Re: S4

["Stephen Bigelow" <sbigelow@sprint.ca>]

Don't be ridiculous...if it works in F1, it'll obviously work well in a
street car...:)
Frankly, I doubt an F1 motor could move a street car, installed as it is....

*stall...stall...stall...snap WING* as it breaks off the axles....

I think everyone should have the engine building experience of over camming,
looking for the "big horsepower numbers"...and then being profoundly
disappointed in the cars performance. BTDT

It'll put torque and "massive amount of power" in there proper place.
Horsepower has parking lot bragging rights, but torque will win most races,
except maybe LSR's.




>errr, i'm not sure you'd want a f1 power unit in your car.  9k rpm before
>you have any torque is not usable.  certainly not in real life.  as to the
>bore and stroke dimensions of f1 power units, there are *none* published
for
>the last few years.  the only published specs of which i am aware are the
>honda v12 ra122b/e in 1993.  have the modern units anything in common with
>this unit?  those that know, certainly aren't telling.
>
>and there is very very little in common between a porsche boxer motor and a
>f1 mill, other than the fuel and air bit.  i certainly would't put porsche
>boxer engines on a performance pedestal.  as i'm sure you know, bmw,
ferrari
>and honda have been getting higher specific n/a horsepower for years...
>
>as far as usuable power is concerned and the hypothetical optimal
>bore/stroke relationship, there's nothing wrong with the rs2 unit.  86mm
>stroke and 9:1 static cr as well. 315 reliable hp from 2.2litres is fine by
>me.  it really has very little to do with the "textbook" bore and stroke
>dimensions, and mostly about materials and manufacturing and the "q" word:
>quality.  look at the 5v audi v8 unit for another example.  it's specific
>hp/cc rating (74bhp/litre for the a8, 86bhp/litre for the s8) is very good
>for a production engine .  certainly much better than porsche have managed
>with a production v8 - don't forget that porsche needed 5.4 litres of euro
>32v 928gts to produce 345bhp, and that the s8 is also managing better per
>litre than the new 3.6l 996 boxer motor.  in fact the n/a a8 is comfortably
>ahead of the 20v turbo ur-quattro in power to weight @180bhp/tonne vs
>158bhp/tonne.
>
>anyway, generally speaking a longer stroke will allow more torque.  there
is
>increasing recognition that this is a very positive component in a good
>engine.  for example, i find it interesting that the bmw 4.4 v8, while
>having a lower hp rating than the 4.2 audi unit, has a higher torque
>rating...
>
>actually to my mind, it is more about cost and efficiency.  for example,
the
>audi 3.7 v8 has a bore/stroke of 84.5/82.4, while the 4.2 has a bore/stroke
>of 84.5/93.0.  why?  clearly because both can be manufactured using the
same
>milling operations with the only difference to the  crankshaft.
>interestingly also the old i5, and the new 2.4 and 2.7 v6's and the 1.8 i4,
>all have bores of 81.0mm.  and the i5, the 2.8v6, the 1.8 and the 2.7 all
>have strokes of 86.4mm.
>
>so, i'm not sure what your point is.  porsche a performance car company and
>audi not?  not sure that i follow you.  here in nz, i can get a subaru wrx
>sti to shade a new c4 dynamically, be faster and be $150k nzd cheaper as
>well (source australian wheels magazine).  i can get a better performing
ttq
>for less than the boxter.  now, who is the performance car company?
>
>dave
>'95 rs2
>'90 ur-q
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael Williams [mailto:urquattro@surfree.com]
>Sent: Friday, 9 April 1999 14:19
>To: Dave Eaton; quattro@coimbra.ans.net
>Subject: RE: S4
>
>
>Dave Eaton decided to speak these words:
>
>>yes, but my point is that the (reputed) increase in stroke and cr will
>>*increase* the low-down torque of the motor, which isn't too shabby in the
>>1st place....
>
>
>Oh, i know this.  But while it may help initial torque, it limits the
>potential of the engine to produce massive amounts of power without MAJOR
>modifications.
>
>Basically, i dont like the theory of small bore long stroke engines.  It
>puts alot of stress on the lower end, and limits redline and power
>potentials...
>
>For example, audi engines have what, 86mm strokes lets say, thats about 3
>inches or so.  An F1 or Porsche boxer engine has a stroke of maybe 1.5-2
>inches...sometimes less...
>
>that is the way to go...large bore, short stroke....interesting way for
>audi to go...but i guess they really arent a performance car
>company.....hmm
>
>later...
>
>Michael Sheridan Williams
>ICQ# 11740998
>1983 UrQuattro, MC--1.8 BAR, borla, 16x7.5 OZ Mito's w/ SP8000's, K&N
>1985 4000S Quattro miles, Koni Yellows/Coilover (2B), strut brace, Sport
>8000 Tires, K&N
>http://members.aol.com/daserde2
>
>