Jump to content
SAU Community

Torque of an F1 engine

Smurf

By Smurf,
in General Automotive Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Rayage Contributor

Rayage

Posted
Posted
I was watching the Indy cars for a little bit before work last Sunday, and they say they were running Turbo 2.4ltr V8's??? Weird combo, altho i understand that higher revving engines seem to have less displacement, but i thought it was interesting to see a small capacity V8 with a Turbo and they said around 700hp :D

I like it. Compact'ish V8 with a blower, think that would be cool to see in a production car. Altho it seems torque may be a problem

So is Indy the CART thing people are talking about?

Are the F1's going to go Turbo again? Oh yeah, the Indy engines were running STUPID boost, i must have heard the commentator wrong, 30-40 psi??? Must have heard wrong...

cheers.

2.65L V8 Turbo actually and they run ~40 inches (of mercury) of boost (not PSI), which I'm told is roughly 5 PSI of boost.

As for Indy and CART, there's IRL and there's the Champ Car world series. Two different series with different cars and engine rules. IRL run strictly on oval courses, tho. There's a bit of history between IRL and Champ Car.. all I know is that CART was formed as a breakaway series from IRL cos they couldn't agree on some shit.

Duncan Grand Master

Duncan

Posted
Posted

lol other way around. CART are the original series but the owner of Indianapolis would not come to an agreement to race there. The bloke who owns Indy then set up a series which races there and elsewhere on Oval tracks. They have added 2 circuit courses this year as well.

Looks like CART won't make it, the number of teams moving to Indy from CART has really picked up in the last year or 2, CART was bankrupt and sold 12 months ago but may be OK again now.

I'm pretty sure ~40 inches of mercury is > 5psi, isn't it?

Guest RedLineGTR

Guest RedLineGTR

Posted
Posted
im pretty sure that turbo's arnt going to ever be allowed in F1. They have rules against the forceful manipulation of air.

I remember reading about the F1 fan car, which basically used a gaint fan to suck up air from the ground (thus keeping it down), that model was scraped due to the rule that was put in.

faq1.jpg

ah interesting :P

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Kinkstaah
      Blue slip

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • GTSBoy
      Best place to order Authetic R32 Parts in Japan

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • GTSBoy
      Ethanol Content Sensor - Always at 11%?

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • GTSBoy
      Blue slip

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
    • GTSBoy
      Blue slip

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Yes they do. For some maybe. But for those used the most by abusers, ie Skylines, the numbers are known. The stock eyebrow height for R32/3 Skylines is about 365/375mm or thereabouts. The minimum such heights are recorded in adjacent columns in the database.
×
×
  • Create New...