Can you see the box from where you are now?

 

I worked on the mechanic's cars, and was able to observe the V12s of Tom Walkenshaw Racings Jaguar Lemans prototype cars. I was allowed to wander at times, unless they were doing something secret.

The combustion chambers weren't any problem, and although the engine had super light specially made rods and pistons, the biggest part of everything, were the cams, which you can have reground, if you find the profile somewhere on the net, and their extreme attention to balancing.

The balancing cost around $6000 per engine. If you can assume that the factory crank is fairly well balanced, then all you really need is a gram scale, to balance the piston and rod assemblies within 1 gram, or zero, if you try real hard. Shaving the heads down would be a given. For saying those engines survived what they were put through, I wouldn't be afraid to put a high compression, rumpety rump cammed, and high pressure fuel and large injector V12 out on the street. I'm sure she would turn some heads, at any Jag meet.

I worked on the banned Unfair Advantage Audi Team, so listen to the engineers on this post, of which I am not(just a master tech), and realize that there is a lot of money and work to push that much HP out of a low compression, smogged V12.

I love challenges, and wouldn't hesitate to build an engine. Just keep the one in your car, so you don't turn it into some $300 project for someone else......Best of Luck........Mike

 

hey mrplow58, was the Audi car the R-10 diesel racer?

i seen it race at Road America,back in 2007, it won just lazily cruising along!

comin of the 1st to main straight, it would pull away from the 10,000rpm Porsches(Penske cars), like they were standing still, and only turning 4500-5000 rpm.

YUP! they banned them from there on,(lot of politics involved,somebody had some serious push),wonder who?

they started by putting major restrictions on the cars, like choking down the air inlets, then adding big weight amounts, and final BS was reducing the size of the fuel tanks, while petrol was 20% larger, and alcohol greeny cars were almost unlimited!
can you see the politics in the situation.LOL.

 

to add, the Audi diesel cars(2009), Daytona/Rolex 24, hauler trucks stopped by the track on way to Sebring, wanted to unload and do some practice laps or just show them!

no such luck, were told dont even open the doors, dont need no stinkin diesels!

right then and there i knew i wanted one of those engines, they were only 5.5L, the street version was 6L, now i hear they stopped making any new ones,DARN!

that will push prices thru the roof!

 

Well the 1st TWR Group A inlet manifold was cast yesterday and we band sawed it today to ensure the internals were as we hoped , they were as can be seen in the pics.





The trumpet like runners were all very nice



and especially nice where they blended into the plenum

 

Also cast up were the Group C sliders

 

And the totally unobtainable big TWR cam carriers



These were still hot when I was there



And sold before even out of the sand! Nice

 

No.....I worked on the team in 88 or 89, when they were racing the 100 sedan, or 5000(same car). We used the 5 cylinder turbocharged engine, and had about half the power the domestic cars from Porsche, Ford, Mercury, Chevrolet..etc.. We just had all wheel drive.

I think we won 8 out of 11 races, just because we weren't burning our tires up. During the season, they added weight to our car, made our turbo inlet smaller, fuel cell smaller and even made our tires narrower, which turned out to be an advantage, because we weren't putting added stress on our drivetrain. We didn't finish a couple of races, because of breakage, but after they made our tires narrower, that wasn't a problem. Making our fuel cell smaller wasn't a real problem, because we were killing the other teams with fuel mileage anyway.

Strangely enough, the rules were changed, so we could no longer be competitive. The first thing they did was eliminate the all wheel drive, and made a minimum weight we would need to be. GM and Ford got what they wanted. Instead of building better cars, they eliminated us with the rule book. There is a short film somewhere called the unfair advantage. I was the guy with a pony tail, and 2 hearing aids. It was fun kicking the big guys asses though......Be cool....Mike

 

XJR5006,, why the group C sliders, what car are they for?

that stuff looks great, what shop is going to do the machining.

especially the cam carriers, large diameter followers, and cams to match, gettin pricey!

seems you wont have any problems making 500HP, N/A

 

Group C sliders are for Group C engines; Cam carriers are likely to go to Germany where a machine shop owner we know already has a CNC program to machine these babys from billet! The casting will therefore be easy, Cam covers to be done in Mag shortly and in ali maybe in a weeks time.
The TWR Group A manifolds have exceeded our expectations I must say.

 

Hey xjr5006, I am new to this board, but I have a 6.0 NOS crate motor that I want to stroke to 84mm. How do I contact you for more information about the items below? My number is 512/468-3436 (Texas USA)

 

What is it? What for? http://www.jag-lovers.org/snaps/snap_view.php3?id=1364512085

 

Nikolay,

I'm not sure if you are referring to the overall process, or, to the manner in which he is weighing the rod.

That is part of the process involved with "balancing your engine", which, more correctly, is actually the act of balancing your rotating assembly.

These photos seem to show that he is trying to isolate & weigh just the small end of the rod, in order to accurately and individually match the weight distribution of the small end, big end, and shaft of each rod.

The purpose is to make your engine smoother, and it also allows it to rev a bit higher, because all the parts that move quickly are now lighter, and, nothing is out of balance.

The basic process for your connecting rods, and pistons is:
1). weigh, and number each one, and you write down that rod's, or, piston's weight.
2). find the lightest piston and rod of the group
3). use a grinder, file, etc. to take weight off every other piston and rod, until their weight matches the weight of the lightest ones.

I seem to remember xjr5006 posting a series of photos showing the best places to remove weight from the rods. Those photos may even be somewhere in this thread.

At an advanced level, an experienced enthusiast/mechanic may first remove even more weight from the lightest rod and piston in the group, and then making the others match this new lower weight.

Note: be sure to only grind & file the weight from non-stressed areas of the rods and pistons. The best places to start are the seams, and counterweight areas. Knowing when "enough is enough" is the key here. You don't want to compromise the strength of these highly stressed components.

Rods:

Pistons:

The crankshaft should also be balanced, but, that is best handled by a machine shop.

 

at this time it just seems like .... a window into a locked room...

 

i have done that rod and piston balance many times many engines!

i also on some rods that were lightened, would polish or shot peen the surface!

most V12 engines with 60* cylinder banks the crankshafts are in a natural balance order,anyway!

 

Thanks to all.

I thinking to rebuild my X300s 6.0, and collect information about performance parts and labor.
What i have -
very tired engine, one item
full gasket kit, included O rings, many items
XJR6 pistons (dimensions are the same only diameter is bigger 91mm, it will be 6.1L), twelve item
And long winter ahead ,more then three month

I think this is better thread for my little posting and questions to experienced enthusiasts, like you all.

 

I dont know if the XJR6 pistons will work, 91mm will with std liners bored out but never heard of anyone doing it. 92mm yes but not 91mm. I would get a piston and use the 1 wrist pin though 1/2 of both to check deck height before getting 12 of these. If all is good then try for +40 to get 92mm A little bit more power for no more money.
Wondering why you are not considering re -using the original pistons? A very much cheaper option. If the reason for going 91 was also to get better compression ratio consider just getting higher comp pistons.
The best performance increase you can get would be buy buying a load of flap wheels and opening the inlet ports out to the gasket blending them in as far as the valve guide, dont even have to take the heads off to do this. The later heads are pretty dreadful in this area, you will see what I mean when you take the inlet manifolds off. From memory the gasket is 35mm and your ports 10mm down could be as small as 30mm. Doing this is actually a very straightforward DIY job, 30 and 35mm flap wheels and a good drill, I have done an engine in 4 hours so allow yourself a days work. Suck the rubbish out with a vacuum cleaner. but turn the engine over to make sure the valve is closed before you start. Headers are good value as the cast iron jobbys are very poor.
If you want value for money re ring the std pistons, do the flap wheel job and invest in a decent set of headers. If you want to go further then add on better inlets (like mine, LoL) Good Luck.
BTW tired engine? enlighten us more, these engines at 100,000 will still have cross hatching visible down the bores,

 

I've seen these for sale in the UK.. Not a bad price?
Jaguar XJ V12 Exhaust Manifold and Jaguar XJ V12 Exhaust Headers

My assumption is that ceramic coating these would do wonders for the under hood temps. Anyone got any other stainless header suppliers?

 

Maybe, maybe not - or could be a waste of money? Roger Bywater states the following & I for one don't have sufficient knowledge to bet against him:


2. Can you supply multi-branch exhaust manifolds for my Jaguar V12?

Well we could - but the trouble is that there isn't enough space to install pipes of the right dimensions to work properly. If the dimensions are wrong then the system can actually have a negative effect. There is virtually no overlap of exhaust pulses into the cast three-into-one manifolds of the V12 (and 6 cylinder engines) so replacing them with separate pipes doesn't reap much improvement for the cost and trouble involved. As the TT system keeps each group of three separate for a considerable distance it provides the most viable solution.

Rgds.

A.

 

Hmm, so a gamble but perhaps one that a rolling road would be the judge of ;-)

The other benefits of course would be a hefty weight saving along with better heat dissipation. ?