Building a dream

[marcos_eirik]

But not actually in a sanctioned race, because you'd not conform to the rules. Even if you did, they'd be laughing at you when your engine wore out after a few laps or you ran out of fuel not long after your engine should have gone pop.

What? The F1 engine would of course only be used for qualifying and/or sprint races. On a side note, the TAG-Porsche engine was the most reliable of the Turbo F1 engines in back it's days to.

But the air/water-cooled Flat 6 on the other hand would do the endurance stuff just fine, just like it did when it brought Porsche to victory at Le Mans seven times. (Once in the 935, twice in the 936 and four times in the 956) Speaking of Porsche's Turbocharged flat six, has there ever been a more successful engine used in these famous endurance events?

 

[sonza68]

While not as ambitious as some of the recent ideas, but my current project is a '68 Bronco build. I can't find a decent sized pic of something similar to my final vision, but this is fairly close, except the color with be Lotus Storm Titanium. It is currently a rolling frame and still has a long way to go. A replacement body tub is the next step, unfortunantly, those are a bit pricey.

https://pic.armedcats.net/2008/02/28/My66.jpg

 

[Meio]

What? The F1 engine would of course only be used for qualifying and/or sprint races. On a side note, the TAG-Porsche engine was the most reliable of the Turbo F1 engines in back it's days to.

I just find the whole, "It would kill tha deezilz" moronic. Over a race that might require pit stops diesel is a reasonable proposition. Running a qualifying engine isn't. So I don't think you'd find many worried drivers of diesel cars

But the air/water-cooled Flat 6 on the other hand would do the endurance stuff just fine, just like it did when it brought Porsche to victory at Le Mans seven times. (Once in the 935, twice in the 936 and four times in the 956) Speaking of Porsche's Turbocharged flat six, has there ever been a more successful engine used in these famous endurance events?

Not winning now is it... things move on.

 

[marcos_eirik]

I just find the whole, "It would kill tha deezilz" moronic. Over a race that might require pit stops diesel is a reasonable proposition. Running a qualifying engine isn't. So I don't think you'd find many worried drivers of diesel cars

So, you're misinterpreting this on purpose now? Do you honestly think it's completely unreasonable to run a qualification spec engine in qualifying[/i], like I said in the post you quoted? Anyway in a sprint race over an F1-ish distance with the boost turned slightly down I think you'd find the the diesel drivers would be rather worried. That is well within what that engine was made and used for, and it was rather good at it, after all it was good enough to give TAG McLaren two WCCs and three WDCs.

For long distance events, the 956-engined would be used, seven Le Mans victories with it should mean that it's more than capable to do it.

The only reason why diesels are so successful at Le Mans is because the rules favor them. Last years season in ALMS proved this very well, the Penske Porsches beat the Audi diesels in eight out of twelve races, and that is despite the Porsches being in a lower class. Apparently the RS Spyders were better than the R10 TDis in everything except straight line accelleration.

Not winning now is it... things move on.

Well, both yes and no. On one hand correct, but the only reason why the turbocharged flat six no longer powers the winning car is because it's not being used any more. The reason for this is that it was effectively restricted to death by the FIA for being too successful. However essentially the same engine, sans turbos, have done very well in the various GT3-models that has succeeded in various levels of international motorsports. So on the other hand, it's still winning races.

 

[Punisher Bass]

While not as ambitious as some of the recent ideas, but my current project is a '68 Bronco build. I can't find a decent sized pic of something similar to my final vision, but this is fairly close, except the color with be Lotus Storm Titanium. It is currently a rolling frame and still has a long way to go. A replacement body tub is the next step, unfortunantly, those are a bit pricey.

https://pic.armedcats.net/2008/02/28/My66.jpg

I don't think there's any way around that. Stacy David rebuilt one several years ago on Trucks, and off the top of my head he had to replace the striker panels, all the floor pans, cross members, rocker panels, front door jams, everything else forward of the firewall, the doors, and the roof. And he was working with a good example. If you need parts you can look up Jeff's Bronco Graveyard. And good luck.

EDIT: Link to his site covering the build. http://www.gearztv.com/?em2048=96290_-1__0_~0_-1_2_2008_0_0&content=projects&em2463=&ek=96290

 

[Meio]

^^^ And you end up with a car to annihilate all the diesels from motor racing.

This is what I responded to.

So, you're misinterpreting this on purpose now? Do you honestly think it's completely unreasonable to run a qualification spec engine in qualifying[/i], like I said in the post you quoted? Anyway in a sprint race over an F1-ish distance with the boost turned slightly down I think you'd find the the diesel drivers would be rather worried. That is well within what that engine was made and used for, and it was rather good at it, after all it was good enough to give TAG McLaren two WCCs and three WDCs.

No a qualifying engine would literally wear out. It's not just down to boost, why do you think they were referred to as qualifying engines, rather than simply having qualifying settings. It probably wouldn't even last a dozen laps without needing some attention.

The only reason why diesels are so successful at Le Mans is because the rules favor them. Last years season in ALMS proved this very well, the Penske Porsches beat the Audi diesels in eight out of twelve races, and that is despite the Porsches being in a lower class. Apparently the RS Spyders were better than the R10 TDis in everything except straight line accelleration.

What about fuel economy? The reason Diesels work so well in endurance racing despite a lack of history (and presumably development) is because they have to stop for fuel less often, that decent torque at lower revs counts for a lot.
Using your argument you might say that the ALMS rules favour the Porsches.

The reason for this is that it was effectively restricted to death by the FIA for being too successful.

Too fast to race? You have to remember that there are technologies and configurations that you will never see on a race track for that reason. Most racing technology is a compromise, playing the rules off against what is possible. Though dropping new rules on teams actually seems to make them go faster. Look at the rule defined clown cars in F1 that are faster than they have ever been.

 

[Punisher Bass]

Come on guys, this doesn't need to be a debate about which engine is best or F1 rules or whatever. If you want to do that take it to PM's. That's not what this thread is about.

 

[Meio]

Come on guys, this doesn't need to be a debate about which engine is best or F1 rules or whatever. If you want to do that take it to PM's. That's not what this thread is about.

OK, you're right.

I'll bring us back on topic by saying that in no way would my dream involve grenade engines, or anything that would need a strip and rebuild every couple of hundred miles.

 

[thedguy]

I wouldn't want a 200kg+ engine in something so light, a bike engine would be a much better option, but if you insist on the look, a 90kg bike derived V8 would be a better fit. In fact I think that the initial development on the RST-V8 was intended for the LCC Rocket. You'd want a light and reliable transmission to go with it such as a Quaife Ralt or a Hewland NMT.

I think he is going for 1) not to expensive, 2) something that mimics some of the original Indy racers of the era and 3) it's an American tradition to shove an engine half the weight of the car (or more) into it's cramped engine bay. The losers usually ran production based v8's and everyone else ran Offy's. Sometimes with Turbos strapped to them.

I find it funny that Europeans think F1 was so far ahead of US open wheel racing and that we stayed behind. US tracks had practically banned turbos by the time Renault even bothered to introduce their first turbo engine into F1. The turbos were banned partially to give the Cosworth DFV cars a chance at the 500.

I the Offy

PS. I don't mean to sound like an ass, but you're starting to come off as trying to tell people that what they want in a car is wrong and that it should be built the way you want.

 

[Meio]

I find it funny that Europeans think F1 was so far ahead of US open wheel racing and that we stayed behind. US tracks had practically banned turbos by the time Renault even bothered to introduce their first turbo engine into F1. The turbos were banned partially to give the Cosworth DFV cars a chance at the 500.[/B]

You work within the rules you have. F1 bums Ferrari and will seemingly legislate in order to keep Ferrari competitive.

Consider some European innovations and influences on American racing:

Banned 4x4 turbine cars in the 60s

Chassis design

Putting the engine in the back for balance

And a while load of other stuff. Some stuff came back the other way too.

 

[thedguy]

Actually the Lotus Turbine Car was built right after STP's "Silent Sam" nearly won Indy the year before.

Chassis design has pretty much stayed ahead of the US, I'm a bit surprised with aerodynamics though, considering the higher average speeds on US tracks.

We are getting way off-topic here.

 

[tigger]

You'd have a bit more than 350hp though

I know . I was thinking that maybe I could de-stroke a 305 or 327, and run a very lightweight rotating assembly. The whole engine, with fuel injection, aluminum heads, electric water pump, no fan, etc etc, would come in around 460lbs/207kg or so, if my fuzzy math is right. That's not a whole lot heavier than a turbo 4 banger, and it would sound like pure terror and hell fire!

Fatty!

Heh, I'm only about 5'10" and 160lbs. My reason for making it a little bigger would be so I could get in and out just a little easier, which would come in handy because a car like that would definitely get pulled over constantly. That doesn't make me want one any less though. As for actually building it: maybe in a few years. I did 3 semesters as an ME, was a member of KSU Formula SAE at that time, and I can still TIG weld like shit :lol: (I'm pretty handy with a MIG welder though.) I just need a garage and a stable income.

You mean like the Light Car Company Rocket?

Oh god, it burns the eyes! No, I'd build it myself, I want it to look like it came straight out of the pits in Daytona, 40 years ago.

I wouldn't want a 200kg+ engine in something so light, a bike engine would be a much better option, but if you insist on the look, a 90kg bike derived V8 would be a better fit.

That's great . A 'busa V8 would not be a better fit, because it doesn't look the part (at least not in my mind), and it doesn't sound the way I want. The weight is a moot point anyway. The engine will be sitting smack dab in the middle of the car, so its balance won't be upset. If anything, the extra weight will help make such a small, powerful car more predictable.

I think he is going for 1) not to expensive, 2) something that mimics some of the original Indy racers of the era and 3) it's an American tradition to shove an engine half the weight of the car (or more) into it's cramped engine bay. The losers usually ran production based v8's

Yes, yes and yes. And I don't mind being the loser; I can go down the street to NAPA and get parts :lol:. IF I was going to run a 4 cylinder, it would probably be normally aspirated for simplicity's sake. If I could really keep the weight down, I don't think a GM Quad 4 would be out of the question. They can even kind of be dressed up as Offys, so that would keep with the period look.

 

[thedguy]

I know . I was thinking that maybe I could de-stroke a 305 or 327, and run a very lightweight rotating assembly. The whole engine, with fuel injection, aluminum heads, electric water pump, no fan, etc etc, would come in around 460lbs/207kg or so, if my fuzzy math is right. That's not a whole lot heavier than a turbo 4 banger, and it would sound like pure terror and hell fire!

I'd have to dig through my specs, but I believe the shortest stroke crank "off the shelf" is a 3 inch stroke. Combine that with a 4" bore and you get a 302. Which is exactly what GM did with the factory efforts. I believe they used 283 cranks in 327 blocks.

There was a 4.3L version of the (mid 90's) LT v8's though, might be able to do something with that

Yes, yes and yes. And I don't mind being the loser; I can go down the street to NAPA and get parts :lol:. IF I was going to run a 4 cylinder, it would probably be normally aspirated for simplicity's sake. If I could really keep the weight down, I don't think a GM Quad 4 would be out of the question. They can even kind of be dressed up as Offys, so that would keep with the period look.

Quad 4
https://pic.armedcats.net/2008/02/29/klittelllg13.jpg

https://pic.armedcats.net/2008/02/29/klittelllg14.jpg

If you look closely you'll notice the guy actually had sheet metal covers that bolt to the factory valve covers. Do that to a 2.3L Duratec and you shave about 95-100lbs, and with a proper header, cams, and of course ITB's or webber side drafts.... 180wheel hp is not unheard of

This guy basically stole my idea mentioned before.
http://www.hotrod.com/featuredvehicles/113_0504_1932_ford_track_t/index.html

 

[vikiradTG2007]

What about fuel economy? The reason Diesels work so well in endurance racing despite a lack of history (and presumably development) is because they have to stop for fuel less often, that decent torque at lower revs counts for a lot.
Using your argument you might say that the ALMS rules favour the Porsches.

A diesel has at Le Mans a 80 l fuel tank, and the petrol cars have a 90 l one; but last year, some petrol cars stopped for fuel some 3 laps later than the R10s and the 908s (talking here about one of the Aston Martins in particular). And that had a bigger engine than some of the LMPs, so the economy point falls away; looks like it's a relative equality in terms of fuel consumption between the two types of engine.

 

[hansvonaxion]

Consider some European innovations and influences on American racing:

You forgot Australia.

Brabham was the world's largest manufacturer of customer open wheel racing cars in the 1960s, and had built more than 500 cars by 1970. During this period, teams using Brabham cars won championships in Formula Two and Formula Three and competed in the Indianapolis 500. In the 1970s and 1980s, Brabham introduced innovations such as the controversial but successful 'fan car', in-race refuelling, carbon brakes, and hydropneumatic suspension. The team won two more Formula One drivers' championships in the 1980s with Brazilian Nelson Piquet, and became the first to win a drivers' championship with a turbocharged car.

First guy to win a championship in a car he built himself.

Anyway, anyone know where I can get a decent sized image(s) of a Suzuki Cappuccino? I want to photochop one to demonstrate my dream build but having trouble getting pics.

 

[Meio]

This do?

http://www.terra2imports.ca/images/model-specific/cappuccino-wallpaper.jpg

 

[Punisher Bass]

Car: 1969 Chevy Chevelle SS convertable.

https://pic.armedcats.net/2008/03/06/69graychevelless3961.jpg

Another A body. Just like my other muscle cars, body off, stiffen the frame, all new suspension. I'd keep the 396 and have a blower put uptop, but it would all be kept tucked under the hood nice and neat. This one would be for cruising up and down the PCH while blasting Joe Satriani's Summer Song.

 

[Manimillion]

• E30 M3 w/ S50B32 Euro engine
• Golf GTi MK3 VR6 - Slammed euro mobile
• 1960's Buick Riviera Low rider, choptop'd etc..
• Sebastian Loeb's Citroen Xsara WRC

 

[The_Finn]

1987 Merkur XR4Ti with a full RS500 conversion

also i kind of want a ST165 celica alltrac that has been converted to ST185 Carlos Sainz Edition suspension and drivetrain with the Repsol WRC livery

 

[tigger]

Alright, I suppose this is more of a continuation of my Fairmont build. Here's the car, '78 Ford Fairmont sedan:

Right now it's equipped with a no-power 5.0L V8 and a C4 automatic. The engine will get some aluminum heads, AFR's if I can swing that. A decent cam, mild enough that it will start in the cold, but I want to get around 400hp.

The 3 speed failmatic is gone. Replacing it would be a Tremec 5 speed, which may have to be beefed up a little. I think a good clutch and a 400hp V8 would kill most '80s Tremecs :lol:.

The suspension would get one of Griggs Racing's GR40 kits, a complete overhaul including a panhard rod, lowering springs or coilovers, subframe connectors, urethane bushings, etc etc.

Now I'm definitely going to need some good brakes. I need to look into it more, but I think that the suspension hardware out of some '80s Lincolns is a bolt in to my Fairmont. If that's so, then I can easily get an 8.8in, limited slip rear axle, with disc brakes. I'd also take the Lincoln's front spindles and master cylinder, along with its forged aluminum lower control arms.

As for rolling stock, something purposeful like American Racing's AR767 wrapped in some stick BF Goodrichs will do nicely.

Finally, the outside of my car looks like hell. I mean, it could've been right at home in Mad Max's post-apocalyptic hell :lol:. So I'd smooth out the body work a little and paint it a nice deep red. Tint the windows and add a front lip spoiler, and I think it would look much better.