rethinking honda s2000 question

[kennyrayandersen]

The Honda engine is pretty tall, comparatively speaking. Is anybody out there putting on a dry sump to lower the engine and putting in in a regular style Birkin/Caterham-sized body/chassis? Obviously the S2K is using the power plant, but anything else out the using it, other than scratch built? How about scratch built? Just wondering. I really like the Birkin-sized car and the classic look, but I'm not that sweet on the Ford i.e. having to import the tanny and whatnot. It would be nice of that drive train could be shoehorned into something a bit smaller (or better said more traditional).

[Tralfaz]

The Honda engine is pretty tall, comparatively speaking. Is anybody out there putting on a dry sump to lower the engine and putting in in a regular style Birkin/Caterham-sized body/chassis? Obviously the S2K is using the power plant, but anything else out the using it, other than scratch built? How about scratch built? Just wondering. I really like the Birkin-sized car and the classic look, but I'm not that sweet on the Ford i.e. having to import the tanny and whatnot. It would be nice of that drive train could be shoehorned into something a bit smaller (or better said more traditional).

 

 

If you compromise and go with a slightly wider (SV) sized chassis than the 2.3 Duratec mated to the Late Model MX-5 transmission should fit nicely.

 

I can't see how you could get a S2000 lump in a Cat/Birkin without extreme bocy/chassis mods.

Edited September 7, 2009 by Tralfaz

[Mondo]

That's pretty much why the S2K & Stalker look the way they do (have you checked out my album?). Haven't seen the Westfield with the honda motor..

 

You may have to choose between horsepower or style (though the new Duratecs are getting close and the Cat/Birkins weigh a little less too). I doubt you'll really care about the HP difference on the street. The difference will be if your the kind of guy that will get the urge for more power after a while.... You can have a supercharged 340+hp S2K for less then the price of some newer Cats... anything over that is just bragging rights or is for the lunatic fringe (WestTexas & 7evin;)). I'm kind of in their camp as I want to be quicker (up to 100 or so) than a corvette... hence the saving up $$ for a supercharger on the stock motor.

 

Don't discount the value of a pre-owned 7. They don't change that much (biggest exception being the Duratec motors) and the prices have come down considerably. Among the many nice cars I've seen for sale here, there's been Mopho's high performance Cat, a tricked out/high HP Nisson motored/ orange Westfield, an awesome Blue Birkin, and Chad's S2K was a steal! I could of bought Chad's car and added the supercharger for what I got in mine:(

 

Decisions, decisions....

Edited September 7, 2009 by Mondo

[slngsht]

I don't have any first hand experience with that engine, but make sure if you go the dry sump route, make sure it solves your ground clearance problems. In my case, even though the pan was the lowest part of the car, the bottom of the bellhousing was the part most frequently hit

[scannon]

If you compromise and go with a slightly wider (SV) sized chassis than the 2.3 Duratec mated to the Late Model MX-5 transmission should fit nicely.

 

I can't see how you could get a S2000 lump in a Cat/Birkin without extreme bocy/chassis mods.

 

A cheaper and IMHO better way to go is with an earlier Miata 1.8 engine and 5 speed transmission. These engines are far stronger than the Duratecs if you want to go for big hp. They were turbo engines in the Mazda 323 GTX/GTR cars.

 

They fit nicely in to a Caterham SV chassis although sump clearance is a little low but I am careful and have not hit anything in 6,000+ miles of driving.

 

The best year is a '99 - '00 engine. It has the best head and does not have the VVT. The engine in my Cat is an '00, completely stock except for turbo, manifold, injectors and a Hyrda ECU. It dyno'd at 301 HP at the wheels and 262 lb ft of torque.

 

People have pushed built up versions of this engine to 660 hp and 500+ lb ft. Should satisfy most anyone's desire for a good power to weight ratio. In my car that would yield a 2.045 lb/HP figure.

 

I'm perfectly happy with a mere 4.45 lb/hp figure and the car is not high strung or finicky at all in traffic or on the highway.

[Boxologist]

the benefit of the miata drivetrain is also the availibility of wheels and brake items if u use the entire driveline. one of the local hotshoes here when he first wanted to codrive with me showed up with a set of wheels and R comps from his me-otter. I had to explain that mine was a ford variant and he should be hunting for a Westfield unit.

 

If u are set for a honda drivetrain, get in touch w/ Del Long out of Iowa who built his own, plus an extra one or two under the name of Sprinto. He may still be able to be contacted thru this site, or better off thru the yahoo D/E mod autoX group. he is away in lincoln this week so be patient.

Del skipped the s2000 drivetrain in favor of teh k20 (RSX) because the s2000 was too peaky of a lump.

 

U should

[Tralfaz]

A cheaper and IMHO better way to go is with an earlier Miata 1.8 engine and 5 speed transmission. These engines are far stronger than the Duratecs if you want to go for big hp. They were turbo engines in the Mazda 323 GTX/GTR cars.

 

They fit nicely in to a Caterham SV chassis although sump clearance is a little low but I am careful and have not hit anything in 6,000+ miles of driving.

 

The best year is a '99 - '00 engine. It has the best head and does not have the VVT. The engine in my Cat is an '00, completely stock except for turbo, manifold, injectors and a Hyrda ECU. It dyno'd at 301 HP at the wheels and 262 lb ft of torque.

 

People have pushed built up versions of this engine to 660 hp and 500+ lb ft. Should satisfy most anyone's desire for a good power to weight ratio. In my car that would yield a 2.045 lb/HP figure.

 

I'm perfectly happy with a mere 4.45 lb/hp figure and the car is not high strung or finicky at all in traffic or on the highway.

 

 

I agree with Skip, though I think (and perhaps I am wrong) that it is likely easier to get into the 200 HP range Naturally aspirated with throttle bodies and maybe a Cam in a Duratec than with the Mazda lump and I think it is a touch lighter (all Aluminum).

 

In the interest of full disclosure I love the Mazda motor, I have one in my Miata. I am working on a Seven but am not sure whether I want a turbo or to keep it NA (would prefer the latter) right now it is set up with an R1 bike motor but still in build stage.

 

Regards,

 

T

Edited September 7, 2009 by Tralfaz

[scannon]

I agree with Skip, though I think (and perhaps I am wrong) that it is likely easier to get into the 200 HP range Naturally aspirated with throttle bodies and maybe a Cam in a Duratec than with the Mazda lump and I think it is a touch lighter (all Aluminum).

 

Regards,

 

T

It is much harder and more expensive to get 200 hp out of a normally aspirated Miata engine than it is to turbo a stock 1.8 motor with 10 - 12 psi boost. Depending on which ECU you use you will probably get around 220 hp.

 

The N/A Miata motors get very peaky up there around 200 hp.

 

Another solution if you are wanting only 200 hp in a Miata engine is to use a smaller turbo which will feel very much like an N/A motor as there is no lag. You will give up some on the top end. It is also easy to upgrade when 200 isn't enough HP anymore. A friend did this on a 1.6 Miata motor and was very satisfied with the results of the small turbo.

[11Budlite]

The Honda engine is pretty tall, comparatively speaking. Is anybody out there putting on a dry sump to lower the engine and putting in in a regular style Birkin/Caterham-sized body/chassis? Obviously the S2K is using the power plant, but anything else out the using it, other than scratch built? How about scratch built? Just wondering. I really like the Birkin-sized car and the classic look, but I'm not that sweet on the Ford i.e. having to import the tanny and whatnot. It would be nice of that drive train could be shoehorned into something a bit smaller (or better said more traditional).

 

I know Jack P. (aka Birkin42) is putting a Honda S2000 drivetrain and a DeDion rear in his Birkin. I've been very impressed with what I've seen of it so far. He still has some work to do but you can check out some build photos here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/10827861@N07/page4/

[BusaNostra]

" Haven't seen the Westfield with the honda motor"

 

 

In a traditional size 7 (with the exception of WCM Ultralight), I have seen more Westfield with Honda S2000 engine.

 

I'm sure with this.....'cause I have one.

[WestTexasS2K]

S2k engine is very tall compared to other four cylinders. Even with the big bump in the hood my valve cover rubs the hood just barely. Kevin is in the middle of putting a dry sump in his car with his new engine. It will buy you a few inches but the bell housing is the next thing hanging low. He is going to lower the engine about 1/2 inch from before, but the supercharger is stopping it from going any lower.

 

There is a guy in San Antonio I forget his name that has a really nice Westfield with S2k engine in it. He went with me to the Wounded Soilders Program and we have them rides.

 

Here is a picture of Kevins new set up you can see the dry sump pan in there.

Edited September 8, 2009 by WestTexasS2K
add picture

[BusaNostra]

If you are going HONDA, talk to Kevin Anderson. He is knowleable in his build. Very helpful person. Honda electronics a bit more complex. He knows to run around the system. He will help you to the bone.

Edited September 8, 2009 by BusaNostra

[Mondo]

nice work!

[Birkin42]

As Bruce pointed out, I am putting an S2000 engine and transmission into a late model Brikin chassis. Definitely a very tight fit with a lot of changes to accommodate it. The primary reason I went this route was for when I eventually want to get the car registered for the road. We seem to have ever changing requirements regarding needing to meet emissions regulations depending on how the car is classified. I wanted to use a stock engine and control system so that should it need to pass an emissions check, I have a hope of passing.

I also was attracted by what will hopefully be a fairly reliable and driveable drivetrain.

 

I am dry sumping my engine to save some height. Like others have pointed out, the bell housing is also and issue. I plan to take some material off there. Next is the sump on the transmission. To help with all this, I am putting the engine/transmission is slightly nose down so the dry sump pan, shaved down bell housing and transmission sump are all about parallel with the bottom of the chassis. I can't remember the exact number but I think they will hang down about 2.5". To get the hood to fit, I need to do a slight modification to the valve cover.

 

The S2000 transmission is quite wide, particularly on the passenger side. To give as much foot well room as possible on the drivers side, the engine/transmission is shifted over 3/8" towards the passenger side.

I have shortened up the passenger foot well to make room for the dry sump tank.

The big loser is the foot well room for the passenger, but I can still fit in at 6'-1".

 

Progress is happening a little slower than I'd like, particularly now that I have a 1 year old at home, but am having a lot of fun designing and building the car.

 

Next projects on my list are to make the dry sump parts. I'm thinking of CNC machining the pan with mounts for the pump and lines right on it.

 

I would say if you have lots of time, access to a lot of fabrication and machining equipment, and have the desire, it can be done, but it is an awfull lot of work. I would say between accommodating the engine and transmission and modifying the frame for my own DeDion rear suspension, I have changed easily more than 50% of the frame. On the plus side, the frame has gained 50% on torsional stiffness (not taking into account the effects of the skin) and should be close to a wash on weight for the chassis (live axle vs DeDion).

If I had to do it again, it would almost be easier building a whole new chassis from scatch.

 

Hope this is of some help.

[7evin]

For dry sumps check out ARE. Just got one and it is very well made.

http://www.drysump.com/index1.htm

 

 

Cheers

7evin

[Birkin42]

I checked out ARE the last time I was at the PRI show. They make nice stuff. My only issues with using their S2000 pan is that it doesn't seem to save any significant ground clearance, and it leaves the oil lines very exposed since in my case, the engine hangs below the frame. I am hoping to route the oil lines inside the pan to the high side and avoid them hanging down. I would hate to rip a line off.

Obviously a lot more work to make my own, but hopefully in the end, worth it.

 

Jack

[7evin]

Jack,

The build you are doing is awesome. Went through your pics.

Something to consider is that if you take the ARE pan (already proven)

and put 90 degree fittings going straight up then your lines would not hang.

You have to have some type of galley for the oil to gather so the pump can scavenge it.

Another thought is to start with their pan and modify it to your specs.

 

If you would like I can take some measurements of my setup (when I get back home)

and tell you what the differnce is between it and stock so you can see what you need

to change.

 

Cheer

7evin

Edited September 10, 2009 by 7evin

[Birkin42]

Thanks for the compliment 7evin. I'm enjoying the work, but it taking way longer than originally hoped. I'm sure many others have or are going through similar.

 

Going with a purchasable pan would save some time. Some pics/dimensions would definitely be appriciated.

I'll send you a PM with my email address.

Thanks,

 

Jack