Show full size
Discussion Forum of
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
 Technical FAQ924 FAQ (Technical)   Technical924 Technical Section   Jump to   Jump to PCA 924 Registry924 Registry

Why Not just keep your regular engine?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Post new topic   Reply to topic Forum Index -> Engine Transplants
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

PostPosted: Thu Jun 27, 2002 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote


On 2002-06-24 07:23, Cbass wrote:
Hey Lars, wanna know why F1 cars are NA? That's the formula! It used to be 2.0 Turbo motors too, and they made more power...

Richard, you said it better than I could. If you want to put a new engine in a 924, great! If you can afford/do it, by all means, do it! If you can't, dream on, but don't try to "realistically debunk" somebody else's goals with your beliefs.

They made more power....USEABLE POWER? The 930 makes lots of power! Who cares? it spins out! Power is useless without practicality. Did they take the turbos off the formula because of reliability? did they take them off because too many people were being killed spinning out, or did they just take the turbo off the formula cars for no reason....I'd like to know.

What I do know, is that they won't allow the formula cars to have more displacement, because of safety. Too many drivers would get killed.

Now tell me, why don't formula one cars drive with 1.0 litre turbos, pushing out the same HP as 3.0 NA's? My best guess, is that AN NA ENGINE IS MORE PRACTICAL, LOOK AT THE PORSCHE 930, IT IS ONLY PRACTICAL IF YOU HAVE A DRIVER FROM GOD THAT CAN ACTUALLY HANDLE THE TURBO POWER!!

Again, please advise, WHY they took turbo's off the F1 market. What do you mean "that's the formula" ? That doesn't help, just confuses me. That's like saying "cold water is nice". SO????

"Because that's the formula" ???????????

What does that mean????

[ This Message was edited by: larso on 2002-06-27 17:35 ]
Back to top

PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2002 7:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, the reason they started calling it Formula 1, is that they all follow a "formula". This formula states how much displacement, how many cylinders, what sort of drivetrain, maximum wing area, and what sort of tire they can run. That sort of thing.

I agree with you about the practicality of turbo street cars. With an older motor, running lots of boost with a mechanical wastegate, the power is really on/off.

However, on many modern engines, it just starts to blend in, from very low rpms. Modern engine computers have really made turbos practical for street performance applications...

That Audi motor I was quoting figures for has it's boost kick in really low, but off throttle, it's still a 2.2 liter motor. Great fuel economy, but power comparable to a 5.0 Ford, with a broader powerband.

The trick to streetable setups is high compression, with knock sensors. You put as much boost as you can into a motor, before reliability is comprimised. The 20VT runs 15 lbs of boost on 9.3:1...
Back to top
Honda Killer  

PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2002 2:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I dont mind the changing motors idea but why use chevy? why not a 2JZ supra or a 300ZX motor just seems more fiting to the car. but to each his own.
Back to top

PostPosted: Tue Jul 30, 2002 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

V8s are cheap and available. High end Japanese motors are expensive and rarer, and they get snatched up by import guys.

I'm a proponent of German swaps, but nobody on this continent seems to agree...
Back to top

PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2002 7:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote


I think you are attributing characteristics to turbochargers that should actually be attributed to a specific car.

930's don't spin because of the turbocharger and power, it's because 60% of the weight is in the back of the car, 911's spin too. A 993 twin turbo, which has far more power than the 930, has a rengineered chassis and is far less susceptable to spinning despite having gobs of power.

As for pulling turbos from F1, it probably has to do with cost containment. F1 was getting so expensive that only the big manufacturers could field competative cars.. that is what put the IMSA GTP series in the grave, cost too much. FIA isn't worried about speed as a safety factor, all they have to do make groud effects rules which slows the car down.


[ This Message was edited by: abduln on 2002-08-05 19:55 ]
Back to top

PostPosted: Fri Aug 09, 2002 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Old technology (930s) have rapid boost which makes the car spin. New 993s are not comparable to930s, they've got technology, and their boost probably comes on evenly, not joltingly. If you are trying to say that a 911 and a 930, with similar tires, and chassis, are the same when it comes to spinning, you should drive them. A car's spinability is a lot more prone, when you've got melted rubber. Melted rubber comes easy with lots of power, uneven power especially.

As for FIA not worried about speed, why did they put grooves in the tires.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Forum Index -> Engine Transplants All times are GMT + 10 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group