FTO AUSTRALIA

aza013 wrote:I'm interested to see what this would get out of it .
And it would look good sitting in the engine bay.

Almost read that as 'my engine bay' lol.

arrrr NO! But if I could get my engine polished like that it would be sweeeeeet .

Better start polishing

aza013 wrote:I'm interested to see what this would get out of it .
And it would look good sitting in the engine bay.

Incase you missed it az

Naturally aspirated on 87 octane pump fuel this thing is said to make 1440hp and 900ft.lbs of torque and will do so for 400 hours of use. With the wick wound up and a bit of boost thrown into the mix, it is capable of an incredible 3600hp!

May be so but are these number with the engine in a car and tested at the wheel?
They sound like engine numbers.

I'm guessing those are engine figures. I'd hate to think of the losses through the gearbox that handles all that power and torque...

yeh id like to see what kind of driveshaft handles 3600hp going to the wheels

Fkn eggbeaters... Can't beat a crankshaft!

^^^ That might do it

nahhhhhh not big enough.

Old post I know but that video just gave me goosebumps. But then again anything rotary related usually does. Aint nothing like a rotary...

Taz wrote:Engine doesnt really matter when it comes to the top speed records

Realise this is an old thread but.. dude.. what.

Does that mean I can chuck in the engine from my barina into the most aerodynamic shell possible and I will break speed records?

You need a combination of both a great engine and aerodynamics. The engine absolutely does matter.

Example - what has a higher top speed - the Veyron or a Zonda?

The Veyron. Why? Because of its engine.

Anything else you would like to take out of context to try and attack me with?
My point is valid. Beyond a certain threshhold the engine cant do much more if anything when aero/the laws of physics prevents you going any faster..

Guarantee that u out the vayron engine in a truck and race it with the zonda who do u think would win both top speed and acceleration areo does account for heaps at these speeds

ZFL45H1 wrote:Guarantee that u out the vayron engine in a truck and race it with the zonda who do u think would win both top speed and acceleration areo does account for heaps at these speeds

Not to mention the truck which would be a good 10 tonne heavier and way smaller gear ratios, fair race I'd say...

Sahin wrote:

ZFL45H1 wrote:Guarantee that u out the vayron engine in a truck and race it with the zonda who do u think would win both top speed and acceleration areo does account for heaps at these speeds

Not to mention the truck which would be a good 10 tonne heavier and way smaller gear ratios, fair race I'd say...

Taz wrote:Anything else you would like to take out of context to try and attack me with?
My point is valid. Beyond a certain threshhold the engine cant do much more if anything when aero/the laws of physics prevents you going any faster..

Im not attacking you at all mate, calm your nips. Im not taking anything out of context at all, simply going off your quote. I do understand your point, but what I'm saying is, both the engine and aerodynamics are equally as important as each other. You need both.

Absolutely you are correct in saying that aerodynamics plays a big part in this, no dispute there at all. But as does the engine. A combination of the two is needed.

Once the performance capabilities of an engine have been maxed out, that is when aerodynamics are the only way of improving a top speed record.

Put it this way, the best engine in the world in a not so aerodynamic car/vehicle (such as the Vauxhall Victor in the UK that runs like a 7.3 1/4 mile - quoted as being as aerodynamic as a brick ) is going to be faster than a car/vehicle with a good, but not amazing engine such as the Mclaren F1.

Yes, you do need aerodynamics, no disagreement there, but again, the engine has to be up to par as well.

Daniel2019 wrote: Put it this way, the best engine in the world in a not so aerodynamic car/vehicle (such as the Vauxhall Victor in the UK that runs like a 7.3 1/4 mile - quoted as being as aerodynamic as a brick ) is going to be faster than a car/vehicle with a good, but not amazing engine such as the Mclaren F1.

Im sorry I still dont agree

ZFL45H1 wrote:

Daniel2019 wrote: Put it this way, the best engine in the world in a not so aerodynamic car/vehicle (such as the Vauxhall Victor in the UK that runs like a 7.3 1/4 mile - quoted as being as aerodynamic as a brick ) is going to be faster than a car/vehicle with a good, but not amazing engine such as the Mclaren F1.

Im sorry I still dont agree

Bad example, they run similar engine powers and Victor 1 is set for acceleration.

Point is, you cant just have an amazing engine for top speed, and you cant just have aerodynamics for top speed..

You need both!

Ok, Veyron vs Mclaren F1. Mclaren is more aerodynamic but has a lower top speed. Because of the power output.

Also are we talking road vehicles or land speed record?

My head hurts now