread Starter #21
It might be worth your time to reach out to Tim at pwnall performance, he sells a reinforced block.

I don't think anyone has asked yet ... What 4wd tranny are you planning on using?
The Pwnall version has closed the gap between cylinders, but the original liner cracking issue still remains.

We are using 3MO gearbox/transfer and rear diff. You don't want to know how much they cost, they are the most expensive parts on this car. :D

Even then we ran into a serious issue with the propshaft. We made a similar propshaft as the R5 Fiesta has, but they kept breaking and twisting on launched starts. Everybody were saying our Ecoboost is too powerful, although we were running the stock internals engine. :LOL:
This propshaft should have easily handled 400hp/600nm.

Turned out 3MO forgot to mention an important bit of information for those transmissions- they basically use 1:1 ratio front and rear. 1 revolution at the wheels is one revolution for the propshaft.

After we changed to joints and tubes more familiar from small trucks, this issue got resolved. The forces going through the propshaft were just 3 times bigger than you would normally see, where 3:1 ratio is used.

20190307_095945.jpg 20190307_130216.jpg 20190307_170748.jpg 20190311_153151.jpg 20190205_121511.jpg 20190205_121505.jpg 20190716_170707.jpg 20190717_143101.jpg 20190818_152610.jpg
 


Messages
50
Likes
23
Location
Gadsden, AL, USA
#23
Very nice work, BTW.

Also- If I were looking for root cause analysis on a particular engine from the experts, I'd ask at Speedtalk. They are not bragging when they use the slogan "some of the brightest minds in racing"- you'll find someone that can knows, or someone that knows someone that knows the answers to your combustion pressure / bore distortion issues.
 


M-Sport fan

9000 Post Club
Messages
14,000
Likes
6,697
Location
Princeton, N.J.
#26
Subbed to this. Interested in seeing how this goes. One thing I wish ford did was an AWD FiST
Yeah, as much as everyone on here hates on the idea of an AWD turbo Fiesta, preferring a FWD version for weight reasons, I do wish that WE would have gotten the RS version, instead of the Focus. [:(] [wink]
 


M-Sport fan

9000 Post Club
Messages
14,000
Likes
6,697
Location
Princeton, N.J.
#27
We are using 3MO gearbox/transfer and rear diff. You don't want to know how much they cost, they are the most expensive parts on this car. :D
Is this unit as much as (or even more than! [crazyeye]) the already exorbitant, 'usual' Sadev R5 units, or the stratospheric cost X-Trac units?? [dunno]
 


OP
eq5

eq5

Member
Messages
52
Likes
127
Location
Tallinn, Estonia
Thread Starter #29
Update to the engine saga.

Pumaspeed met me halfway and sent me a replacement engine block to cover some costs for the failed one- bonus points for them for doing this.

However they managed to kill some of those bonus points right away- I instructed them to just sleeve the block, not to bore and hone. Less work for them and more control for me. When the block arrived, the sleeves were already honed to 79.00mm, which is the number required for most aftermarket pistons in first STD measurement. All measuring nice and round in the whole length of the sleeve, nice work by the machinist from that perspective.

Now why is this a problem? Because the hone work is done without the torque plate imitating the engine head. I noticed this issue with my previous block and had my own torque plate made. And now when I used the ARP head bolts and attached the torque plate to the block with correct torque sequence given by ARP, the upper half of the sleeves turns oval. Mostly has an effect on 1st and 4th cylinder, which also makes sense. Longitudinal measurement(crankshaft axis/plane) is larger (up to 79.05mm) and seems to vary on different blocks, while measurement perpendicular to that is slightly below 79.00mm.
Ford's stock tolerance for this is 79.005 ā€“79.025 mm, while maximum out-of-round is .008 mm. Both exceed measures that I got.

After looking at the previous engine block, this is a problem, as I have developed blow-by in 1st and 4th cylinder (measuring up to 79.05mm with about 0.04-0.05mm out of round). 2nd and 3rd seem to have held so far, they measured around 79.03mm. Seemingly small differences, but results show it matters a lot. While probably not an issue in short term for a street driven car, definately something I do not want for a competition engine.

It seems the new block behaves a little better, the differences are smaller, measuring up to 79.025mm. As I have already purchased pistons, I will try to see if my machinist can hone sleeves to 79.03mm, which considering my previous block should hold and not develop blow-by yet. But this is still somewhat of a guess, only relying on experience from one previous block.

Definately not happy with this solution and with the reason I am facing this problem in the first place. I do not understand how Pumaspeed is preparing their other blocks. Torque plate is a common practice for aluminium blocks and a must when building these engines daily. Moreover, it also has an effect on the mains line straightness and you could end up with clearances that are not correct(made a post about this here: Modified engine block options.)

For those who find the metric system confusing, divide my values with 25,4 to get to imperial. 0.05mm is basically 2 thou imperial.
 


Last edited:

JDG

1000 Post Club
Premium Account
Messages
1,860
Likes
1,983
Location
Conshohocken, PA
#30
Update to the engine saga.

Pumaspeed met me halfway and sent me a replacement engine block to cover some costs for the failed one- bonus points for them for doing this.

However they managed to kill some of those bonus points right away- I instructed them to just sleeve the block, not to bore and hone. Less work for them and more control for me. When the block arrived, the sleeves were already honed to 79.00mm, which is the number required for most aftermarket pistons in first STD measurement. All measuring nice and round in the whole length of the sleeve, nice work by the machinist from that perspective.

Now why is this a problem? Because the hone work is done without the torque plate imitating the engine head. I noticed this issue with my previous block and had my own torque plate made. And now when I used the ARP head bolts and attached the torque plate to the block with correct torque sequence given by ARP, the upper half of the sleeves turns oval. Mostly has an effect on 1st and 4th cylinder, which also makes sense. Longitudinal measurement(crankshaft axis/plane) is larger (up to 79.05mm) and seems to vary on different blocks, while measurement perpendicular to that is slightly below 79.00mm.
Ford's stock tolerance for this is 79.005 ā€“79.025 mm, while maximum out-of-round is .008 mm. Both exceed measures that I got.

After looking at the previous engine block, this is a problem, as I have developed blow-by in 1st and 4th cylinder (measuring up to 79.05mm with about 0.04-0.05mm out of round). 2nd and 3rd seem to have held so far, they measured around 79.03mm. Seemingly small differences, but results show it matters a lot. While probably not an issue in short term for a street driven car, definately something I do not want for a competition engine.

It seems the new block behaves a little better, the differences are smaller, measuring up to 79.025mm. As I have already purchased pistons, I will try to see if my machinist can hone sleeves to 79.03mm, which considering my previous block should hold and not develop blow-by yet. But this is still somewhat of a guess, only relying on experience from one previous block.

Definately not happy with this solution and with the reason I am facing this problem in the first place. I do not understand how Pumaspeed is preparing their other blocks. Torque plate is a common practice for aluminium blocks and a must when building these engines daily. Moreover, it also has an effect on the mains line straightness and you could end up with clearances that are not correct(made a post about this here: Modified engine block options.)

For those who find the metric system confusing, divide my values with 25,4 to get to imperial. 0.05mm is basically 2 thou imperial.
Solid info. I am also surprised to hear this as shops like DHM were using the torque plate method to build fiesta blocks 4 years ago. Keep up posted on Pumaspeed's response when you explain to them how they messed up.
 


OP
eq5

eq5

Member
Messages
52
Likes
127
Location
Tallinn, Estonia
Thread Starter #32
We had some serious issues getting the rod bearings to hold on our previous setup and it is still an anomaly to why it was like that, as we went through 3 sets of bearings without any improvement. Tried different oils, pressures, pumps...no help. Looking back, there must have been something wrong with the block, possibly a small crack somewhere, causing loss of pressure when oil reached the bearings.

Now on the last block, rod bearings were holding well and we also improved on our dyno figures. Unfortunately again ran into some anomaly, where after some 200 SSkm we got excessive knock and burnt a piston. The MBE ECU we are using has a self-learning function and this seems to be the only possible cause left on the table. Luckily the block survived and we just had to go for oversize pistons.

So hopefully now the engine we are assemblying will finally give us the reliability we are looking for. To make sure of that, we will do the following:
1) Purchased a billet crank. Rod bearings were looking good, but mains had some polishing marks indicating flex. It wasn't so bad, but when aiming for reliable 2000 SSkm, we needed an upgrade.
2) Dyno session starting from scratch. To make sure the ECU is not making the wrong corrections based on some additional strategies written into the ECU, my dyno guy will have to spend quite a lot of time going through all of the functions and tables in the ECU. The MBE does not have much information out there to rely on, so it will be proper amount of work.
3) Dyno guy following and logging the process closely in our future tests, making sure everything is within parameters. Considering our previous failure, we aim to cover some 300 SSkm in tests before taking it to a competition.
 


TyphoonFiST

9000 Post Club
Premium Account
Messages
11,495
Likes
7,986
Location
Rich-fizzield
#33
The engine saga, starting from spring 2019 and still in progress.

So to begin with, the hardware that is (most likely) here to stay in one form or the other:

- Custom made turbo from Turbo Technics with 34mm restrictor and electrical WG. Spools so quickly that we do not use anti-lag, which in return should also increase the lifespan of the turbo once we stop flowing rod bearing particles through it (ok ok, the particles should not reach it, but its the hot stop that is killing it).
- tubular manifold
- 3" exhaust all the way, sounds like a less powerful WRC
- port injection kit
- Titan 2-stage dry sump kit
- Powertrain Racing clutch
- custom flywheel to match the gearbox + ARP bolts
- SBD/WOSP 95A race alternator
- Sytec dump valve
- Davis Craig electrical water pump
- bunch of billet blanking plates
- ARP head studs, OC main studs
- MBE 9A6 ECU, Ecumaster ADU5 Dash, 2x Ecumaster PMU16, full milspec wiring
- custom radiator and custom IC with Setrab core fitted side-by-side, 2x Spal fans,
- Setrab oil rad
- loads of extra sensors
- loads of AN6 to AN12 hoses and tubes
- Bosch 040 fuel pump and 6-bar fuel filter for returnless fuel supply
- probably some other stuff I forgot

View attachment 25393 View attachment 25394 View attachment 25399 View attachment 25395 View attachment 25396 View attachment 25397 View attachment 25398 View attachment 25400 View attachment 25401 View attachment 25402
View attachment 25413

Version 1:

- bought a brand new complete engine from Pumaspeed (if someone needs some stock items, I still have those, turbo, clutch, flywheel etc)
- ran a "safe" map with 1.6 bar of peak boost, giving approx 280 hp/330 ft-lb
- pushed it for 350 competitive km-s
- Polo R5 with Oliver Solberg at the wheel was not far away, but we wanted to get closer, so we opened it up to go for forged internals and give it 2 bars of boost. We also wanted to check the liners, as the internet searches suggested some common problems with liners could take place at higher cylinder pressures
- photos attached, liners indeed had deformed towards each other and a piece of the top aluminium ring had broken off. Hence opening it up was good decision

View attachment 25403 View attachment 25405

Version 2:

- ordered the bulletproof built-up short block from Pumaspeed. According to their homepage a "all the abuse you can give it" type of a block. Ductile sleeves, PEC rods, Wiseco oversize(+1mm) pistons. From the looks of it, sleeving and machine work was done very well
- break-in and dyno. Very good results, approx 310 hp/360 ft-lb
- ran 5 km in a test and a hole appeared on the side of the block. Some photos are attached, on one of them guys in the garage are holding a wooden bottle opener in the background for hole sizing reference, also giving an idea of the mood that we had when this happened.

View attachment 25407 View attachment 25406 View attachment 25410
View attachment 25412

- we did a thourough analyzis what could have caused this. We arrived at rod bearing clearance which was much smaller than Pumaspeed claimed it to be. With 2 bars of boost and our 4WD transmission giving a lot of load, tight clearances are not a safe way to go. This is when we also learned Ford's oil pump gives a constant oil pressure of 40 psi, even at 7000+ RPM. With older engines the rule of thumb has been 10 psi per 1000 RPM, so oil pressure is also not a supporting factor here. Also another factor in play concerning bearing load is the piston and rod weight. The piston+rod assembly is approx 20% heavier per cylinder compared to OEM. Have it rotating at 7000 RPM and you get significantly higher loads on the bearings.
View attachment 25404
- in addition to the whole block being a pile of scrap, the head got hit, sump got hit, Titan pump is done, oil pump is done, oil cooler needs changing and turbo needed a rebuild. A nice pile of money out of the window right there....
View attachment 25408 View attachment 25409 View attachment 25411
- block has also now been sent back to Pumaspeed for inspection and I am waiting for their take on it. Will post any updates when they come.

Version 3 is the one we are working on this very moment and it will be coming in the next post.
I see what you did there through the hole in the block pic...very clever. HAHA. How Did anyone not see that is beyond me!
 


JDG

1000 Post Club
Premium Account
Messages
1,860
Likes
1,983
Location
Conshohocken, PA
#34
We had some serious issues getting the rod bearings to hold on our previous setup and it is still an anomaly to why it was like that, as we went through 3 sets of bearings without any improvement. Tried different oils, pressures, pumps...no help. Looking back, there must have been something wrong with the block, possibly a small crack somewhere, causing loss of pressure when oil reached the bearings.

Now on the last block, rod bearings were holding well and we also improved on our dyno figures. Unfortunately again ran into some anomaly, where after some 200 SSkm we got excessive knock and burnt a piston. The MBE ECU we are using has a self-learning function and this seems to be the only possible cause left on the table. Luckily the block survived and we just had to go for oversize pistons.

So hopefully now the engine we are assemblying will finally give us the reliability we are looking for. To make sure of that, we will do the following:
1) Purchased a billet crank. Rod bearings were looking good, but mains had some polishing marks indicating flex. It wasn't so bad, but when aiming for reliable 2000 SSkm, we needed an upgrade.
2) Dyno session starting from scratch. To make sure the ECU is not making the wrong corrections based on some additional strategies written into the ECU, my dyno guy will have to spend quite a lot of time going through all of the functions and tables in the ECU. The MBE does not have much information out there to rely on, so it will be proper amount of work.
3) Dyno guy following and logging the process closely in our future tests, making sure everything is within parameters. Considering our previous failure, we aim to cover some 300 SSkm in tests before taking it to a competition.
Thanks for the update. Sounds like your team has your hands full. Stupid question: what is "sskm"? Is that a reliability measurement of some kind? Stage kilometers?
 


OP
eq5

eq5

Member
Messages
52
Likes
127
Location
Tallinn, Estonia
Thread Starter #35
TyphoonFiST- I guess it was well hidden between the lines :ROFLMAO:

JDG- SSkm is Special Stage kilometers for short. Mainly used on the rallying scene to measure life expectancy and rebuild intervals for different components. Basically all the km-s where you are pushing the car to its potential, we measure as SSkm. Different producers also give different additional formulas for calculating it. For example French gearbox manufacturer 3MO gives a formula of: SSkm= stage + test + 10% road.

3mo rebuild intervals.jpg
 


M-Sport fan

9000 Post Club
Messages
14,000
Likes
6,697
Location
Princeton, N.J.
#37
You are fortunate that your local rules allow for a dry sump, since they are verboten in FIA spec R5 cars (but of course are allowed in the top factory WRC class). [thumb]
 


OP
eq5

eq5

Member
Messages
52
Likes
127
Location
Tallinn, Estonia
Thread Starter #38
You are fortunate that your local rules allow for a dry sump, since they are verboten in FIA spec R5 cars (but of course are allowed in the top factory WRC class). [thumb]
Considering the price of a Titan drysump kit, it is definitely cheaper than developing a reliable wet sump solution.
 


Messages
444
Likes
519
Location
Metro Detroit
#39
The more I read about Pumaspeed the less respect I have for them.

First, they should have FULLY warrantied that Short block, that type of rod failure isolated to just one journal had just two causes. An improperly drilled journal feed passage or improper clearance, both of which fall at the feet of Pumaspeed.

Second there is honing the block without a Deck Plate. Back when I was building Small Block Chevies back the late 70's/early 80's it was standard practice at almost any machine shop to use a deck plate to hone the block. So 40 years later Pumaspeed doesn't use a deck plate.
 


OP
eq5

eq5

Member
Messages
52
Likes
127
Location
Tallinn, Estonia
Thread Starter #40
When you can get Tony from Pumaspeed on the phone, then he actually gets (some) things done. But basically with all of the machinists I have worked with, things only have a chance of being done properly if you send a step-by-step guide for them.

1. Tighten the main bolts to specification
2. Tighten the deck plate to specification
3. Hone the cylinders
4. Measure the result, check for ovalness and taper
etc
etc

And even then it has happened, that they decide to give the sheet to a new guy in the shop, who misses a point on the written guide, rendering the rest of the work pretty much useless...
 


Similar threads



Top