Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | AF 350Z | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
| Latest | 0 Rplys |
03-02-2004, 11:38 AM | #1 | |
AF Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Canberra
Posts: 27
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Renault engine?
What on earth were renault thinking when they decided to go from a 110 degree V10 to a 72 degree engine? no wonder gascoyne left - Imagine having to design the bodywork to fit around that sucker. At least cooling wont be a problem...
BRING BACK THE TURBOS!!!!!!!!! 1200HP FOR ALL!!!!!!!!
__________________
Initial D ain't about drift. It's about "driving the fastest way". |
|
03-02-2004, 12:29 PM | #2 | |
AF Modelrater
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Forks Township, Pennsylvania
Posts: 12,894
Thanks: 18
Thanked 63 Times in 56 Posts
|
Re: Renault engine?
Renault were thinking about engine reliability, servicability, power....
Any more questions? |
|
03-02-2004, 04:17 PM | #3 | |
Zomby Woof
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 8,871
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
Re: Renault engine?
The benifits of a wide angle engine are clear to all. Unfortunately, as Ray says, Renault encountered too many unforseen problems that made it unworkable in the short term. So they retreated to a more conventional (for current F1) layout. I know for a fact an awful lot of thinking would have gone into that decision!
|
|
03-03-2004, 08:41 PM | #4 | |
AF Newbie
Thread starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Canberra
Posts: 27
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
That layout is still a very tight angle by current standards, and not only do you lose the low centre of gravity benifit but you lose aero grip because of the damage to the airflow over the rear wing. Reliability may have been the main concern, but watch the renault creep in a straight line and in high speed corners for the first half of the year. I would have stuck with the wide angle. That engine was reliable anyway, apart from the cooling issues, and had more benifits than compromises. If you're going to have next to no power at least build an engine that gives you gains elsewhere.
__________________
Initial D ain't about drift. It's about "driving the fastest way". |
|
03-05-2004, 06:45 AM | #5 | |
Forza Schumacher
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Tallinn
Posts: 6,695
Thanks: 9
Thanked 19 Times in 19 Posts
|
Re: Renault engine?
I'm sure Renault considered all pros and cons before making this decision. Aerodynamically they probably haven't compromised at all as the regulations for this year call for larger engine covers anyway. And if anything, Renault know very well how to make F1 engines, so if they think this is the best way to go forward, I trust them.
And I'll tell you why Gascoyne left - money.
__________________
Would love to resume my duties as AF's own official thread bastardizer!!! 1:29:53.435 || 207.316 || 310.596 |
|
03-18-2004, 06:01 PM | #6 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Borlänge
Posts: 1,098
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Renault engine?
The wide angle engine lacked both power and reliability.
As known, perfect balance can only be achieved with a 72 degree V angle for a V10 engine. All other angles will introduce unbalances which can decrease rpm and power. A wide ange also cause cylinder filling problems due to intake tuning and that less place is avialible for the exhaust manifolds. There have been some disagreement within the team about the wide angle engine. Now they have went back to the old 72 degree supertec engine but a new wider angle engine will be introduced to next year. |
|
|
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
|
|