|
1
|
|
|
|
|
Post #1 Fri, Feb 10, 10:52 PM |
|
Atomic
Supercar Messiah - 2393
 |
to be honest, this car is nothing short of breath taking, i want to make that clear off the bat. but it CAN be even better [its not real so who knows, it may even be better just like the veyron was better then expected]
firstly, IMO an engined turbochaged to that power is better then it revved so high.if it were turbocharged, Yes it would weigh slightly more from the most likely Twin Turbo assembaly and intercooler, Yes it would take more space [slightly] but with lowering the revs and turbocharging it would make more torque and even can make more HP then this [Leblanc Caroline has a 2L I4 turbo charged to over 510HP!] it can probly be turbocharged to over 600HP and have torque also be in the same general area. sure this will add more weight [need stronger shafts and etc for the extra torque, not to mention TT and intercoolers] but it will still be rediculously light and the extra HP will balance out the HP/tonne ratio and still be over 1000, but now with more torque meaning faster off the line!
the one problem with what im saying is that they want an F1 car. F1 cars arent turbocharged...
either way its still amazing, just, assuming they can do what they set out to do, then they could do more. torque is where its at!
edit k disregard most of that, its supercharged... [WOOPS! i should read before i post!] but either way, they still can make over 600 if theyre doing supercharging]
Edited by Atomic - Fri, Feb 10, 10:57 PM
|
|
Post #2 Sat, Feb 11, 4:26 AM |
|
660hpV12
Senior Member - 303
 |
just a question, if u turbo charge it, to achive that power it need fair bit of psi, dosent high boost cause turbo lag, hence the torque deliverory won't be instantous and won't that cause slower accleration?
2min 16s lap time around wine country with a 360
|
|
Post #3 Sat, Feb 11, 9:29 AM |
|
Lucky Strike
Supercar Messiah - 18060
 |
500 bhp @ 10500 rpm
#$%#ing awesome.
|
|
Post #4 Sat, Feb 11, 2:20 PM |
|
boomerkk
Supercar Messi - 1347
 |
Quote from Atomic to be honest, this car is nothing short of breath taking, i want to make that clear off the bat. but it CAN be even better [its not real so who knows, it may even be better just like the veyron was better then expected]
firstly, IMO an engined turbochaged to that power is better then it revved so high.if it were turbocharged, Yes it would weigh slightly more from the most likely Twin Turbo assembaly and intercooler, Yes it would take more space [slightly] but with lowering the revs and turbocharging it would make more torque and even can make more HP then this [Leblanc Caroline has a 2L I4 turbo charged to over 510HP!] it can probly be turbocharged to over 600HP and have torque also be in the same general area. sure this will add more weight [need stronger shafts and etc for the extra torque, not to mention TT and intercoolers] but it will still be rediculously light and the extra HP will balance out the HP/tonne ratio and still be over 1000, but now with more torque meaning faster off the line!
the one problem with what im saying is that they want an F1 car. F1 cars arent turbocharged...
either way its still amazing, just, assuming they can do what they set out to do, then they could do more. torque is where its at!
editk disregard most of that, its supercharged... [WOOPS! i should read before i post!] but either way, they still can make over 600 if theyre doing supercharging]
also, at 500kg, it doesn't need much torque.
doesn't need to be faster off the line either, 0-100mph
Bizzarrini P538
Carbon fibre monocoque chassis and full carbon fibre body.
600hp. 800kg.
|
|
Post #5 Sat, Feb 11, 3:37 PM |
|
Atomic
Supercar Messiah - 2393
|
well it IS supercharged so my point was kinda already considered. i just prefer turbocharging to supercharging because its more efficient and using sequential turbos limits lag. also the turbo is not limited to the engines RPMs and can achieve full boost without the engine being at redline [the supercharger's rpms are proportional to engine RPM so in order for the SC to be living to its full potential, the engine will have to be at redline]
but also if they really wanted HP/tonne to be high, they could have done as much as 600HP. the Caroline did 512HP from 2L straight4. this is 2.4L v8. assuming the same hp/L ratio, this thing can make over 610HP. like the zonda F. also a V8 can handle more boost then an I4 so it can do even more. i bet if they really put their minds to it, they could do 640HP
|
|
Post #6 Sat, Feb 11, 3:45 PM |
|
boomerkk
Supercar Messi - 1347
|
Quote from Atomic
well it IS supercharged so my point was kinda already considered. i just prefer turbocharging to supercharging because its more efficient and using sequential turbos limits lag. also the turbo is not limited to the engines RPMs and can achieve full boost without the engine being at redline [the supercharger's rpms are proportional to engine RPM so in order for the SC to be living to its full potential, the engine will have to be at redline]
but also if they really wanted HP/tonne to be high, they could have done as much as 600HP. the Caroline did 512HP from 2L straight4. this is 2.4L v8. assuming the same hp/L ratio, this thing can make over 610HP. like the zonda F. also a V8 can handle more boost then an I4 so it can do even more. i bet if they really put their minds to it, they could do 640HP
anyway, i thought you had good thoughts there but just wanted to make the point that this is car is so light at 500kg that it doesn't need to make much torque. As it is, it does 0-100mph in less than 5s.
Also the designers used to work for Gordon Murray, who strictly excluded any form of forced induction for the McLaren F1 to give the driver the greatest throttle response and control.
Granted, it is supercharged but i would imagine that the forced induction covers the whole rev range.
Also, this is no run-of-the-mill v8, it weighs only about 80+kg dressed! Pretty sure it's even lighter than the Caroline's I4.
Bizzarrini P538
Carbon fibre monocoque chassis and full carbon fibre body.
600hp. 800kg.
|
|
Post #7 Sat, Feb 11, 5:23 PM |
|
YoungJae
Supercar Guru - 578
 |
Quote from 660hpV12
just a question, if u turbo charge it, to achive that power it need fair bit of psi, dosent high boost cause turbo lag, hence the torque deliverory won't be instantous and won't that cause slower accleration?
My ideal garage (10): 1995 McLaren F1 LM, 2005 Koenigsegg CCR, 1990 Lamborghini LM 002 Americana Estate Paris Dakar, 2000 Lamborghini Diablo Coatl, 2005 Gemballa Mirage GT, 2000 Hamann M Roadster, 2004 Hamann HM 7.0, 2005 NISMO R34 GT-R Z-tune, 2005 Maserati MC12, 1993 Jaguar XJ220 w/open exhausts
|
|
Post #8 Sun, Feb 12, 11:42 AM |
|
Atomic
Supercar Messiah - 2393
|
Quote from boomerkk
my post was incomplete, i don't know what went wrong.
anyway, i thought you had good thoughts there but just wanted to make the point that this is car is so light at 500kg that it doesn't need to make much torque. As it is, it does 0-100mph in less than 5s.
Also the designers used to work for Gordon Murray, who strictly excluded any form of forced induction for the McLaren F1 to give the driver the greatest throttle response and control.
Granted, it is supercharged but i would imagine that the forced induction covers the whole rev range.
Also, this is no run-of-the-mill v8, it weighs only about 80+kg dressed! Pretty sure it's even lighter than the Caroline's I4.
|
|
Post #9 Sun, Feb 12, 1:34 PM |
|
boomerkk
Supercar Messi - 1347
|
Quote from Atomic
its hard for me to believe that the engine is lighter then the caroline, i mean its a V8, granted its very light, i just cant see how a 2.4L v8 can be lighter then a 2.0 I4. i have no facts to base this off, its just hard to believe. maybe if you take into account the turbochargers and intercoolers...?
Bizzarrini P538
Carbon fibre monocoque chassis and full carbon fibre body.
600hp. 800kg.
|
|
Post #10 Tue, Feb 14, 5:04 PM |
|
Bariki
Member - 90
 |
It's just super impressive engineering
"Numbers presenting a car mean nothing without a purpose or soul"
-Myself
1. 2005 Lotus Exige sport 240R
2. 2007 Caparo T1
3. 2005 Radical SR8/SR3
4. 2005 Leblanc Mirabeau
5. 2005 Noble M400
6. 2004 Arial Atom 2 300
7. 2004 ASL garaiya
8. 2007 Porsche 911 GT3 RS
9. 2006 Koenigsegg CCX
10. 2005 Ferrari F430
British sports cars for life!
|
|
Post #11 Sun, May 7, 6:10 AM |
|
sameerfair
New User - 3
 |
well...
as you all must have noticed that caparo's designers have worked with McLaren, and we all know that McLaren makes Formula 1 cars.
and Secondly, nowadays due to the FIA regulations McLaren is using a 2.4L V8 engine to power its McLarens. It seems obvious that the engine powering the caparo is a formula 1 engine rev limited to meet CO2 and noise regulations, and that is the very reason why its so damn light weight.
Turbocharging an engine rev limited is not at all a good practice because its not emitting enough power out of the exhaust. 10,000 is just baby talk for a Formula 1 engine which can easily rev at 19,000+ RPM but despite that they always had the option to use the crank to power air in, and so they did.
I am 99% sure that it would be a Mercedes engine because Mercedes engines are the ones supercharged mostly to extract more power out of them.
all in all A McLaren Formula 1 car for people who dremt of ever earning a Formula 1 License...
For many this would be a dream come true...
|
|
Post #12 Thu, Nov 9, 3:18 PM |
|
stoya111
New User - 9
 |
well... power isnt everything, you have to remember this is a street legal car and it has to
comply with all the emmisions and noise regulations bs, which would be a bit on the hard
side if the engine was tuned to produce more than 500hp, and reliability will be just
as sacrificed. you have to remember that there will be people trying their best to go to
work in this "car" one day soon (hopefully)
|
|
Post #13 Fri, Nov 10, 7:25 PM |
|
Adyndril
New User - 4
|
Your average B-series Honda engine does weigh a lot more than this engine. 275~ pounds or so.
Someone should have put it to you this way... a typical American, iron block v8 weighs somewhere around 600+ pounds. If your friend's car was going to survive with anywhere close to the boost he needed to make 515 from a 2 liter engine, it would have probably been one with an iron block. The caparo engine weighs about 160 american pounds... there's no comparison.
The engine in this car is about as perfect as can be... adding power might just spoil the whole experience.. especially at the expense of weight. Isn't unnecessary added weight exactly whats wrong with new cars?
Oh.. it can be better though. How about putting on a smaller supercharger pulley? 50 extra HP in a car that weighs 1/3 of one VW Golf GTI is like 150 in that same GTI.. how about that all steel suspension? Ill bet we could find 40 or 50 easily removed pounds... and TIRES.
|
|
Post #14 Wed, Nov 15, 12:02 AM |
|
BlankyBLT
New User - 1
|
There is no point in turboing this car. There is no issue of torque, obviously the acceleration is what "most" people may deem acceptable. My only probelm is that the car is almost cheating. All that you would really be getting is a slitghtly detuned F1 car, that doesnt rev quite as high, and has added turn signals. There is absolutely no utilitarian value to the car. UNlike the mclaren F1 which had ample cargo space compared to competitors, while being able to seat three people.
|
|
Post #15 Wed, Nov 15, 12:59 PM |
|
bruxell
New User - 2
|
Yeah, they can produce power like that, provided they don't have to last longer than two Grands Prix.
|
|
Post #16 Thu, Feb 15, 8:32 PM |
|
CosworthV8
New User - 4
|
In the description is says that the engineers were also trying to keep costs down...keeping the power at 500 hp was probably a good balance between performance and price. Plus increasing power only makes an engine more unreliable. Look at drag racers...those engines produce 6000+ hp but need to be rebuilt every 3 min. Or an F1 engine is only lasts 2 races. This also plays into the whole cost reduction thing.
Finally cars such as the Lotus Exige and Ariel Atom show that massive amounts of hp aren't necessary to achieve a great amount of performance.
|
|
Post #17 Tue, Apr 10, 1:38 PM |
|
terraflata
New Member - 11
|
Well they COULD produce more power. And they will. In the production car it will no longer have a forced-induction engine. It will be a N/A 3.5 V8 making well in excess of 550bhp and still weighing acceptably less than 100KG. Which means in plain math that it will be raping the 1000BHP/Tonne figures as previously stated. There are even rumours that it will be spitting out 700HP (Rumours, nothing offical). As far as the turbocharging discussion. I don't really see the advantage. To me it would be added weight in mechanics and body work to allow air entry for the intercooler(s). Even if it was sequential I don't see the responsiveness beating that of a supercharged engine. And not any supercharged engine. But a supercharger and engine properly tuned and mated to create a perfect balance of response. I understand that the caroline makes 510BHP from a TT(I believe)I-4. But as far as reliabilty is concerned, well that's another story. We are talking about a car that has F1 perfomance, and street-legal aspirations.
As far as N/A F1 cars making 900 bhp....
"The maximum power achieved in the history of the series was around 1200 bhp (900 kW) in racing trim, during the 1980s turbo era.....and as much as 1,400 bhp / 1050 kW in qualifying trim..." (Wikipedia)
2006:
"Engines are mandated as 2.4 litre normally aspirated V8s, with many other constraints on their design and the materials that may be used. The 2006 generation of engines rev close to 20,000 rpm and produce up to 740 bhp (552 kW)"
And these engines have to be rebuilt every 2 races which is what, 600 Km's. The fact that for about 4 hours they are constantly kept in the redline and don't break is rather amazing but far from reliable in terms of a road car.
Terraflata
|
|
Post #18 Sun, Jul 1, 6:59 PM |
|
THEBEAST101
Senior Member - 421
 |
Just read the new R&T article on this track beast, and it said that its N/A tuned to 575hp. They said that the chassis weights 7 LBS, and the engine weighs less than jared from subway did when he was fat.(250+ lBS) The 3G cornering hasen't been tested yet, and is just a goal, or a claim by caparo. It was wind tunnels tested, and they say that it can be driven upside down at 150 MPH. Also, has anyone noticed the prototypes name? (XP1) sounds familiar. Lets hope that the production model is just as fast now. I can't wait for a road test. Lastly, this thing needs no turbos if its 0-60 MPH time of 2.5 is correct, thats fast as hell.
PS. the inside of this car is crap, purley a track car that you can have fun with on the street and the track and nothing else. It also reminds me of a mix between a F1 car and a audi R10 LM.
|
|
Posted: Today |
|
Superbot
|
|
|
Posted: Today |
|
Superbot
|
|
| All Forums > 2007 Caparo T1 > its amazing but... > Post Reply |
|
1
|
|
|
|
