Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

all the old land speed record holders had massive engines. i know one was 18L and i think another was 22L, and they were only putting out much less than 1000hp. there was the sunbeam that was the 18L one. it was a v12 putting out about 350hp. that's the main one i remember.

i also remember seeing something on a show years and years ago about some sports car in the 20's i think it was that was had a supercharger that used to kick in like a turbo and because the tyres were so skinny and crappy it would about spin the car around because it nearly doubled the power in a very short period of time. it kicked in at somewhat high rpm so you were travelling at speed when it kicked in.

i also have somewhere some info on an old bugatti or bentley (can't remember which but it started with B and was from the early 1900's) and it had a straight 16 engine.

I'd be interested to see how fast it would go on the salt flats.

It's got enough torque to pull a stonehenge megolith up a mountain.

Anyway it must be mad to drive because of the lack of grip, brakes, and total mechanicalness of it...that and the insane torque.

I'd be interested to see how fast it would go on the salt flats.

It's got enough torque to pull a stonehenge megolith up a mountain.

Anyway it must be mad to drive because of the lack of grip, brakes, and total mechanicalness of it...that and the insane torque.

top speed is quoted at 168mph. very low revs and high weight would slow it down a bit. i really don't think the torque would be too much of an issue though. sure it only has small tyres, but heavy weight over small tyres can actually increase the grip. plus i doubt the engines are that responsive. if you were to simply stop the accelerator i doubt it would simply fry the tyres like on a modern high powered car. also the gearing would be pretty tall (once you take into account tyre size).

Unfortunately, the article is wrong. It is not a V12, it's actually a straight 12cylinder.

If you look at the picture, there are 12 exhausts on the side of the motor. If it was a V12, then there would be only 6 exhausts on the side of the motor facing the camera.

:D

Unfortunately, the article is wrong. It is not a V12, it's actually a straight 12cylinder.

If you look at the picture, there are 12 exhausts on the side of the motor. If it was a V12, then there would be only 6 exhausts on the side of the motor facing the camera.

:D

Nope, its def a V12. The old packard boat engines have 24 exhaust pipes, 12 on each side. They also run in the opposite direction to road car engines (same as aircraft engines) so that lumbering behelmoth must have a primary gearbox hidden in it somewhere as well. Awesome engineering.

Packard-Bentley-7_1789468i.jpg

awesome vid of the road test - http://www.telegraph...ed-Bentley.html

Nope, its def a V12. The old packard boat engines have 24 exhaust pipes, 12 on each side. They also run in the opposite direction to road car engines (same as aircraft engines) so that lumbering behelmoth must have a primary gearbox hidden in it somewhere as well. Awesome engineering.

Packard-Bentley-7_1789468i.jpg

awesome vid of the road test - http://www.telegraph...ed-Bentley.html

nah it says that have the bently speed 6 rear end in it, reversed. so they probably have the diff (or at least the internals) in upside down to get it to run the other way.

and yeah, it says in the story that it has 24 exhaust pipes. second line of the second paragraph.

top speed is quoted at 168mph. very low revs and high weight would slow it down a bit. i really don't think the torque would be too much of an issue though. sure it only has small tyres, but heavy weight over small tyres can actually increase the grip. plus i doubt the engines are that responsive. if you were to simply stop the accelerator i doubt it would simply fry the tyres like on a modern high powered car. also the gearing would be pretty tall (once you take into account tyre size).

I'd imagine the top speed is limited by the effective final drive ratio rather than power.

No that I'd feel especially safe doing 200 mph in that car LOL.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi, SteveL Thank you very much for your reply, you seem to be the only person on the net who has come up with a definitive answer for which I am grateful. The "Leak" was more by way of wet bubbles when the pedal was depressed hard by a buddy while trying to gey a decent pedal when bleeding the system having fitted the rebuilt BM50 back in the car, which now makes perfect sense. A bit of a shame having just rebuilt my BM50, I did not touch the proportioning valve side of things, the BM50 was leaking from the primary piston seal and fluid was running down the the Brake booster hence the need to rebuild, I had never noticed any fluid leaking from that hole previously it only started when I refitted it to the car. The brake lines in the photo are "Kunifer" which is a Copper/Nickel alloy brake pipe, but are only the ones I use to bench bleed Master cylinders, they are perfectly legal to use on vehicles here in the UK, however the lines on the car are PVF coated steel. Thanks again for clearing this up for me, a purchase of a new BMC appears to be on the cards, I have been looking at various options in case my BM50 was not repairable and have looked at the HFM BM57 which I understand is manufactured in Australia.  
    • Well the install is officially done. Filled with fluid and bled it today, but didn't get a chance to take it on a test drive. I'll throw some final pics of the lines and whatnot but you can definitely install a DMAX rack in an R33 with pretty minor mods. I think the only other thing I had to do that isn't documented here is grind a bit of the larger banjo fitting to get it to clear since the banjos are grouped much tighter on the DMAX rack. Also the dust boots from a R33 do not fit either fyi, so if you end up doing this install for whatever reason you'll need to grab those too. One caveat with buying the S15 dust boots however is that the clamps are too small to fit on the R33 inner tie rod since they're much thicker so keep the old clamps around. The boots also twist a bit when adjusting toe but it's not a big deal. No issues or leaks so far, steering feels good and it looks like there's a bit more lock now than I had before. Getting an alignment on Saturday so I'll see how it feels then but seems like it'll be good to go       
    • I don't get in here much anymore but I can help you with this.   The hole is a vent (air relief) for the brake proportioning valve, which is built into the master cylinder.    The bad news is that if brake fluid is leaking from that hole then it's getting past the proportioning valve seals.   The really bad news is that no spare parts are available for the proportioning valve either from Nissan or after market.     It's a bit of a PITA getting the proportioning valve out of the master cylinder body anyway but, fortunately, leaks from that area are rare in my experience. BTW, if those are copper (as such) brake lines you should get rid of them.    Bundy (steel) tube is a far better choice (and legal  in Australia - if that's where you are).
×
×
  • Create New...