2003 Bentley details...

MulsanneMike · 29 Jan 2003, 14:43 (Ref:489471)

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/news.html

Smokey 6 litre · 29 Jan 2003, 15:16 (Ref:489509)

i need a picture,
i cant find one.
Help.

Tim Northcutt · 29 Jan 2003, 15:30 (Ref:489521)

Thanks, Mike!!!!

Question: What do you know about the new Yates power for the Matthews team...I e-mailed Riley & Scott, but I thought you might know the answers as well...

Is it derived from the Robert Yates engines like he builds for his NASCAR entries, or is it a variation of a powerplant that Yates may have built for other forms or racing?

I'm assuming it is Ford-based....do you know which basic Ford block is used? (5.0L??? 4.6L Quad-Cam????)

I'm also assuming that it has been bored out & modified to be a 6.0L engine??? Correct???

Please advise, if you know...otherwise, I'll wait to see what R&S sends me and I'll pass along whatever I learn to the group...

MulsanneMike · 29 Jan 2003, 16:31 (Ref:489593)

Picture posed now. Its a sketch based on the picture which no one has rights to use.

C_g · 29 Jan 2003, 18:55 (Ref:489753)

The Yates motor is a development of the motor they built for Panoz during the 1999 season - a 6.0L pushrod, 2-valve V8 based on the Ford smallblock. So yes, basically a bored NASCAR motor with fuel injection.

Tim Northcutt · 29 Jan 2003, 19:41 (Ref:489788)

Thanks CQ!

That's what I thought, but I wanted to be sure...

Smokey 6 litre · 29 Jan 2003, 20:31 (Ref:489840)

the drawings a help but is a photo,
anywhere! or will that have to wait.
Hopefully i will be able to hear it testing at Snetterdon,
im gonna try to get my dad to go down in his Anglain water van and pretend there is a problem with some sewers.
My dad does this all the time,
he saw it testing last year.

MulsanneMike · 29 Jan 2003, 20:33 (Ref:489843)

No photo, don't have rights to use it. Also, see the revised image, it is very different than the first version. The orignal photo was very dark, its now been lightened up and the nose details are clear. The car is very different.

MODE · 29 Jan 2003, 20:34 (Ref:489844)

Hi guys, I have the picture of 2003 bentley, apparently the same as MulsanneMike (with another little one of the rear end). In this picture the front end is dark, I don't see the same forms as Mike's drawing. I see the same front as Peugeot 902 EVO 2, which is very spectacular. What do you think Mike ?

Garrett · 29 Jan 2003, 20:40 (Ref:489850)

That is the most radical looking Bentley in history. Very cool. I like it.

MulsanneMike · 29 Jan 2003, 20:46 (Ref:489854)

MODE,

We enhanced that image (Auto-Hedbo), and viola. Was quite surprised actually. I had all ready drawn the first sketch. They intentially printed the image dark in the nose to make it ambiguos. I think its cool. Very interested in the detailed air mamangement.

MODE · 29 Jan 2003, 21:01 (Ref:489867)

yes, the narrow front tub allowed them to go far from the design of Lola MG for example and to be much more radical. I didn't enhance the picture and I don't see it as clear as you for the nose but I find the lateral air exits not very large. DE CORTANZE who told that first Bentley was a simple copy of his TOYOTA GT1 could tell that this one is a copy of his Peugeot 905.

Tim Northcutt · 29 Jan 2003, 21:30 (Ref:489899)

Very sharp and exciting look!!!!

Can't wait for Sebring!!!!

IanGrohse · 30 Jan 2003, 06:43 (Ref:490237)

Well, its looks more purposeful and serious.........unfortunatly alot uglier than the old Bently. But thats okay, still very striking.

Fab · 30 Jan 2003, 07:00 (Ref:490245)

Impressively agressive ! I love it for now ! Keep on the good job Mike !

kdr · 30 Jan 2003, 11:38 (Ref:490439)

its in this weeks autosport. nose seems flatter and front wings more bulbous, and engine cover behind cockpit has a bump. rear looks ok, as does the head on view. this is all from a visual context of course...maybe it'll go like stink.

AllonFS · 30 Jan 2003, 12:21 (Ref:490488)

Quote:

Originally posted by kdr
its in this weeks autosport. nose seems flatter and front wings more bulbous, and engine cover behind cockpit has a bump. rear looks ok, as does the head on view. this is all from a visual context of course...maybe it'll go like stink.

"Fast and bulbous". Clearly Bentley are fans of Captain Beefheart.

(Mini-quiz pop-pickers - what the hell I am on about?)

Fab · 30 Jan 2003, 14:42 (Ref:490618)

Quote:

Originally posted by AllonFS
"Fast and bulbous". Clearly Bentley are fans of Captain Beefheart.
(Mini-quiz pop-pickers - what the hell I am on about?)

Sounds like a Franck Zappa song too !

**Aysedasi** · 30 Jan 2003, 16:49 (Ref:490770)

I think you're both giving away your ages......but then, who am I to talk

rdjones · 30 Jan 2003, 18:25 (Ref:490874)

I am sorry - I think it look ugly, I much prefer the car from the last 2 years............

pirenzo · 30 Jan 2003, 23:30 (Ref:491137)

It appears from the picture that there are two intakes at the front on each side, one pair forward of the front hweels, one pair either side of the cockpit.

Is this actually the case, or is the forward most pair formed by where the bodywork has been wrapped around the upper suspension wishbones, and simply feed the larger pair round the sides of the cockpit?

C_g · 30 Jan 2003, 23:35 (Ref:491141)

The Bentley does look a lot like the Peugeot 905. It also has a much narrower and lower cockpit bubble, like the Peugeot and the XJR14.

The fenders are much rounder too - no sharp edges like on last year's car.

That front air management reminds me of the Ascari and Robinson R&S MkIIIc setups, but with the ultra-narrow footbox allowed for older GTPs, it looks very, very radical.

A question though: from the drawing the splitter almost looks like a wing section. Isn't that forbidden by the rules?

pirenzo · 30 Jan 2003, 23:48 (Ref:491150)

I haven't seen what ever pic you are looking at, but I have seen the one on mulsannescorner, and that doesn't show it but i remember this.

The rule say that wing* sections are not allowed forward of the front wheel centre line, or below and behind the rear wheel centreline.

It then defines a wing section, it being something like two curves of different radius joining to from a leading and trailing edge, so if the top section of the splitter is flat, then presumably, it's not a wing as the ACO define it

Rhino · 31 Jan 2003, 00:01 (Ref:491171)

Doesn't the front suspension have to be covered up as viewed from above and from the front. So as long as the top and bottom surfaces are mirrored it's ok. bit like F1 suspension arms

RacingManiac · 31 Jan 2003, 00:41 (Ref:491197)

Since the pic cannot be posted, I can't post here what I found neither, but somebody on other forum scanned the pic and posted elsewhere. The car looks like a totally new car now with little in common with the previous Bentley EXP Speed 8 other than the paintjob and wheels. Equally as radical as the front has to be the greenhouse treatment. It almost look as if the car has been turned into a LMP and then added a roof on it. The car's bodywork has been change to EXTREMELY low on all the section that's not used by wheels or green house. From the pic the rear bodywork does not even have those bellcrank bulges like the Audi does. The profile of the roof reminds me of the Lance Armstrong's timetrial helmet in tour de France. It has 2 section to the roof/spine of the car, one is at the height of the cockpit, one is at the height of the engine, and the transition is very abrupt looking....the rear wing treatment reminds me of the C60 Evo in 2002. And the front overhang looks even smaller now, and the rear seems to be yet more extended....

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
photos of BENTLEY Speed 8 2003 are here	benjabulle	Sportscar & GT Racing	3	2 Sep 2004 22:55
[LM24] Le Mans 2003 (For Team and Driver Details)	rdjones	24 Heures du Mans	823	13 Jun 2003 07:32
[LM24] Bentley and Audi at Le Mans 2003	egor	24 Heures du Mans	7	8 Jan 2003 21:27
Bentley a definite for 2003	iucrmh	Sportscar & GT Racing	3	8 Jan 2003 15:12
Bentley 2003 plans starts at Sebring!	pink69	North American Racing	4	2 May 2002 14:04