AER news

[knighty]

Well we have a Judd news thread, so I thought I'd start one for AER, as I dare say they are feeling left out .....so where do I start.....err, here gos

V8 LMP1 - started off with a 3.6L designed by an ex-Ilmor F1 engineer, originally raced in the ALMS with a Dyson Lola, was reading recently AER have now sneaked in a 4.0 version.....my educated guess is it probably makes about the same power, or a tad less, but with a significant hike in torque.......unfortunatley, it looks like Oreca-Courage have just dropped this engine in favour of the Judd V10

I4 LMP2- still selling customer units of the evolved 4-pot that originated from the MG LMP675 days, now they have used one of the cylinder heads from the V8 and created a new 4-pot which is about 10-20 Kg lighter.......currently its unique to Mazda, but I think I read it will go on sale to interested LMP2 teams in 2008.......last I heard was they want to use direct injection and variable geometry turbos, but I dont actually know if they did it yet......anyone know?

AER also own Life Racing which are ECU and software manufacturers and suppliers, which is basically the remnants of Pectel.....another company that Mike Lancaster started up.....very good kit I'm told

if anyone hears any other AER blurb, now you know where to put it

[The359]

Cytosport I know used the new 4.0L P32T during the last two races of 2007. I believe Chamberlain-Synergy also used it at Le Mans.

[HORNDAWG]

I thought that both ex-Dyson Lolas ran the upgraded AER at Petit and Laguna. That way Intersport had a baseline to compare the AER to the Judd in the off season to decide which to run in 08.

L.P.

[knighty]

thats very interesting, lets hope they can make the AER V8 work, as it would be a shame to see another replaced with a Judd......I'm sure the light-weight and torquey nature of the 4.0 engine will be a great benefit in the tight twisty tracks of the ALMS.......more so than a 5.5 Judd......my educated guess is the 4.0 AER V8 has in the region of 800Nm of torque.......thats about 130Nm more than the Judd 5.5 V10......thats what makes the difference when pulling out of corners.......and the ALMS has lots of corners!

regarding the new I4 LMP2 motor for Mazda......I was looking on the AER website, and it looks like its leaning over by about 10 to 20 degrees?.....has anyone seen one in a chassis recently?........this is how we did the Mountune 4cyl LMP675 motor, it was laid over 30 degrees in order to make the rear bodywork lower & neater, reynard loved it, and it made a significant aero difference and lowered the C of G quite a bit

[knighty]

heres the I4 pic, I'm sure AER wont mind me nicking it!.......is this the new Mazda motor, or the old one?.......do you think its canted over slightly, or is it just a funny camera angle?

[Tom908V12]

Originally Posted by knighty

...unfortunatley, it looks like Oreca-Courage have just dropped this engine in favour of the Judd V10
...

If they really want to appear as a threat for Audi and Peugeot, they should chose the V8 Audi FSI instead !!

[dj choc ice]

Originally Posted by Tom908V12

If they really want to appear as a threat for Audi and Peugeot, they should chose the V8 Audi FSI instead !!

in the short term thats the best option but over the long term..... no way, audi wont develop the engine enough to see off their pride and joy the R10, so you could more than likely forget the FSI engine ultimately becoming the best engine because it wont, simply because of audi being able to control development of that engine.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Tom908V12

If they really want to appear as a threat for Audi and Peugeot, they should chose the V8 Audi FSI instead !!

I'm sure Audi is just chomping at the bit, hoping that their old engine beats their R10 multi-million dollar marketing program. That engine *might* be faster to begin with, but you'll NEVER beat the R10 with that engine.

[TRuss]

The V-8 does seem like a good choice. It reportedly has more torque than the Judd. That's super important in any road racing machine. I would also assume that it's fuel consumption may be a little better too. Less cylinders, less displacement...seems likely anyway. Might be the engine to take to Audi

[knighty]

heres an interesting quote from DJ-Choc-Ice from the Oreca-Courage thread

"the AER engine is by no means bad, accelarating out of the slower corners the AER powered cars were faster than the judd engined cars, the LC70 AER was flying out of mulssane, compared to the pescarolo and judd engined cars at lemans, but as soon as the judd engined cars strecthed their legs the AER engine was left floundering"

[TRuss]

In ALMS that is. The increase in displacement could come in handy at LeMans though.

[dj choc ice]

Originally Posted by knighty

heres an interesting quote from DJ-Choc-Ice from the Oreca-Courage thread

"the AER engine is by no means bad, accelarating out of the slower corners the AER powered cars were faster than the judd engined cars, the LC70 AER was flying out of mulssane, compared to the pescarolo and judd engined cars at lemans, but as soon as the judd engined cars strecthed their legs the AER engine was left floundering"

as i said, the AER engine seems to be lacking in top end power, how could this actually be sorted out?, would the direct port injection rectify the problem?, personally i cant see it making a huge difference, not on its own anyways but pair it with the new 4.0 variant and it could be a match for the judd V10.

but then next year arent the judd engine's getting AIM engine updates?, more power and torque for the 5.5 V10 which may take away the only advantage the AER engine has over the judd powerplant, that phenomenal low end wallop.

[knighty]

just because the AER V8 is not making the top speeds, dont naturally assume thats due to a lack of power......drag increases with the square of speed, its not linear, so at 200mph the drag is horrendous......thats an Aero issue.

the 90 degree AIM-Judd will have no torque or power advantage over the standard 72 degree V10, this is what John Judd aparrently told Henri Pescarolo......but I dare say the C of G will be a tad lower, which will help a great deal......in F1 they reckon 1mm makes 0.1 of a second per lap gain, so draw your own conclusions

Direct injection wont solve power issues, it just increases fuel efficiency via more efficient burn and combusion, when Audi applied it to the 3.6 V8 they gained another lap between pit stops.....this is not off-the-shelf technology, people like Denso and Bosch are ony just selling it to major motor manufacturers, AER are aparrently eyeing it up for Mazda, but I will be surprised to see it on a non-works engine......but never say never!

ref the AER V8 bank angle of 75 degrees, I could never understand why they did this, if anything there is more reason to open up the v-angle beyond 90 degrees, much like Pug have with the V12 diesel.....as the engine height is a real packaging factor in an LMP car.......width is just not a problem......perhaps they were thinking it may end up in a single seater at some time.....even so, I think it was a bad idea that may be coming back to haunt them, as I dare say the inlet system is quite compact and not that open to tuning potential via length changes.

I would be interested to hear why AER went the 4.0 route all of a sudden.....perhaps Courage had an influence?

[dj choc ice]

i would possibly think the poor performance of the AER engine in the dyson lola's in 2006 and in the courage chassis this year is what put AER on the 4.0 route, maybe if it is a new block or the 4.0 modification will give AER more torque and a little boost in power but also might give AER more room to play around and experiment with the engine.

[joeb]

speaking of AER performance, did anybody see that article on Dailysportscar that said Team Cytosport just broke the track record at Infenion Raceway? I only saw the headline, so I know no more details other than Gidley was the driver.

[knighty]

no I missed that, sounds interesting, I'm assuming they are running one of the Ex-Dyson LMP1 Lolas with AER V8 power?......but 3.6 or 4.0?......cant say I know much about Cytosport!

[dj choc ice]

i think cytosport ran the 4.0 AER lump from petit onwards, it would not surprise me that a lola AER would break the record at infineon, afterall the current cars generate more downforce than the P900 cars and run a bigger air restrictor.

add to that as well the current cars have ABS and TCS whilst the old P900 cars only had ABS and no TCS, under braking and accelaration the new reg cars are superior to the old cars but are only marginally faster through the corners.

so its no surprise, the better accelaration and braking of the newer cars it does not surprise me that the track record was broken by the cytosport lola.

[ScuderiaV8]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

add to that as well the current cars have ABS and TCS whilst the old P900 cars only had ABS and no TCS, under braking and accelaration the new reg cars are superior to the old cars but are only marginally faster through the corners.

According to Article 12.4 of the ACO LMP regulations, any form of ABS or power braking function is prohibited.

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/chass.../2007LMP12.pdf

[gwyllion]

It seems AER's business is not going well. They used to supply various LMP1 and LMP2 teams with their 2 liter turbo engine.

The V8 turbo is not finding a lot of customers. Judd GV5.5 is becoming the defacto standard in LMP1.

In LMP2 Zytek appears the engine to have, of course unless you run a Porsche or Acura Judd aims to close the gap with the new DB engine.

How many teams will run the Mazda 2 liter turbo next year?

[knighty]

I think its only a matter of time before AER consider a 3.4 LMP2 version of the V8........it will keep their options open, and business running....... but it will conflict with their 4cyl turbo engines........its been proven in LMP2 that both 3.4 NA and 2.0 turbo options work well, so its not a big deal really.

[ScuderiaV8]

DSC have an interesting report on a visit to AER this week. On the LMP2 the current P07 four-cylinder is still receiving some development as one of their 'established customers' for this engine is continuing to use it next year (from the accompanying thread I presume this relates to RML). A European spec of the MZR-R is being developed (different restrictors and fuel to the ALMS) and endurance testing is underway. A direct injection system may be introduced in 2008 as well.

As for the P32 LMP1 engine it seems all is not as bad as it might appear. There's a new customer for next year (no announcement as yet) and a direct injection system is in the development stage too. According to Mike Lancaster the 4.0 variant is producing 'over 780Nm'. Interestingly Cytosport were using a spare 3.6 engine at Infineon as their 4.0 was due for a rebuild.

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by ScuderiaV8

DSC have an interesting report on a visit to AER this week. On the LMP2 the current P07 four-cylinder is still receiving some development as one of their 'established customers' for this engine is continuing to use it next year (from the accompanying thread I presume this relates to RML). A European spec of the MZR-R is being developed (different restrictors and fuel to the ALMS) and endurance testing is underway. A direct injection system may be introduced in 2008 as well.

As for the P32 LMP1 engine it seems all is not as bad as it might appear. There's a new customer for next year (no announcement as yet) and a direct injection system is in the development stage too. According to Mike Lancaster the 4.0 variant is producing 'over 780Nm'. Interestingly Cytosport were using a spare 3.6 engine at Infineon as their 4.0 was due for a rebuild.

The fuel should not be an issue with the European MZR-R as the ALMS uses E-10 and the LMS will in 08. While the mapping for the air side would be different as BK did run all year w/45mm restrictors @ 2700 mbars

L.P.

[dj choc ice]

Originally Posted by ScuderiaV8

DSC have an interesting report on a visit to AER this week. On the LMP2 the current P07 four-cylinder is still receiving some development as one of their 'established customers' for this engine is continuing to use it next year (from the accompanying thread I presume this relates to RML). A European spec of the MZR-R is being developed (different restrictors and fuel to the ALMS) and endurance testing is underway. A direct injection system may be introduced in 2008 as well.

As for the P32 LMP1 engine it seems all is not as bad as it might appear. There's a new customer for next year (no announcement as yet) and a direct injection system is in the development stage too. According to Mike Lancaster the 4.0 variant is producing 'over 780Nm'. Interestingly Cytosport were using a spare 3.6 engine at Infineon as their 4.0 was due for a rebuild.

very quickly how much is over 780nm of torque?, is that about 550 lb ft of torque or around that region or even more?

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

very quickly how much is over 780nm of torque?, is that about 550 lb ft of torque or around that region or even more?

Here you go.

780 newton meter/hour = 575.298 517 482 foot pound-force/hour


L.P.

Here's a link for ya.

[knighty]

Originally Posted by ScuderiaV8

As for the P32 LMP1 engine it seems all is not as bad as it might appear. There's a new customer for next year (no announcement as yet) and a direct injection system is in the development stage too. According to Mike Lancaster the 4.0 variant is producing 'over 780Nm'. Interestingly Cytosport were using a spare 3.6 engine at Infineon as their 4.0 was due for a rebuild.

I couldnt agree more......the 4.0 V8 appears to be a cracking engine, which has only been tarnished by Courage dropping it.....I honestly think AER will have the lash laugh there.......yes, very interesting article on DSC, bleedin fantastic site!.......so how much over 780Nm.....hmmmm.....when indipendent engine suppliers under quote power figures its normally by around 20-30bhp.......so I think you can say the 4.0 V8 is good for 800Nm.......shame no numerical hint was given about power.......but its more than the 3.6, not the same/less that I previously suspected.