Ferrari Mailing List: Re: Well, that just about sums it up (with lots of TECH and Ferrari Content, but no opinions added)

[Mike (themightytoe]

OK,

So if we are going to discuss engine tech what are the real limits that need
to be pushed in the future?

In my mind they will be

1.  Fuel Economy
2.  Weight (see above)
3.  Flexibility (how many different fuel sources can it use?) 
4.  Safe to dispose of when you are done (possibly why Li-O and Li-Po based
batteries in cars won't ever be a big thing?, but then again consumers don't
often think that far ahead).

I think even Ferrari has to be looking at hybrid vehicles, you can't beat
the torque curve on a brushless DC motor.  All torque available at 0 RPM.
Maybe a decent speaker system can replicate the Ferrari sounds...

I think that power hungry engines by their very nature are inherently lower
tech than the high efficiency, high longevity motors, and mass produced
motors.  To manage a lot of power they need to be quite overdesigned and
they still tend to break, have more moving parts, are often higher revving,
operate at higher compression, have higher flow rates for fuel, air and oil,
etc...  From an engineering perspective if you can hand build all of your
motors to spec and match everything in the engine that way, that takes
arguably less engineering effort (and more physical mechanical effort and
cost to pay those guys) than if you design each component to work in harmony
together with known tolerances and still turn out a decent product.  But
Combustion engine design has not really seen major leaps in technology that
other areas have, mostly it has been slow refinements and applications of
existing tech (engine management computers, fuel and direct injection, CAD
design for piston heads, etc).    

I thought this was particularly interesting:
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060227/FREE/302270007/1
023/THISWEEKSISSUE

A 6 stroke motor...  Part gas combustion, part diesel, all quite excellent
applications of existing technology.

Pretty cool stuff.

BR,
Mike



-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Craig [mailto:dave.craig [at] sbcglobal.net] 
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 8:14 PM
To: Mike Fleischer
Cc: 'The FerrariList'
Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Well, that just about sums it up (with lots of TECH
and Ferrari Content, but no opinions added)

Ok, Lashdeep, I will join in.  Have you ever checked into this technology?
http://www.coatesengine.com/engine_of_the_future.html
This technology must cost a lot because it has been around for a while now
and you just don't hear about it.  But small blocks for the street turning
almost 15k RPMS is way sweet.  

And to answer your question.  No, I really don't see a pneumatic valve
assembly being robust enough to go 200K miles.  And to be real honest, I
don't see the average street car needing to spin over 6K rpm.  So, assuming
electric cars don't take over the world anytime soon, what I do see as a
real possibility (and a near possibility) is a solenoid based (with spring
return) valve system.   Think about this some, you could infinitely vary the
duration and if you got fancy enough with the spring design and solenoid
design, you could have a few different lifts as well.  I really see this as
the future of the internal combustion engine.  You get rid of all of the
upper rotating mass (associated with overhead cams), seriously reduce the
internal friction of the engine (the higher the rpm, the bigger the
benefit).  I have heard rumors that BWM have been working on this for a few
years and others have as well.  

Here it is running on small engines.
 http://rbowes1.11net.com/dbowes/
But so far it seams that no-one has figured it out for the automobile.

I think the main reason to drive this technology will be fuel economy
(infinitely variable valve timing to optimize for varying conditions) and
the reduction of internal engine friction.  Also, we can all agree that
mechanical components of the past are constantly being replaced by
electrical components of today on almost everything in the car.  So, the
valve assembly has to be on this upgrade path somewhere in the future.   

Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: LS [mailto:lashdeep [at] yahoo.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 12:26 PM
To: Dave Craig
Cc: The FerrariList
Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Well, that just about sums it up (with lots of TECH
and Ferrari Content, but no opinions added)

DL-"I'm pretty much blown away by this statement from Lashdeep."

LS-"I think you're missing the
point again on why these cars are not in the least bit impressive from an
engine tech standpoint."

To keep things technical, let's examine the Ford GT's 5.4 liter supercharged
V8, one of the forced induction supercars on Dennis' list.

 It's extremely strong and makes about 550bhp. It has DOHC, 32 valves, 4
camshafts overhead and a supercharger. This basic engine is also used in the
Koenigsegg (all models despite their shady "bespoke" claim). It's fuel
economy is not so great either.

Comparing that engine with a typical pushrod V8 makes for an interesting
demonstration (see post #37) :

http://corner-carvers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21944&highlight=teksid

This image shows the Ford Modular motor, in this case a 4.6 liter sitting
next to a pushrod V8, in this case a Ford 302. The Ford GT uses basically
the engine on the left, PLUS a supercharger.

The LS V8 is VERY similar in dimensions to the 5.0 V8. In fact, I can
produce exact dimensions of the 302 as I have a spare at home I can measure.
If anyone wants the exact numbers of either that or the LS V8 (showing that
they are similar), please call me after 8pm tonight and I can measure both
for you. 202-236-4589.

Regardless, the above picture is frightening...for just one moment, put
yourself in a car/engine builder's shoes. Assuming that both the pushrod and
the blown OHC engine make the same power (which they can) and both rev
comfortably to 8000rpm (which they both can)...which would you want in your
performance oriented car? 

An OHC engine with 4 cams, 32 valves and a supercharger making up a bulk of
the weight high in the engine, just underneath the hood? 

Or would you prefer the dramatically smaller and lighter, normally aspirated
pushrod design? As a cherry on top (or on bottom for better weight
distribution), the pushrod gets much better fuel economy as well thanks to
impressive engine mgmt...

>From an engineering standpoint, it's a tough point to ignore no? 

The SL65 comparison would be very simliar to the one above...two turbos add
a lot of weight, heat, oil and coolant...what a mess. The M5 V10 is soooo
huge it's scary. If you get the chance to see one outside of a car, you will
soil your knickers. That thing has no business being in a performance car or
parked outside a Sierra Club meeting for that matter. 

Is this science fiction? 

It might seem that way...I didn't want to believe it. Hell, one of my
"babies" has the Ford Mod motor pictured above. But now, in Dec 2007, it
seems like silly complication at best...especially if you like track
performance or balanced handling...and saving fuel.

In hopes of sparking the elusive technical discussion (without any car
religion or personal preferences involved), what would be the next step in
ultimate performance engine design?

Ferrari has an amazing reputation for translating racing tech into street
tech. They were testing an early form of paddle shifters in '78 with Gilles.
That feature evolved and eventually changed street motoring. 

What is next? I'd like to see a pneumatic valvetrain discussion with pros
and cons. Will the elimination of the valve spring and its weight high atop
the engine more than counter act the additional weight of the pressure tank
and hard air lines? Is this something we could see in a future V8
Ferrarimodel? 

Someone, please chime in...this could be fun!

LS



----- Original Message ----
From: Dennis Liu <bigheaddennis [at] gmail.com>
To: LS <lashdeep [at] yahoo.com>
Cc: The FerrariList <ferrari [at] ferrarilist.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2007 10:25:02 PM
Subject: [Ferrari] Well, that just about sums it up

I'm pretty much blown away by this statement from Lashdeep.  I think it
pretty much shows his POV.  Ask yourself if you really think this is
correct.

>Regarding the supercars you listed...their powertrain engineers should be
fired. They couldn't figure out how to make that power out of n/a engine
technology?  Or lighten their vehicles? I'd love to see engine weights and
sizes...prob not so impressive at that point. Anyone can throw a blower onto
a motor. Where is the skill or technology there? I think you're missing the
point again on why these cars are not in the least bit impressive from an
engine tech standpoint. And...I don't think I can type this point up again.

==============

So...  all of the powertrain engineers at Porsche, Mercedes-Benz, Bentley,
Bugatti, Audi, Jaguar, Ford, Audi, Lotus and even Chevrolet are idiots, and
the guys building and selling custom V8s in their garages are geniuses?   

Wow.

Well, that's it for me.  I'm outta here....

vty,

--Dennis

_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/lashdeep%40yahoo.com

Sponsored by BidNip.com eBay Auction Sniper
http://www.BidNip.com/
and F1 Headlines
http://www.F1Headlines.com/


 
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/dave.craig%40sbcglobal.
net

Sponsored by BidNip.com eBay Auction Sniper
http://www.BidNip.com/
and F1 Headlines
http://www.F1Headlines.com/

_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/themightytoe%40gmail.co
m

Sponsored by BidNip.com eBay Auction Sniper
http://www.BidNip.com/
and F1 Headlines
http://www.F1Headlines.com/

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1176 - Release Date: 12/6/2007
11:15 PM
 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1176 - Release Date: 12/6/2007
11:15 PM