Here's a thought guess it might be cheaper to buy BBC mains caps 1/2 finished and get Jag 4 bolt holes drilled + set of block reducers and crank reduced to BBC mains than custom make Jag caps!? Are we simply re manufacturing the wheel here. If I didnt have so many engine sets of Jet rods I would be looking to go the SBC 2" BE wit smaller pins or even the current NASCA system of Accura BE with much smaller wrist pins, might even make enough room that way to get an 88 crank and 6" rod under a piston and within the std deck height.
Looking for a B bank CA (Gp 44 Califorian ) head if anyone knows of one. (or a pair).

 

I'm all for the twin turbo route for a V12 build of one of my cars, but, how do you expect to be able to run any more than 3 or 4 pounds of boost if you just have a stock 6.0, with it's cast pistons, and 11.5:1 compression? You really need to hit at least 12 PSI (preferably 18-24 PSI) in order to make any real power, and to justify the expense and trouble of plumbing twin turbos into an already cramped and overheated engine bay. I just don't think it's possible with cast pistons and a super high compression ratio. Otherwise, I would have already done it.

 

If someone can post all the specifications on the 5.3 motor I will tell you anything that can be done (part swappin ) . I want a stock bore dished pistons (4340 forged steel ) and h beam rods. Rated at 1000 hp .

 

guys, let is all reflect on the term "reinventing the wheel" ok, almost all of the modern advancements in sports cars are reinvented wheels. the whole torque tube rear transmission was popular in the late 1800s, the power hard top came out in the 50s, headlights that adjust when you steer? 1940s. the electric car? 1890s.

 

the point I'm making is often times you have to overly redo something in order to make advancements.

so I'm all for this crazy fly by the seat of your pants ****.

 

I for one, completely agree Calvin. I am following all this with great attention and even greater admiration. The point is YOU are doing it, who cares if someone else has? Loads of people have rebuilt XJSs, but I rebuilt MINE, is the point! Go Calvin say I.

Did you buy titanium valves? If so where from and how much were they please?

Ggreg

 

all this talk and NO action!

when do we race??

I aint gettin no younger Ya know.

 

don't worry ron, I should have the block together in the next couple weeks, and then we shal race, dont you worry

 

xjr5006,, did you say you already have one California Grp44 A bank cyl. head, you lucky dog!!

if you have the B bank what is wrong with it?

some times aluminum heads can be repaired,even when badly damaged!

 

Group 44 only ever built 18 v12 engines, Lanky had all the log books on them. I have #14 #15 & #18. Lanky sent me the log books for them, which was very nice of him, many years back.
I was told there were 24 CA heads made, guess that would have been 12 engines worth but it wasnt as BT only paid for testing on 4 of the heads and it was later found that 3 were lost due to core shift, now not sure if thats 3 pairs or 3 heads. Most will be on XJR5/7's but there will be a few over. One pair was ruined because they opened up the wrong holes, these were bare heads offered about in the last 8 years occasionally on Ebay but given the work required to rectify and finish then off maybe too expensive.
Have had a head or 2 repaired when dropped valves smashed through the flat combustion area. Got given 1 extra CA 'A' head and can only guess the other was scrapped due to damage as this one does have broken valve marks.
I use these engines racing and just wonder if anyone has an odd CA'B' about or even a pair. Might even get some remade in awhile as 'I know a man' as they say. Would love to get hold of a Mag block to save a bit of weight, guess thats not likely though as there were only 6 made and in the Mag Jag one was allowed to rot out.
The std 1.9 inlets are a tad heavy and bounce even with schmitelhelm springs when you go over 10K especially with tight clearances to keep the comp ratios up when using .54 or .6 cams rather than the softer .45. Hence the move to titanium valves never used by Group 44 to my knowledge. Used at the end by TWR but the big lobed cams were very aggressive and required even larger carriers; a bit too marginal for historic use IMHO.
Real problem is keeping originality whilst trying to get more power to simply not fall behind the turbo cars that simply turn up boost or the DFV cars who produced 450 in period but now can get well over 600, thats an extra 33% ! . I'd need 800 - 850 to remain competitive! Not possible unfortunately, these cars are raced all to seriously in the UK and Europe, I was warned that the way we drive them wouldn't be overly welcomed in the USA.

 

i need to see some pics of these things jesus

 

Cant see how to post pics up here, let me know and I will see what I can do. Did put a few engine pics on the Group 44 Facebook site a while back (might be 2 years back) easy enough to find with a couple of minutes scrolling down once there. This was the 1st ever tear down of the engine in 006, it had done 247 hours according to the cars engine clock, not bad for an engine lifed at a max of 24 hrs and looking at the log books generally pulled apart after going over 12! Incredably reliable and only stripped because it lost power. Later found this was because the chain had jumped 2 teeth; yet it still ran and I even raced it this way for a couple of races and picked up a 3rd if I recall properly. The chain jumped when I lost the clutch at Paul Ricard and elected to continue racing without. Gear change was hard and corner taken very fast so as not to have to change gear, I eventually spun it away and the car was going backwards with the engine running; somethng had t give and it wound up and sheared a drive shaft (scroll down further, didnt realise the chain jumped at the time. Nearly made it back to the pits before the diff plates started slipping too much, happy days.....

 

xjr5006, it a great pleasure to see here somebody like you and listen to this kind of stories !

 

Forgive me my mistakes in English, please.

Well....

Thats not true... Actually, it was quite the opposite...
Jaguar it's racing...
Results in motorsport has always been a priority for the prestige of the brand. I believe that a strong influence on the direction of Walter Hassan had. Fifties is the time Jaguar wins at Le Mans. However, at the end of the decade, it became obvious that the XK engine can not compete with V12Colombo .. These concerns confirmed Ferrari winning streak in 1960-65 ... In 1964 it was decided the construction of the V12 engine, in 1965, began the project XJ13, the story of a race car that never raced ... The first prototypes were created in 1964, the engine. 87mm bore x 70mm stroke resulting 4991cm (5000 is the limit for Le Mans), dry sump, quadcam heads which allowed to exceed the limit of 500 HP.
In 1966, the BMC takes Jaguar over to form British Motor Holdings. Sir William Lyons no longer take decisions, accountants, trade unions are in charge. One of the first decisions is to withdraw from the sport.
XJ13 project was terminated, the racing engine was no longer needed.
It was decided to adapt the engine to the needs of mass-produced limousines.
Engineers opted out of dry sump and mechanical injection, used cheaper to manufacture, simple heads.
Tests in Jaguar MK10 proved to be satisfactory.
Racing engine came to ordinary cars.


These are the facts...

V8's ... In fact, from 1949 and Rocket V8 engine has not been built anything groundbreaking. Even the current NASCAR engine is still the same pushrod V8 ... When in Europe, manufacturers competed in races from the twenties, American companies missed the importance of sport, in the early years not paying attention to the AAA. Therefore, American engines are just modified serial structures. With the increasing popularity of NASCAR and Drag Racing muscle cars became fashion. There was demand for performance parts among sports fans ... Many wanted to improve the performance of their chevy, appeared on the market so cheap, mass solutions for each based on the experience in racing. They used the same engine after all...
In Europe, stock car racing was not as popular, and no one thought about improving his car. In the U.S. aftermarket parts is a whole industry and parts can be bought at every corner. In contrast, it is difficult to find in the states mechanic who knows how to fix and adjust the Jaguar, not to mention the modifications ...
On the subject of Jaguar, very few have real knowledge ...

 

adamnl you make some interesting comments about American V8s!

some is true, like we americans dont win racing events where you live, but there is no country in the world that can beat our drag race cars!

the latest top fuel events ,use 8L V8 engines, they make around 5000-8000HP, can you name anyone who can do better??? YES push rod V8s

latest speeds attained, 329MPH, in 3.7seconds, all done in just 1000 ft, not a 1/4 mile.

 

also i'm going to the FI (formula 1 ) race this weekend, at COTA, Circuit of the Americas.

 

And here in the land down under (Australia) in our V8 Supercar series the American pushrod 5L V8's are kicking the buts of the Mercedes AMG twincam 4 Valve V8's. The GM and Ford V8's have more power and better fuel consumption.

 

The newcomers are hardly being allowed to compete on their merits Warren.

 

Yes it is their first year but the engines are straight from AMG competition they should already be well sorted. V8 supercars added an additional mandatory pit stop for the Nissans and Mercs due to their poor fuel consumption.


Anyway the point was twincam 4 Valve is not the beeall and end all cast iron pushrod V8's can still hold their own in a very competitive racing series.

 

What can I say... good design is good design.

IIRC, the current NASCAR engine no longer use the older-style engines. For instance, I'm 99% sure that the GM teams use the LS2 engine family as opposed to the old-style small block Chevy (SBC) engine. Indeed, the LS family retains many of the characteristics of the widely successful SBC, including the single-cam pushrod layout, but made numerous refinements and improvements to the original design. The LS architecture was a clean sheet, sharing no parts with the original SBC.

Reading on the LS engine family's history, it was designed with both mass production and performance in mind!