Page 211 of 225 FirstFirst ... 111161201209210211212213221 ... LastLast
Results 2,101 to 2,110 of 2248
  1. #2101
    Senior Member NickRally's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Great Britain
    Posts
    170
    Like
    134
    Liked 131 Times in 61 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by janvanvurpa View Post
    Real engine designers don't talk "horsepower"..That's for children on forums..
    Real engine guys talk BMEP...Brake Mean Effective Pressure..

    NASCAR motors make more BMEP than those poooftie little girlyboy F1 motors.

    To illustrate how ridiculous this suggestion is (which is like comparing apples with pairs, by the way, as the F1 engines are turbocharged, while NASCAR ones are naturally aspirated), I will do the calcs for each of the two types of engine using figures significantly skewed in favour of the NASCAR engine, so here it is:

    NASCAR engine:
    - Top power: 660 kW @ 8 000 min-1 (remember figures are intentionally distorted to work in NASCAR’s favour)
    - Engine capacity: 5.85 litres

    F1 engine:
    - Top power: 500 kW @ 12 500 min-1 (remember figures are intentionally distorted to work in NASCAR’s favour)
    - Engine capacity: 1.6 litres

    NASCAR calcs:
    BMEP = (660x120) / (5.85*8000) = 1.69231 MPa

    F1 calcs:
    BMEP = (500x120) / (1.6*12500) = 3.0 MPa

    On my side of the pond, 3 is bigger than 1.69 and I suspect it is the same in the US of A, but as I mentioned comparing these two types of engines is stupid in itself as one is naturally aspirated while the other is heavily turbocharged.

    Also, for comparison purposes and using the official figures, which anybody is free to agree or disagree with, here are the calcs for a current WRC engine:

    BMEP = (280x120) / (1.6*6000) = 3.5 MPa

    Now, before anybody starts shouting how the current WRC engines are more efficient than the F1 engines, if we use numbers that are closer to reality for the strongest F1 engine (currently believed to be the Mercedes), then the BMEP is probably not less than 4.2 MPa.
    Last edited by NickRally; 4th April 2018 at 23:27.

  2. Likes: AMSS (5th April 2018),Mirek (6th April 2018),the sniper (7th April 2018)
  3. #2102
    M-Sport WRC Champions Fast Eddie WRC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Great Britain
    Posts
    9,296
    Like
    1,866
    Liked 4,205 Times in 2,248 Posts




    The Incurable Enthusiast

  4. Likes: Micke_VOC (6th April 2018),pantealex (7th April 2018)
  5. #2103
    Senior Member Gregor-y's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    943
    Like
    154
    Liked 68 Times in 42 Posts
    Modern open face helmets flatter no one's looks.

  6. #2104
    Junior Member Daviesalaam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Dar es salaam
    Posts
    17
    Like
    5
    Liked 6 Times in 1 Post
    what's the major difference between the R5 Katsuta is driving now en the one he crashed in testing??

    Sent from my SM-G610F using Tapatalk

  7. #2105
    Senior Member racerx1979's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    504
    Like
    103
    Liked 357 Times in 176 Posts

    Filled Mills

  8. #2106
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sleezattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,259
    Like
    596
    Liked 462 Times in 255 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by NickRally View Post
    To illustrate how ridiculous this suggestion is (which is like comparing apples with pairs, by the way, as the F1 engines are turbocharged, while NASCAR ones are naturally aspirated), I will do the calcs for each of the two types of engine using figures significantly skewed in favour of the NASCAR engine, so here it is:

    NASCAR engine:
    - Top power: 660 kW @ 8 000 min-1 (remember figures are intentionally distorted to work in NASCAR’s favour)
    - Engine capacity: 5.85 litres

    F1 engine:
    - Top power: 500 kW @ 12 500 min-1 (remember figures are intentionally distorted to work in NASCAR’s favour)
    - Engine capacity: 1.6 litres

    NASCAR calcs:
    BMEP = (660x120) / (5.85*8000) = 1.69231 MPa

    F1 calcs:
    BMEP = (500x120) / (1.6*12500) = 3.0 MPa

    On my side of the pond, 3 is bigger than 1.69 and I suspect it is the same in the US of A, but as I mentioned comparing these two types of engines is stupid in itself as one is naturally aspirated while the other is heavily turbocharged.

    Also, for comparison purposes and using the official figures, which anybody is free to agree or disagree with, here are the calcs for a current WRC engine:

    BMEP = (280x120) / (1.6*6000) = 3.5 MPa

    Now, before anybody starts shouting how the current WRC engines are more efficient than the F1 engines, if we use numbers that are closer to reality for the strongest F1 engine (currently believed to be the Mercedes), then the BMEP is probably not less than 4.2 MPa.
    Go argue with Racecar Engineering and tell them they're all wrong. And that you know because this is your profession..They do seem equally enamored by both F1 and NASCAR, which defies all imagination to me. What team to you work for?
    John Vanlandingham
    Sleezattle WA, USA
    Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

  9. #2107
    Senior Member NickRally's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Great Britain
    Posts
    170
    Like
    134
    Liked 131 Times in 61 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by janvanvurpa View Post
    Go argue with Racecar Engineering and tell them they're all wrong. And that you know because this is your profession..They do seem equally enamored by both F1 and NASCAR, which defies all imagination to me. What team to you work for?
    Apologies, I won’t highjack this thread any more after this post. To answer, I suspect they have compared the old naturally aspirated engines used up until 2013 included, which had perhaps a BMEP of just under 1.6 MPa, while the NASCAR engines topped out at maybe slightly over 1.6 MPa, I guess.

    Once again for comparison’s sake, the highest BMEP naturally aspirated engines that I have come in contact with, were the old F3000 engines used up until 1995 (before the series became one make championship) with the BMEP entering the 1.7 MPa territory.

  10. #2108
    M-Sport WRC Champions Fast Eddie WRC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Great Britain
    Posts
    9,296
    Like
    1,866
    Liked 4,205 Times in 2,248 Posts
    Ogier speaking today:
    "We’ve made good progress since last year and in this sport you don’t achieve anything alone – it’s always a team effort. All the energy we’ve put into developing the car over the past year is really starting to pay off. We saw it already in Mexico with a good step forward on gravel, and so far I think we’ve improved on asphalt too which is very positive for the future."

  11. Likes: A FONDO (7th April 2018)
  12. #2109
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,142
    Like
    21
    Liked 125 Times in 94 Posts
    I guess WRC cars still use the road car engine blocks - compared to a F1 engine system which probably costs as much as if not more than a whole WRC car.
    Complexity of current F1 engine system guessed at by this writer who gives the reader options as to whether the Honda F1 engine system used in 2017 either did or did not have spark plugs?
    A bit more transparency in F1 might be beneficial for the honda fans(if there are any left)?
    F1 is a high miler fuel economy run compared to Nascar?
    https://www.grandprix247.com/2017/07...engine-so-bad/

  13. #2110
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    14
    Like
    0
    Liked 13 Times in 6 Posts
    As Ari Vatanen said about the t16 'the car was starting to fly' & this is where I think Seb is starting to reach with this Fiesta..... which is lump in your throat stuff for West Cumbria.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •