|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
10 Jul 2014, 10:29 (Ref:3432438) | #1 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,699
|
So just how does modern technology improve old engine BHP
I am curious, I keep reading time and time again about mega horse power engine outputs for 'Legal' Group 1 cars and FIA Apps K cars and the fact its not cheating but down to 'Modern Technology'. I personally question this and someone posted recently somewhere that someone or other was coming out in the Classic with a 'Legal' Apps K 450bhp 289ci Ford V8 engine!
How is this possible and keeping within FIA's criteria for such an engine? The Ford 289 small block back in the day would have produced as a high performance factory option in a road car 275bhp (with factory Tri Y headers) so lets say with blue printing and a careful build give it the benefit of doubt another 50bhp say 325. The cylinder heads on this engine never favoured high bhp outputs so unless they were changed I cannot see how 450bhp can ever be achieved by modern technology especially with pressed steel rockers and a flat tappet camshaft presumable to an homologated specification also I presume using the standard ignition system, standard cast crankshaft, rods and probably factory spec forged pistons and a 650cfm carb. So my question is what precisely has modern technology changed that can produce these figures in what is meant to be a reproduction of a period engine without bending the rules? |
||
__________________
You can't polish a turd but you sure can sprinkle it with glitter! |
10 Jul 2014, 11:17 (Ref:3432446) | #2 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,647
|
One thing that could increase the power of the engine is if modern technology/materials allow an increase in revs. (As BHP is basically torque multiplied by engine speed. If there's not a huge drop off of torque at the top end, more RPM would also mean more BHP).
|
||
__________________
Incognito: An Italian phrase meaning Nice Gearchange! |
10 Jul 2014, 11:22 (Ref:3432449) | #3 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,523
|
Deafened by silence Al. Personally I think looking at the std items in your last line of the middle paragraph is not the way to look at it.
|
|
|
10 Jul 2014, 11:46 (Ref:3432458) | #4 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 397
|
I would hazard a guess that the biggest improvements come from increasing volumetric efficiency, gained by spending hours on flow bench tests - more air equals bigger bang? Then design a cam to optimize the new found breathing capabilities.
|
||
|
10 Jul 2014, 12:50 (Ref:3432477) | #5 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3
|
Al, have you ever read FIA app K?
|
|
|
10 Jul 2014, 14:16 (Ref:3432500) | #6 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,699
|
Read bits of it yes. I just don't understand the virtual doubling of BHP.
|
||
__________________
You can't polish a turd but you sure can sprinkle it with glitter! |
10 Jul 2014, 14:21 (Ref:3432502) | #7 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,699
|
Just a quick search found this.
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
You can't polish a turd but you sure can sprinkle it with glitter! |
10 Jul 2014, 15:51 (Ref:3432520) | #8 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 340
|
Quote:
My old banger is a 302 block with 289 hi po heads, usual bolt on goodies and comp cams roller tip rockers..This will give about 285hp at the flywheel at no more than a 6-6500 safe rev limit.. I would guess that the modern incarnations will have fully forged billet rods and cranks and the capability of 8000 rpm…More power.. All down to money..My old knacker is on its last crank grind at 30 thou, cost me £800 before a re-fresh build…Its all down to what the rules say are allowable…most regs allow new parts so original block, new crank and new rods and you are half way there i would say. There are always those who forget the fun bit and must win at all costs.. points makes Pratts as an old dear friend used to say. N. |
|||
|
10 Jul 2014, 16:42 (Ref:3432528) | #9 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,699
|
Can the camshaft profile be changed within the rules? If not I fail to see why you would need to rev much over 6500rpm.
|
||
__________________
You can't polish a turd but you sure can sprinkle it with glitter! |
10 Jul 2014, 17:03 (Ref:3432531) | #10 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,078
|
I didn't think you could use a 302 block in a Pre 66 FIA car, I thought it has to be a 289 block?
|
|
|
10 Jul 2014, 17:21 (Ref:3432539) | #11 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 340
|
Quote:
Do you want to show me the differences between a 302 and 289 block But yes in Pre 66 the block has to be Pre 66. There was talk of relaxing these rules because you can't find many useable pre 66 blocks anymore..You can only really bore to 40 thou so finding one is pretty hard these days. Finding a HIPo block even harder. I also wouldn't get mixed up between FiA and Appendix K. I don't think any appendix K cars will be running more than 300hp ?? N. |
|||
|
10 Jul 2014, 17:57 (Ref:3432549) | #12 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,368
|
Al, I know where you read that 450bhp legal engine bit - have you noticed the post has now been edited and the power output removed
Don't get me started on sbf appK engines |
|
__________________
CSCC Swinging Sixties #128 Red/Black Mustang |
10 Jul 2014, 19:11 (Ref:3432571) | #13 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,078
|
Quote:
The scarcity of 289 blocks is I believe why they allow 302 blocks in the US (which is what my car has ) Please can you explain the difference between an Appendix K and and FIA car, as I'm confused, thanks. |
||
|
10 Jul 2014, 19:29 (Ref:3432576) | #14 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 340
|
Quote:
When I refer to appendix K I mean the regs attached to appendix K in swinging 60's rather than some of the hi brow Fia events where very special cars are ran plus Fia in Europe…I am far from knowledgable in this area though. N. |
|||
|
10 Jul 2014, 20:53 (Ref:3432593) | #15 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 241
|
Al, go pay Mark at Mathwall £35k plus VAT and you will find out.
|
||
|
10 Jul 2014, 21:01 (Ref:3432598) | #16 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 340
|
|||
|
10 Jul 2014, 21:16 (Ref:3432602) | #17 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,078
|
Quote:
|
||
|
10 Jul 2014, 21:19 (Ref:3432605) | #18 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,699
|
Why would I do that when I could build one for a fraction of that sticking to the FIA rules, bet it wouldnt ever be up the sharp end though!
|
||
__________________
You can't polish a turd but you sure can sprinkle it with glitter! |
11 Jul 2014, 06:16 (Ref:3432683) | #19 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 340
|
Quote:
I like to fettle my own engines. I am more than happy with the 290 or so HP I get…I think I would just be a gibbering heap at the back of the garages If I had 400hp In my Griffy N. |
|||
|
11 Jul 2014, 07:35 (Ref:3432709) | #20 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 6,778
|
Quote:
mind you, often these fabled ultra-powerful engines are just that: fabled or gossip. Well set up cars, well-practiced drivers, more talent, call it what you will. It's easier to cry "he's got more power than me" than it is "he's better than me". Going back to your original point, oils and fuels are more efficient than they were in period as well, leading to an increase in power across the board and the more powerful an engine the more dramatic the increase in number terms. E.g. Shell used to claim an extra 10% efficiency from Optimax. |
|||
__________________
Midgetman - known as Max Tyler to the world. MaxAttaq! |
11 Jul 2014, 08:44 (Ref:3432720) | #21 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,699
|
I have to disagree on the fuels as my memory stretches back to when you could buy genuine full leaded five star at the pumps I think 105 Octane so I doubt the green mixes today are up to that. The oils will make no difference as you have to run an Ash based old technology oil in a flat tappet old style engine with ball rockers you cannot run a thin synthetic unless you run roller cams and rockers or you will wipe those components out.
So where does that leave us? A 35k (42k with vat!!) LEGAL engine pumping out in excess of 400bhp to 450bhp (original pre edited claim) on a single carb and cast manifolds, I think not! Hey I just had a thought, back in the day the Yanks Holy Grail was 1 bhp per Cubic Inch (i.e. on the 289 Ford 289bhp, respectable) so what is it now £1000 per 10 bhp lol! Last edited by Al Weyman; 11 Jul 2014 at 08:50. |
||
__________________
You can't polish a turd but you sure can sprinkle it with glitter! |
11 Jul 2014, 09:03 (Ref:3432723) | #22 | |||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
|
Quote:
I've had my first major hiccup in 5 seasons with my cheapish engine this year as a camshaft broke but then that's probably down to the fact it's over 40years old and it's been back ground. Last season I think if I'd have taken the trouble to do most races in my series I could have easily been series champion just by completing races as not one of the front runners managed to complete many races over the year. |
|||
|
11 Jul 2014, 09:35 (Ref:3432736) | #23 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,368
|
Obviously a lot of it is down to how you interpret the rules..............
The rules say ''use stock/standard component'' - most of us would go to the spares shop and buy standard replacement part, those big money pointy end of the grid guys go get something made that looks like the standard part but performs 300% better (ie the rockers on a sbf - £75 for set of standard or £1500 for the race version) Or they just modify the original part so much its difficult to claim its original, but it is based on the original so therefore must be legal, right? |
|
__________________
CSCC Swinging Sixties #128 Red/Black Mustang |
11 Jul 2014, 10:02 (Ref:3432744) | #24 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
Until you have the mega buck engine on a dyno that you can put your own engine on treat the hp figures as marketing spin. If you've built it carefully and have really good heads and plumbing they will not make more than 5% more than you, guaranteed! Look at top speed down the straight! |
||
|
11 Jul 2014, 11:34 (Ref:3432770) | #25 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 397
|
As I previously mentioned a better understanding of fluid dynamics and being able to quantify head flow must have made a huge difference compared to what was understood and available to most in the 60's. A man in his shed can build an engine very competently but cannot obtain the knowledge and understanding of fluid dynamics and the equipment to measure it easily as most people haven't got the time/ability to devote to it or the finances to buy the equipment required or in my case both :-(.
|
||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Freeze on engine technology | Marbot | Formula One | 51 | 29 Mar 2006 16:01 |
1,000 bhp? | Marbot | Formula One | 14 | 10 Jun 2005 14:56 |
modern F1 engine torque figures | Yunis | Formula One | 4 | 27 Sep 2003 11:19 |
Your F1 BHP? | Sodemo | Formula One | 22 | 20 Sep 2001 18:07 |
the bhp issue.... | Gt_R | Formula One | 3 | 20 Mar 2001 16:38 |