Jump to content


Photo

are bke engined cars about to be obslete?


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#1 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,377 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 17 February 2012 - 12:11

Bike based engines have become a big thing in kit and track cars over the last 5-10 years. Radicals for example and then the development of bike based V-8's for hillclimbs etc. Now an Argentinian saloon car series is apparently thinking of adopting bike based V-8's as it's spec. engine.

Clearly bike engines provide lots of power in a light, reasonably compact package with 140- 180 bhp available from 1.0 to 1.3 litre engines. However there ar some drawbacks - very high rev bands , not much torque and the supply of donor engines depends on some poor fool getting over ambitious on his Hyabusa etc.

Today the big OEM car makers are launching a new range of small, highly turbo charged three cylinder engines to meet fuel economy rules. BMW have admitted the next 3 series will go three cylinder and Ford have just introduced a 1 litre Ecoboost turbo which is winning rave reviews.

It develops 123bhp @ 6,000 rpm with up to 148 ft-lb of torque from low revs. The block is so small it can be covered with a sheet of A4 paper Ford claim.

Here are some reviews

http://uk.autoblog.c...-engine-priced/

A new, three-cylinder 1.0 litre turbocharged version of the Ford Focus, driven here in 123bhp form but also available with 99bhp.

"This engine, whose cylinder block has barely the area of a sheet of A4 paper, arrives first in the Focus because its high-tech gadgetry (variable valve timing, miniature turbo, advanced electronics, direct fuel injection system) would make it expensive for the Fiesta.

The triple's efficiencies – which include super-efficient combustion, stop-start, a remarkably wide torque spread (with peak 125lb ft torque that overboosts to 148lb ft for 30 seconds to assist acceleration and passing manoeuvres), a six-speed gearbox and a 30kg weight saving over the front wheels – result in CO2 output of just 114g/km and combined fuel consumption of 56.5mpg for the six-speed version.

Five-speed figures are a little sharper, but that model loses a bit of performance against the six-speeder's 120mph top speed and 11.3sec 0-62mph acceleration. Both versions bring impressive tax advantages to business users.
What’s it like?

Even such promising paper figures don't prepare you for the driving experience. You barely hear the thing start, and it idles so smoothly you'd swear it had stalled. Your brain tells you such a small engine will need lots of revs off the mark, but it gets going easily because the combination of a tiny turbo, advanced electronic engine management and double variable valve timing give it amazing oomph in the low gears, even below 2000rpm (though the redline's 6700rpm)."

- From Autocar.

The point is that a mainline OEM has produced an engine which may be as small and light as many bike engines with Ford durability and 123bhp/litre before any tuning or enlargement. It also is euro 6 compliant so any kit/amateur builder should be able to pass any global emissions test easliy.

I do wonder if the age of bike engines will fade away as tuners get to work on these new three cylinder , high boost small engines. For one thing the donor availibililty should be way better than bike engines due to sheer production volumes. I would guess that 150 to 170bhp could be achieved by winding the revs up to say , 7,500 rpm



Advertisement

#2 jatwarks

jatwarks
  • Member

  • 202 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 17 February 2012 - 12:53

I do wonder if the age of bike engines will fade away as tuners get to work on these new three cylinder , high boost small engines. For one thing the donor availibililty should be way better than bike engines due to sheer production volumes. I would guess that 150 to 170bhp could be achieved by winding the revs up to say , 7,500 rpm

Instant reaction, without too much detailed thought, is that there is still room for the lockup specials builder to prefer bike engines due to their transmissions being lighter and less complex.

The bike engined specials can be, literally, one step up from a kart.

To build more sophisticated cars, based on the new generation of engines, would require the resources of a small, specialist manufacturer; the software element of the spec would be crucial.

I guess I agree with you when it comes to those manufacturers who can manage a decent volume of production; it's those who can't which will find sticking with bike engines a safer bet.

#3 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 17 February 2012 - 13:16

Bikes have 6 speed close ratio transmissions in a very lightweight package, that would be the deal clincher for me.

Hyabusa's are noted for their wide power spread too and the crash rate isn't going to go down anytime soon and anyway, you can buy Kawasaki ZX14 crate motors and the 2011 ZX14 is the worlds first 200hp production motorcycle.

#4 Wolf

Wolf
  • Member

  • 7,881 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 17 February 2012 - 13:26

Bikes have 6 speed close ratio transmissions in a very lightweight package, that would be the deal clincher for me.

Hyabusa's are noted for their wide power spread too and the crash rate isn't going to go down anytime soon and anyway, you can buy Kawasaki ZX14 crate motors and the 2011 ZX14 is the worlds first 200hp production motorcycle.


I thought the gloves are about to come off with +200BHP sport bikes, with BMW throwing a gauntlet in face of Japanese manufacturers (who I was given to understand had 'gentleman's agreement' that cca 185BHP was good enough and not to push the envelope much farther)...

#5 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,377 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 17 February 2012 - 20:16

I understand the bike gearbox point but they also require special final drives to convert 11,000 rpm into usable wheel speeds which adds some weight back.

The real issue may be emissions, as I understand it the bike engines are not fully cat'ed and won't meet standards like euro 6. With a Ford three cylinder turbo type engine you start with a euro 6 compliant package.

For the one off or purely track based racer bike engines are very good but what if the local registration rules require full emissions stds. such as euro 6.

As mater of curiosity how much is a ZX14 crate motor to buy new?

#6 Fondles

Fondles
  • Member

  • 50 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 18 February 2012 - 01:42

Instant reaction, without too much detailed thought, is that there is still room for the lockup specials builder to prefer bike engines due to their transmissions being lighter and less complex.

The bike engined specials can be, literally, one step up from a kart.

To build more sophisticated cars, based on the new generation of engines, would require the resources of a small, specialist manufacturer; the software element of the spec would be crucial.

I guess I agree with you when it comes to those manufacturers who can manage a decent volume of production; it's those who can't which will find sticking with bike engines a safer bet.


The other big advantage that the 'Busas have (no doubt some other bike engines can do this as well though) is that they have barrels/cylinders that are separate to the crankcase, so you can build a V8, V12, or X16 if you want to. It wouldn't be cheap as you have to get a crankcase and crank specially made but far from impossible these days.

#7 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,302 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 18 February 2012 - 04:09

Clearly bike engines provide lots of power in a light, reasonably compact package with 140- 180 bhp available from 1.0 to 1.3 litre engines. However there ar some drawbacks - very high rev bands , not much torque . . .

Hate that word "Torque". If the need is to minimise gear-shifting in racing/performance conditions, the important metric is "Width of power band". If the need is to minimise gear shifting under city-driven conditions the important metric is "Width of torque band"

I would guess that 150 to 170bhp could be achieved by winding the revs up to say , 7,500 rpm

Increasing the power or revs will require a larger turbo and compromise the torque whoops "Width of torque band".

#8 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 18 February 2012 - 04:45

I understand the bike gearbox point but they also require special final drives to convert 11,000 rpm into usable wheel speeds which adds some weight back.


Nothing special at all for a basic mid engine'd arrangement - a normal chain and sprocket is all that's needed. Some use an intermediate reverse gear box as bikes don't have reverse gear of course while others use an electric motor to drive in reverse and others just Fred Flintstone it.

There is other setups for front engine use but I'm not sure what they use, maybe a reduction box?

As mater of curiosity how much is a ZX14 crate motor to buy new?


http://www.muzzys.com/71200-1094-LF/

http://www.muzzys.co...ines/index.html

Also see what you can get for them, dry sump kits, 1600cc etc .....

http://www.muzzys.co...alog/index.html


#9 MatsNorway

MatsNorway
  • Member

  • 2,059 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 18 February 2012 - 10:09

As soon as you turbo charge the bike engine the comparison is pointless.

Is the bike engines and their gearboxes separate from the enginebottom end? etc.



#10 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,377 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 18 February 2012 - 10:55

I would willingly agree that bike engines are the best solution NOW and will probably remain so for track only cars but , at least in the EU, the legistlators are now zeroing in on bike emissions with the aim of imposing euro3 (2014) ,euro 4 (2017)and eventually euro 6 standards (2020) to all bikes sold in the EU.
e
The annoucements , in increasing order of boredom are linked below. Those of you living in places like China, may smile that all this new legislation ( including "Increased market surveillance") comes from the official EU commissioner for Entrepreneurship!

http://europa.eu/rap...;guiLanguage=en

http://europa.eu/rap...;guiLanguage=fr

http://eur-lex.europ...10PC0542:en:NOT

So my point is that if you want to build a bike engined car in the EU anyway buy the engine in the next 24 months before bikes get the same tailpipe standards as cars.

At that point I think the trend will swing back to car engines due to supply and cost factors


#11 Grumbles

Grumbles
  • Member

  • 326 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 18 February 2012 - 20:27

Some people (and I'm one of them) just don't like to drive turbo'd engines and prefer a bigger, NA engine.

#12 Wolf

Wolf
  • Member

  • 7,881 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 18 February 2012 - 21:01

The idea of 1,5l V8 (with GSX-R 750 cylinders) does sound intriguing, if not even frightening...

#13 phoenix101

phoenix101
  • Member

  • 260 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 18 February 2012 - 21:55

A motorcycle engine is a reverse engineered racing engine. They can be run flat out with stock internals, and series like FIM Supersport, AMA SBK, BSB, use stock engine parts. Production car engines are made for production, hence, they require dedicated motorsport versions to be raced in competition.

If you put a 1L+ motorcycle engine next to a 1L+ car engine, I think you will have your answer. The packaging of motorcycle components is superior, as are the mechanical systems and the quality of the components (in many instances). Furthermore, motorcycle engines don't requiring engine compartment space for turbo equipment.

If motorcycle engines disappear from trackday cars, the change will result from the collapse of the sportbike industry or a change in the racing rules or government regulation which ultimately govern what is available in the production market.

#14 24gerrard

24gerrard
  • Member

  • 2,008 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 18 February 2012 - 22:21

A motorcycle engine is a reverse engineered racing engine. They can be run flat out with stock internals, and series like FIM Supersport, AMA SBK, BSB, use stock engine parts. Production car engines are made for production, hence, they require dedicated motorsport versions to be raced in competition.

If you put a 1L+ motorcycle engine next to a 1L+ car engine, I think you will have your answer. The packaging of motorcycle components is superior, as are the mechanical systems and the quality of the components (in many instances). Furthermore, motorcycle engines don't requiring engine compartment space for turbo equipment.

If motorcycle engines disappear from trackday cars, the change will result from the collapse of the sportbike industry or a change in the racing rules or government regulation which ultimately govern what is available in the production market.


It is possible to race with any engine even a steam engine if you wish.
It is all relative and very much so in control formula.
There is no 'right' engine for motor sport.
The only thing that makes a difference is availability and cost.

#15 Vanishing Point

Vanishing Point
  • Member

  • 1,093 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 18 February 2012 - 23:08

Bike based engines have become a big thing in kit and track cars over the last 5-10 years. Radicals for example and then the development of bike based V-8's for hillclimbs etc. Now an Argentinian saloon car series is apparently thinking of adopting bike based V-8's as it's spec. engine.

Clearly bike engines provide lots of power in a light, reasonably compact package with 140- 180 bhp available from 1.0 to 1.3 litre engines. However there ar some drawbacks - very high rev bands , not much torque and the supply of donor engines depends on some poor fool getting over ambitious on his Hyabusa etc.

Today the big OEM car makers are launching a new range of small, highly turbo charged three cylinder engines to meet fuel economy rules. BMW have admitted the next 3 series will go three cylinder and Ford have just introduced a 1 litre Ecoboost turbo which is winning rave reviews.

It develops 123bhp @ 6,000 rpm with up to 148 ft-lb of torque from low revs. The block is so small it can be covered with a sheet of A4 paper Ford claim.

Here are some reviews

http://uk.autoblog.c...-engine-priced/

A new, three-cylinder 1.0 litre turbocharged version of the Ford Focus, driven here in 123bhp form but also available with 99bhp.

"This engine, whose cylinder block has barely the area of a sheet of A4 paper, arrives first in the Focus because its high-tech gadgetry (variable valve timing, miniature turbo, advanced electronics, direct fuel injection system) would make it expensive for the Fiesta.

The triple's efficiencies – which include super-efficient combustion, stop-start, a remarkably wide torque spread (with peak 125lb ft torque that overboosts to 148lb ft for 30 seconds to assist acceleration and passing manoeuvres), a six-speed gearbox and a 30kg weight saving over the front wheels – result in CO2 output of just 114g/km and combined fuel consumption of 56.5mpg for the six-speed version.

Five-speed figures are a little sharper, but that model loses a bit of performance against the six-speeder's 120mph top speed and 11.3sec 0-62mph acceleration. Both versions bring impressive tax advantages to business users.
What’s it like?

Even such promising paper figures don't prepare you for the driving experience. You barely hear the thing start, and it idles so smoothly you'd swear it had stalled. Your brain tells you such a small engine will need lots of revs off the mark, but it gets going easily because the combination of a tiny turbo, advanced electronic engine management and double variable valve timing give it amazing oomph in the low gears, even below 2000rpm (though the redline's 6700rpm)."

- From Autocar.

The point is that a mainline OEM has produced an engine which may be as small and light as many bike engines with Ford durability and 123bhp/litre before any tuning or enlargement. It also is euro 6 compliant so any kit/amateur builder should be able to pass any global emissions test easliy.

I do wonder if the age of bike engines will fade away as tuners get to work on these new three cylinder , high boost small engines. For one thing the donor availibililty should be way better than bike engines due to sheer production volumes. I would guess that 150 to 170bhp could be achieved by winding the revs up to say , 7,500 rpm


Just forget about fuel consumption and make the thing as a 4 Litre or even an 8 Litre V 12. :cool:

But there must be a point where all the technology becomes a liability and makes it a throwaway engine when something goes wrong or when it needs a rebuild in which case who can afford it anyway compared to good old fashioned technology.

Edited by Vanishing Point, 18 February 2012 - 23:11.


#16 phoenix101

phoenix101
  • Member

  • 260 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 18 February 2012 - 23:50

It is possible to race with any engine even a steam engine if you wish.
It is all relative and very much so in control formula.
There is no 'right' engine for motor sport.
The only thing that makes a difference is availability and cost.


Well then, that settles it. Everyone runs V8 crate engines, and motorcycle-powered vehicles do not actually exist. Dumb thread, moving on........

#17 Nathan

Nathan
  • Member

  • 2,568 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 20 February 2012 - 00:13

As mater of curiosity how much is a ZX14 crate motor to buy new?

Around $6250 USD.

Edited by Nathan, 20 February 2012 - 00:13.


#18 bigleagueslider

bigleagueslider
  • Member

  • 858 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 20 February 2012 - 02:10

However there are some drawbacks..............the supply of donor engines depends on some poor fool getting over ambitious on his Hyabusa etc.


Mariner,

That's not a drawback, it's the perfect convergence of Darwinian principles and free market economics. The low price and ready supply of very high performance powerplants/transmissions for us garage enthusiasts is the result of a larger number of individuals with more money than brains or riding skills.

slider

#19 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,377 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 20 February 2012 - 20:06

Of course its Darwinian and great for amateur builders.

However a a supply of used engines from wrecks is no basis for anybody trying to sell cars on a commercial basis. Before investing in the sort of R+D and testing to make a good product you need to know you have a good supply of the parts you can't make like engines and transmissions.

Advertisement

#20 examateur racer

examateur racer
  • New Member

  • 21 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 21 February 2012 - 14:00

A motorcycle engine is a reverse engineered racing engine. They can be run flat out with stock internals, and series like FIM Supersport, AMA SBK, BSB, use stock engine parts. Production car engines are made for production, hence, they require dedicated motorsport versions to be raced in competition.

If you put a 1L+ motorcycle engine next to a 1L+ car engine, I think you will have your answer. The packaging of motorcycle components is superior, as are the mechanical systems and the quality of the components (in many instances). Furthermore, motorcycle engines don't requiring engine compartment space for turbo equipment.

If motorcycle engines disappear from trackday cars, the change will result from the collapse of the sportbike industry or a change in the racing rules or government regulation which ultimately govern what is available in the production market.


Phoenix 101

I'm sorry you are just plain wrong, Sports 2000 uses a Duratec engine with Jenveys and a dry sump, the base engine costs £1300 plus VAT when you blow one up you just replace the £1300 bit. Clubman's also uses a bog standard MG 1600cc at 130 BHP. Both engines work very well in a race environment. You can run several seasons on a rebuild, one ex champion (9 times) has not touched his engine for 7 seasons.

I'm afraid with the bike engines they need rebuilding as they use something called "revs" to produce power, I also wonder how long the noise limits will be 105db and therefore there is a potental problem there too.

I think these new engines should seriously be considered for the future.

#21 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 21 February 2012 - 14:59

I'm afraid with the bike engines they need rebuilding as they use something called "revs" to produce power, I also wonder how long the noise limits will be 105db and therefore there is a potental problem there too.


Nope - Those same engines that "rev" come with a factory "2 Year Unlimited Mileage Warranty" and are sold under America's "Lemon" Laws - shame the Lemon Laws weren't around when those oil leaking Pinto's came out....

Revs and piston travel/speed are different matters and the components being so small are well within stress levels.

Those same "revving" engines pass many countries stringent noise levels obviously.


I'm sorry you are just plain wrong, Sports 2000 uses a Duratec engine with Jenveys and a dry sump, the base engine costs £1300 plus VAT when you blow one up you just replace the £1300 bit.



1) Single mass lightweight steel flywheel and uprated clutch assembly.
2) Modified induction system with separate 40mm throttle bodies.
3) M.B.E. 967 management system mapped for optimised spark and fueling controlled by air temperature, engine speed, water temperature, throttle position and barometer pressure.
4) Pace three stage dry sump system.

Cost of complete kit. £2495.14 + v.a.t. + engine £1300 plus VAT


Of course must run that specific class...


Sportsbike engine, £500 and up, run anywhere you like that accepts you.


#22 jatwarks

jatwarks
  • Member

  • 202 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 22 February 2012 - 07:51

"This engine, whose cylinder block has barely the area of a sheet of A4 paper, arrives first in the Focus because its high-tech gadgetry (variable valve timing, miniature turbo, advanced electronics, direct fuel injection system) would make it expensive for the Fiesta.

This may all also count against using this engine instead of a bike engine; to me it all screams complexity and expense, both in installation and servicing.

The advantage of bike engines, currently, is their less complex nature, in terms of compact packaging, and their less advanced environmental requirements; this will probably change, of course.

It depends mostly, I guess, on whether we are considering volume production or limited availability. A properly set up volume production line will be able to make best use of the new engines and their post-production support. Small scale, labour intensive, workshop based production would be best served by sticking with bike engines.

#23 examateur racer

examateur racer
  • New Member

  • 21 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 22 February 2012 - 09:05

1) There are no warranties with race engines.

2) You are comparing a new Duratec and bolt on kits vs a second hand bike engine, you can buy a used duratec to the right spec quite competitively.

It's about time we moved away from the moronic bike engined one make series and move on.....................

Nope - Those same engines that "rev" come with a factory "2 Year Unlimited Mileage Warranty" and are sold under America's "Lemon" Laws - shame the Lemon Laws weren't around when those oil leaking Pinto's came out....

Revs and piston travel/speed are different matters and the components being so small are well within stress levels.

Those same "revving" engines pass many countries stringent noise levels obviously.





1) Single mass lightweight steel flywheel and uprated clutch assembly.
2) Modified induction system with separate 40mm throttle bodies.
3) M.B.E. 967 management system mapped for optimised spark and fueling controlled by air temperature, engine speed, water temperature, throttle position and barometer pressure.
4) Pace three stage dry sump system.

Cost of complete kit. £2495.14 + v.a.t. + engine £1300 plus VAT


Of course must run that specific class...


Sportsbike engine, £500 and up, run anywhere you like that accepts you.



#24 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,377 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 22 February 2012 - 17:55

Well at least there are diverging views on this topic!!

As an addendum to my original post Ford have told some motorng journalists that they ( Ford ) think they can get the new 1 litre engine up to 177 bhp with sequential turbos to retain low end torque.

They said it was a "stretch" but quoting an output as precise as 177 bhp suggests they may already have the high power version running.

So the bike engines have probably got to beat about 180bhp from these new high boost car engines.

I am not disputing the advantages of second hand bike engines for one-off builders but if its going on the road then the new car engines may well prove better.

#25 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:38

1) There are no warranties with race engines.

2) You are comparing a new Duratec and bolt on kits vs a second hand bike engine, you can buy a used duratec to the right spec quite competitively.

3) It's about time we moved away from the moronic bike engined one make series and move on.....................


1/ You made a statement, I countered - please refer back to your statement.

2/ Post prices please.

3/ Which "moronic" series would that be, the extremely popular Jedi or the massively popular Legend series (in it's various worldwide forms)?. Then we could refer to Euro Hillclimbing, Speedway Midgets, Off Road Racing while none a specific series motorcycle power units are used in spades as well as for pleasure use such as SandRails ......


#26 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 23 February 2012 - 05:54

So the bike engines have probably got to beat about 180bhp from these new high boost car engines.


No, the bike engines have to beat Ford's stated 123hp of which they all do even starting down at the 600's. If your allowed modifications to uprate the power then so am I.... 250hp 1500cc Busa anyone (eg; Radical SR3) ;)

Bike engines still have a weight and packaging advantage not to mention a huge gear ratio advantage ... then there's the sound.


#27 kikiturbo2

kikiturbo2
  • Member

  • 630 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 23 February 2012 - 07:37

1/ You made a statement, I countered - please refer back to your statement.

2/ Post prices please.

3/ Which "moronic" series would that be, the extremely popular Jedi or the massively popular Legend series (in it's various worldwide forms)?. Then we could refer to Euro Hillclimbing, Speedway Midgets, Off Road Racing while none a specific series motorcycle power units are used in spades as well as for pleasure use such as SandRails ......



lets not forget the radicals...

#28 kikiturbo2

kikiturbo2
  • Member

  • 630 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 23 February 2012 - 07:40

Bike engines still have a weight and packaging advantage not to mention a huge gear ratio advantage ... then there's the sound.



Exactly...

my gsxr 1000 is about 180 HP at 64 kg, and that is with sequential dogbox...

If anything is the problem with using any modern car engine, that will be the gearbox.. Try buying a dogbox, let alone a sequential one..

Having said that, it would be really cool to be able to buy crate engines, directly from suzuki.. :)

#29 phoenix101

phoenix101
  • Member

  • 260 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 23 February 2012 - 08:28

Phoenix 101

I'm sorry you are just plain wrong, Sports 2000 uses a Duratec engine with Jenveys and a dry sump, the base engine costs £1300 plus VAT when you blow one up you just replace the £1300 bit. Clubman's also uses a bog standard MG 1600cc at 130 BHP. Both engines work very well in a race environment. You can run several seasons on a rebuild, one ex champion (9 times) has not touched his engine for 7 seasons.

I'm afraid with the bike engines they need rebuilding as they use something called "revs" to produce power, I also wonder how long the noise limits will be 105db and therefore there is a potental problem there too.

I think these new engines should seriously be considered for the future.


That's all well and good, but the OP asked whether or not new car engines would relegate motorcycle engines to the dustbin. Of course, motorcycle engines have drawbacks, but they have advantages as well. Motorcycle engines are compact and lightweight. Motorcycle engines have sequential gearboxes. Motorcycle engines are designed to be raced, even with minimal modification. New production car engines don't diminish the advantages of motorcycle power. If amateur racers and sanctioning bodies don't want to deal with turbocharging, the new car engines might not even replace the existing car engines.

#30 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 5,883 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 24 February 2012 - 11:45

I believe the bike gearboxes are a bit suspect in a car, that weighs more, corners far faster and brakes harder. Within reason the engines dont care
Watching a field of Westfields at Mallala last Sat night. Fast and Boring. Look the same, sound the same though the field did spread out and there was at least 2 engine sizes

#31 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 24 February 2012 - 16:46

I believe the bike gearboxes are a bit suspect in a car, that weighs more, corners far faster and brakes harder.


Nope, most damage is done by clowns slamming down the gears expecting engine braking with engines with small inertia - downchange, big revs and bang! Learn to drive properly.

The Busa is especially noted for it's robust clutch.

You've seen Legend Cars racing Lee (Aussie Racing Cars in Oz), they run 40 car fields, race after race and all finish mechanically no problems - note that the Yamaha FJ1200 they use is a 5 speed so maybe a bit wider in the gears and was a pretty meaty bike originally at 260kgs.


#32 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 1,671 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 26 February 2012 - 03:29

Hate that word "Torque". If the need is to minimise gear-shifting in racing/performance conditions, the important metric is "Width of power band". If the need is to minimise gear shifting under city-driven conditions the important metric is "Width of torque band"

I seem to remember that being called the torque curve.

#33 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,302 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 26 February 2012 - 06:00

I seem to remember that being called the torque curve.

"Torque curve", "Power curve" - same information presented differently.

#34 Fondles

Fondles
  • Member

  • 50 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 07 March 2012 - 01:07

There's a good article on the Radical Hayabusa V8's in this month's Racecar Engineering magazine, page 51.

Edited by Fondles, 07 March 2012 - 01:09.