More on specific output

[clyde]

450mm tall
552mm wide
550mm long
74kg heavy

2.0L

V-8

340 HP (race trim..."only" 320 for road use)
190 lbs/ft torque

And it goes in a Caterham 7

That makes for about 1 HP/3.5 lbs

http://www.c7mle.co.uk/v8/html/image/img_7508.jpg

http://www.c7mle.co.uk/v8/html/image/d2040-04_copy.jpg

http://www.c7mle.co.uk/v8/html/image/d2040-12_copy.jpg

http://www.c7mle.co.uk/v8/html/image/v8_cat_card_1_088.jpg

more info (http://www.rst-v8.co.uk/)

[lip277]

Oh...
My...
God.....


:jawdrop:

[blee]

hOLY sHEET.

Great googly mooglin' mother of....wow. The beauty of this idea is that low torque is not a problem in a car as light as the 7. HP will matter more than anything, and this engine has...just...gobs of it. OMG.

[Nick M3]

I think I could enjoy driving that.

[FC]

Why can't they stick that in an Elise. :roll:

:D

[lemming]

Why can't they stick that in an Elise. :roll:

:D

v. funny.

:D

the caterham is a cool concept of a car.

[clyde]

The beauty of this idea is that low torque is not a problem in a car as light as the 7. HP will matter more than anything, and this engine has...just...gobs of it. OMG.

What do you mean low torque? 190 ft-lbs isn't a massive amount in terms of pure production, but considering the car's weight (~1200 lbs), 190 ft-lbs of torque is HUGE

Compare lbs/ft-lbs torque of some other cars:

6.3 lbs / 1tq Caterham w/ V8

6.5 lbs / 1tq Viper SRT-10

6.6 lbs / 1tq 2006 Z06

7.0 lbs / 1tq GT

7.9 lbs / 1tq C6

10.8 lbs / 1tq Mustang GT

13.0 lbs / 1tq M3

14.3 lbs / 1tq Elise

18.2 lbs / 1tq RX-8

[JST]

There are no cam sprocket covers?

Sorry, that's a deal breaker.

[blee]

What do you mean low torque? 190 ft-lbs isn't a massive amount in terms of pure production, but considering the car's weight (~1200 lbs), 190 ft-lbs of torque is HUGE

Compare lbs/ft-lbs torque of some other cars: blah blah blah...


I meant that it's not a lot of torque in terms of pure production, whereas 320hp is a goodly amount of hp. Go pick your nits somewhere else. :D

[lemming]

What do you mean low torque? 190 ft-lbs isn't a massive amount in terms of pure production, but considering the car's weight (~1200 lbs), 190 ft-lbs of torque is HUGE

Compare lbs/ft-lbs torque of some other cars: blah blah blah...


I meant that it's not a lot of torque in terms of pure production, whereas 320hp is a goodly amount of hp. Go pick your nits somewhere else. :D

were you expecting anything else but lots of HP but lesser torque from an oversquare 2.0 litre v8?

with the right gearing and powerband, that's a monster in the caterham.

[blee]

were you expecting anything else but lots of HP but lesser torque from an oversquare 2.0 litre v8?

with the right gearing and powerband, that's a monster in the caterham.

Oh, it's not a surprise. And like I said, the trade-off -- "low" torque for excellent horsepower -- makes perfect sense for the 7.

[Autarch]

This is exactly the direction that I predict sports cars will be going with regards to the type of output they pump out.

There isn't room any more to climb in horsepower on pump gas. They are already stretching the limits with 600+hp Porsche and MB units.

The next big push will be lighter weight, better dynamics and more efficiency because there is very little practical room for more power. Small and light will become even more of the rage from what I can tell.

I bet that engine could fit under the hood of almost anything. That's enough torque to launch forward a 2500-3000lb car off the line until it gets towards it's power band and can shoot forward like a rocket.

Edit: Nice touch to write the output per/lb of engine. That is probably the best indicator out there of a well designed performance engine.

[JST]

This is exactly the direction that I predict sports cars will be going with regards to the type of output they pump out.

There isn't room any more to climb in horsepower on pump gas. They are already stretching the limits with 600+hp Porsche and MB units.

The next big push will be lighter weight, better dynamics and more efficiency because there is very little practical room for more power. Small and light will become even more of the rage from what I can tell.

I bet that engine could fit under the hood of almost anything. That's enough torque to launch forward a 2500-3000lb car off the line until it gets towards it's power band and can shoot forward like a rocket.

Edit: Nice touch to write the output per/lb of engine. That is probably the best indicator out there of a well designed performance engine.

Oh, I think there's plenty of room for additional power. You will see lightweight materials used more extensively, as companies become more familiar/comfortable with working with aluminum and as the costs of such things come down. But there is a corresponding pressure to make cars larger and to include additional safety features.

Engine technology like variable valve timing has already caused a revolution in the ability of carmakers to make engines that produce BOTH high peak hp and strong low-end torque--this used to be impossible, as camshaft grinds could give you one or the other but not both. Things like Valvetronic and (eventually) electronic valve actuation will improve this still further. I think in the Accord Hybrid you see a harbringer of another very potent possibility--a medium sized electric motor to give you lots of torque coupled with an engine that gives good high-end power.

600 hp is no more a practical limit than was 500 or 400. Unless something really drastic happens, within a few years, I bet 1000 hp engines will be widely available in high-end cars.

[Autarch]

I realise that as enthusiasts everyone here thinks that more power is better (I know I do!) but there comes a point where more just becomes pointless. There are limits of what you can use without losing traction, running out of road, etc.

I think that fairly soon (in the next 5-10 years) manufacturers will just stick to the power levels they have and just concentrate on weight, efficiency, packaging and good design - especially in the sedan/everyday car segments. In the sports car segment I am sure we will see 1000hp monsters eventually but I think that we will soon see more lightweight, efficient but amazingly fast and nimble sports cars coming out. Bloat has been the trend for years but it seems that weight is slowly coming back down from where it once was and with lighter weight comes less of a need for high power engines.

Unless it's a dedicated track car an engine like the above combined with a Miata-like weight will basically be the ultimate performance vehicle (or at least MY take of what the ultimate performance vehicle would be like).

[JST]

I realise that as enthusiasts everyone here thinks that more power is better (I know I do!) but there comes a point where more just becomes pointless. There are limits of what you can use without losing traction, running out of road, etc.

I think that fairly soon (in the next 5-10 years) manufacturers will just stick to the power levels they have and just concentrate on weight, efficiency, packaging and good design - especially in the sedan/everyday car segments. In the sports car segment I am sure we will see 1000hp monsters eventually but I think that we will soon see more lightweight, efficient but amazingly fast and nimble sports cars coming out. Bloat has been the trend for years but it seems that weight is slowly coming back down from where it once was and with lighter weight comes less of a need for high power engines.

Unless it's a dedicated track car an engine like the above combined with a Miata-like weight will basically be the ultimate performance vehicle (or at least MY take of what the ultimate performance vehicle would be like).

The HP war shows no signs of tapering off, and I don't think it will without some sort of external factor (such as insurance companies balking or an oil shortage). Marketers always want to be able to brag about more power--we've already gotten to the point that 200 hp is piddling, nearly 300 hp is routine in entry-level luxury cars, and 400 hp seems somewhat pedestrian. I agree that there is a limit on the usefulness of all this--is a 600 hp Mercedes any faster, from a practical standpoint, than a 500 hp Mercedes? Probably not, but it hasn't kept the company from building both.

[clyde]

Edit: Nice touch to write the output per/lb of engine. That is probably the best indicator out there of a well designed performance engine.

it was lbs of car per 1ft-lb of torque.

[clyde]

I agree that there is a limit on the usefulness of all this--is a 600 hp Mercedes any faster, from a practical standpoint, than a 500 hp Mercedes? Probably not, but it hasn't kept the company from building both.

Remember, too, that increasing horsepower has diminishing returns as you climb up the scale when it comes to how it moves the car. 600HP doesn't really translate to a significant increase in acceleration or top speed capability in a 4,000 lb car compared to 500 HP. Take that 100 HP increase and add it to a 100 HP engine to give you 200 HP (100% increase) should show significant gains....gains that would shame the difference between a 600 HP enigne and a 1200 HP engine (same 100% increase) powering a given can.

Traction, aerodynamic drag and other external limiting physical factors play an increasingly large role as power increases. Yes, there is a limit on practical, measureable performance improvments but "more is better" is the name of the game even if it's just for bragging rights.

[Autarch]

I agree that there is a limit on the usefulness of all this--is a 600 hp Mercedes any faster, from a practical standpoint, than a 500 hp Mercedes? Probably not, but it hasn't kept the company from building both.

Remember, too, that increasing horsepower has diminishing returns as you climb up the scale when it comes to how it moves the car. 600HP doesn't really translate to a significant increase in acceleration or top speed capability in a 4,000 lb car compared to 500 HP. Take that 100 HP increase and add it to a 100 HP engine to give you 200 HP (100% increase) should show significant gains....gains that would shame the difference between a 600 HP enigne and a 1200 HP engine (same 100% increase) powering a given can.

That's exactly my point. The next push is going to have to be about efficiency, dynamics, etc. because after a certain point more power really doesn't help.

Look at FWD cars as an example. They have come to the absolute limit of what kind of power you can add to the front wheels without excessively hard to handle torque steer. The only room for improvement on such a vehicle is about content, weight, efficiency, feel, etc. because more power is actually detrimental. This isn't necessarily the case with RWD cars but we are already at the limit of what kind of power you can actually use with cars like the Porsche GT, Viper, the new Z06, etc.

The only room to improve for such cars is in factors like weight.

[lemming]

I agree that there is a limit on the usefulness of all this--is a 600 hp Mercedes any faster, from a practical standpoint, than a 500 hp Mercedes? Probably not, but it hasn't kept the company from building both.

Remember, too, that increasing horsepower has diminishing returns as you climb up the scale when it comes to how it moves the car. 600HP doesn't really translate to a significant increase in acceleration or top speed capability in a 4,000 lb car compared to 500 HP. Take that 100 HP increase and add it to a 100 HP engine to give you 200 HP (100% increase) should show significant gains....gains that would shame the difference between a 600 HP enigne and a 1200 HP engine (same 100% increase) powering a given can.

That's exactly my point. The next push is going to have to be about efficiency, dynamics, etc. because after a certain point more power really doesn't help.

Look at FWD cars as an example. They have come to the absolute limit of what kind of power you can add to the front wheels without excessively hard to handle torque steer. The only room for improvement on such a vehicle is about content, weight, efficiency, feel, etc. because more power is actually detrimental. This isn't necessarily the case with RWD cars but we are already at the limit of what kind of power you can actually use with cars like the Porsche GT, Viper, the new Z06, etc.

The only room to improve for such cars is in factors like weight.

i think that you and JeSTer are both correct.

the company cars that intended to be more focused sporting vehicles will focus on weight and power to weight ratio. this has already been hinted at with the upcoming m6 CSL, the extensive diet the c6 z06 went on and even the carrera GT and enzo --although they missed their targets for weight, they are still light vehicles.

but the company cars that lean more toward GTouring and luxe, weights may creep up but will likely stabilize at about 4000 pounds as aluminum content increases. the 645ci already uses a lot of plastic fender parts and it's still rather hefty.

[clyde]

because after a certain point more power really doesn't help.

But that's not entirely true. More power will ALWAYS help sales and marketing...whether it's usable or not.

Look at FWD cars as an example. They have come to the absolute limit of what kind of power you can add to the front wheels without excessively hard to handle torque steer.

That's what they've been saying for 25 years. It wasn't that long ago that 200 HP was thought to be the absolute limit of what a FWD car could handle regardless of how much it weighed or how it was geared. Obviously, that wasn't the case. There is a limit out there, but we won't know that we've reached it until well after the fact.

[Rob]

I will be happy to make large bets with those of you that think the hp war has reached its pinnacle. Big ones.

It doesn't matter if your thoughts on why more power won't help performance are correct. It matters if the perception of the buying public thinks more hp is better. I am confident that the perception of the average car buyer isn't going to change and therefore the marketing drive isn't going to change and therefore we will have more engines with higher hp numbers. Who cares if I can't really go from 0 - 60 in 2 seconds flat? I need more hp.

Lots of people think the 400 hp in the V is useless. I disagree every time I get in the car.

[lemming]

I will be happy to make large bets with those of you that think the hp war has reached its pinnacle. Big ones.

It doesn't matter if your thoughts on why more power won't help performance are correct. It matters if the perception of the buying public thinks more hp is better. I am confident that the perception of the average car buyer isn't going to change and therefore the marketing drive isn't going to change and therefore we will have more engines with higher hp numbers. Who cares if I can't really go from 0 - 60 in 2 seconds flat? I need more hp.

Lots of people think the 400 hp in the V is useless. I disagree every time I get in the car.

i'm with you, brother.

the issue for me is not absolute so much as it is relative.

so, whether my car now has 400hp or the next one 500hp is meaningless unless it is in relation to the average car/suv on the road. and that whole population, the median and the mean, has gotten a LOT faster. and it is mainly in relation to the mean/median vehicle where i'd like to be waaaaaaaaaay above that.

when accords and camrys and altimas have 260hp, yeah. it means that sports cars had better have good power to weight ratios and big HP because they cost a lot more and where is the sport if it can't get out of the way of the average vehicle?

for example, BMW can choose to ignore the legion of WRXs and Evos that run sub-5 second 0-60mph times, but they can no longer ignore the infinitis, MB's, audis and even camrys and accords that run easily in the 6s to 60mph. mainly because the middle 50% of the auto market is getting faster, that will push the top 5% even more than ever to reach more absurd heights of power.

[Pinecone]

I WANT one. :)