UCP Supercar II: Engine Department.

[Matra et Alpine]

PLease do mental sketches. To "throw out" with coments like "Not an SUV" shows a serious lack of consideration of how to achieve it. As I'd said, my roe is to facilitate and advise. As with all consultants, can't force the close-minded.

The V/W issues have ALREADY been raised.
Heat, space, fit, safety.

My role is not to "solve" it is to facilitate the teams thinking processes and advise on alternatives for consideration that are there or mentioned. This is painfully slow as you seem to block that and produce the immediate negative -- which is easy and the most common issue in teams as is exageration of those !

[Matra et Alpine]

Yeah I know the A610 was good but just because it was a relative succes doesn't make the idea of a 4 seat Mid engined GT supreme. Besides it was rear engined anyways. And it wasn't that much of a GT, not much luxury too it.

You're kidding right ?
It is an extrememly comfortable ride AND performance and handling when you need/want it.
Full leather interior and seats that are supportive and great opn long distances.
Have you seen one ?
It's BIGGEST failing as a 4-seat GT is the lack of luggage space.
You can either be 2/3 up and luggage space ( the rear seats fold individually to provide a strap down luggage space. ) But 4 up there is NO room as all of the front space is taken up with spare tyre, fuel tank and most of the ancillaries from the engine !!!!

[Matra et Alpine]

Where else can you mount ancillaries on a flat engine?

Apply some lateral thinking -- ( hint, read DeBono's books, he teaches how to be effective in lateral thinking approaches. It is recommended to all who are in R&D )

WHY are you mounting them "off the engine" ?)
Mount it above the diff for examples -- assuming a racing transmission layout with gearbox to the rear and diff mid mounted.

That took me 5 seconds to solve on reading your negativity.
You can achieve the same and improve on your own ideas and absorb others with positivity and reality.

[hightower99]

PLease do mental sketches. To "throw out" with coments like "Not an SUV" shows a serious lack of consideration of how to achieve it. As I'd said, my roe is to facilitate and advise. As with all consultants, can't force the close-minded.

Yes so why aren't you facilitating and advising me when I ask simple questions? I am not close minded I have switched ideas several times. Just because I don't want to go down the Flat engine route doesn't make me close.minded.

The V/W issues have ALREADY been raised.
Heat, space, fit, safety.

Umm they do a better job at all of that then anything else... Is there any specific problems that will cause excess heat or make it difficult to get rid of it? V and W configurations are more compact then flats and inlines, meaning they fit better too. Is there any specific reason as to why a V or W is not as safe as say a flat 6 under the rear seats.

It seems to me that for all your claiming that I am close-minded you are the one who is singularly pursueing a flat engine configuration, even when I give valid reasons why it isn't what suits this application best.

My role is not to "solve" it is to facilitate the teams thinking processes and advise on alternatives for consideration that are there or mentioned. This is painfully slow as you seem to block that and produce the immediate negative -- which is easy and the most common issue in teams as is exageration of those !

I haven't asked you to solve anything I asked you to present your obvious objection to V or W configuration engines in an orderly and presentable fashion so that I can see what you want solved. So far the only advantage a flat engine has is that it has a slightly lower CoG. That just simply isn't enough to warrent all the hard work that will be needed to solve the myriad of other problems a flat configuration has.

And I am sorry Matra but I didn't think it was a confortable car to be in (I haven't driven one I have only been a passenger in the front because my 6'10" frame doesn't fit in the back.)

Apply some lateral thinking -- ( hint, read DeBono's books, he teaches how to be effective in lateral thinking approaches. It is recommended to all who are in R&D )

WHY are you mounting them "off the engine" ?)
Mount it above the diff for examples -- assuming a racing transmission layout with gearbox to the rear and diff mid mounted.

That took me 5 seconds to solve on reading your negativity.
You can achieve the same and improve on your own ideas and absorb others with positivity and reality.

Yes but one of the first things to think about is "Is this worth it?"

Wow Matra I am impressed you have solved the problem so easily

Just a few problems you have at least an Alternator, A power steering pump (which could be electric), Coolant pump (could also be electric), and AC pump (most likely not electric) You can't mount all of that in a small place. The Alternator needs to have a good deal of mechanical energy put into it and the best place for that is belt drive off the crank. Yes you could mount it somewhere else on the drivetrain but you need the speed of the crank (otherwise the pulley/gear ratio gets too high) the AC pump needs alot of mechanical power too but it can be mounted on a slower speed part of the drivetrain so yes for the AC pump the differential would work. If you make Power steering and Coolant pump electric then the alternator has to be larger.


I had another idea that might be interesting: since TEGs normally have ceramic plating on both sides you could in theory line the cylinders with them. This way you could use some of the heat that is lost to the cooling system to generate electricity. If enough could be made it could replace the alternator all together and drive all other ancillaries (except maybe the AC pump). It would also reduce the thermal capacity needed in the cooling system, meaning a smaller lighter cooling system.

[Matra et Alpine]

Yes so why aren't you facilitating and advising me when I ask simple questions?

I am.
But more so tryign to advise when you are closing down ideas without demonstrable consideration.
This isnt' about the falt but I'm using it as the example.
I can think of major issues too, but are it's BENEFITS being considered as part of a whole solution (sic)?

Just because I don't want to go down the Flat engine route doesn't make me close.minded.

It's an approach not a solution

Umm they do a better job at all of that then anything else

BS. They are NOT perfect in all situations. See ? an example of that "closed" approach to thinking

Is there any specific problems that will cause excess heat or make it difficult to get rid of it? V and W configurations are more compact then flats and inlines, meaning they fit better too.

Yes, you ahve to take the exhausts from the front banks.
If you want FI then you also have a huge heat radiator to find in that front bank space without compromising in and out gas flows.
You are sticking to that "compact" rather than "fit in" mindset.
Come on ht, remove that handrbake from your thoughts

Is there any specific reason as to why a V or W is not as safe as say a flat 6 under the rear seats.

Yes.
If you look at what a car designer does withthe engine and transmission is to divert it's energy on impact. So they are designed to go DOWN on meeting the front bulkhead. Having an engine hit square on will certainly impinge on the compartment. You can't beat the laws of physics. A perfect example of when "square" is worse then rectangular. A flat can easily absorb energy as it pushes down and out. OK ? Another 5 second answer. Seriously , ht, DeBono's techniques enables everyone to evaluate and explore. It's not hard, upwards of 150+ engineers who have worked for me over the years have ebenefitted from it and I did when I was first introduced to it.

It seems to me that for all your claiming that I am close-minded you are the one who is singularly pursueing a flat engine configuration, even when I give valid reasons why it isn't what suits this application best.

You don't give valid reasons tho' You're giving knee-jerk reasons.
And as I'd indicated before, the BIGGEST lesson I learned in leadership over the years was the "archibald technique". I know the 3 best things about the V/W and I know the 3 best things about flat so then I can reasonbaly rely on my thoughts to ebvaluate the negatives.
So, I recommend you think of the reasons WHY it suits this application before proceeding.
[quote]I haven't asked you to solve anything I asked you to present your obvious objection to V or W configuration engines in an orderly and presentable fashion so that I can see what you want solved.[/;quote]
As they had already been posted then I assumed you now wanted more from me and that involved detailed design work.

So far the only advantage a flat engine has is that it has a slightly lower CoG.

THe only advantage you are aware of. Please get the English right.
Have you solved how you are going to ensure a rear end does not simply push the engine in and through the bulkhead ? Remember the engine block won't deform so you have to make the bulkhead stronger. There is a reasons the Urraco ended up too heavy. This route was undertaken by Lambo .. adding strenght and weight to resolve early design choices.

That just simply isn't enough to warrent all the hard work that will be needed to solve the myriad of other problems a flat configuration has.

Myriad ? List them ? Protection - already shown not an issue. Cooling - access to cool air under the car. Exhaust routing - both banks don't share space. Inlet space - injection and can easily direct air. Space - only the block needs to go under the rear set and the drivetrain behind. Ancillaries - generate electricity and use it for all ( helps make weight distribution adjustable )

And I am sorry Matra but I didn't think it was a confortable car to be in (I haven't driven one I have only been a passenger in the front because my 6'10" frame doesn't fit in the back.)

It didn't ? Not a surprise at 6'10" ---- wow, explains the nickname
OK, so I suggest you dont' use your experience to design cars unless you have agreed with the employer what range of heights it's targetted at. I think you'll be hard-pressed to find ANY car comfortable - thus making the negativity irrelevant
Height isn't a problem in the back, width is tho' !! Seriosuly found it UNcomfortable in the front ? Wow. Was it standard seats ? The leather or not. Trying to think what differences there are as I've had 6'3 and 18 stone guys and once in were very comfortable even whilst getting chucked about Not pretty to watch anyone that size try to get in to such a low slung car tho

Wow Matra I am impressed you have solved the problem so easily

which wasn't the point.
YOU could solve as quickly if you can approach whilst thinking HOW rather than "why not"

Just a few problems you have at least an Alternator, A power steering pump (which could be electric), Coolant pump (could also be electric), and AC pump (most likely not electric)

Cough .... A610, electric aircon pump
Nearly every new car in Europe is now popping electric power steering in - and cheaply. I'm looking into reconstruction of interior on daughters kit cars to fit Corsa one with variable sensitivity to cope with rallying and cruising
[quote]You can't mount all of that in a small place.{/quote]
So whjy not think "it doesn't need to"

The Alternator needs to have a good deal of mechanical energy put into it and the best place for that is belt drive off the crank. Yes you could mount it somewhere else on the drivetrain but you need the speed of the crank (otherwise the pulley/gear ratio gets too high) the AC pump needs alot of mechanical power too but it can be mounted on a slower speed part of the drivetrain so yes for the AC pump the differential would work. If you make Power steering and Coolant pump electric then the alternator has to be larger.

You dont' double the size of an alaternator to double it's power.
So many wrong assumptions are driving the decisions.
For example, if wanting to be "clever" then consider driving the "alternator" DIRECTLY as in motorbikes, nothing external, inline ( or how about part of clutch ? )

I had another idea that might be interesting: since TEGs normally have ceramic plating on both sides you could in theory line the cylinders with them. This way you could use some of the heat that is lost to the cooling system to generate electricity. If enough could be made it could replace the alternator all together and drive all other ancillaries (except maybe the AC pump). It would also reduce the thermal capacity needed in the cooling system, meaning a smaller lighter cooling system.

Will make cold weather starting very difficult as you won't get any energy till you get them hot enough.
You keep repeating the AC pump -- please stop

Best "nearly there" solution is to not have an alternator and use the Photovoltaic TEG that MIT developed.
Seebeck effect is tiny and requires a cold component too as it uses temperature differential.

[Coventrysucks]

Since when did 5 against 5 give an obvious preference to one or the other?

So how did you conclude that forced induction "won" then, if there is no "obvious preference"?

Why are you continuing to suggest a "W" configuration in light of the fact that the vote is 7 - 3 against?

[derekthetree]

I'm fed up of hightower imposing his views on this engine design.

We argue to have a poll on what engine type to have.

So then one is picked.. and then ignored.

Why bother even fighting it.

please change the thread title to Hightower's Supercar II: Turbocharged W configuration Propulsion Department.

[hightower99]

Derek: No single total configuration was decided on. The poll was to see if people wanted a FI or NA engine firstly they tied and so I tried to get the best of both worlds which is developing an FI system that just makes the engine feel like a bigger NA engine.

Secondly it was to see if people wanted a V or W configuration but that was also in a time when most assumed a North-South mid mounted engine. I then asked what if the engine was mounted transversly. This changes the question as actual length of the engine becomes more important. Why am I not allowed to suggest a W8? Especially if everyone else is allowed to suggest whatever they like and run down my ideas without supporting there own?

Matra: Are you pushing for a flat configuation or not? If you truly want to have it and you really think it is the best solution then I will work on a total solution that uses a flat engine. If not then I would like to focus on other ideas and try to make total solutions for them to see how well they "Fit".

I have told you that for a V6 and W8 configuration that I do have a way to route front bank exhaust with a turbo without any ill effect to flow and without making it harder to get rid of the heat.

So you are telling me that I shouldn't consider a V or W configuration because it is impossible to get it to react properly in the event of a collision? I thought you said you are trying to facilitate my thinking? Why are you not allowing me to create total solutions with anything other than a flat configuration? I have been trying to create total solutions for a few configurations and see how they stack up against each other but I am finding that excedingly difficult because I am not allowed to think independently from what or other say... This means that we are still stuck with no idea of what the finished engine will be and no real options to choose from.

Please Matra help me by facilitating total solutions instead of arguing over the configurations.

Do you really think that I just personally have something against flat engines and that I didn't think at all about them or even wrote the idea of quickly after only brief thought? You would be wrong if you believe any of that.

Actually I find a great many cars comfortable (as long as I sit in the front) But I don't think that the A610 I was in had original seats. It felt like I was ontop of the seat and there wasn't much leg or head room. And yes watching me getting into anything that low slung is hilarious at best. However I don't think that you should assume that I will want the lowest setting in the car to fit me.

Yes it had an electric AC pump but it was a tiny system in general and IIRC it wasn't the most reliable part in the car. For a larger GT you will need to consider a larger AC pump. I think that driving it on some part of the drivetrain is best (meaning that it can be almost where ever we want it).

Driving the alternator directly may not be possible as they do need a relatively high speed (hence why they are directly mounted on bike engines). Yes I know yyou don't need to double the alternator size to double the power but to get more power out reliably you need to make it larger (whether it is longer on is designed with a larger radius is another question).

About the TEG idea. Notice your first comment is knee-jerk reaction without thinking much?

During cold start up you use the power stored in the battery to start the car. Having the entire cylinder walls lined with TEGs means that from the very first combustion you will see some power (and it will be good because of the increased temperature difference). Also it will keep the heat in the cylinders (TEGS are lined with ceramic) meaning the cylinder temperature will stabilise more quickly then in a normal engine where the huge mass of cold metal and coolant fluids have to be heated up at the same time. A downside I do see is with the lubrication system. Maybe if electronic intercoolers (Using TECs) where used the heat pumped out could be used to preheat a pressurized resservior (SP?) of oil (i.e. before the engine is turned over).

[Matra et Alpine]

[quote=hightower99;669604]Matra: Are you pushing for a flat configuation or not?[Qipte]
Nop and made it clear to you WHY it was being discussed further already.
Not very impressive

If not then I would like to focus on other ideas and try to make total solutions for them to see how well they "Fit".

THere we go with the "I"
You clearly want to buidl what you want and "Know" rather than be challenged.
Fine, my role is consultant.
I have advised.
Chose your engine layout as you wish.

I have told you that for a V6 and W8 configuration that I do have a way to route front bank exhaust with a turbo without any ill effect to flow and without making it harder to get rid of the heat.

You've said a lot about what "I have" and no evidence of it.
SHow it so others can provide inputs on it's validity and the issues you undoubtedly havent' seen - cos that's the way development IS.

So you are telling me that I shouldn't consider a V or W configuration because it is impossible to get it to react properly in the event of a collision?

No I suggested you needed to consider the safety.
Youre respones confirms for me what I had a feeling on and that was that you didn't have it as a consideration and didn't understand the mechanical issues of impact absorption.
The input was give, you chose whether to benefit or not.

I thought you said you are trying to facilitate my thinking?

I am, but you cannot faciliate moving the mountain to mohammed not matter how well you try

Why are you not allowing me to create total solutions with anything other than a flat configuration?

and WHERE was that said ?
First lesson of teamwork do not twist the truth
[quote]I am not allowed to think independently from what or other say[q/uote]
You ar emeant to work in a team.
The idea drakkie had was of a UCP car ... not a ht engine fitted to a car bodged around it to make up for difficiencies in packaging.
Think about the approach you just described and ask why you are a team of one ?

Please Matra help me by facilitating total solutions instead of arguing over the configurations

erm ... I have been.
Been trying to get you taking other inputs on board and ebaluiating them.
As ALREADY explaiend the flat is only being used as one example. I could have chosen fmor many that others have presented and you ignored
"Facilitation" is not about making it easier for you to do what you wanted at the start

Do you really think that I just personally have something against flat engines and that I didn't think at all about them or even wrote the idea of quickly after only brief thought? You would be wrong if you believe any of that.

REPEAT -- it has nothgin to do with flat.
I am trying to facilitate team work and frankly your "I" attitude continues to surface and very visibly in seeing this as a "flat engine" thing despite having said earlier it wasn't

Yes it had an electric AC pump but it was a tiny system in general

Right I Need to call you on thie one.
Send me a pic of this A610 you were in.
The A610 aircon pump is fecking huge. I think you've got cars mixed up and especially confused as I don't know of any after market seats in any A610 other htan a race one in Germany.

I think that driving it on some part of the drivetrain is best (meaning that it can be almost where ever we want it).

Well it can't be after the clutch !!!!!
The A610 aircon can cool the car with 4 adults almost immedately even i nthe hottest days in Spain - I know because the crew told me they sometimes had the camera and sound man in the back and the actors in the front !!!
[quote]Driving the alternator directly may not be possible as they do need a relatively high speed/quote]

No electric generators need high rate of field crossings. You coudl easily generate from 1000 rpm.
Can you give your engineering background on electric generators please ?

(hence why they are directly mounted on bike engines).

Oh dear my confidence is now a zero.
Bike engines idle at the smae speed as car engines and alternators have to supply power for lights and running then.

Yes I know yyou don't need to double the alternator size to double the power but to get more power out reliably you need to make it larger (whether it is longer on is designed with a larger radius is another question).

No... let me "advise" ... you can use materials to make alternators MUCH smaller. eg the high output rally versiosn are the same size as the "stock" and are SMALLER.
Let me facilitate again that you need to take inputs fomr as many places as possible as you know little about thingfs you are making decisions on. THings that are widely known and researchable on the 'net.

About the TEG idea. Notice your first comment is knee-jerk reaction without thinking much?

Wrong. Was thought through .... unlike the following ....

During cold start up you use the power stored in the battery to start the car. Having the entire cylinder walls lined with TEGs means that from the very first combustion you will see some power (and it will be good because of the increased temperature difference). Also it will keep the heat in the cylinders (TEGS are lined with ceramic) meaning the cylinder temperature will stabilise more quickly then in a normal engine where the huge mass of cold metal and coolant fluids have to be heated up at the same time. A downside I do see is with the lubrication system. Maybe if electronic intercoolers (Using TECs) where used the heat pumped out could be used to preheat a pressurized resservior (SP?) of oil (i.e. before the engine is turned over).

If you have isolated the cylinfer that much then you are going to get pre-ignition of the fuel and doubly so if you were to use forced induction.
Have you tried starting a car in cold climates ? It can take a LOT of cranking and during that you are NOT getting ignition and NOT generating the heat you are looking to use.
Sorry I HAD --- remember when I told you about the three good before the bad ... I had done that. It's called EXPERIENCE
I've advised as much as my contract with the engine department allows. I'm off to where folks WANT facilitaion and constructive input and willing and able to think

[hightower99]

Nop and made it clear to you WHY it was being discussed further already.
Not very impressive

Fine so you have pushed because you where making a point fine.

THere we go with the "I"
You clearly want to buidl what you want and "Know" rather than be challenged.
Fine, my role is consultant.
I have advised.
Chose your engine layout as you wish.

This whole discussion has not been driven by what I want at all. I have tried to find out what engine configurations people wanted in the car because I wanted to create total solutions using several different configurations one of the reasons I challenged Flat design was because if nobody stood up for it then they didn't want it. As part of the engine department my job is to choose from what works best as well as what the members of UCP want.

You've said a lot about what "I have" and no evidence of it.
SHow it so others can provide inputs on it's validity and the issues you undoubtedly havent' seen - cos that's the way development IS.

My idea was that since each bank would power one turbo then the exhaust is reduced to a single pipe from each bank. The single pipe from the front bank can come straight from the turbine outlet and around the short side of the motor (if it was transversly mounted the long end is the one attached to the transmission).

No I suggested you needed to consider the safety.
Youre respones confirms for me what I had a feeling on and that was that you didn't have it as a consideration and didn't understand the mechanical issues of impact absorption.
The input was give, you chose whether to benefit or not.

Safety is an integral part of the engine design.

and WHERE was that said ?
First lesson of teamwork do not twist the truth

Well lets see as I was starting to have a discussion about V and W engines you came in with Flat and it has been about that since.

You ar emeant to work in a team.
The idea drakkie had was of a UCP car ... not a ht engine fitted to a car bodged around it to make up for difficiencies in packaging.
Think about the approach you just described and ask why you are a team of one ?

I know that this is supposed to be a team effort but so far nobody else has stayed at the plate. I am ready and willing to work in a team and I enjoy doing so. I also know that UCP members wishes is what should be the main force driving the design and thats what I want too but nobody has brought anything to the table.

erm ... I have been.
Been trying to get you taking other inputs on board and ebaluiating them.
As ALREADY explaiend the flat is only being used as one example. I could have chosen fmor many that others have presented and you ignored
"Facilitation" is not about making it easier for you to do what you wanted at the start.

I have said time and again that I am open. Nobody has brought a serious idea to the table. I am not talking about people who have said "make it a flat" or "make it a Vee" those are just opinions on a path that leads to a solution.

REPEAT -- it has nothgin to do with flat.
I am trying to facilitate team work and frankly your "I" attitude continues to surface and very visibly in seeing this as a "flat engine" thing despite having said earlier it wasn't

Fine I understand BTW why is it wrong to referr to myself with "I"? When I say "I" I mean my own actions and thoughts. I don't mean that I am the engine design department period and I decide everything.

Right I Need to call you on thie one.
Send me a pic of this A610 you were in.
The A610 aircon pump is fecking huge. I think you've got cars mixed up and especially confused as I don't know of any after market seats in any A610 other htan a race one in Germany.

I don't have any pictures as it was a one-time drive and I didn't think it was worth taking a picture of (not that I had a camera with me anyways). You know all of the ca. 700 A610s? You don't think that someone tried to put aftermarket seats in one? Are we talking about the same thing? I am talking about the AC compressor which I thought was driven by the ancillary belt.

Well it can't be after the clutch !!!!!
The A610 aircon can cool the car with 4 adults almost immedately even i nthe hottest days in Spain - I know because the crew told me they sometimes had the camera and sound man in the back and the actors in the front !!!

Really wow I am impressed

No electric generators need high rate of field crossings. You coudl easily generate from 1000 rpm.

Yes you can generate power but you need alot to run an entire car with lights, ICE (thats In Car Entertainment), and other vital electronics. Thats why most alternators have a 1:2 ratio pulley on them so that even at a idle speed of 600 rpm they can make power. Bike engines tend to idle at a higher speed too.

Oh dear my confidence is now a zero.
Bike engines idle at the smae speed as car engines and alternators have to supply power for lights and running then.

Motorcycle engines tend to idle faster than car engines. Also bikes normally have to support alot less electronics than your average car does. And normally bikes don't stand still for as long as cars normally do idling. When you are sitting in traffic in your car, almost everyone on a bike is trying to get through between the cars.

No... let me "advise" ... you can use materials to make alternators MUCH smaller. eg the high output rally versiosn are the same size as the "stock" and are SMALLER.
Let me facilitate again that you need to take inputs fomr as many places as possible as you know little about thingfs you are making decisions on. THings that are widely known and researchable on the 'net.

I haven't said that I am a genius or that I know everything. Yes you could use materials or you could change the design on the alternator alltogether. I didn't say having a bigger alternator was a problem anyways I said it was something to consider.

If you have isolated the cylinfer that much then you are going to get pre-ignition of the fuel and doubly so if you were to use forced induction.

That would be a good thing seeing as it is going to run on compression ignition. And don't you worry your head about the timing either because the direct injection will handle that too. Maybe you didn't pay attention to the part where I mentioned that?

Have you tried starting a car in cold climates ? It can take a LOT of cranking and during that you are NOT getting ignition and NOT generating the heat you are looking to use.

Yes indeed I have but I suggest you are thinking "spark ignition"

Sorry I HAD --- remember when I told you about the three good before the bad ... I had done that. It's called EXPERIENCE
I've advised as much as my contract with the engine department allows. I'm off to where folks WANT facilitaion and constructive input and willing and able to think

So what where the 3 good things you thought of about this system exactly?

I will give you time to think about that now.

[Matra et Alpine]

Stopped reading after the first copule of points.

You need to review your interactions on the forums, ht.

Wonder WHY you're the only one left ?

Just look at what you said about you choosing which design from those offered. That is a million miles away from teamwork. Leaders ONLY make the decisions when there are no clear differences between solutions and one has to be chosen.

[Ferrer]

Stopped reading after the first copule of points.

You need to review your interactions on the forums, ht.

Wonder WHY you're the only one left ?

Just look at what you said about you choosing which design from those offered. That is a million miles away from teamwork. Leaders ONLY make the decisions when there are no clear differences between solutions and one has to be chosen.

It makes me want to leave too...

In fact I'm just about to.

[hightower99]

I for one am not going to give up so easily.

Matra: it was pretty much just Jediali and me in the engine department (I haven't seen much of P4) Jediali quit because he disliked the communication.

But lets start on a new page shall we:

Right

Totally blank now.

Car design has agreed on making a mid-engined 4 seater GT.

Anyone have any suggestions as to what sort of engine we should design and how it should be mounted in the car (North-South for example or maybe transverse?).

[Ferrer]

I'd say tranverse since it will give more space for the occupants as well as a smaller car, since a mid-engined 4 seater means it'll have to be pretty big. As far as layout and aspiration is concerned I don't have any preferences but the engine should be as compact as possible as well as having a good response to the throttle with low down torque (not peaky). That's what product planning has in mind so far.

[Waugh-terfall]

I say use the Audi R8's V8, that's pretty compact.