New Audi A4 vs. New 3 Series
-
My understanding of the F50 engine is very different from what you have described.Originally posted by Gedanken:Uh, Gaz, Heng listed the F50 and OX99 as examples of F1 engines taken and detuned for road use. Of course, both engines were extensively modified in terms of cooling, ignition and the other systems I mentioned earlier, and that modification is the definition of detuning. In effect, the F50 and OX99's engines fit the definition of "road-going F1 engines", while the M5's V10 does not, because it was never an F1 engine to begin with.
Quote :
The second important area is the F50's much acclaimed 'Formula One derived' engine. This is based on the 3.5 litre V12 unit which powered Prost and Nigel Mansell in the 1990 season, but it's relations are loose. The road going powerplant took the F1's 65-degree vee, used the same 5-valve per cylinder design, and retained the block length. Everything else, however, is different. It had to be - although the F50 is a remarkable car, the requirement to replace an engine every 200 or so miles as in an F1 car would be ridiculous! Some of the exotic materials have made it onto the road engine, however, with titanium playing a part in the internals. The capacity was increased to 4.7 litres, and the engine hits the rev limiter at 8,700 rpm, quite some way short of the 14,000 attainable with the F1 engine - pneumatic valve springs made such revs possible, but these were too unreliable to be used due to air leakages (which have been often seen to cause problems in Grands Prix), and were replaced with steel springs for the road engine
Btw, do you know how loud is a F50? You sure this can be registered in Singapore like a road car? -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
Ged, have you compared the engine spec of M5 and F50? I think they are comparable in term of power, rev limit, and capacity. BMW might not call it F1, but it is obvious that the M5 is capable of matching what ferrari refered as F1.
My understanding of the F50 engine is very different from what you have described.
Quote :
The second important area is the F50's much acclaimed 'Formula One derived' engine. This is based on the 3.5 litre V12 unit which powered Prost and Nigel Mansell in the 1990 season, [b]but it's relations are loose. The road going powerplant took the F1's 65-degree vee, used the same 5-valve per cylinder design, and retained the block length. Everything else, however, is different. It had to be - although the F50 is a remarkable car, the requirement to replace an engine every 200 or so miles as in an F1 car would be ridiculous! Some of the exotic materials have made it onto the road engine, however, with titanium playing a part in the internals. The capacity was increased to 4.7 litres, and the engine hits the rev limiter at 8,700 rpm, quite some way short of the 14,000 attainable with the F1 engine - pneumatic valve springs made such revs possible, but these were too unreliable to be used due to air leakages (which have been often seen to cause problems in Grands Prix), and were replaced with steel springs for the road engine
Btw, do you know how loud is a F50? You sure this can be registered in Singapore like a road car?
[/b] -
Here is a comment of a F50 owner who also own a 355 and 360.
However, it has the faults of it's qualities, so to speak. If you want the ultimate in performance, you're going to have to sacrifice plenty. There's no luggage space. None. No stereo, no electric windows, no fancy adjustable seats, no "amenities" at all aside from air conditioning. The interior is spartan, almost stark. The car is loud, so loud that your ears will ring at full throttle (sure does sound good though). And hot, very hot. That A/C isn't an option, it's there to keep you from baking.
Do you call this as a road car? or a race car on the road? -
Gaz, this bit you quoted agrees with what i just said:
Originally posted by Gazelle:
Exactly what I said - the design started life as an F1 engine, and substantial changes were made to it.
The road going powerplant took the F1's 65-degree vee, used the same 5-valve per cylinder design, and retained the block length. Everything else, however, is different.Originally posted by Gazelle:
As I said earlier - the valve trains had to be changed. Also, at 8700rpm, the Mrelli system from the original F1 design was replaced as well, if I recall correctly.
The capacity was increased to 4.7 litres, and the engine hits the [b]rev limiter at 8,700 rpm, quite some way short of the 14,000 attainable with the F1 engine - pneumatic valve springs made such revs possible, but these were too unreliable to be used due to air leakages (which have been often seen to cause problems in Grands Prix), and were replaced with steel springs for the road engine[b]
So if you agree with this article you posted, you agree with Heng's definition of a detuned F1 engine: that an F1 engine was extensively modified to make it suitable for road use.
As for noise, that's up to each country's traffic authority to make a judgement on. Ferrari built the car as a) a production model, b) a car that is not limited to race tracks but can in fact run on normal roads and c) is available to buyers without a racing licence. That makes it a road car, and that's Ferrari's definition. -
Okay, how can I put this succinctly?Originally posted by Gazelle:Ged, have you compared the engine spec of M5 and F50? I think they are comparable in term of power, rev limit, and capacity. BMW might not call it F1, but it is obvious that the M5 is capable of matching what ferrari refered as F1.
Neither the M5's nor the F50's engine can be considered an F1 engine by any stretch of the imagination. Both are well over 3 litres, and both rev at about half the speed of an F1 engine.
That's where the similarity between the two engines ends. The F50's engine used an actual F1 engine as a base, after which modifications were made - by that measure, it is an F1 engine modified for road use.
On the other hand, the M5's engine has never at any point been an F1 engine. It may borrow technology from the F1 program, but it is not a road-going F1 engine.
Hopefully that clears things up. -
To me, both engine have significant F1 technology and it is hard for anyone to say how much are being transferred or which engine is more F1 than the other.Originally posted by Gedanken:Okay, how can I put this succinctly?
Neither the M5's nor the F50's engine can be considered an F1 engine by any stretch of the imagination. Both are well over 3 litres, and both rev at about half the speed of an F1 engine.
That's where the similarity between the two engines ends. The F50's engine used an actual F1 engine as a base, after which modifications were made - by that measure, it is an F1 engine modified for road use.
On the other hand, the M5's engine has never at any point been an F1 engine. It may borrow technology from the F1 program, but it is not a road-going F1 engine.
Hopefully that clears things up.
From a marketing point of view, it will be easy for Ferrari to market F50 as a Ferrari F1 road car, since they own both F1 team and car company. How F1 is the F50 engine? I think they are comparable to M5, if not lesser.
As for BMW, their main role is to build engine for Williams. If BMW would to market the M5 power plant as something that derieved from a BMW-William F1 engine, BMW might have to pay profit sharing to Williams.
The only major difference between these 2 cars is , the BMW has a more practical approach and it is used in a normal looking saloon car. The F50 was build for a one-off 50 anniversary project, with the purpuse to fulfill their dream and curiosity of building a true "F1" car for the road. The F50 project is the first and the last of its kind, and mainly it is because it is simply not practical for the road and the driver. -
fyi, i didnt bother reading all ur posts....
-
In that case, I think we're ready to go back to the original point, where you said that BMW's F1 participation is something you would take into consideration when buying a car.Originally posted by Gazelle:To me, both engine have significant F1 technology and it is hard for anyone to say how much are being transferred or which engine is more F1 than the other.
From a marketing point of view, it will be easy for Ferrari to market F50 as a Ferrari F1 road car, since they own both F1 team and car company. How F1 is the F50 engine? I think they are comparable to M5, if not lesser.
As for BMW, their main role is to build engine for Williams. If BMW would to market the M5 power plant as something that derieved from a BMW-William F1 engine, BMW might have to pay profit sharing to Williams.
The only major difference between these 2 cars is , the BMW has a more practical approach and it is used in a normal looking saloon car. The F50 was build for a one-off 50 anniversary project, with the purpuse to fulfill their dream and curiosity of building a true "F1" car for the road. The F50 project is the first and the last of its kind, and mainly it is because it is simply not practical for the road and the driver.
We've established that unlike extreme examples such as the F50 and the OX99, the relationship between F1 constructors' road and race cars is tenuous at best. As such, how much can you really count on the constructors' F1 performance as an indicator of their road cars' quality?
I assert that F1 participation is not a very good indicator at all. The road cars do not share the chassis, suspension or engine designs of the race cars, and as such are so different that any inference is dubious.
What we're left with, then, is the engine management system and transmission. Sure, the E60's EMS is a you-beaut unit, running three 32-bit processors and making a couple of million calculations per second, but that ultimately affects smoothness, not power. Plenty of people have taken a big-block engine and cranked out lots of horsepower - a Chevy V8 can be made to pump out 500 bhp quite easily, so the E60's power is more a function of its size and rev speed, not the fact that it's got individual throttles for each cylinder. As for semiautomatic transmissions, they're becoming pretty common these days, with even Alfa producing shifters mounted on the steering wheels. To your average road driver, what difference does 50 miliseconds between gears make?
The bottom line, therefore, is that when you're behind the wheel, the manufacturer's participation isn't going to make much of a difference. -
The guys at ITV are speculating that the sackings are related to a disagreement over the choice of the second driver. It seems that Mateschitz and his assistant Helmut Marko wanted to hire a Red Bull-backed driver, either Christian Klien or Vitantonio Liuzzi. On the other hand, Purnell and Pitchforth preferred B.A.R test driver Anthony Davidson or McLaren test driver Alex Wurz.Originally posted by HENG@:ged, while we're touching on F1 again, whatcha think of Tony n David's sacking from Red Bull?
I'll prod Alan to see if he's willing to spill the beans. -
my money is with Anthony davidson.....this dude is fast!!!Originally posted by Gedanken:The guys at ITV are speculating that the sackings are related to a disagreement over the choice of the second driver. It seems that Mateschitz and his assistant Helmut Marko wanted to hire a Red Bull-backed driver, either Christian Klien or Vitantonio Liuzzi. On the other hand, Purnell and Pitchforth preferred B.A.R test driver Anthony Davidson or McLaren test driver Alex Wurz.
I'll prod Alan to see if he's willing to spill the beans. -
Sadly, that's not to be - Red Bull have decided to test Klein and Liuzzi.Originally posted by Gazelle:my money is with Anthony davidson.....this dude is fast!!! -
same, thats what i read from ITV. anyways now that tony and david are gone, the seat is likely to go to either of the RB drivers.
-
Oh, Heng, according to Alan, Purnell's a wanker but Pitchforth shouldn't have gone. That's all I could get out of him.
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:Oh, Heng, according to Alan, Purnell's a wanker but Pitchforth shouldn't have gone. That's all I could get out of him.
hey i got to see some of the Vauxhall BTCC cars yest. really lovely. -
i thought is already confirmed that Klein and Liuzzi will be sharing the seat for 2005? Is the anthony thingy you mentioned new?Originally posted by Gedanken:Sadly, that's not to be - Red Bull have decided to test Klein and Liuzzi. -
No, the Davidson thing is being put forward as the cause of Pitchforth and Purnell's sacking - it happened a few months back.Originally posted by Gazelle:i thought is already confirmed that Klein and Liuzzi will be sharing the seat for 2005? Is the anthony thingy you mentioned new?
While Klein and Luizzi have both signed contracts with Red Bull, it has yet to be decided who's racing. They're not going to share the seat; only one will be racing, with betting odds on Klein. Beyond that, I don't expect there's much point speculating until an announcement is made - RB have a weird way of making decisions. Just a few short weeks before signing Couthard, they said they weren't even considering him, so they do send out a lot of mixed signals to the press. -
Ged,Originally posted by Gedanken:No, the Davidson thing is being put forward as the cause of Pitchforth and Purnell's sacking - it happened a few months back.
While Klein and Luizzi have both signed contracts with Red Bull, it has yet to be decided who's racing. They're not going to share the seat; only one will be racing, with betting odds on Klein. Beyond that, I don't expect there's much point speculating until an announcement is made - RB have a weird way of making decisions. Just a few short weeks before signing Couthard, they said they weren't even considering him, so they do send out a lot of mixed signals to the press.
I thought RB has "confirmed" about a month ago that Klein and Luizzi will be sharing the seat.
Quote from F1 racing. Date 14th Jan 2005.
'Tonio' Liuzzi will use a part time F1 drive in 2005 to prove he can be trusted to become a 'proper' team member next year. The young Italian, like Christian Klien, will almost certainly 'share' the sister Red Bull cockpit next to David Coulthard. "I'll learn this year, giving my best," said the F3000 champion, "and showing my potential." He added: "For example, I see this as an opportunity because I can learn about how to set up a car well, which is a difficult task, and then show I can become a proper driver in 2006."
Team principal Christian Horner, meanwhile, said Red Bull can decide who'll race in Australia 'literally a day or two before' the opening grand prix. But he added: "We'll probably make a choice a bit before that." -
You could well be right - I'm interpreting the news upon the basis that a driver gets a complete season with the team. If Klein and Luizzi are willing to sacrifice their standings in the championship to each get part of a season in the team, they could share the seat. I'm not aware of any rule that prohibits this.
It's an odd form of placement, though. I've seen drivers sign on for a few races (Senna with McLaren at the beginning of 1993, for example, was on a race-to-race contract for the first four races), or one driver taking over the seat for the remainder of the season, but I can't recall anyone ever agreeing at the start of a season to "share" the seat. -
-
already posted here:Originally posted by Gazelle:
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=112371
-
Cute segment, even accounting for the fake spin.
I can't help thinking, though - at 200, both drivers are toe-to-toe, while at 60, one guy's a heavy hitter while the other's just another chump in a rice rocket. -
ah. u caught on about that fake spin too eh?Originally posted by Gedanken:Cute segment, even accounting for the fake spin.
I can't help thinking, though - at 200, both drivers are toe-to-toe, while at 60, one guy's a heavy hitter while the other's just another chump in a rice rocket. -
Just noticed there was a short review in the TG Jan05 issue, on the F430 vs. Lamborghini Gallardo. You might want to check it out.Originally posted by HENG@:ah. u caught on about that fake spin too eh? -
saw it, read it. The next gen Gallardo should be very exciting.Originally posted by Gazelle:Just noticed there was a short review in the TG Jan05 issue, on the F430 vs. Lamborghini Gallardo. You might want to check it out.
-
I think lambo can only catch up with Ferrari after they start moving toward the concept of V8 engines. And it should happen after F1 V8 engine regulation kicks in in 2006.Originally posted by HENG@:saw it, read it. The next gen Gallardo should be very exciting.
At the moment I see no reason why Volkswagen would want to invest in a new multi millions V10 program when it is going to be outdated in 2 to 3 years.
I think Audi already has a very good V8 program with Le Mans and they are likely wait till 2006 to lanch the assault.