Home  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides Veloce Books  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Saloon & Sportscar Racing > Sportscar & GT Racing > ACO Regulated Series

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 19 Jul 2010, 06:40 (Ref:2728859)   #151
gwyllion
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Belgium
Posts: 8,738
gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by chernaudi View Post
Based on the events of this race, it'll be an all Audi/Peugeot show in the ILMC. A Rebellion Lola got to within .3 of a second in qualifying, but the gasers have a way to go to match the diesels in race pace.
With that 4% increase in restrictor size (good for about 30 bhp) the petrol engines are still down on power. Top speed during the race:
Oreca Peugeot 302 km/h
Lola Aston Martin 296 km/h
Lola Rebellion/Judd 287 km/h
gwyllion is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Jul 2010, 20:47 (Ref:2729302)   #152
ubrben
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
United Kingdom
Birmingham
Posts: 508
ubrben has a lot of promise if they can keep it on the circuit!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwyllion View Post
With that 4% increase in restrictor size (good for about 30 bhp) the petrol engines are still down on power. Top speed during the race:
Oreca Peugeot 302 km/h
Lola Aston Martin 296 km/h
Lola Rebellion/Judd 287 km/h
Peugeot would (and have) argued that if they did a petrol car they'd be quicker than the Aston simply due to development budget.

Audi beat everyone when they ran petrol, so a formula that allows a non-factory petrol (and that is what the Aston programme is) to beat a factory diesel, means a factory petrol would probably be quicker still.

Ben
ubrben is offline  
Quote
Old 19 Jul 2010, 23:30 (Ref:2729406)   #153
Purist
Veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
United States
Wichita, Kansas, USA
Posts: 5,892
Purist is going for a new world record!Purist is going for a new world record!Purist is going for a new world record!Purist is going for a new world record!Purist is going for a new world record!Purist is going for a new world record!
I don't see how even a factory-built petrol car beats the diesels as things stand, given the MASSIVE torque advantage the diesel WILL have if the two are matched on horsepower.
Purist is offline  
__________________
The only certainty is that nothing is certain.
Quote
Old 20 Jul 2010, 04:30 (Ref:2729441)   #154
hcl123
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
hcl123 is heading for a stewards' enquiry!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwyllion View Post
With that 4% increase in restrictor size (good for about 30 bhp) the petrol engines are still down on power. Top speed during the race:
Oreca Peugeot 302 km/h
Lola Aston Martin 296 km/h
Lola Rebellion/Judd 287 km/h
No they are not down on power... they are HIGHER on max power than the diesels, and quite notoriously now (4%) if the potential is to be taken to its max possibilities. The problem with petrol is then if they are to take that potential to the zenit, then fuel consumption goes down the drain... badly...

But max power is illusory, even more in a stupid obsolete tech like the petrol engine in its present form. Petrol power is achieved by injecting more fuel into the cylinders, meaning that substantial part of that fuel is still burning (slow burner) when it leaves the cylinders and finishes burning in the exhaust pipe... the reason for the VERY HIGH NOISE and the relative low torque...

And that relative low torque is the reason why a diesel engine even with less potential max power is able to beat petrol. Portimão has very short length straights, it would had been needed the double or triple the straight length for the petrol engine to achieve its max power superior to diesel... lower torque means that it takes more time to get to max power under the same load... Portimão does not allow that time...

SO WHAT IS THE WONDER ABOUT TOP SPEEDS ?

4% larger restrictors is a futile exercise... PETROL ENGINES ARE OBSOLETE... ITS OBVIOUS.. even in the long straights of SPA ... petrol engines will lose... because if they really cranck the volume on those stupid petrol engines to have more torque, fuel consumption will go down the drain... if they stay with a reasonable fuel consumption it will take much more time for those petrol engines to achieve its max power, meaning that even in a long straight they will lose for a diesel that accelerates much faster due to much better torque..i.e... by the end of the straight when the petrol engines starts to catch up and max power (superior to diesel) is about to be reached, they have already lost a considerable distance since the beginning of that straight.

Why people don't catch the obvious and stop *****ing about rules when it is diesel that is much more penalized ??... petrol engines in the present form are obsolete , no big deal, get over it...

No matter what ACO rules it only takes a little more compression rate for diesel to remain in the top level... technique that petrol cannot follow... this is a stupid exercise, all being equal in restrictors and weight a 2 liter turbo diesel would beat a 3.7 l petrol any time soon... petrol engines have a century of development, diesel 4 years... isn't that obvious ??...

The marketing notion that petrol is a superior power engine due to its fuel, by putting a large volume diesel engine to compete with a high rev petrol smaller engine, is a busted campaign... the scum oil lords wanted to make power = speed = more fuel to spend (gasoline), but practical science has proved the contrary that is torque = force = efficiency that matter the most.

meaning that in your day life with a diesel engine car you will be much better in all senses... effective power... an money...exactly the contrary of what the oil scum lords wanted to promote.
hcl123 is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Jul 2010, 05:59 (Ref:2729460)   #155
Spyderman
Veteran
 
Spyderman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Mozambique
Mozambique
Posts: 4,642
Spyderman should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridSpyderman should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridSpyderman should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridSpyderman should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid


Just out of curiosity: What do you think diesel is made from?
Spyderman is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Jul 2010, 09:29 (Ref:2729522)   #156
Jody Firth
Rookie
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
England
Wakefield, West Yorkshire
Posts: 9
Jody Firth should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bentley03 View Post
Difficult to comment on the race with the lack of any meaningful tv coverage, but there appeared to be some excellent battles once again amongst the GT2 competitors. The pace of the Aston was particularly impressive.......I wonder how much of that was down to the tyres?

Must offer my congratulations to Warren Hughes and Jody Firth. Warren was without doubt the class of the FLM field, but Jody did everything that was asked of him, kept out of trouble and posted some very respectable lap times. I sense they would have won the class even if their adversaries hadn't contrived to self destruct and present the win to them on a plate. Let's hope we see this driver combination move up to P2 in the not too distant future!
Thanks for the kind words Bentley. It took us both quite a while to get on terms with the car. They are very very different to a P2, very quirky! Once we got our heads around it we were fine. Quali didn't go well as a particular handling difficulty prevented Warren from exploiting it fully, hence only 6th (I know you'll be particularly dissapointted because of the predictions competition! ). We resolved this issue in warm up and enabled us both to drive more to our potential.

First two stints of Warren's went well and just about got a lap lead, I jumped in and was told to take it easy and pick a 90% lap time that I could just rattle off, which I did. The only issue we had as a team was a coupke of louvres broke which required two nose changes. I had an issue in all three of my stints in that the seat belts came of my HANS device and therefore I wasn't strapped in properly (don't tell the ACO ) which makes it incredibly hard to drive. No hands driving down the straights trying to strap yourself back in is not advisable!

Anyway, great result to finish 6th overall, we had that class won dispite everyone else doing thee best not to finish. Our pace along proved that. So for my first Le Mans Series race, first time ever sat in a FLM car in first free practice, first time driving at night, it wasnt't a bad debut at all!!
Jody Firth is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Jul 2010, 09:31 (Ref:2729525)   #157
gwyllion
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Belgium
Posts: 8,738
gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!gwyllion is going for a new world record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcl123 View Post
No they are not down on power... they are HIGHER on max power than the diesels, and quite notoriously now (4%) if the potential is to be taken to its max possibilities.
In 2008 the Peugeot was said to have around 730 bhp. This year the Peugeots were faster than in 2008, so the engine still produces a lot more than 700 bhp.

Officially petrol engines produce 650 bhp, but in practice they probably have around 670 bhp. The 4% restrictor increase means that petrols now have 700 bhp. Hence, my comment that they are still down on power.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcl123 View Post
The problem with petrol is then if they are to take that potential to the zenit, then fuel consumption goes down the drain... badly...
... and with diesel you can magically increase power without decreasing fuel consumption

When Peugeot was running in full attack mode, they were running 11 lap stints instead of the 13 lap stints in fuel saving mode.
gwyllion is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Jul 2010, 22:35 (Ref:2729836)   #158
hcl123
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
hcl123 is heading for a stewards' enquiry!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyderman View Post


Just out of curiosity: What do you think diesel is made from?
Much more pertinent question is what it could be made from in the future

hints ( those are running proved operations scientifically baked, that "they" don't want you to know, so those possibilities never appear on the news and if they do never in context of true potentialities)...

WW II nazi war machine run on high grade diesel (common name kerosene) made from COAL ...so possibilities http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Biodiesel are :


coal and shale oil dirt

trash... yes common land fill thrash

plastics

kitchen grease

algea

Other oil rich plants

All those substances can be harvested, and employing the old but now more efficient derivatives of the fischer tropsch process

http://www.google.pt/search?q=fische...ient=firefox-a

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer...ropsch_process


In the section "fuels" in this "greencarcongress" site you can see among many others, some of those improved fischer tropsch processes... BTL CTL GTL LFG...

http://www.greencarcongress.com/topics.html

And engines to match the "new" fuel paradigma, directly applicable to current techs
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Engines

particularly fund of 3

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directo...8MYT%29_Engine

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directo...m-Drive_Engine

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directo..._rotary_engine

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directo...bustion_Engine

This isn't about bashing the scum oil war lords, though IMHO a perfectly deserved title, this is about that the actual tech, most applicable to motorsport is all but modern ( really really obsolete) including the engines.
hcl123 is offline  
Quote
Old 20 Jul 2010, 23:15 (Ref:2729848)   #159
HORNDAWG
Veteran
 
HORNDAWG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
United States
Oregon
Posts: 8,919
HORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridHORNDAWG should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Hell, just need a Mr. Fusion thrown on top of it.










L.P.
HORNDAWG is offline  
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent
Quote
Old 21 Jul 2010, 01:25 (Ref:2729875)   #160
arakis
Veteran
 
arakis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Serbia
Belgrade,Serbia
Posts: 2,900
arakis has a lot of promise if they can keep it on the circuit!
so even when half a dosen posts by people who obviusly know more about the subject then you, littereraly prove you wrong, you dont change your tune!

you remind me of someone, welcome to the club!
arakis is offline  
__________________
To launch a new FIA GT2 category based on strict technical rules, with limited wavers and ‘balance of performance' limited to success ballast. A category where GT manufacturers will prove through competition they can produce the best road going GT car.
Quote
Old 21 Jul 2010, 04:06 (Ref:2729909)   #161
hcl123
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
hcl123 is heading for a stewards' enquiry!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwyllion View Post
In 2008 the Peugeot was said to have around 730 bhp. This year the Peugeots were faster than in 2008, so the engine still produces a lot more than 700 bhp.

Officially petrol engines produce 650 bhp, but in practice they probably have around 670 bhp. The 4% restrictor increase means that petrols now have 700 bhp. Hence, my comment that they are still down on power.
The same proportion WAS already true for petrol as for diesel... there is no poor mr petrol, all the contrary... now with 4% more so in favor of petrol (why doesn't ACO abolish diesel, because it seems that is what they are pressed to do, or press conference calling stupid to teams and constructors why there isn't more diesel engines)... the point is that petrol engines are designed to be lighter (less strong) and more balanced in order to attain those high revs, so when they are stressed to achieve those high rates of power that "potentially" are there, they tend to break much more often than diesels... and consume disproportional amounts of fuel...

There is no dirty game with max power numbers with neither of the techs... actually those max power numbers mean very little... Buggati Veyron road super car has 1000 HP, BUT pushing in 4th gear with the engine in "high rev" but very far from its max velocity of 400Km/h of its 6th gear, higher than any Lemans prototype now... meaning that MAX velocity depends more on the ability of the engine to withstand some specific load,... meaning torque is more important... meaning a 750HP F1 engine would be the laughing stock if put in a Lemans prototype because the weight and the loads are much more greater in those last ones( it could never reach those 750HP)

What is officially knowned is not what corresponds in practise... matter of fact with modern electronics and telemetry the same exact engine dosen't have the same exact caractirist values of power, torque, fuel consumption all the time during the race and qualifying sessions ... because "engine parameters" are constantly being modified from the pits according to race conditions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwyllion View Post
... and with diesel you can magically increase power without decreasing fuel consumption
Yes and no... both in a dynamic and in a static way... there are more than first meats the eyes of engine parameters that can be tweaked.

But to illustrate in a gross mode... have you seen the movie that some guy wanted to blow a big save door with a relative small explosive, so he filled the save with water first so that the force of the explosion could create a much more greater "pressure wave" inside the save... had he puted the "small" bomb outside attached to the door only a small scratch would result... in the first form he blew the door...

transponding the example to engines, the water is the "compression rate" of the engine... AND that is the biggest advantage of diesels... so its possible to have more power in the same motor... changing motor heads to have more compression... and sometimes "consume less" at the same time... and there isn't anything magical about it... its pure thermodynamics physics. ONLY that petrol engines cannot pursue that route, but to a very small extent, because of auto combustion "knocking" effects... due to the chemical and physical characteristics of Gasoline... an very poor substance for a ICE IMHO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwyllion View Post
When Peugeot was running in full attack mode, they were running 11 lap stints instead of the 13 lap stints in fuel saving mode.
Of course engine parameters modified then to be more "agresssive" , consuming more due to more higher average revs... and perhaps also less fuel between stops to run lighter with less weight.
hcl123 is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Jul 2010, 09:46 (Ref:2730032)   #162
arakis
Veteran
 
arakis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Serbia
Belgrade,Serbia
Posts: 2,900
arakis has a lot of promise if they can keep it on the circuit!
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcl123 View Post
The same proportion WAS already true for petrol as for diesel... there is no poor mr petrol, all the contrary... now with 4% more so in favor of petrol (why doesn't ACO abolish diesel, because it seems that is what they are pressed to do, or press conference calling stupid to teams and constructors why there isn't more diesel engines)... the point is that petrol engines are designed to be lighter (less strong) and more balanced in order to attain those high revs, so when they are stressed to achieve those high rates of power that "potentially" are there, they tend to break much more often than diesels... and consume disproportional amounts of fuel...

There is no dirty game with max power numbers with neither of the techs... actually those max power numbers mean very little... Buggati Veyron road super car has 1000 HP, BUT pushing in 4th gear with the engine in "high rev" but very far from its max velocity of 400Km/h of its 6th gear, higher than any Lemans prototype now... meaning that MAX velocity depends more on the ability of the engine to withstand some specific load,... meaning torque is more important... meaning a 750HP F1 engine would be the laughing stock if put in a Lemans prototype because the weight and the loads are much more greater in those last ones( it could never reach those 750HP)

.
clearly you haven't got a clue what you are talking about.
Racing engines be it disels or petrol are always built to specification, to last only the dsignated time of the race plus some leway, the closer you built the engine to the race distance more power, torque it will have. prof: Peugeut this year!

Fact of life Horse power is the only thing that defines maximum speed, if you knew anything about physics you would know that, torque is for acceleration. any racecar, wants to be set up its gearing so that it reaches max speed at max hp! and bougaty veyron is a slow reving engine reaching its max power at 6000 rpm!!!!!

Learn your facts first then start to educate everyone else, or even better listen to some very smart people here that actualy know what they are talking about, me excluded.

porsche lmp2 engine was preaty close to f1 engine, its a 11000 rpm engine, and while it raced it was the best lmp2 engine!

BTW engine torque means nothing, it doesent move the car, force pushing the tarmac trough tires is the only thing that matters, and to get to the tires you have to go trough gearing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! you know big sprocket-little sporocket means more torque, less rpm, little sprocket -big sproket means less torque more rpm, guess witch is used by petrol witch by diesel

Last edited by arakis; 21 Jul 2010 at 09:55.
arakis is offline  
__________________
To launch a new FIA GT2 category based on strict technical rules, with limited wavers and ‘balance of performance' limited to success ballast. A category where GT manufacturers will prove through competition they can produce the best road going GT car.
Quote
Old 21 Jul 2010, 20:08 (Ref:2730324)   #163
hcl123
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
hcl123 is heading for a stewards' enquiry!
Quote:
Originally Posted by arakis View Post
clearly you haven't got a clue what you are talking about.
Racing engines be it disels or petrol are always built to specification, to last only the dsignated time of the race plus some leway, the closer you built the engine to the race distance more power, torque it will have. prof: Peugeut this year!
Clearly its you don't have a clue. As hard as it is for you to imagine torque is independent of the speed of the engine. Specific torque that is. Specific torque is a function of how energetic combustion is inside a cylinder in each power stroke. The first way to achieve this, is to inject more fuel inside the cylinders for each power stroke. That is essentially the only route taken by petrol engines. The other way is to make each of those power strokes more efficient by applying thermodynamic principles of pressure and heat. And this is the route that diesels take to advantage, because when combustion starts for each power stroke in a diesel, pressure and heat inside the cylinder is already higher than petrol, that can only achieve those initial "diesel like" conditions of pressure and heat after combustion has started for a while.

And in here is one of the unfair rules, in terms of BTU, petrol( racing petrol) and diesel are very much like the same, no reason for diesels to have a 9 liter less tank. Only that diesels are substantially more thermodynamic efficient.

Specific POWER is a PRODUCT of torque X the speed of the engine ( the revs), not the speed of the car. The problem is to attain those high efficient RPM. If there weren't any load on the engine, the weight of the car, aerodynamic pressure and the friction of the tires on the tarmac... a petrol engine with its high revs would win now (more specific max power "HP" ), because diesels haven't quite reached yet the mechanical balance needed to achieve more high revs than now, that they can "FOR SURE" reach in the short future.( not as much as petrols but clearly 8K RPM is not that hard)

Now we can see why rules have been bent always in favor of petrol. Less weight on the car, less aerodynamic support, were put in place to REDUCE THE LOAD ON THE ENGINE essentially, favoring petrol. If they were concerned with "dangerous" top speeds they would have increased the weight of the cars to 1 ton... if they were concerned with corner speed stability they would have increased the minimal axle length between tires, and the minimal tire size, and augmented the weight to lower corner speed. But a larger and heavier car definitely would have benefited diesels because of the much better torque, making petrol difficult to achieve high rates of power because the load on the engine would had been greater.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arakis View Post
Fact of life Horse power is the only thing that defines maximum speed, if you knew anything about physics you would know that, torque is for acceleration. any racecar, wants to be set up its gearing so that it reaches max speed at max hp! and bougaty veyron is a slow reving engine reaching its max power at 6000 rpm!!!!!
You contradict yourself... gearing is there to "facilitate" an engine to reach those higher levels of power, and though that linearity in a perfect condition " max speed at max power", is what is pursued, that often is the case... if seldom. Gearing is a mechanical "process" ( putted in simple terms) by which the "LOAD" on the engine is reduced, reducing the time that an engine takes to achieve those high levels of power in each of its stages. Because diesels have more torque, they can pass very well with less gear "stages"(audi case)... and the reason why an electric motor, which has a very short time lap between zero and max power and max torque( some generalize as instantaneous torque), and much higher power and torque to weight ratios, can pass very well without any gearing... or "transmission".

A W 16 8 liter Bugatty Veyron engine weight 400 Kilos !!!... has 16 cylinders in a poorly tested and so balanced configuration... no wonder it only reaches 6K RPM !... but it has a tremendous torque so it compensates to reach 1000 HP( power= torque x speed of engine), tough being a petrol engine, because it has 8 power strokes for each revolution of the crankshaft, instead of 6 power strokes for each revolution for the 5/6 liter V12s of aston martin and peugeot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arakis View Post
Learn your facts first then start to educate everyone else, or even better listen to some very smart people here that actualy know what they are talking about, me excluded.
that is an understatement... for sure!

Quote:
Originally Posted by arakis View Post
porsche lmp2 engine was preaty close to f1 engine, its a 11000 rpm engine, and while it raced it was the best lmp2 engine!
For a 775 Kilo car, total weight, its not hard to imagine that it was fast alright. But in 2007, the audi R10 with 995Kilo, those audis were like dragging a 200Kg trailer competing with Penske porsche in ALMS... situation only fair to the corrupted minds of IMSA "oil" lubricated petrol heads, that demanded it... yet the Audi R10 won most of the races. Wonder why ??


Quote:
Originally Posted by arakis View Post
BTW engine torque means nothing, it doesent move the car, force pushing the tarmac trough tires is the only thing that matters, and to get to the tires you have to go trough gearing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! you know big sprocket-little sporocket means more torque, less rpm, little sprocket -big sproket means less torque more rpm, guess witch is used by petrol witch by diesel
You contradict yourself again. That "force pushing the tarmac trough the tires" is torque not power... power is the "speed" you can "MULTIPLY THAT FORCE" in a specific unit of time, and that doesn't automatically translates to the "speed of the car" because there are several loads to account to... and the TIME TAKEN TO ACHIVE a "faster" order of sustained force.

If you start with a much higher force, like the case of diesels, you don't need to multiply it to high levels of speed to achieve a high power ratio... so the short times of acceleration... if you start with a less force, case of petrol, you need to achieve higher speeds of force multiplication to get to those levels of power... and though petrol engines can achieve higher levels of power "potentially" by having considerable more speed of force multiplication (now that diesels rev lower than 7K RPM), those higher levels of power compared with diesels is small or very small, and take considerable more TIME to achieve because petrol engines start with less force.

So its not that linear that troque = acceleration and power = speed... that is the scum oil war lords mantra that they want to indoctrinate.

Because this TIME TAKEN to achieve high orders of power, is the reason why max power of an engine is irrelevant... or less relevant, because from 0 to max power if it takes an eternity the engine its not good for racing.

Torque is much more relevant.
hcl123 is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Jul 2010, 21:13 (Ref:2730350)   #164
Graham Goodwin
Veteran
 
Graham Goodwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
United Kingdom
Epsom UK
Posts: 3,389
Graham Goodwin is going for a new world record!Graham Goodwin is going for a new world record!Graham Goodwin is going for a new world record!Graham Goodwin is going for a new world record!Graham Goodwin is going for a new world record!Graham Goodwin is going for a new world record!Graham Goodwin is going for a new world record!

Fascinating though this debate is it seems to have precious little to do with a race last weekend in Portimao!
Graham Goodwin is offline  
Quote
Old 21 Jul 2010, 23:49 (Ref:2730394)   #165
arakis
Veteran
 
arakis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Serbia
Belgrade,Serbia
Posts: 2,900
arakis has a lot of promise if they can keep it on the circuit!
!@#!#!#!@$!$! I am realy ****ed right now, listen! take my, and about a 100 people with degrees in phisics and mechanical engeneering. Max HP is the figre to watch for top speed,

power stays consistant trough gearing, (only minimal gearing efficiancy losses)

torque gets converted trugh gearing, the big sprocket small sprocket thing.

torque and force are not the same!!! torque is Nm force is N,

torque aplyies to axels, force aplyes to the liner motion!

maximum HP, means that at that rpm the proportion of rpms and torques is highest!!!!

the proof:::::::it gets scientific here:::welll as far as i can after a sixpack:::::
for a car to accel. from 100km it has to have its engine conected to its tyres trough gearing.
lets calculate this for a ferrari 430 scuderia it has 375Nm at 8750RPM(maxHP mark), and 470Nm at 5000rpm(gighest torque),
if the wheels are 50cm in diametar the circufrence is ~1.57m
100kmh is 1.66km per min, that means the wheel makes around 1061 rpm at 100kmh.

now for the test part
there are two gears, one is setup so that at 100kmh the engine is at the highst torque mark, and the other at the highest power mark, lets see witch dlivers more force to the wheels!

the ratio for the first is 1:5 mening the torque is 5 times greater at the driveshaft(wheels) then at the cranckshaft and it is 2350Nm (engine is spining at 5000rpm, the wheels at 1000rpm)

the second gearing is 1:8.750 meaning the torque is 8.75 times greater then at the max hp mark and it is.........

.....
...
... wait for it.....
....
.

3281Nm Engine is spining at 8750 rpm and the wheels at 1000rpm

the actual force at the tarmac is 820N in the second case, and 587N in the first

witch is 40%more, witch means that the car always has more torque at the wheels when it its at its max hp mark at the same speed that is!!! and thats why you down shift when overtaking people on the high way1!!!

proof 2

corvette gt2 car has similar power as the porsche rsr~470hp +-10hp

while the corvette has >700Nm of torque the porsche has only 450Nm
and guess what their top speed is equal to a few kmh!! at le Mans

Last edited by arakis; 21 Jul 2010 at 23:55.
arakis is offline  
__________________
To launch a new FIA GT2 category based on strict technical rules, with limited wavers and ‘balance of performance' limited to success ballast. A category where GT manufacturers will prove through competition they can produce the best road going GT car.
Quote
Old 22 Jul 2010, 01:49 (Ref:2730419)   #166
NightStalk3r
Veteran
 
NightStalk3r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
United Kingdom
Wiltshire, England
Posts: 3,487
NightStalk3r should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridNightStalk3r should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Torques is the kick up the backside when you press the loud pedal, Horsepowers makes you go fast.
NightStalk3r is offline  
Quote
Old 25 Jul 2010, 21:45 (Ref:2732864)   #167
MJ_N_09
Veteran
 
MJ_N_09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
United States
Posts: 2,595
MJ_N_09 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
What the heck happened in here? I wanted to know about how the race went, not to see people throwing mud about nothing.
MJ_N_09 is offline  
__________________
On a mission to get back into following GT racing series again.
Quote
Old 26 Jul 2010, 20:57 (Ref:2733622)   #168
Matt
Veteran
 
Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
United States
Connecticut
Posts: 7,175
Matt is going for a new lap record!Matt is going for a new lap record!Matt is going for a new lap record!Matt is going for a new lap record!Matt is going for a new lap record!Matt is going for a new lap record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by arakis View Post
!@#!#!#!@$!$! I am realy ****ed right now, listen! take my, and about a 100 people with degrees in phisics and mechanical engeneering. Max HP is the figre to watch for top speed,

power stays consistant trough gearing, (only minimal gearing efficiancy losses)

torque gets converted trugh gearing, the big sprocket small sprocket thing.

torque and force are not the same!!! torque is Nm force is N,

torque aplyies to axels, force aplyes to the liner motion!

maximum HP, means that at that rpm the proportion of rpms and torques is highest!!!!

the proof:::::::it gets scientific here:::welll as far as i can after a sixpack:::::
for a car to accel. from 100km it has to have its engine conected to its tyres trough gearing.
lets calculate this for a ferrari 430 scuderia it has 375Nm at 8750RPM(maxHP mark), and 470Nm at 5000rpm(gighest torque),
if the wheels are 50cm in diametar the circufrence is ~1.57m
100kmh is 1.66km per min, that means the wheel makes around 1061 rpm at 100kmh.

now for the test part
there are two gears, one is setup so that at 100kmh the engine is at the highst torque mark, and the other at the highest power mark, lets see witch dlivers more force to the wheels!

the ratio for the first is 1:5 mening the torque is 5 times greater at the driveshaft(wheels) then at the cranckshaft and it is 2350Nm (engine is spining at 5000rpm, the wheels at 1000rpm)

the second gearing is 1:8.750 meaning the torque is 8.75 times greater then at the max hp mark and it is.........

.....
...
... wait for it.....
....
.

3281Nm Engine is spining at 8750 rpm and the wheels at 1000rpm

the actual force at the tarmac is 820N in the second case, and 587N in the first

witch is 40%more, witch means that the car always has more torque at the wheels when it its at its max hp mark at the same speed that is!!! and thats why you down shift when overtaking people on the high way1!!!

proof 2

corvette gt2 car has similar power as the porsche rsr~470hp +-10hp

while the corvette has >700Nm of torque the porsche has only 450Nm
and guess what their top speed is equal to a few kmh!! at le Mans
Without wind resistance, you could get a car with 10hp to 200mph with the correct gearing.
Matt is offline  
Quote
Old 26 Jul 2010, 21:40 (Ref:2733651)   #169
dxk1
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
United States
Annapolis
Posts: 2,630
dxk1 should be qualifying in the top 5 on the griddxk1 should be qualifying in the top 5 on the griddxk1 should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt View Post
Without wind resistance, you could get a car with 10hp to 200mph with the correct gearing.
Ah, someone in this thread who appreciates Shakespeare's observation: "...brevity is the sole of wit."

DK
dxk1 is offline  
Quote
Old 27 Jul 2010, 17:24 (Ref:2734077)   #170
KSR88
Rookie
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
United States
California
Posts: 67
KSR88 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt View Post
Without wind resistance, you could get a car with 10hp to 200mph with the correct gearing.
Actually you couldn't.
Rolling drag is very considerable and also increases with speed. Everything that rolls in a vehicle--tires, bearings, gears, and brake drag chew up power. Alignment settings such as toe-in add drag. To the point where chassis settings are very often the trick to the extra mph that wins a NASCAR race. Grandam cars test on speedways for optimum alignment to get top speed with a given aero package.
In street cars the break point for equal drag from aero and rolling is about 55mph--in racing cars with big sticky slicks it is much higher. Prius designed their own low drag tires to boost low speed mpg.
KSR88 is offline  
Quote
Old 27 Jul 2010, 17:40 (Ref:2734089)   #171
Matt
Veteran
 
Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
United States
Connecticut
Posts: 7,175
Matt is going for a new lap record!Matt is going for a new lap record!Matt is going for a new lap record!Matt is going for a new lap record!Matt is going for a new lap record!Matt is going for a new lap record!
Then what I should have said was, without any sort of resistance, you could get a car with 5hp to 200mph with the correct gearing.
Matt is offline  
Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
'10 FRC Round 7 • Algarve • July 16th & 17th HORNDAWG Predictions Competitions 21 19 Jul 2010 18:13
[WTCC] Portimão, Portugal (Rounds 9 & 10) - 2nd - 4th July I Rosputnik Touring Car Racing 24 7 Jul 2010 12:03
[FIA GT] '10 GT1 WC Round 1 • Abu Dhabi • April 16th-17th mirkob Sportscar & GT Racing 195 24 Apr 2010 08:04
'09 LMS Round 3 • Algarve - Portimão, Portugal HORNDAWG ACO Regulated Series 227 7 Aug 2009 14:07
Anglesey Meeting - BARC - 16th/17th July Mark Mitchell Marshals Forum 40 20 Jul 2005 13:53


All times are GMT. The time now is 15:43.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2021 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2021-2022 Grant MacDonald. All Rights Reserved.