F1 engine technology

[wannabe]

Cspray- You obviously know a lot about the engines of that era. The Chevy/Ilmor engine that won the 1986 Indy 500, I know that Ilmor kept very tight track on the motors because they did not want GM getting their hands on one. I think this is why GM turned to Lotus to design the ZR1 motor with the DOHC and reverse cooling flow. They got Mercury to build the motors in Stillwater being low production. GM didn't have anywhere they could do it then. I remember watching a dyno run at my buddy's shop in Troy and spinning the engine to 7200 rpm. Chevy wanted 500 HP from the motor. The first twin turbo V8's my buddy built were the test mules. The Doug Nash 4+3 trannys broke with that power. GM gave the twin turbo contract to Callaway who could not keep the first batch from breaking. Basic stuff he missed.

Wannabe

 

[ILMORdude]

Look up Sharkeys slideshow of our place. The lobby has some serious history sitting in it and he captured some goods images of them.

 

[C_Spray]

Well Actually Daytona Marines Scarab427 was at 600+ with a Turbo back in 66 and there has been 1800hp Streetcars with Turbos done by Monty Williams So In my opinion there´s not a substitute for cubic inches.

If they got 1800 hp out of 427 cubic inches, that's quite an accomplishment, but remember: These (209 ci) engines made 980 hp for over 3 hours and about 12 psi boost after only 3 months of track-testing, not 40 years of development.

Our projection for the 1995 season was between 1,100 and 1,200 hp at close to 11,000 rpm. The 1994 version was over-cammed. Horsepower was still rising dramatically with rpm, but the valve train would go unstable around 9900 rpm. The plan was to reduce the acceleration on the cam ramps to allow higher rpm. Most of the power would have come from that higher rpm. That's equivalent to 2,200 to 2,400 out of a 427. For 3 hours; not 7 seconds... :drool5:

Take a look at the intake ports in post #62. There's no way you can match the efficiency of those with a production-based engine.

 

[Anchored]

"Take a look at the intake ports in post #62. There's no way you can match the efficiency of those with a production-based engine."

This is the best I've found to date, SHO V6 Yamaha piece.


Jeff

 

[Uncle Dave]

"Take a look at the intake ports in post #62. There's no way you can match the efficiency of those with a production-based engine."

This is the best I've found to date, SHO V6 Yamaha piece.


Jeff

I had one of those in 93. Bought it brand new- awesome car.
I blew almost everything away at that time.

UD

 

[shifter]

(4) flat 12cyl Motori Moderni (Carlo Chitti's F1 engine) 2.9 ltr twin supercharged originally then twin turbo, 1250hp each. (4) 2-speed weismann boxes ,(4) shaft drives (Atzori)

1988/89 with Edardo Polli SDA. 144 mph 1st test.

10 speeds are easy. There are 6 speeds x2 in this boat.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3o5srCLGCuE

pat W:sifone:

 

[Powerabout]

be wary of big horsepower number along with a big rpm...
remember
(Torque x Engine speed) / 5,252 = Horsepower

one F1 team last year or so, set up a car for a top speed run on the salt.
I think it ony did about 250ish mph... rice power
A Nascar with a big carb will do that...grunt

so if you can make ( only) 300ftlbs of torque at 20,000rpm you have 1000hp

 

[TrippM]

be wary of big horsepower number along with a big rpm...
remember
(Torque x Engine speed) / 5,252 = Horsepower

one F1 team last year or so, set up a car for a top speed run on the salt.
I think it ony did about 250ish mph... rice power
A Nascar with a big carb will do that...grunt

so if you can make ( only) 300ftlbs of torque at 20,000rpm you have 1000hp

The speed of the open wheel car vs the nascar is more a result of aerodynamics and built in downforce than it is power. I remember when one of the motoring mags had a top speed shootout between a Porsche 956, a nascar Chevrolet and an Indy car. The Chevrolet had the highest top end because of the lack of downforce and reduced drag of the body even though it had a slight horsepower disadvantage.

 

[Powerabout]

The speed of the open wheel car vs the nascar is more a result of aerodynamics and built in downforce than it is power. I remember when one of the motoring mags had a top speed shootout between a Porsche 956, a nascar Chevrolet and an Indy car. The Chevrolet had the highest top end because of the lack of downforce and reduced drag of the body even though it had a slight horsepower disadvantage.

Yer right
It was Hotrod.

 

[Anchored]

(4) flat 12cyl Motori Moderni (Carlo Chitti's F1 engine) 2.9 ltr twin supercharged originally then twin turbo, 1250hp each. (4) 2-speed weismann boxes ,(4) shaft drives (Atzori)

1988/89 with Edardo Polli SDA. 144 mph 1st test.

10 speeds are easy. There are 6 speeds x2 in this boat.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3o5srCLGCuE

pat W:sifone:

I like this place.

 

[Anchored]

More

Jeff

 

[C_Spray]

be wary of big horsepower number along with a big rpm...
remember
(Torque x Engine speed) / 5,252 = Horsepower

one F1 team last year or so, set up a car for a top speed run on the salt.
I think it ony did about 250ish mph... rice power
A Nascar with a big carb will do that...grunt

so if you can make ( only) 300ftlbs of torque at 20,000rpm you have 1000hp

Not at all. Horsepower is horsepower when it comes to top speed. As others have noted, the downforce generated by an F1 car carries a big price in drag, plus exposed rotating tires are far, far worse than enclosed wheels. That's why no unlimited land speed record car has run with exposed tires. Even Craig Breedlove covered the rear wheels of his 1963 Spirit of America with spats.

By the way, Emerson Fittipaldi ran one of our cars up to 252 mph with the 1994 pushrod engine. On the track at Indy without a 3-mile run-up.

300 ft-lbs @ 20,000 rpm is closer to 1142.857 hp.

 

[Wobble]

Not at all. Horsepower is horsepower when it comes to top speed. As others have noted, the downforce generated by an F1 car carries a big price in drag, plus exposed rotating tires are far, far worse than enclosed wheels. That's why no unlimited land speed record car has run with exposed tires. Even Craig Breedlove covered the rear wheels of his 1963 Spirit of America with spats.

By the way, Emerson Fittipaldi ran one of our cars up to 252 mph with the 1994 pushrod engine. On the track at Indy without a 3-mile run-up.

300 ft-lbs @ 20,000 rpm is closer to 1142.857 hp.

18000 rpm is the current limit. Honda ran a car in legal F1 configuration in 2006

A Honda Formula One car, running with minimum downforce on a runway in the Mojave desert achieved a top speed of 415 km/h (258 mph) in 2006. According to Honda the car fully met the FIA Formula One regulations.[71] Even with the limitations on aerodynamics, at 160 km/h (99 mph) aerodynamically generated downforce is equal to the weight of the car, and the oft-repeated claim that Formula One cars create enough downforce to "drive on the ceiling", while possible in principle, has never been put to the test. Downforce of 2.5 times the car's weight can be achieved at full speed. The downforce means that the cars can achieve a lateral force with a magnitude of up to 3.5 times that of the force of gravity (3.5g) in cornering.[

 

[Powerabout]

I always wondered why the industry used HP and rpm when torque at an rpm means much more
I could transmit 1000hp through my pencil if I could turn it fast enough...
but that 1000hp wouldn't get a boat on the plane

 

[Anchored]

(4) flat 12cyl Motori Moderni (Carlo Chitti's F1 engine) 2.9 ltr twin supercharged originally then twin turbo, 1250hp each. (4) 2-speed weismann boxes ,(4) shaft drives (Atzori)

1988/89 with Edardo Polli SDA. 144 mph 1st test.

10 speeds are easy. There are 6 speeds x2 in this boat.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3o5srCLGCuE

pat W:sifone:

This probably the only instance where an F1 engine has made it into marine use.

Jeff

 

[Anchored]

A few Renault engines,

Jeff

 

[shifter]

When SDA was all running right she was awesome........It would be cool to see that set-up in a modern boat.

pat W:sifone:

 

[MikeyFIN]

The only one I have ever been to was the Indianapolis race in 2006 where all the Michelin clad cars protested and pulled into the pits at the end of the parade lap, leaving only 6 cars to run - HAHA. Wish I had that money back.

The sound of those things running is amazing but watching them slow down is UNREAL.

They would make a horrible boat application for any practical purpose. If they sit for more than about 20 seconds they often times end up disintegrating within a few minutes. They don't handle not being able to dissapate heat, that's why the radiators ducts are packed with dry ice, and fans are run over them if they have to sit for ANY length of time anywhere.

We have some guys running silhuette racers with BMW/Megatron F1- turbo era engines... they can idle if you increase the radiator size-...same goes for every racecar as they don´t carry fans.

As a Boat application It´s been done... the Alfa Romeo 3.0 flat-12 which became the Motori Moderni Subaru engine was used as Turbocharged in Class1 back in the day.
I have a lead of those Class1 engines unused still in crates.

OOPS seems Pat beat me to it

 

[MikeyFIN]

This probably the only instance where an F1 engine has made it into marine use.

Jeff

Nope..Ferrari Engines have also been used in the early 60´s

 

[MikeyFIN]

Take a look at the intake ports in post #62. There's no way you can match the efficiency of those with a production-based engine.

Well I´ve had a better flowing head in my hands and I´m not talking about ladies..

from a production based engine but they are multivalved...

Are we talking pushrods only or production engines in general ?

Enter Honda...