Quote:
Originally Posted by HopAlong
I don't think much is wrong with the AER on the power front, their 4.0 V8 P1 engine was more than a match for the diesels, the new P1 V6 was better than the others for power and so was the 2.0 4cyl. I'm just shocked how its been the same issues for years. I was watching the 2009 Sebring 12 Hours on YouTube and sure enough both P1 AER teams had retired after an hour and a half, then 2-3 hours in, both Dyson Mazdas went pop.
Is the engine a new design or is it still related to the early 2000s 675/P2 motor?
|
not sure on the design being honest. But reading the few articles that have come out over the years it looks like the last two years have seen big changes at the company, between new bosses etc.. They had said its been an iteration of the previous or something with a rev increase.
My two cents would be this, AER look like they have motors much more suited to the IMSA power requirements. That P60 V6 looks good for easily getting at least some more torque.
For me this comes down to Mazda. Mazda want the I4, that much is clear. How many years has it been? An zero input from factory? Why would AER want to continue to race an I4 2litre motor that is required to run so much harder than the competition???
I mean look at the BOP for Daytona! they are the lightest car at 905kg, smallest capacity by miles, highest revving by miles, lowest air/fuel ratio, second highest fuel capacity!
Im no expert on the matter, would like if some of the tech heads on here could comment, but the 5.5litre caddy is using a 70litre tank! 2l mazda on 79litres..... What sort of dame power are they having to pull out of that poor motor!??? An the caddy, granted with ex F1 drivers in some cases, looks faster.
No way AER, having a LMP1 WEC engine that supposedly runs very lean would be pushing to run those numbers if they had the choice.
As for the car itself, well I know Multimatic got involved heavily this year, and maybe homologation rules are stopping them, but surely the car cant be as good as the rest.