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

    • A few small updates since the previous post and lessons. I decided to do a little interior light upgrade on the 110. I quite like the iilumo items, even if they're a bit of a premium over other brands. You'll also note the Stedi Fogs, that will go into the S15 fog lights as I needed to match the bulbs since I got the new ones earlier. I hope they fit as the body is quite a bit longer than your normal bulb.  Annoyingly, I managed to trip the fuse, which normally wouldn't be an issue until I located the fuse. I can't say I've ever come across this. I had lucked out that someone nearby had a spare, but oddly enough Toyota dealerships seem to keep this in stock. I ordered some to keep in my stash and as luck would have it, someone else nearby tripped the same fuse so I passed on the favour.  I also did a little service on the 110 ahead of some additional work coming up. It's been annoying that Goleby's stopped carrying this particular HKS filter for the 110, so now I need to keep them on order from Japan. I also took the opportunity to install a bash plate and number plate riser. The plate riser is such a cheap but nice fix to help really tidy up the car. I'm tempted to now also replace my headlights, on this car. Both items were from Project Aero.    I also needed to replace the rear tyres on the 110, and after trying to get it aligned learnt that I need to replace some bushes in the front end, so that's next.  Closing out this update with a nicer picture as always! 
    • Yeah mate, never miss it.
    • Any going to watch World Time Attack at SMSP this year?
    • Appreciate the correction on the "ground", that will make a huge difference to looking at this. That makes complete sense about AF70/AF71 which is what I had come down to being the issue, one of these. I'll have another look in the ignition wiring when I get a chance next week. I'll also make up a jumper wire for running that AF73 test.  ECU is fine, relay itself is fine, pump harness is fine and the pump itself is fine. I am going to upgrade the Walbro 255 anyway with a DW300 I have since I need to replace the fuel sender and I'm going to upgrade the FPR with my chasebays kit ready for new plenum/injectors/dbw, but I'll get this working first. That's why this is so frustrating. 
×
×
  • Create New...