View Poll Results: What basic design should we go for?

Voters
10. You may not vote on this poll
  • NA, V

    5 50.00%
  • NA, W

    0 0%
  • FI, V

    2 20.00%
  • FI, W

    3 30.00%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 226

Thread: UCP Supercar II: Engine Department.

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Quote Originally Posted by derekthetree
    In my opinion it has to be naturally aspirated all the way.

    the sound, the delivery, no turbo/super charger can match it

    FI = sledgehammer
    NA = scalpel
    A low pressure turbo designed for early boost would essentially give the feeling of a larger NA engine, with the added bonus of killing some of the exhaust noise and alot of heat so a less restrictive more acurately toned exhaust can be created.

    so in this case

    low pressure quick boost FI = Sharper better scalpel
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99
    VC idea 1: I am not sure what you mean I have considered what happens when the cam gears are further away or closer to the crankshaft. The main problem is how to maintain a set distance in three locations, from crank to first cam gear, between the two cam gears, and lastly between the last cam gear and the crank. As long as the length of chain is maintained in those areas then the timing isn't affected at all by being closer or farther from the crankshaft. I made a mistake I meant to say that two tension gears are needed per pair of cam gears. Basically extra slack is run between the crank and the first and last cam gear. When the system is set for high compression (i.e. the cam gears are close to the crank) then the tension gear have to take up all the slack. As the head moves up and the cam gears travel further from the crank then the tension gears take up less slack and the timing is unchanged.

    VC idea 2: Yes it sounds complicated but I have already simplified the total system somewhat. I plan on the top faces of the pistons being the cup that fits over the piston body which is directly connected to the connecting rod conventionaly. I have tried to minimise the volume of oil needed to move the piston face without reducing the working surface area too much. I have also been thinking of combining both systems because this will allow me to half the distance traveled by both systems and therefore make the total solution more realiable, efficient, safer, and possibly lighter. I am looking at an operating range stretching from 16:1 down to 9:1 compression ratio.

    Jediali: I do like your system. I hope that as you refine it you strive to make it as light as possible (judging from the pictures they look really heavy) Also wouldn't it be great if we could control intake and exhaust lift seperatly? and what about being able to control the lift of each intake valve in relation to each other (i.e. in one cylinder one of the two intake valves opens with medium lift but the other only lifts abit), this would help achieve the swirl we will need to get good combustion with lean fueling. I hope that you can get a good operating range (I was thinking from 0mm to something like 10-12mm). I can't wait to see what you get once you have refined it. I think you might want to consider where the air is going to go if you try filling the whole thing with oil to get max lift.
    vc1:
    http://www.autozine.org/technical_sc...gine_4.htm#SVC
    ok your probably right.
    vc2:
    what about piston shape as it cools/heats

    my idea could be lighter if we just used an air spring instead. yes valves are controlled by group of intake or exhaust.and a intake pair could be staggered to create swirl. The constant volume of low pressure air in the resevoir gets compressed to a small volume by the oil before (full lift) or by the cam lobe (more work done by engine)
    autozine.org

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99
    A low pressure turbo designed for early boost would essentially give the feeling of a larger NA engine, with the added bonus of killing some of the exhaust noise and alot of heat so a less restrictive more acurately toned exhaust can be created.

    so in this case

    low pressure quick boost FI = Sharper better scalpel
    you might also kill the vocal delight as well as the volume of the exhaust noise, however it would be useful to have a freere exhaust. The 335i doesnt sound "as good as" M3. Still with you though.
    autozine.org

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    VC1: thanks but I am still refining the idea...

    VC2: Yeah that has been one point that has been bugging me. I am assuming that with a good deal of oil flowing through the piston (at least in relation to what is normally sprayed on the back) that the piston temperature would be somewhat moderated. However I will need to design the cup to be fairly strong in it's own right (which actually was one of the benefits of lowering the volume of oil used). Also so far the designs I am thinking of all have guided joints that help positively locate the piston face (don't want it to start rotating in relation to the cylinder centre).

    Glad to hear that your system is capable

    Quote Originally Posted by Jediali
    you might also kill the vocal delight as well as the volume of the exhaust noise, however it would be useful to have a freere exhaust. The 335i doesnt sound "as good as" M3. Still with you though.
    Volume will be down due to the exhuast being colder and having less kinetic energy. But that doesn't mean that we can't tone the exhaust to those pleasing frequencies actually since the SoS will be lower it would be easier to tone the exhaust

    Hahaha yes the M3 does sound better but that is mostly because the M3 has a big V8 and a sports exhaust while the (330i twin turbo I6) which is the one I think you are referring to sounds more docile because it has a long exhaust designed to maximise the turbo response.

    Still the 330i doesn't sound half bad does it?
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99
    VC1: thanks but I am still refining the idea...

    VC2: Yeah that has been one point that has been bugging me. I am assuming that with a good deal of oil flowing through the piston (at least in relation to what is normally sprayed on the back) that the piston temperature would be somewhat moderated. However I will need to design the cup to be fairly strong in it's own right (which actually was one of the benefits of lowering the volume of oil used). Also so far the designs I am thinking of all have guided joints that help positively locate the piston face (don't want it to start rotating in relation to the cylinder centre).

    Glad to hear that your system is capable


    Volume will be down due to the exhuast being colder and having less kinetic energy. But that doesn't mean that we can't tone the exhaust to those pleasing frequencies actually since the SoS will be lower it would be easier to tone the exhaust

    Hahaha yes the M3 does sound better but that is mostly because the M3 has a big V8 and a sports exhaust while the (330i twin turbo I6) which is the one I think you are referring to sounds more docile because it has a long exhaust designed to maximise the turbo response.

    Still the 330i doesn't sound half bad does it?
    good to see your ideas progressing. I actually meant the 343 hp M3 i6 vs the LPT DI i6 in 335i
    autozine.org

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St Marys Western Sydney
    Posts
    20,953
    Regarding the engine layout, im a fan of the typical NA V12. The V12 especially for smoothness. Afterall, its a GT we're going after and IMO the packaging benefits of a W engine may be best suited for a more raunchy supercar.
    I am the Stig

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Quote Originally Posted by jediali
    good to see your ideas progressing. I actually meant the 343 hp M3 i6 vs the LPT DI i6 in 335i
    Ok in that case I would have to agree with you to.

    E46 M3s have one of the greatest engine sounds ever.

    But the 335i doesn't sound bad at all I might add.
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Quote Originally Posted by fpv_gtho
    Regarding the engine layout, im a fan of the typical NA V12. The V12 especially for smoothness. Afterall, its a GT we're going after and IMO the packaging benefits of a W engine may be best suited for a more raunchy supercar.
    May I ask why you think the compactness of a W configuration is suited to a more raunchy supercar?

    A W12 is almost just as balanced as a V12 so much so that you would only notice it if you had your hand on it...
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St Marys Western Sydney
    Posts
    20,953
    A GT can afford more liberties in its packaging, like a longer engine in this case if it means it'll evoke more passion in the buyers, or it'll simply sound better. A supercar however will be all about performance, so a W layout which can package the engine tighter, will be better appreciated and utilised. I know youve got your mind set on a mid engined GT here, in which case a W layout would ensure more luggage room and perhaps not influence the styling as much as had the car needed to accomodate a V engine.
    I am the Stig

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,200
    Quote Originally Posted by fpv_gtho
    A GT can afford more liberties in its packaging, like a longer engine in this case if it means it'll evoke more passion in the buyers, or it'll simply sound better. A supercar however will be all about performance, so a W layout which can package the engine tighter, will be better appreciated and utilised. I know youve got your mind set on a mid engined GT here, in which case a W layout would ensure more luggage room and perhaps not influence the styling as much as had the car needed to accomodate a V engine.

    Weird I am thinking almost exactly the opposit.

    Basically I don't think anyone would want a W engine in a full out supercar for track racing because of the potential cooling problems, slight increase in vibration, and thin connecting rods.

    In a supercar i wouldn't care much about luggage space. and I wouldn't mind having to drive it in a slightly cramped cabin. I would appreciate the smoother engine, lack of cooling problem and stronger connecting rods. As well as the fact that a V12 is slightly lower and would allow me to make the car lower aswell.

    I think that in a GT where confort is a priority and a certain amount of luggage space is needed that a W configuration suites the needs better...

    IMOA
    Power, whether measured as HP, PS, or KW is what accelerates cars and gets it up to top speed. Power also determines how far you take a wall when you hit it
    Engine torque is an illusion.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by hightower99
    Ok in that case I would have to agree with you to.

    E46 M3s have one of the greatest engine sounds ever.

    But the 335i doesn't sound bad at all I might add.
    thats why i used quatotation "not as good as"...who would turn down a 335i?
    autozine.org

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,323
    Quote Originally Posted by jediali
    thats why i used quatotation "not as good as"...who would turn down a 335i?
    for your info: BMW has an extensive "sound" department, where every engine is tuned to make the sound that the expected clientele likes to hear. (also the sound of closing doors and whatever sound is carefully thought about). So when you think that an M3 sounds better, the BMW people have done their job perfectly. I am sure that they make a 335i sound like an M3 if they wanted to.
    "I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,734
    Quote Originally Posted by henk4
    let's use the Radical V8 then, 2.6 litres...
    pff, that's just massive. lets strap a few turbos on this baby



    while FI does allow you to have a smaller capacity engine, the cooling requirements necessitate more room...
    How can men use sex to get what they want?
    Sex is what they want. - Frasier

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by henk4
    for your info: BMW has an extensive "sound" department, where every engine is tuned to make the sound that the expected clientele likes to hear. (also the sound of closing doors and whatever sound is carefully thought about). So when you think that an M3 sounds better, the BMW people have done their job perfectly. I am sure that they make a 335i sound like an M3 if they wanted to.
    Thats a good point. This team probably also consider NVH, cabin insulation and maybee some other things. Would you still think that an engines sound isnt simply an afterthought but an inherent property of the whole engine design. A turbochargerd engine limits the spectrum of the noise available (without artificial intervention) meaning that the sound may be good/bad (thats subjective) just not comparible...its what ive read in a few magazines/books so sorry if im wrong

    335i: noticable t/c exhaust note, despite Light boost - this isnt a bad noise!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDfINoRJeFs

    old M3(csl): listen to the shrill it makes near the rev limiter, and how the frequency tells of the engine speed far more noticably
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=546L60OPhY8

    im just exploring this for myself..
    autozine.org

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by derekthetree
    pff, that's just massive. lets strap a few turbos on this baby
    i say rotary. they are really compact!

    keeps matra happy
    autozine.org

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Mercedes-Benz C111 Research Car 1969-1979
    By Matt in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 10-21-2015, 10:35 PM
  2. The New UCP Supercar's Engine!
    By Egg Nog in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: 12-29-2005, 11:19 AM
  3. If you were going to build a mid engine supercar...
    By "Clevor" Angel in forum General Automotive
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 10-07-2005, 12:25 PM
  4. International Engine of the year 2005 is.....
    By lukeh in forum Car comparison
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 06-20-2005, 05:08 AM
  5. Help create the UCP Supercar!
    By Egg Nog in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 296
    Last Post: 04-07-2005, 08:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •