The Ultimate Racing Car

[HampusA]

I would say the F1's cornering speeds are way higher.

IIC an huge problem of these Group C cars was balance, the front was always lacking downforce. Then the teams started thinking about front diffusers and wings, this reduced the problem, mostly the front diffuser on the Eagle Mk. III was pretty succesful. the wing was an more sensitive an less efficient solution. The 'Wing' was imo more driven around the idea to allow to set the car up better and ultimate downforce, overall it is an less efficient solution.

For example the XJR-14 had this front wing, but with the Bi-plane wing the problem the front wing reduced was back again really quickly. The XJR-14 still had an huge understeer problem. Lter solutions of the wing had not, but were incredibly draggy, for example the 905 Evo2 and Allaard J2X-c. The latter even had the problem of when the lower tier of the rear wing its angle was increased the front downforce increased too, on paper this sounds good, on track it is not as it makes setting the car up more difficult.

To come back on the mix of an F1 car and Group C car, the Peugeot 905 Evo2 and allard J2X-c were an real mix of F1 and Group C, with the front wing ad raised nose. The wheelcovers where only there as required by regulations(although they are useful)

the cars having slower corner speeds then F1 cars is a given
I was thinking compared to todays LMP´s.

[MIKEY_!]

What about a driver lying down configuration. With the feet hanging out over the diff and the engine in one sidepod and the gearbox in the other. Would be a bugger to package but interesting still.

[ESPImperium]

What about a LMP1 car like the Audi or Peugeot with a slightly larger rear wing with a F1 V10 screamer engine from 2005 in the back with the Mercedes Benz KERS from todays breed with unlimited usage.

That car would be bloody fast.

[MIKEY_!]

Modify a 80's spec 1.5L v6 (at best 1500hp qualifying spec) to a flat 6 configuration. Then blot 4 of them together to make a H24 with 6000hp (theoretical). Thats before raising the rev limit sky high and using stuff like beryllium and tungsten for the block.

[N12ck]

What about a LMP1 car like the Audi or Peugeot with a slightly larger rear wing with a F1 V10 screamer engine from 2005 in the back with the Mercedes Benz KERS from todays breed with unlimited usage.

That car would be bloody fast.

What About a V12 screamer.... with Turbo! and Mercedes KERS,

[megz]

Turbo would kill the scream - Supercharging would make the scream even better but the engine less powerful compared to a turbo'd version...

Configuration for a piston engine you'd be looking for some variant on the straight 6 correct for it to be as well balanced as possible yes?

Oh how I heart the old group C - must say I prefer the aero heavy look we have now.

[MIKEY_!]

Why does this discussion always come back to group c. An F1 car ('09 FW + '08 RW) that had wheel covers could be wayyy quicker. Much less cross-section at any one point. that means less air is moved and reduction in drag. Thinking along the lines of red bull's x2010.

PS does anyone have any idea of dimensions for the inline 4 turbo engine run by BMW (bt55) 1986.

[flynfrog]

Why does this discussion always come back to group c. An F1 car ('09 FW + '08 RW) that had wheel covers could be wayyy quicker. Much less cross-section at any one point. that means less air is moved and reduction in drag. Thinking along the lines of red bull's x2010.

PS does anyone have any idea of dimensions for the inline 4 turbo engine run by BMW (bt55) 1986.

cross section is only one part of drag. also you can create more downforce treating the car as a wing instead of bolting a bunch of little wings to it. I think muleasnes corner has pictures and drawings of the bmw engine you are looking for.

[MIKEY_!]

I think removing the wing car concept could beneficial. Use a fan (yes i'm obsessed) and a wide floor for constant DF. True cross section is only part of the equation but any advantage is still an advantage as long as your not compromising the overall design. Just has to be balanced with packaging and surface drag.

Found the site and looks promising but no drawings, got a link for me?

[matt21]

PS does anyone have any idea of dimensions for the inline 4 turbo engine run by BMW (bt55) 1986.

http://www.gurneyflap.com/bmwturbof1engine.html

[MIKEY_!]

Could move towards a camera in the nose and a LCD screen for the driver. That also frees up packaging layout a bit.

Thanks for that matt

[engineer_roy]

So not much in the way of original ideas for new engine design.
The current engines are based upon the narrow angle 4 valve combustion chamber and that design is now virtually 50 years old.
Engines are merely a combination of multiple cylinders, it is the one cylinder design which matters and after the overhead bathtub and hemispherical combustion chamber the 4 valve narrow angle has remained unopposed. Yes it has benefitted from technological improvements to individual parts but the generic design remains supreme.
.................................... to learn How/Why the design came about, how it got to be the first F1 engine with that technology in the Dan Gurney Eagle Weslake and possibly rise to the challenge laid down, Improve upon that!

[thisisatest]

i do like the idea of free-thinking engineering and design to make racing cars faster. on the other hand, the title is Ultimate RACING Car, not just the ultimate track car, so for me, besides lots of power, lots of grip, lots of downforce, i would restrict the cars to being pretty small (no bigger than today's f1) and i would put requirements on driver sightlines. and they would have big side mirrors and that's the only place i would consider a flex test!

[MadMatt]

Would it be useful to use fans at the front to suck the car down like at the back ? Or would the benefit be so little compared to the disadvantages ?

[MIKEY_!]

That would be good too. Or just use a central fan if you can package it well.