|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
19 Jul 2010, 06:40 (Ref:2728859) | #151 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
Quote:
Oreca Peugeot 302 km/h Lola Aston Martin 296 km/h Lola Rebellion/Judd 287 km/h |
||
|
19 Jul 2010, 20:47 (Ref:2729302) | #152 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 508
|
Quote:
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 |
|||
|
19 Jul 2010, 23:30 (Ref:2729406) | #153 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,892
|
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.
|
||
__________________
The only certainty is that nothing is certain. |
20 Jul 2010, 04:30 (Ref:2729441) | #154 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
|
Quote:
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. |
||
|
20 Jul 2010, 05:59 (Ref:2729460) | #155 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,642
|
Just out of curiosity: What do you think diesel is made from? |
||
|
20 Jul 2010, 09:29 (Ref:2729522) | #156 | |||
Rookie
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 9
|
Quote:
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!! |
|||
|
20 Jul 2010, 09:31 (Ref:2729525) | #157 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
Quote:
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:
When Peugeot was running in full attack mode, they were running 11 lap stints instead of the 13 lap stints in fuel saving mode. |
|||
|
20 Jul 2010, 22:35 (Ref:2729836) | #158 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
|
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. |
|
|
20 Jul 2010, 23:15 (Ref:2729848) | #159 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
Hell, just need a Mr. Fusion thrown on top of it.
L.P. |
||
__________________
Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent |
21 Jul 2010, 01:25 (Ref:2729875) | #160 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,900
|
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! |
||
__________________
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. |
21 Jul 2010, 04:06 (Ref:2729909) | #161 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
|
Quote:
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:
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. 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. |
|||
|
21 Jul 2010, 09:46 (Ref:2730032) | #162 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,900
|
Quote:
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. |
|||
__________________
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. |
21 Jul 2010, 20:08 (Ref:2730324) | #163 | ||||||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 889
|
Quote:
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:
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:
Quote:
Quote:
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. |
||||||
|
21 Jul 2010, 21:13 (Ref:2730350) | #164 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,399
|
Fascinating though this debate is it seems to have precious little to do with a race last weekend in Portimao!
|
||
|
21 Jul 2010, 23:49 (Ref:2730394) | #165 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,900
|
!@#!#!#!@$!$! 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. |
||
__________________
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. |
22 Jul 2010, 01:49 (Ref:2730419) | #166 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,487
|
Torques is the kick up the backside when you press the loud pedal, Horsepowers makes you go fast.
|
||
|
25 Jul 2010, 21:45 (Ref:2732864) | #167 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,595
|
What the heck happened in here? I wanted to know about how the race went, not to see people throwing mud about nothing.
|
|
__________________
On a mission to get back into following GT racing series again. |
26 Jul 2010, 20:57 (Ref:2733622) | #168 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7,175
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
26 Jul 2010, 21:40 (Ref:2733651) | #169 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,630
|
|||
|
27 Jul 2010, 17:24 (Ref:2734077) | #170 | |||
Rookie
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 67
|
Quote:
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. |
|||
|
27 Jul 2010, 17:40 (Ref:2734089) | #171 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 7,175
|
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.
|
||
|
|
|
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 |