future supercar engines

Discussion in 'Car Comparisons' started by mpg, Dec 9, 2009.

  1. The 15 degree V6 has a very compact block, but by the time you add the intake and exhaust they really aren't any more compact than a conventional V6.
  2. if it was such a good idea other people would have done it.
  3. block is more compact, and the exhaust is no less compact than a normal v6. The intake routes over the block, so it was a very compact engine. Not the best at other things, but it was super compact.
  4. The same can be said of the narrow angle V6.
  5. other people have! in big cars. conventional thinking, doing what seems like what everyone else is doing, is IMO, a poor place to start when dreaming up supercar engines.
  6. oh, and suzuki/chevy did it in a small car, no less. it was pitifully underpowered and by all accounts barely holding together under the power it made.

    The idea isn't an impossible task, it just needs development. the kind of development most supercar makers would rather put into a v8/10/12 sadly <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?displayFAQ=y"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/sad.gif"></A>
  7. maybe because V engines make a lot more sense for packaging than I engines. why would a company try to stuff an I6 in, when a v6 would fit much easier, have a lower CG, and they wouldnt need to do anything special (ie: new tranny, make the car horrible to work on, etc)

    basically what is the BENEFIT of using an I6 in a mid engined car? just being different?
  8. who's gonna work on their supercar engine? Maybe we should talk in the future kia engine's thread!

    an inline makes for a better performance engine, and that's what matters most. if you wanted to have a short wheelbase car, say as short as an exige, you gotta use a transverse set up, that's pretty much a given. so carrying on with that example, in the exige you've been given two choices. first, the inlines it's come with, the toyota or rover units, or b: the RSTv8. Now someone has gone through the development costs of making that v8 and getting it to fit in the car, but shocker of shockers, it's never been a good idea in any car it's been put in. It's just not a street worthy engine. there have been V6 cars in that chassis, but never intact. they're all stretched. not a bad thing for track use (the added DF is definately nice) but it's just on the same car.

    No matter what, if you wanted to work on a midengined car, you're not likely to enjoy the process. I've done it, it sucks. a technician won't have any trouble dropping the engine out (if designed to do as much), and that brings it on level with any removed engine. again, as a super car, being special matters, but it's just an added bonus to the enhanced performance and street worthiness of a I6.

    So to bring it into perspective, I've got a fake car dreamed up in my head that can't be done with any arrangement in a car exige sized without being a transverse I6

    500-700 "reliable" hp (I4 power cycle becomes very difficult to control at these levels amung other things. Note the RS200 evo)

    10k RPM noise (balance needed achievable only by much smaller engines (inertia is manageable) and low-mid displacement I6 and V12s)

    Exige sized (not a v12)
  9. Lots of people do work on their own cars. Especially when theyre car people, IE: the people that would buy small track ready cars.
    Where did you get the notion that inline engines are so much better for performance? Where do you get that notion from? and even if it was a tiny bit better, saying thats worth throwing all the other factors away is stupid. You have to factor in all of the variables, like serviceability, cost, packaging, THE FACT NO TRANSMISSION EXISTS FOR IT, etc.

    How hard the thing is to work on is incredibly important, especially for a performance car. Performance cars break things. having to drop the engine to do anything is not acceptable.

    smaller cars than the elise have had larger engines than some small inline 6 with a fUcked up transmission setup.

    basically your whole argument is stupid. 500+hp cars with tiny wheelbases/track width is stupid. Saying there are only like 3 engines that could fit in something exige sized is stupid.
  10. I'd like to see an increase in English-style, ultra-lightweights.
  11. Just remember the porsche 956/962, it used a flat 6 porsche with two turbo kkk turbo compressors, of course the flat 6 was prepared with specific racing pistons,cam shafts, valves, heads and hi perf exhaust. The chassis and the body of the car where studied to give thehighest level of performance in every aspect, the result is what we know, the 956-962 has won more group c, lemans and imsa races and championships than any other car.I can also give you the example of the 917/30 and the 917 which were both dominant forces in canam and lemans in the 70's.
  12. Yes an caburators
  13. More Tripple/quad rotors. One day I will make a rotary...

    One day *sigh*
  14. I second this. The more revs the better!
  15. #40 numbers, Feb 6, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Ahhh NZ drifters
    Oh yes, 26B PP sounds amazing
    It use to have a 20B PP in it

  16. #41 dnd, Feb 9, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    His rx8 still uses a 20b turbo. Didnt he find that MADBUL didnt have enough power against the american drifters, even with the na 26b?
  17. #42 20000 RPM, Feb 9, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  18. I think he had quite a large lack or torque in comparison to them
  19. #44 Orange F1LM, Feb 14, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Id rather see the cars go more along the lines of the Cinque and at the extreme, the FXX.

    Lighter car, more advanced large bore, high revving N/A V12 (sound is very good) being my personal choice.

    Ferrari, make your next Hypercar look as extreme as, and sound like this.

    Turbo is not the solution for the top of the line Hypercar. Anything that decreases the crazy rawness of the powerplant should not be allowed.

  20. #45 Phanofmuzik, Feb 14, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    How does a turbo decrease the crazy rawness of a power plant?

    a good chunk of the rawest, meanest cars over the last 40 years have been turbocharged. 917/30, 935, 911 turbos, F40, XJ220, turbo F1 cars, etc.
  21. On a sidenote, prices aside it is also one important reason why even just talking powerplants, that the Lexus LFA makes a GTR boring in comparison. It is a huge reason.

    There are a ton of V8 and V6 cars out on the road making big power with turbos, but how many are getting almost 700 horsepower out of an N/A powerplant at approx 6 liters and sounding that good at the same time? Every tuner and their dog are doing the turbo thing for power on engines that are otherwise not even close to exotic level in any way, shape or form. I would want to distance myself from that crowd as much as possible if I am spending over a million dollars on a car.

    I just think Ferrari better be careful here that they don't mistakingly take away some of what has made their cars such special and at times viceral machines.

    Cars such as the:

    All of these are beautiful and very desireable cars all without turbos and they all had engines that were unique which you would not see a tuner trying to duplicate for the masses on a $10000 to $15000 project budget. THink about the Enzo's engine, 6 liter, V12, 8000 rpm redline, 660 horsepower. That combined combo right there makes it more unique than 99.5% of all the cars on the planet. If they go to turbo I am afraid it may give the impression that they are compromising on the expense of further refining the Tipo F140. I thought that was the whole purpose for the FXX. WHat they really need right now is to drop an 800 to 850 horsepower 7 liter Tipo F140 successor into the new car, then they will have something people are going to really notice and have to purchase. I never thought I'd say this but it really isn't all about horsepower anymore.

    A related message from the Ferrari CEO Amedeo Felisa.
    "sound is just as important as design and performance for Ferrari."

    I hope they don't compromise on that sound with the new Enzo successor.
  22. The 917/30, 935 and turbo F1 cars are obviously all race cars so they shouldn't even be in this discussion. You can't expect a modern supercar, with mufflers, cats and a need to meet current noise regulations to compete with race cars from the 70s and 80s for rawness.

    I can't think of any turbocharged road cars that sound as good as cars like the F50, Enzo, Carrera GT, Zonda F or Murcielago SV though.
  23. F40, any GT2 Porsche, Mercedes SL black, etc...
  24. Don't agree at all. Even if you have totally different taste as far as what sounds good, none of those cars are even that loud relative to the ones I mentioned.
  25. thats what exhaust modifications are for.

Share This Page