Fuel formula

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

So if road cars get better fuel efficiency, why shouldn't the same apply for race cars? After all endurance races can be won on fuel efficieny, when you have to pit less than your competitors.

I agree that it should be loud and fast, but i don't think there's a need to grandfather dinosaur-technologies that have absolutely nothing in common with the technology you see on the road.

Nor should there be a mandait about unproven technology?

hybred cars here in the states are not selling as well as people thought. Some manufactures are reduing the number of these hibrid car productions and even cancling some modles. Cars that get high fuel milage are the same. They are OK for the novelty, but the population does not want them, nor are they buying these cars.

Besides have you ever seen one of the nice little light weight fuel effeciant cars, stuck under a big truck in an accident?? That is another reason ppl dont want them, unsafe.

I race a 450BHP C5 Corvette. Under race conditions I get 5 miles per US gallon ( ~ 8.1 kM / 4 liters or 2 km / liter ) 93 octane or 100 European Octane.

My diesel pick-up truck gets 20 miles per US gallon ( ~ 8.13 km / liter ) when I am not towing the car hauler. I drive about 50-60 miles per day.

Your youth will excuse your ideaolgies. ( and dont ever loose them )

[dj choc ice]

Originally Posted by FLGTFAN

Do air restictors make engines less fuel-efficient? Although it's not a "fuel formula", we could get rid of the air restrictors so HP is naturally increased, then limit displacement and/or revs. The low-reving turbo-diesels could get displacement limits, high-reving NA's could get rev limits.

Perhaps top speeds would require ridiculously low displacements/revs, but efficiency would be increased.

i wouldnt bother with rev limits, the ACO would fix it in favour of diesels , air restrictors make the engines more fuel efficient, a 650bhp judd 5.5 V10 will be more efficient than it being unrestricted with around 800-850bhp.

rev limits wouldnt be a good thing, NA engines with no air restrictos to be powerful would need to have a big displacement above 5.0 litres and be atleast a V8, i think the 7.0 V12 in the XJR12 delivered the beans at around 8,000-8,500rpm.

a lot for a 7.0 V12, it would be fantastic to see so much variety again, engine wise there would be turbo engines galore, supercharged engines, N/A engines, maybe even the odd boxer or rotary engine .

although the cars would need big redesigns to the cooling systems, electrics and chassis and suspension and brakes.

and i think we would see a lot more coupe's in LMP1 and LMP2 with that kind of a formula .

[Speed-King]

[quote=AU N EGL]Nor should there be a mandait about unproven technology? [quote]
I think the market (at least in Europe) will mandate it sooner or later. Motorsport is advertising, and why not advertise your actual products.

hybred cars here in the states are not selling as well as people thought. Some manufactures are reduing the number of these hibrid car productions and even cancling some modles. Cars that get high fuel milage are the same. They are OK for the novelty, but the population does not want them, nor are they buying these cars.

I do not live in the states, so I can't really comment on that, but in Germany everybody is b*tching about high fuel prices and fuel efficiency is a factor in the descision what cars people buy. A lot of manufacturers are actually advertising with the fuel efficieny of their cars.
About the hybrid cars: I saw a test on TV not long ago, where they tested a hybrid against similar petrol and diesel powered cars in the same price range. The hybrid had its advantages during in-town traffic, but on the Autobahn it got really into trouble fuel efficieny-wise, so hybrid may after all not be the philosophers stone. At least for longer distances and it's to expensive considering the bang you get for the buck.

Besides have you ever seen one of the nice little light weight fuel effeciant cars, stuck under a big truck in an accident?? That is another reason ppl dont want them, unsafe.

Again, I do not live in the states and can't comment on the situation there, but over here small cars get only slightly worse ratings in crash tests than middle or full sized cars.
And my point wasn't that everyone should buy small cars, but that todays road cars can generate the same amount of HP out of less fuel than they did 10 years ago, and this should also be applied in race technology if possible.

I race a 450BHP C5 Corvette. Under race conditions I get 5 miles per US gallon ( ~ 8.1 kM / 4 liters or 2 km / liter ) 93 octane or 100 European Octane.

Do you race as a professional race driver or as an amateur? If you are an ameteur, that's fine, as long as you can afford it. If you're racing as a pro it's okay as well, as the potential buyers of the car you showcase will probably have no problems to afford it as well. But if you raced a car or a brand that was targeted to a different customer range it would matter as the target customer group may be one that actually has to care about fuel consumption.

[...]Your youth will excuse your ideaolgies. ( and dont ever loose them )

Actually most of my friends call me a stupid cynic, but I guess being born and raised in Europe makes the difference.

[dj choc ice]

about the high fuel prices, people whinge and moan but they do a good thing because they have succesfully pushed the price of fuel down by a fair bit, it went down from £1 a litre to now 92p a litre, its stilll a lot but its better than a quid a litre.

and just because the majority of people may buy smaller gas sippers, me included but only from the side of insurance and cost because im 17 (peugeot 106 1.1 petrol), i cant wait to buy an alfa romeo or a BMW, preferrably a GTV or an old E30 shape 323 or 325.

[Speed-King]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

about the high fuel prices, people whinge and moan but they do a good thing because they have succesfully pushed the price of fuel down by a fair bit, it went down from £1 a litre to now 92p a litre, its stilll a lot but its better than a quid a litre.

The problem is: There are several factors that contribute to the gas price.
One is availability, which is still really bad and tends to become worse as Chinas and Indias appetite for fossil fuels is increasing.
An other factor is global politics and this caused the rise of the fule prices to its high last year with the Lebanon war and the situation in Iran. As the imminent danger of a new war in Middle East has decreased now, the global political factor for the high fuel prices has lost some importance and the prices declined until some politican in some country does something stupid. And trust me someone will do something stupid...
But still the amount of fuels of any kind needed in the world grows, as the industries of so called 3rd world countries grow and a part of their people gets wealthier and decides to buy cars. So IMO we will see a continous increase of the gas prices in the near and middle future and they will reach last years horror levels again even without negative political factors. I think you should be prepared to pay 1.5 pounds/l in ten years.

[chewymonster]

dj choc ice

The diesels would be able to make more power with the same amount of energy. The diesel engine will always be more fuel efficient than a gasoline engine.

[AU N EGL]

[quote=Speed-King]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

Do you race as a professional race driver or as an amateur? If you are an ameteur, that's fine, as long as you can afford it. If you're racing as a pro it's okay as well, as the potential buyers of the car you showcase will probably have no problems to afford it as well. But if you raced a car or a brand that was targeted to a different customer range it would matter as the target customer group may be one that actually has to care about fuel consumption.

Semi-Pro, but no Chevy Backing, no big sponsors. and ppl who buy Corvettes really dont give a rats behind about fuel milage too much. On the highways at 80 mph most stock Corvettes get 30-32 mpg, and that is better then most cars

Actually most of my friends call me a stupid cynic, but I guess being born and raised in Europe makes the difference.

Very true. Most families in the states that live outside of the cities teach there childrean to very indvidulistic and not follow the crowd.

[PascaLM]

Some consumption rules could bring new solutions to make engines and aero more efficient. Remember the Joest team in '84 and '85 at LM when they displayed their own electronic injection system on thier 956 and they were much faster thean others 956 or Lancia. The average speed would only depend on the amount of energy allowed for all cars. And at last, the aerodynamic restrictions could be less drastic.
The remaining problem is the equivalency between differents kinds of fuels.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by PascaLM

Some consumption rules could bring new solutions to make engines and aero more efficient. Remember the Joest team in '84 and '85 at LM when they displayed their own electronic injection system on thier 956 and they were much faster thean others 956 or Lancia. The average speed would only depend on the amount of energy allowed for all cars. And at last, the aerodynamic restrictions could be less drastic.
The remaining problem is the equivalency between differents kinds of fuels.

The problem is you just outlined another stinking spec. series that makes current rules ultra-liberal in comparison.

Bring back Formula Vee and put fenders on them, yeah, that out to do it.
!

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by PascaLM

Some consumption rules could bring new solutions to make engines and aero more efficient. Remember the Joest team in '84 and '85 at LM when they displayed their own electronic injection system on thier 956 and they were much faster thean others 956 or Lancia. The average speed would only depend on the amount of energy allowed for all cars. And at last, the aerodynamic restrictions could be less drastic.
The remaining problem is the equivalency between differents kinds of fuels.

Sorry Pascel but one paragraph and FOUR mentions of RULES AND RESTRICTIONS.

WHO cares??? let the teams run. Let the teams purchase the fuel they need, no matter how much they use.

This is auto racing, the BIG DOGS, not solar powered or alternative fuel racing or politically correct BS.

Lets stop being POLITICALLY CORRECT and start being individuals again. Racing means competition and remove restrictions and you will find the best technologies come to the grids.

[PascaLM]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

...
...Lets stop being POLITICALLY CORRECT and start being individuals again. Racing means competition and remove restrictions and you will find the best technologies come to the grids.

What an in-depth debate !
Let the pure performance for the excellent John Force or Doug Kalitta. It's their job.
But in endurance, what's the use of reaching 400 km/h nowadays ? Some limitations on engines consumption will make prototypes lighter, and will allow more aero fluidity then nicer cars, etc, etc. And finally as fast as non restricted cars.
I point out to you that the energy efficiency ranking was in place at Le Mans long before the first oil crisis of 1974. And the cars that won this award were not the slowest.

[dj choc ice]

Originally Posted by PascaLM

What an in-depth debate !
Let the pure performance for the excellent John Force or Doug Kalitta. It's their job.
But in endurance, what's the use of reaching 400 km/h nowadays ? Some limitations on engines consumption will make prototypes lighter, and will allow more aero fluidity then nicer cars, etc, etc. And finally as fast as non restricted cars.
I point out to you that the energy efficiency ranking was in place at Le Mans long before the first oil crisis of 1974. And the cars that won this award were not the slowest.

the point pasca of reaching 400kmph is to be the fastest, that is the whoel point of motorsport.

i agree with AU completely, racing is too politically correct, this whole green thing is getting out of hand its spreading like a bad rash.

today we had a lecture in school from the labour party representative from our area, he said that EVERYONE should have hybrid cars ala toyota prius, when i popped the question "what car do you drive?" the answer was a range rover V8, and this man lives in liverpool so the politicians certainly dont reap what they sow.

it would be fantastic to have no restrictions, it should attract some more big manufacturers into sportscars, and i mean in LMP1 i think banning diesel may be a good move in some ways but bad in others, we all know porsche wont go to LMP1 because of the pro-diesel regs, honda are already going to LMP1 in 2008 with a petrol engined car.

i like the current cars quite a lot, its just though that the audi R10's are probably going to put off potential LMP1 competitors ala porsche, plus as well the fact that diesel racing cars are unbelieveably bland and boring and way too quiet and uninsiring is not good for attracting fans to the sport.

casual observers may view sportscar racing as "oh god its those silent milk float diesel cars", not a good image imo, the ACO have done a damn good job of pulling the LMP scene in europe from the brink of excinction, but the pro diesel LMP1 regs arent good for the sport imo.

if we get a fuel formula back it would be amazing, im all for it, but i doubt the ACO are for it.

[PascaLM]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

today we had a lecture in school from the labour party representative from our area, he said that EVERYONE should have hybrid cars ala toyota prius, when i popped the question "what car do you drive?" the answer was a range rover V8, and this man lives in liverpool so the politicians certainly dont reap what they sow.
.../...
casual observers may view sportscar racing as "oh god its those silent milk float diesel cars", not a good image imo, the ACO have done a damn good job of pulling the LMP scene in europe from the brink of excinction, but the pro diesel LMP1 regs arent good for the sport imo.

if we get a fuel formula back it would be amazing, im all for it, but i doubt the ACO are for it.

Me ? I have a Peugeot HDI.

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

today we had a lecture in school from the labour party representative from our area, he said that EVERYONE should have hybrid cars ala toyota prius, when i popped the question "what car do you drive?" the answer was a range rover V8, and this man lives in liverpool so the politicians certainly dont reap what they sow.

Good Man DJ

[dj choc ice]

Originally Posted by PascaLM

Me ? I have a Peugeot HDI.

good man on that front , im a peugeot guy too own a peugeot 106, if they were more reliable i would love a 406 coupe

[PascaLM]

Seriously, in Formula 1, they limited the revs max to 19000 revs/min in order to limit the costs. See the DP ... and the new COT !

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by PascaLM

Seriously, in Formula 1, they limited the revs max to 19000 revs/min in order to limit the costs. See the DP ... and the new COT !

YES, but they are still multi-million dollar cars. Cost containment on the F1 and NASCAR level is only to please the nea-sayers.

NASAR FINALLY went to Unleaded fuels after the Daytona 500.

[Speed-King]

this whole green thing is getting out of hand its spreading like a bad rash.

I thought the same until not so long ago. This may go a little OT(actually a whole lot, sorry for that), but here's what changed my mind:

EXTREMELY OFF-TOPIC!!!
My Dad has a dairy-farm and a little piece of forest belonging to it; about 10 Acres or so. 30% of this forest used to be spruces until about 10 years ago. Today the percentage of spruces is down to about 5% and rapidly falling. 25% of our forest are completely without trees or in the early stages of reforestation. The point is: We didn't cut down all those spruces voluntarily (it being an insane amount of work!). They died from the dryspells and heatwaves we had in 9 of the last 10 summers and from the bark beetles that survived the very warm winters we had in that period unharmed and then devoured the already weakend trees in the summer.
And that's the case not just in our piece of forest, but basically in the whole of southern Germany.
Spruces grew here since the end of the last ice age, but suddenly they literally disappear within ten years. So there's definitely something going on climate-wise. A natural change? Maybe, but according to most scientist it's going on to blindingly fast (Am I following a crowd here?!! )

Oh, and don't be fooled: Though I used a tree-example, I don't consider myself a tree-hugger. The trees per se are not my concern, my concern is, though: the money my family lost by selling dead trees of a small diameter instead of healthy ones of a big diameter in twenty or thirty years time (actually that would probably have been my money!) and the ridicoulous amount of work that all that involves. Back when I was a little boy, my Dad spent all in all about 30 (spread over severall months) in the forest. Today he (and I if I'm not to busy at the Uni) start working in the forest in late November and finish in the middle of April, with another two or three weeks of cutting in the summer (summer and wearing chainsawing gear sucks BTW).

[Speed-King]

Back to topic (can't edit the the last message anymore):
So if there is something like global warming, what I believe in, seeing the proof for the last three weeks with my own eyes and feeling it in the muscles in my back, sportscar racing must in order to not become an obvious target for the public and politicians adopt a greener life(or should I say Drive-?)style. Another thing isto mirror the developement in road cars and to ensure technical relevancy.
I know that traffic is only responsible for 20% of the co2-emission, but as other sources of co2 will be forced to cut back their emission, cars and racecars will be as well...

[JAG]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

the point pasca of reaching 400kmph is to be the fastest, that is the whoel point of motorsport.
.

Achieving 400kph for one lap, with special preperation, and being 10-15 seconds a lap slower than the quickest cars is nothing to be proud of.

It's a meaningless headline figure.

Stretching out a tank for that extra lap or two, and being quick over a lap, is a real achievement.

Current cars have a nice balance and lots of potential for new technology.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by JAG

Achieving 400kph for one lap, with special preperation, and being 10-15 seconds a lap slower than the quickest cars is nothing to be proud of.

It's a meaningless headline figure.

Stretching out a tank for that extra lap or two, and being quick over a lap, is a real achievement.

Current cars have a nice balance and lots of potential for new technology.

It is not a balance it is a contrivance; take away the aero gimmicks that increase corner speads and they would be little faster than the Daytona Prototypes.

What car that could do 240 mph was 15 seconds a lap slower?

[Gil Abobeleira]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

It is not a balance it is a contrivance; take away the aero gimmicks that increase corner speads and they would be little faster than the Daytona Prototypes.

What car that could do 240 mph was 15 seconds a lap slower?

This one:

[minimangler]

haha and then 15 hours slower come finish time- i was watching a le mans video from a bout '88 and the woman in the pitlane is at WM and she says 'i think they've changed everything but the steering wheel now' and she was probably right. pretty, but absolutely useless!

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Gil Abobeleira

This one:

Didn't that car actually top 250?

What were the next ten top trap speeds?

[AU N EGL]

trap speeds 1961-1989

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/maxspeed.htm

No that peugeot did not top 400 kph.

Mike only list two cars that topped 400 kph
1988 Porsche 962C 405 km/h (251.1 mph) W.M.P. 88 during the race
1989 Sauber Mercedes C9 400 km/h Practice