racingdynamcs

Theoretically Z?s engine can produce 1076.25RWHP!!!

I tell you how and don?t laugh! =)

My friend?s 2.0L 4cyl can put out 615RWHP
And the Z has a 3.5L 6cyl, which is aluminum block that is sleeved with extra strength iron.

If you set it up as a ratio then you get?(615rwhp) x (3.5L) / (2.0L) = (x RWHP for 3.5L engine of same power ratio.) = 1076.25rwhp

I?m not sure on the math and all but I was just playing around?what do guys think?
Don?t flame it?

FLY BY Z

Haha. You just proved that there is NO REPLACEMENT FOR DISPLACEMENT!!

Given the same technoloy, FI, etc. the motor that starts the biggest finishes the biggest.

collinsc

What you just proved there is that you know what fractions and ratios are. Congrats.

racingdynamcs

collinsc - dont flame the thread kid

Nocturnal

iTrader: (2)

Yea, thats true, normally the engine that start the biggest finish the biggest...but then the ratio cannot and will not ever linear.

I mean think of it being an streetable N/A motor.

S2000 (240HP/2.0L), 120HP/L

imagine that ratio on a Viper 8.0L V10 engine...

Now, I am pretty sure the mordern Formula 1 engine that are also V10 (not sure on displacement) also produce some ratio like the S2K, but then they aren't streetable and max power is achieved some where around 16-18K RPM.

But yea, I am sure with enough boost pressure, and many expansive, one off, strengthening part for the engine (if not a brand new one that are also a VQ35 design but uses different material), the car can go over 1K HP easily.

If the Supra 2JZ-GTE and the Skyline RB26DETT and go over 1K HP, and many of them do, the VQ35DE should be able to do that too...in theory

FLY BY Z

Racing has 1000 HP 4 cylinders, too...

reen

F1 cars have naturally aspirated 3.0 liter V-10 engines that make about 900 hp at about 18,000 rpm.

300 hp per liter.

They run on gasoline. Just a tad on the expensive side though

joeshow750

F1 engines are limited to 3 liters. The current engines make around 900 hp.....300hp/liter .

peptidbond

iTrader: (2)

One thing to keep in mind is the street-able aspect. Many of you have mention 4-cyl and 6-cyl cars that have a 1000hp or more. However, most of these are race cars and dragsters. These cars are usually not street-able and receive special attention. I am not sure what kind of care import draggers get, but top-fuel draggers are torn down to components after every race and completely re-built. Same goes for NASCAR and F-1.

However, I would easily back-up the idea of a 1000 hp VQ35. It certainly is possible.

peptidbond

RedRocketZ

iTrader: (2)

I've always been a supporter of "there is NO REPLACEMENT FOR DISPLACEMENT!" however a while back I read an artical somewhere about Nismo(or a simular Co) doing a project TT 300Z. Now I don't know about the 3.5 motor but in this artical Nismo pushed the TT300 to its max (according to them) at aprox. 800HP to the wheel, so their next step was replacing the motor with the Nissan 4, and it worked. I don't know if technology has change since but that artical to me was amazing.

supra crazy

iTrader: (22)

F1 engines are not limited to 3 liter engines they just ues it because it would make the most power with less weight.

racingdynamcs

no they are limited FIA rules state that all competitors must have v10 3.0L engines... i watch F1 religiously...i know they talk about it all the time

FLY BY Z

So I guess that there is a replacement for displacement and it is RPM's?? I think that may be the only thing that you could do to a 4 compared to an 8 is string it higher? True, false, what?

joeshow750

Well, yeah, but only to a certain point. I mean F1 engines are made from mostly aluminum and steel but they use ceramics and other exotic materials too...expensive. The ultra high (18k) rpm motors mean about 8,000 g's is exerted onto the piston at max acceleration which puts about 6,000 pounds of force to the connecting rods...way more than production cars can handle. You could do this to a 4, in theory, but the engine internals would have to be "that" much stronger in order to rev faster, and they don't get much stronger than F1. Also, higher rpms mean more friction...which is why horsepower typically peaks at a certain rpm then goes down as it reaches the redline, the friction equalizes the rpm's no matter what the car revs to. So having an engine that minimizes the friction loss during high rpm usage is more efficient...again, getting more effecient than F1 is splitting hairs.

racingdynamcs

FIA limits F1 engine's on what they can be made out of...space age materials most of them have been eliminated because make those 19rpm bmw engine's run 19's w/ no problems...max mosely the chief of FIA spoke out against using such materials because it would not make F1 fun to watch...or something of this nature.



But there have been studies of engine's doing 130,000rpm in constant motion for a little period of time... there is an institute somewhere in american that once published a study of using space age materials in engine's and they came out with some amazing result but the project was canned because the cost of these materials was too high and vey hard to work with. Nothing that could relate to something bettering the avg. engine in someguys car.


Then i read later they restarted the program and now are testing less expensive metals and other materials to conduct the same experiments.
I dont remember tha name of the stuff i was reading because no one really mentioned it till now and i remembered reading about it.

racingdynamcs

FIA limits F1 engine's on what they can be made out of...space age materials, most of them have been eliminated because they make those 19rpm bmw engine's run 19's w/ no problems...max mosely the chief of FIA spoke out against using such materials because it would not make F1 fun to watch...or something of this nature.



But there have been studies of engine's doing 130,000rpm in constant motion for a little period of time... there is an institute somewhere in American that once published a study of using space age materials in engine's and they came out with some amazing result but the project was canned because the cost of these materials was too high and very hard to work with. Nothing that could relate to something bettering the avg. engine in some guys car.


Then I read later they restarted the program and now are testing less expensive metals and other materials to conduct the same experiments.
I don?t remember that name of the stuff i was reading because no one really mentioned it till now and I remembered reading about it.

racingdynamcs

i dont know what wrong with the forum but it double posted .... the above

joeshow750

Yeah, using all exotic materials would eliminate alot of teams from competition...I mean F1 is already dominated by money, imagine what it would be like then...only a select few able to afford the outrageously expensive engines. It would be fun to watch it just as a spectacle, I mean that's what F1 is anyway, a spectacle. Cart races and motorcycle races are more fun to watch IMO, but F1 is just amazing.

racingdynamcs

if F1 wants to be what it was in terms of exitement then they should really lower the cost of getting an F1 team running...im mean lotus cant afford a F1 team and they have so much amazing technology...so many companies can't afford teams...