|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
19 Feb 2007, 21:44 (Ref:1845830) | #26 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,936
|
Quote:
in all fairness the last panoz like car in terms of sound at least and engine wise was the lister storm hybrid, that was a very nice sounding car at full chat although quiet compared to the judd engined cars and the zyteks. |
|||
|
20 Feb 2007, 07:16 (Ref:1846112) | #27 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,790
|
I have footage of Gunnar's battle at the end of Le Mans I believe in '02. As soon as I get Media Center Installed and find my VCR in this mess, I'll capture it to the HD and post it someplace....
|
||
|
20 Feb 2007, 09:27 (Ref:1846210) | #28 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,555
|
Quote:
Is there a reason why huge rumbly V8's don't appear in prototypes much? Is it due to weight? It's not as if they'd lack any grunt or torque, so I'm guessing weight is the main reason? |
|||
|
20 Feb 2007, 15:56 (Ref:1846513) | #29 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,936
|
Quote:
but it might be size and weight, i couldnt see someone stuffing a 6.0 V8 into the back of a courage, lola, zytek or pescarolo any time soon, infact im not even sure any of the current cars could swallow up a big displacement V8 engine. far as things go on sportscars, engine installation wise and gearbox wise i know very little, hell i dont really know the difference between a pushrod and flatplane crank V8, only that a flatplane crank V8 vibrates more |
|||
|
20 Feb 2007, 23:30 (Ref:1846845) | #30 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,790
|
The reasons -
Length, Height & Weight are issues with 90 degree V8s Cam-In-Block designs make the engine narrower, but has less high rpm breathing ability. Weight was mostly an issue with IRON blocks normally used for NASCAR purposes as that's what the rules mandate. The whole point in building a American based V8 is to reduce cost, forging your own Alum block does away with that. The Lister used a production based version of the LS7 engine found in the C6R Corvette. It's alum from the factory, however its still heavier than a purpose built racing engine. That doesn't mean an effective chassis cannot be built around these engines. Something that would be both powerful and affordable would be small block based V8s using twin turbos like the old Buick Indy V6 program & Chevy's 90 degree stock block V6 Indy engine program. The Chevy saw duty in Hendrick Motorsport Corvette GTP program and could be turned up to 900hp NO PROBLEM in qualifying trim. It would be affordable and cheap to take a stock block, pushrod, cam in block say Ford engine and slap a couple of turbos on it. With modern turbo technology these engines would be beastly to say the least and be on par with Audi's diesel engines in terms of output and torque. And even with turbos it would still rumble like a 90 degree V8 should... Even R&D and dyno testing such an engine wouldn't be all that costly, most of the R&D has been done for you by the Hot Rodders of the world. By reducing the need to turn the engines to 8-9K, you cut down on valve related failures. The turbos would make the top end punch that restricted V8's lack. It would be a thristy engine however and that's maybe why you don't see it being done. You might only get say 10 laps out of a tank of fuel, while the Audi would go 12-13 laps before stopping. But you would be on TERMS with the Audi if the chassis was up too it. |
||
|
21 Feb 2007, 04:18 (Ref:1846944) | #31 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,926
|
The Panoz engine used a 351 Ford Windsor aluminum block, and Cleveland aluminum heads, thus making it a 351 SVO, which has an cast iron block(NASCAR), or aluminum block(everything else). It was the closest thing Ford had to a custom made purpose built engine that they had that suited Panoz' requirements.
|
||
|
21 Feb 2007, 04:36 (Ref:1846949) | #32 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,608
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
21 Feb 2007, 05:56 (Ref:1846970) | #33 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
Quote:
Love to see that fight up to the last lap again . |
|||
|
21 Feb 2007, 11:49 (Ref:1847208) | #34 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
http://www.speedarena.com/resources/...LMS_3_1600.jpg
Just found this . Anyone got a large pic of the first Panoz LMP1 please ? |
||
|
21 Feb 2007, 12:26 (Ref:1847235) | #35 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,704
|
Les Leader avec Les Valliant??
Bob Kreamer drove a Leader - Panoz I think - failed just yards from the line with victory in sight. |
||
__________________
Chase the horizon |
21 Feb 2007, 13:00 (Ref:1847261) | #36 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,406
|
Now I cant remember where I found it, but I remember the Panoz push-rod engine weighed in at 198Kg........the Chrysler Mopar weighed in at 170Kg.........compare this to the latest generation of Judd V10, which is now quoted at 138Kg.......thats a fair lump of weight to be giving away......but not the end of the world.......I never new Panoz was looking at installing the push-rod into a courage......now that would have been very interesting.........
the americans are getting 650-700bhp from 6 litre jet boat engines, which run at full chat for 45 minutes......based on small-block chevy,s.......the max power is delivered at about 650bhp at 6000rpm........700bhp at 6500rpm, which is quite low revving in my book....... with about 570lb/ft of torque........this would be ideal for an LMP1 V8 push-rod engine.......as long as the engine weight could be kept around the 160-170Kg range - it would be competetive I'm sure.......the LS series of V8 engines would be ideal donors. The real bonus a big 6.0 90 degree V8 would offer is that it can be fully stressed, as proven on the Chrysler-Mopar-Dallara........therefore no extra chassis rails, so overall, the engine weight is not bad - not to mention very compact. Last edited by knighty; 21 Feb 2007 at 13:04. |
||
|
21 Feb 2007, 14:04 (Ref:1847297) | #37 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
Quote:
And yes ..... that would have been a nice engine to have in the back of a Courage . Is it still available to drop into a proto , and would it still be competitive ? |
|||
|
22 Feb 2007, 20:44 (Ref:1849388) | #38 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,608
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
22 Feb 2007, 22:10 (Ref:1849442) | #39 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,936
|
Quote:
but being honest i think the engine in the panoz esperante could be used in P1, lighten it a bit and also it would be powerful and make lots of torque. as far as i know the only pushrod engine in LMP is the lavaggi's ford 6.0 V8. |
|||
|
22 Feb 2007, 22:14 (Ref:1849445) | #40 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,936
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
22 Feb 2007, 22:22 (Ref:1849452) | #41 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,608
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
23 Feb 2007, 18:03 (Ref:1850002) | #42 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,936
|
is it, the max engine size in LMP1 is 6.0 litres and i thought for any kind of forced induction the max size was 4.0 litres, or was this for old design LMP900 spec cars?
|
||
|
23 Feb 2007, 19:57 (Ref:1850079) | #43 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,704
|
on the courage tie up - I saw a Panoz GTLM in the Technoparc a couple of years ago and was given the impression that courage were developing it for europe but it seems that was not the case On the same day I saw a pre release Z06 in CVO, and coupe bodywork at Pescarolo...
|
||
__________________
Chase the horizon |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Panoz | gttouring | Sportscar & GT Racing | 5 | 12 Apr 2006 14:04 |
New Panoz | pink69 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 5 | 17 Mar 2002 16:21 |
What will Panoz do? | pink69 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 10 | 22 Oct 2001 11:33 |
Where would Panoz be? | Heeltoe6 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 10 | 20 Aug 2001 16:57 |
Panoz does it again. | marcus | Sportscar & GT Racing | 3 | 9 Aug 2000 14:38 |