MG-Cars.net

Welcome to our resource for MG Car Information.

Recommendations

Parts

MG parts spares and accessories are available for MG T Series (TA, MG TB, MG TC, MG TD, MG TF), Magnette, MGA, Twin cam, MGB, MGBGT, MGC, MGC GT, MG Midget, Sprite and other MG models from British car spares company LBCarCo.

MG MGF Technical - Solid Cams

Hi guys,

Are solid cams the way forward??

I have a VVC unit awaiting possible modifications..

Give me your views on modifying........no expense spared..
Jimbo H

>>no expense spared

Supercharge it :-) - only 6K

Nothing wrong with the VVC if you're happy with 170bhp levels. Just flow the head and add filter and exhaust.

To go beyond this at the moment, with no replacement ECU available, then you will have to give up the VVC mechanism and pay a lot more for DTHTBs and an Emerald M3DK ECU giving you an extra 15bhp and taking you to around 185bhp.

Check out http://www.dvapower.com./


Dave Livingstone

Dave

Is it worth trying webbers??
Jimbo H

Dave,

Was there talk of doing a Emerald VVC unit?
I thought there was. No idea where I got this impression tho.


P.
Paul Nothard

no good trying us ;-)
andrew lloyd

Paul,

There was talk of doing a VVC implementation of the M3D, but I haven't heard of it coming out. However, I haven't asked Dave Andrews recently - easiest thing is to check with him.
Dave Livingstone

do you have their details??
Jimbo H

Sorry - that should have been Dave Walker not Dave Andrews - slight mental abberation. Anyway check out Emerald's new website here

http://www.emeraldm3d.com/index.html
Dave Livingstone

>Nothing wrong with the VVC if you're happy >with 170bhp levels. Just flow the head and >add filter and exhaust.

What's involved in this? / how much and where (Mike Satur?).

Has anyone here had this done?
Neil H

Neil,

Look at the K06a kit on http://www.dvapower.com./ and then call Dave Andrews and talk to him. Dave's in Milton Keynes.

And, yes my VVC makes 172bhp on the rolling road. DVA did mine before he standardised on the K06a spec. Basically I still have standard cams, but do have an ITG Maxogen filter, Trophy 52mm TB and Phoenix exhaust.
Dave Livingstone

You might be able to tickle out another couple of horses from the K06a kit by replacing the standard and rather mild exhaust cam with a Piper BP270H exhaust cam... chat to DVA for a little more information - but all should be compatible with the standard MEMS2J/ MEMS3 ECUs

I haven't heard anything more about VVC compatible M3D ECUs either... probably another one of those projects that are either in or awaiting further development?
Rob Bell

Hard question to ask Dave, but is it really noticable in terms of acceleration / torque, or just noise?

I have been looking at DVA's 185BHP kit - but too much money too soon for me I'm afraid..
Neil H

.. sorry didn't finished (pressed return at the wrong point) - D'oh.

Anyway... when you said "Just flow the head and add filter and exhaust."
I was thinking short term solution in the middle of saving up..
Neil H

The beauty of Dave Andrews kits (and many others of course) is that they can be seen as modular. Naturally the first port of call is a decent filter and a 160 TB to release the extra horse from the existing head. Next would be flowing the head. This removes the restriction found in a mass produced head. The VVC head is a good place to start as there are many similarities to the VHPD head (which is capable of 190+bhp). It is at this point it is important to know what your ultimate goal is. A head can be flowed to many different levels, from a 'quick and dirty' port, to a full-on larger valves/ports and solid lifters etc... If you don't intend taking the head to DTHTB then there is little point flowing the head to that degree, however, if in the future you do then you want to make sure there is enough air flow capacity.

For you the initial choice of cams is pretty straight forward, if you want to keep the VVC unit of course.

At a later stage it will then be possible to fit the Emerald ECU and then (if desired) ditch the VVC unit, stick in some hot 285 grind cams and have a decent 190bhp.

There is a lot decision making here, the trick is to really understand what you want to achieve..... If you want to chat off-line drop me an email.....

Been there, done that......

Tim
tim woolcott

What I don't really understand.., is that the MGF comes with a 1.8MPi engine, and a 1.8VVC unit.
The VVC unit is the more powerful and offers better performance stats.

So why ditch VVC when you tune up the engine? What does the VVC unit do that stops it from being harnassed to the same (or better) degree? ?
Neil H

The MEMS cannot cope with the tuning options, and there is no aftermarket ECU available for the VVC mechanism ( a bit chicken and egg, there is no demand as tuned engines tend to ditch the VVC!)
Will Munns

Neil,

Here's my (limited) understanding.

1st issue:

To go beyond a certain level of tuning you need to reprogramme the Engine Management System (EMS). The standard MEMS will cope up to a point. I'm told that the earlier MEMS wil cope more than the later version, which were tied down to stricter emission requirements. My car, a VVC BTW, is at around 170bhp and this is still within the limit of the standard (it's a 1998 model) MEMS. If I took it much further I'd need to reprogramme the MEMS or replace it with an after market item.

2md issue:

VVC = very very complicated - valve timing that is. This means that any engine management system has to be pretty clever to manage it. The standard MEMS does this, but AFAIK there are still no after market EMS's that do. Emerald with their highly regarded M3D EMS thought long and hard about attempting to do anything with the VVC and certainly initially shied away from it for fear of someone programming the thing badly, trashing their engine and then blaming the EMS. I don't know where they currently stand on this, you'd have to ask Dave Walker, but nothing is yet available.

As for reprogramming the standard MEMS - again apart from the same dangers (very complex), AFAIK no-one has got a system to do it.

If all this makes sense, you can see that ditching the VVC is currently the only option if you want to go beyond 170-180 bhp.
Dave Livingstone

Ah.. makes sense I suppose.

So airfilter - got..
Throttle Body is next (if I want to do it in installments?).
Neil H

Do bolt-on goodies first:

1. air filter
2. Throttlebody
3. Exhaust
4. 3.2 bar fuel pressure regulator
5. Either a bored out standard manifold, or far better, a decent 4-2-1 exhaust manifold (chat to Mike Satur for one of these)

These mods are very simple and reversible. They should also see you comfortably over 160 bhp on the VVC.

Your next stop is depend on how much more of a power hike you want. If 180 bhp is your limit, then go for DVA's 06a kit (gas-flowed head), retaining the VVC mechanism, but ditch the exhaust cam for a BP270H cam. And that'll be your limit on the standard MEMS.

If you want more then now is the time to ditch the VVC, sell the inlet plenum and throttle body, and go for the full monty solid cam kit with multiple throttle bodies and a Bernard Scouse airbox.

You'll end up with more horses than in a cheap Western movie. ;o)
Rob Bell

RoverBRM.co.uk is a web site that covers a Rover 200 BRM which I fitted a modified head to in 1999, the fact that it stillruns as well as it does provides a good indication of the reliability of the engine in tuned form. The power recorded on Dave Walkers roller was corrected to 177.

Interestingly this is with a standard manifold and downpipe, which I know is restrictive following some very promising experience with another 1.8 litre engined Rover that had a Janspeed 4-2-1 manifold fitted in place of the original (externally welded and internally cleaned up) standard parts. I expect that if this was fitted onto the BRM it would now easily break through the 180bhp mark.

Also interesting is the fact that with a calibrated fuel pressure regulator (known pressure and at the top end of the 2.8 to 3.2 bar accepted setting for the standard unit) the full load mixture was not giving any indication of being weakened through the system falling short of capacity.

All the comment on ECU so far has concerned the MEMS 2J system, however the MEMS3 as found on post 2001 cars and all TFs is more flexible being as the base unit is common and on the line the appropriate mapping is downloaded. EOBD requirements makes the future far more attractive for aftermarket software applications and already I am aware that Superchips has had some success with remapping a TF160. Not that changing from MEMS2J to MEMS3 is a viable option though.

Rog
Roger Parker

The 2J v 3 MEMS question is probably another one of those 'swings and roundabout' questions: MEMS3 is certain to be more 'programmable' than MEMS2J, but 2J is programmed in conjunction with larger standard injectors as standard... Plus, there is the question of the post-cat Lambda sensor, emissions compliance etc etc... but I guess that some clever lateral thought ought to over come these 'limitations'

Overall, I think that you are right Rog: MEMS3 will be opening some very interesting avenues for tuning. :o)
Rob Bell

This thread was discussed between 05/01/2004 and 14/01/2004

MG MGF Technical index

This thread is from the archive. The Live MG MGF Technical BBS is active now.