Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Classic Morgans (pre-CX) Monty Takes A Deep Breath

The big valve ported head and Newman Phase 3 cams are working out really well, intially I was concerned I'd gone too far as Monty's idle was very spashy, I've since by way of an early update, I've now spent some considerable time refining my PID and other closed loop ECU idle seettings, surprisingly advanced timing numbers in the idle area of the ignition table helped a lot too.

I'm now idling at a richer 13.7:1 and at 1,050rpm, this rather than the previous 14.7:1 at 970rpm I was able to achieve on the much milder Phase 2 cams, I'm now super happy with Monty's idle quality.



As you'll see the IATs are very high as I'd been sat idling while tuning for 40 minutes, air temps do fall dramatically on the move but I definitely need to build a cold air intake setup. Saying that if I can get Monty idling this well while he's sucking 55c air, then it's only getting even better from here.

Overall impressions of the way Monty drives are also super posotive, sticking with the Fusion Fabrications inlet and refusing to follow the herd by fitting ITBs was definitely the right decission. Probably the best way to describe the drive is Monty feels the same from idle to 3,000rpm, so he remains a very usable street friendly machine.

However, from 3,000-3,500 you can start to feel the better breathing taking effect, by 4,000rpm Monty takes on a more sporty exhaust note. From 4,000-5,000rpm the push is way stronger than before, and becoming super exhilerating as you press on to 6,000rpm. From there and above it's a very different engine, those following Monty's journey will know he previouly fell over at 6,500rpm, now he just laughs at such low engine speeds as he encourages you to wind out the Duratec way beyond 6,500rpm.

I've only taken him to 7,300rpm so far which TBH is already pretty intense, but James my engine builder says he expects peak power to arrive at 8,250rpm, he also said he'd be disapointed if it did'nt make at least 230hp.

But best of all, Monty still trickles through town at a lovely smooth 1,500-1,800rpm and now also returns to a civilised idle at junctions, this is the difference between a well tuned engine on a modern engine management system and the kind of cammed up Mk1/2 Escorts on a pair of DCOE Webbers we used to play with back in the day.

In summary, so far so good

That sounds nice 👌

Thanks for taking the time to explain your setup, objectives and outcomes. Nice to see you using video clips too.

We were back on the rolling road earlier in the week getting our race cert. I’ll post a clip and the power curves in a few weeks on the channel.

This is a cracking thread Dave but your knowledge of engine tuning goes way over my head

I’m just catching up so will most probably show my ignorance but a couple of more basic points do come to mind regarding Monty’s final BHP score.

Have I missed any discussions on dry sumps? I assume Monty’s crank is still splashing around in a wet sump? If Monty does still have a wet sump then would you not be losing out compared to say a 420R at 8k RPM owing to crank drag. I know nothing about dry sumps but how much horsepower might be being robbed at the top end?

Re the air intake next to the exhaust header, it would take very little effort to just move the filter over to the other side of the engine and remount it directly on the Fusion inlet where it might benefit from the pressure wave produce by the screen pushing ambient air into the louvers (and have one less intake bend too). It might be a good intermediate solution, every degree will make a little difference…



Fantastic thread, keep it going

Excellent, I've been following your videos with interest, I'm also looking forward to watching your rolling road session, if you're attending the upcoming Williams track day at Castle Combe do come and say hello.

If not, I'm keen to come and see you race when you hit the track, having followed your preparation journey I now feel compelled to see the results, one way or another I'm sure we'll meet soon

Cheers Rog, all valid points, Monty's filter will indeed be relocated to the cooler side, I will eventually build a forward-facing cold air intake but for the time being I'll be shamelessly copying your superior setup

In doing so both cooler air and fewer bends can be achieved in one go and for minimal outlay, making the change a no-brainer. One other thing I have to thank you for is drawing my attention to the dreadful plastic throttle body and identifying the existence of the immeasurably better metal one, like my metal cam cover I bought my metal TB from Ali Express for very little money. I would strongly encourage any Duratec Plus 4 owner to do the same, the manufacturer is 'Pokess' and their part number is: IS7G9E926HB-18509

More recently I completed some throttle body sizing calculations, the outcome being unless you're looking to make in excess of 350 horsepower the standard Ford TB is oversized and for a bone stock 143hp Duratec Plus 4 a 65mm TB is huge!



My cross sectional area calculations and the results of my TB sizing reasearch both point to a smaller 60mm TB being more than sufficient to support 300hp, and there are definitely drivability benefits to be enjoyed by going smaller.



Given the above gasket and butterfly bypass port for the IACV, it makes sense to retain the Pokess 65mm TB and simply choke down to 60mm using a suitable velocity stack as part of the cost-effective air filter relocation project, I've found this one that should work.



I'll then cover it with this foam air filter and mirroring your directly over the TB placement Rog



On the subject of dry sumping Monty, my thoughts are while great in principle it does add considerable cost and complexity. Cost and complexity aside, while there are a number of undisputed benefits in going dry sump it does also move Monty a bit further away from the usable fast road brief and a little bit too much towards a full on race car. However, on the track and especially as I use Toyo Proxy RRR tyres, there's a strong argument that says it would be a good idea to fit a baffled sump like this Duratec one from Retro Ford.



Regarding Monty's likely power output all I can say is James at M2R Motorsport who fitted the A.L Developments big valve ported head and Newman Phase 3 cams has gone on record saying: "I'd be disappointed if Monty didn’t make 230 horsepower plus".

TBH I'm more interested in the torque spread we eventually achieve, it's easy to hit a pub bragging rights big peak horsepower number to impress your friends, it's a lot harder to tune an engine to deliver a really nice usable spread of torque over the widest possible window in the rev range. Of course, if we can deliver both strong torque over a wide rev range and a good top-end horsepower number too, that would be the ideal.

I've run a multitude of artificial intelligence virtual dyno graph models now, first I fed various different agents with the Stage 2 Monty engine spec (Phase 2 cams, exhaust and inlet manifold), and then the Surrey Rolling Road dyno results he achieved in that guise. I then gave the same agents detailed port and valve sizing specification of the new A.L Developments head and the Phase 3 cam spec (lift, duration, lobe separation angle and overlap), all the training helped calculate the estimated CFM increase which in turn produced the virtual dyno graphs.

The average of all three AI virtual dyno graphs is shown below:



However, all the AI generated estimates are really just educated guess work, which is why Monty returns to Surrey Rolling Road on the 20th June. TBH the peak horsepower number is less relevant to me, but anything from 213hp-220 would be nice. What I'm really looking for is the horsepower to keep climbing beyond 6,500rpm where Monty previously fell over in Phase 2 spec.

However, if he also makes the spread of torque I want, I'll definitely be over the moon

Interesting Dave. Who would have thought the 2.0 Duratec TB was too big but that might well explain the mystery of why they used the same TB on the 1.8 Duratec but restricted the butterfly from fully opening

It's odd that Ford chose 65mm TB Rog, but it's definitely unnecessarily large, my theory is they went to 65mm because it works with the swirl flaps that are a big restriction, especially at idle where this is actually by design.

The swirl flaps are there to create a significant increase in air velocity at idle, this helps to keep the fuel from falling out of separation with the air and in-turn improves emissions at idle especially during cold start where internal combustion engives produce the most pollution. That's all well and good, but it's not like they disapear when they're not needed. The swirl flaps, which are really just a second set of vacuum operated butterflys, are indeed fully open above 1,500rpm, however, even in this fully open state the spidle remains a significant and undesirable restriction to airflow above 2,000rpm so for me they had to go, and fitting the FF inlet atomatically saw to this.

The idea of going with a smaller 60mm TB is to reduce the area exposed by the butterfly at small openings, going with a smaller butterfly exposes less area for the same throttle pedal movement which in turn tames any 'touchy throttle' syndrome on initial tip-in, I also feel a smaller TB it's a better way of increasing air velocity at idle and during low speed driving than those dreadful swirl flaps.

Admitedly, my idea of choking the inlet just in front of the butterfly is a bit of a bodge, in the perfect world Monty needs a good 60mm TB, I like this one from Jenvey:



https://www.jenvey.co.uk/single-body-60mm-sfg600

A 60mm TB is not only better sized for a standard Duratec Plus 4, but also easily capable of supporting Monty's tuned engine. Jenvey's SFG60/0 also comes with a snail cam type cable track/throttle wheel, this is an old idea but a good one. Back in the day you'd frequently see this setup on Jap four-cylinder motorcycles running multiple carbs; with no flywheel, aggressive cams and a butterfly per cylinder such bikes would have been virtually unrideable without a snail cam.

Running the cable over a large radius at small throttle openings and decreasing that radius as the throttle demand (pedal travel) increases, gives a nice progressive throttle action. This is especially useful when pulling away from junctions or when you simply need to make smooth progress through town as the whole setup becomes far less sensitive to rider throttle inputs at lower road speeds. The issue with Jenvey’s SFG60/0 is at £400 it's rather expensive, and while I suspect the stud pattern is the same as the Ford TB making it a direct fit, the other issue is there's no idle valve (IACV) throttle butterfly bypass port.

The best solution would be to fit a snail cam type cable wheel to the metal Pokess TB, and while not strictly as ideal as having a smaller 60mm butterfly, choking down the 65mm TB should work in a similar way. Using a velocity stack as the choke also delivers the additional well understood benefits of a bell-mouth, which works by using a smooth funnel-shaped flare to draw air from multiple directions, this prevents the turbulence and airflow restriction caused by the hard-edged opening of the standard Ford TB.

A bell-mouth velocity stack allows the engine to ingest a higher volume of air efficiently and relocating all this to the cooler side of the engine bay while at the same time deleting Monty's bendy intake pipe will create a 'best value' power increase, and tame any snatchy tip in too. Actually, Monty already has four bell-mouth velocity stacks buried inside the plenum chamber of his Fision Fabrications long runner inlet:



But he really needs one on the primary air entry point at the throttle body too.



Saying all this, by retarding Monty's ignition timing in the tip-in zone within his ignition table, I've already largely been able to eliminate the 'Touchy Throttle' syndrome.

This works by reducing torque in that critical tip-in area, dulling engine response and smoothing the throttle response as Monty first pulls away from junctions. I've highlighted this area below in my latest updated ignition table; by adjusting the load scaling on the X axis the new table also has better resolution in this critical area which helps dial in more accurate fuelling and ignition timing to deliver enhanced drivability..



As you can see below, the new table now also reaches out to 8,500rpm giving a logical ceiling above my 8,250rpm soft rev limiter, and 8,400rpm hard fuel cut strategies.



I'm now also idling Monty at 18 degrees BTDC with a revised closed loop idle target of 1,050rpm, this is achieved at a super stable manifold vacuum of 55 kPa; I'd challenge anyone in the ITB club to achieve anything close that level of vacuum stability on a set of their darling individual throttle bodies

From Rog,

Re the air intake next to the exhaust header, it would take very little effort to just move the filter over to the other side of the engine and remount it directly on the Fusion inlet where it might benefit from the pressure wave produce by the screen pushing ambient air into the louvers (and have one less intake bend too). It might be a good intermediate solution, every degree will make a little difference…

This is my air intake courtesy of K&N

Dave, I can kind of see your logic with the large 65mm TB and the swirl flaps regulating the inlet velocity. I’ve thought long and hard about removing the flaps ever since my first Duratec. It just seems so counter intuitive to have all of that mechanical clutter in the intake but if you read the reports from people who have removed them they do report a slight torque loss once removed.