Aston Martin power for new Lola LMP1 Coupe

[elise787]

The thing is too heavy. Basically two Ford Duratec join together at the crank. There are much better engine opions out there.

[Wouter Melissen]

The thing is too heavy. Basically two Ford Duratec join together at the crank. There are much better engine opions out there.

How much does it weigh? Is the Lola chassis all that heavy?

[RacingManiac]

Well with the weight break they get for being gasoline, and restrictor break they get for using a "production based" engine, the weight is probably less of an issue. But it will have higher CofG being a 60degree V variety(common in most production car for packaging reason)....

[elise787]

The production v6 duratec is around 125KG. So, no matter how you slice it, joining two together to form a v12 will be heavy. They should take the race engines on the market like the cosworth or AER v8 turbo and rebadge it as AM.

[RacingManiac]

but that would not qualify it as a "production based" thing.....its all marketing at the end of the day....

[elise787]

the best marketing is by winning it all. heheh, just like the audis!!

[Turbo.Jenkens]

The production v6 duratec is around 125KG. So, no matter how you slice it, joining two together to form a v12 will be heavy.

The V6 is an aluminum block so the V12 can't be much less than 250 (if anybody knows the exact weight please post.) For comparison a GV5 weighs 159 kilos dry and an AER p32 about 115. To me it sounds like the bigger restrictor opening is over compensating a bit.

Does anybody have any Idea of what the diesels weigh?

[Wouter Melissen]

The V6 is an aluminum block so the V12 can't be much less than 250 (if anybody knows the exact weight please post.) For comparison a GV5 weighs 159 kilos dry and an AER p32 about 115. To me it sounds like the bigger restrictor opening is over compensating a bit.

Does anybody have any Idea of what the diesels weigh?

The engine will be fitted to the Lola chassis, which is designed side by side a virtually identical LMP2 car. The LMP2 cars have a 800/825 weight limit, so it is safe to say that with a regular engine the P1 chassis would have needed extra ballast to bring it up to regulation weight. As was mentioned earlier, the higher centre of gravity will most likely be the engine's biggest problem. With the low drag coupe body and the higher horsepower engine, it could very likely have the highest top speed of all the (petrol) cars.

[elise787]

The diesel of the R10 is rumored to be around 200kg (Audi R10 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Consider it's size it is not that bad. Packaging would be more of an issue. Audi go for the V12 route since it is the most favorable configuation under the ACO rule.

[Turbo.Jenkens]

I realize the Lola-Aston will weigh 900 kilos just like everyone else in LMP1. I just felt that a 47.2 mm restrictor verses a 45.5 mm (a gain of 30hp i've heard) will be overcompensation when the only detriment of running the production based V12 is a slightly higher center of gravity.


I'm just a race fan, and have spent zero time under the hood of an LMP so please let me know if my assumtions are wrong.

[RacingManiac]

The diesel of the R10 is rumored to be around 200kg (Audi R10 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Consider it's size it is not that bad. Packaging would be more of an issue. Audi go for the V12 route since it is the most favorable configuation under the ACO rule.

Not only favourable under the rule, it makes the most sense as the it is the most reliable configuration when taking into account of the crank bearing stresses, which is enormous for a diesel that makes more than 800lb-ft of torque....

Turbo.Jenkens,

Higher CofG of the engine is one, another is the fact that with other engine configuration, particularly the normally aspirated Judd, you can have more ballast at the point you'd like to achieve ideal weight distribution, while with a heavier engine you don't have that luxury, coupled with higher CofG(something Group C Jaguar have experienced when they switched to a dual overhead cam engine, most drivers complained about the car being notably harder to drive), it may make for a less than ideal handling car. However, as Wouter have noted, at Le Mans, straightline speed is key, and the power advantage might be enough to make the car competitive....

[Kitdy]

Not only favourable under the rule, it makes the most sense as the it is the most reliable configuration when taking into account of the crank bearing stresses, which is enormous for a diesel that makes more than 800lb-ft of torque....

Turbo.Jenkens,

Higher CofG of the engine is one, another is the fact that with other engine configuration, particularly the normally aspirated Judd, you can have more ballast at the point you'd like to achieve ideal weight distribution, while with a heavier engine you don't have that luxury, coupled with higher CofG(something Group C Jaguar have experienced when they switched to a dual overhead cam engine, most drivers complained about the car being notably harder to drive), it may make for a less than ideal handling car. However, as Wouter have noted, at Le Mans, straightline speed is key, and the power advantage might be enough to make the car competitive....

Great info there RacingManiac. The bit about the DOHC Jag engine being harder to drive is really interesting. I assume they switched from SOHC then? What car was this in? How the hell do you know this anyways?

I wouldn't have thought it would make any significant difference to tell the truth.

I have a question then. V8s are naturally balanced at 90 degrees, and Audi's R10 engine is a 90 degree V12. Why not just make it a V8? Is there a packaging problem or would the V8 develop less power or is it something else?

[Cyco]

A AM V12 road engine is about 300kgs fully dressed, I'm guessing the race version should shave approx 30-45kgs.
A Diesel Le Mans engine (eg Audi or Pug) as about the 250-280kg mark.
A 6 litre expressly developed race engine would be approx 170-200kgs
The old Pug (905) engine was around 158kgs, for a 3.5 litre V10

[RacingManiac]

Great info there RacingManiac. The bit about the DOHC Jag engine being harder to drive is really interesting. I assume they switched from SOHC then? What car was this in? How the hell do you know this anyways?

I wouldn't have thought it would make any significant difference to tell the truth.

I have a question then. V8s are naturally balanced at 90 degrees, and Audi's R10 engine is a 90 degree V12. Why not just make it a V8? Is there a packaging problem or would the V8 develop less power or is it something else?

I forgot where I read it, it was a Jag in the 80s, but the quote was something along the line of the car felt to have more movement(roll most likely) in the rear. Which makes sense as the Jag Group C V12s were of 60 degree V variety, with a DOHC head you'll get a huge lump of concentrated mass up high. The V angle at that time was primarily for the packaging of the massive ground effect tunnels......

The reason for R10's move to V12 was for engineering reason. They knew that with the V8 you are spreading the load over much less crank bearing area that they will fail, V12 was the only logical and realistic way reduce the crank bearing load to managable level. With diesel running much higher compression chamber pressure it makes sense for that reasoning....which is also the reason why they make so much more torque. Peugeot went further with their V12 by opening up the V angle to >100 degree(111 or something?), in search for lower CofG....

[Turbo.Jenkens]

Wow, I didn't realize an extra cam could affect the center of gravity enough to make a difference in handeling. Which jag has dohc? Was it something they only experimented with? All of the Group C jags listed on UPC are sohc.

Ultimatecarpage.com - Images, Specifications and Information

Makes you wonder why nobody is running a horizontally opposed engine. I suppose their inability to be a load barer is to much of a handicap.