Advanced Engineering Tech - How do NASCAR engines make 750+HP?

OK. From what is known, NASCAR engines are making around 750+ HP. Some people on this forum say they are running ungodly compression ratios. No they aren't. They're limited to 12:1. They must have a cast iron block and have a choice of aluminium heads or cast iron. The engines are around the 350-355ci mark right? Aren't the combustion chambers limited to 61CC? ( I know they are limited), Cam specs are limited etc. I know items such as the oil gallery are polished smoothe for improved oil flow, etc.
But in all possibilites, it's impossible for a 350CI engine to run the HP they are running N/A right?? Engine masters are only making 600HP and up with a max restriction of 366ci in the small block competition. Although they are restricted to pump gas. But still, John Kasse was running in the upwards of 35 degrees of timing on his winning pull (it was detonating though, but that's why he has coatings).
Am I missing something?
Thanks,
Philip S. :)

umm good ?.... I would have said High Compression.

A "NASCAR" motor makes 750+ RWHP 358ci N/A because the teams have millions of dollars to R&D.Teams may run any bore and stroke as lons it fits in the 358 dimesions..cams are open as well heads blocks and manifolds are supplyed from the teams praticular MFG as well as serious technical support.

358 cubes is correct. Max bore is about 4.180 or so, so strokes are down around 3.3. Max power on open engines (not plate) probably comes in the high 8's and holds on without dropping much past 9500. It depends on the track and rpm range. Martinsville today showed about 4500-9000. Some track have a gear rule imposed to limit rpm to maybe 95-9700.

The secret is making great BMEP at 8700-9500. IOW, pumping lots of air at those rpms. Cup engines have to use flat lifter cams. 9700 isn 't all that much problem for them now, but it is ungodly expensive to do.

if you have a set of heads that can flow 500cfm and you rev it to 10krpm, you can make a ton of power.

also are you sure on the compression? They are spinning these motors pretty high, nothing like IRL cars though

The amount of R&D in the engine is ungodly. I am not sure how true this is, but I have been told that they don't have any bearings in the bottom end of the engine. Everything is polished extremely smooth, and the tolerances are of course very close.

From what I've heard is that they spend millions on just the head design.

Yes theres bearings....babbit type main and roller bearings for the cam

OK. From what is known, NASCAR engines are making around 750+ HP. Some people on this forum say they are running ungodly compression ratios. No they aren't. They're limited to 12:1. They must have a cast iron block and have a choice of aluminium heads or cast iron. The engines are around the 350-355ci mark right? Aren't the combustion chambers limited to 61CC? ( I know they are limited), Cam specs are limited etc. I know items such as the oil gallery are polished smoothe for improved oil flow, etc.
But in all possibilites, it's impossible for a 350CI engine to run the HP they are running N/A right?? Engine masters are only making 600HP and up with a max restriction of 366ci in the small block competition. Although they are restricted to pump gas. But still, John Kasse was running in the upwards of 35 degrees of timing on his winning pull (it was detonating though, but that's why he has coatings).
Am I missing something?
Thanks,
Philip S. :)

First off start off with a SB2.2 Cylinder head. 400-440cfm is easily doable out of these castings for these teams. The chambers aren't limited at all, they are in the 30-40cc range with flat top pistons and have extremely good burn and timing settings in the mid to high 20's. 2.0:1 rocker ratios and .750-.800" lift teamed up with a 2.180" intake valve. Throw in there lots of work to get the intake manifolds and headers perfect along with everything else and these power levels aren't hard when you have 3-4million dollars a year per team just to spend on motors.

Bret

There is sort of a rule of thumb, originated I believe by Air Flow Research, that the max power potential of a 2 valve/cylinder V8 gasoline engine is about 2.0 x CFM (intake port CFM at max lift). This is a "give and take" number, of course - bigger displacement motors will tend to make a bit more, smaller a bit less, compression ratio is a factor, etc.

For a smaller displacement engine with a high flowing port, the only way to actually take advantage of the available air flow is to rev the heck out of it, as has already been noted in this thread. Not so for a bigger displacement motor. My '67 has a 548 CID big block, with heads that flow about 380 CFM at max lift, and makes 618 RWHP (about 730 crank HP) with a very streetable cam.

The Engine Masters competition is another thing altogether. First, they can't )(by rule) use the kind of specialized heads that the Cup motors do. Just as important, the competition is about average power from (I think) 3000 - 6500 RPM. A Cup motor would lose that competition, badly, because they're designed to run from about 7000 to 9000 or so. But because HP is a function of torque and RPM, they make more power at those higher RPMs.

The cams are expensive! On the order of 1000$+ for just the cores :D The lobes are welded to be able to withstand the abuse they take :)

First off start off with a SB2.2 Cylinder head. 400-440cfm is easily doable out of these castings for these teams. The chambers aren't limited at all, they are in the 30-40cc range with flat top pistons and have extremely good burn and timing settings in the mid to high 20's. 2.0:1 rocker ratios and .750-.800" lift teamed up with a 2.180" intake valve. Throw in there lots of work to get the intake manifolds and headers perfect along with everything else and these power levels aren't hard when you have 3-4million dollars a year per team just to spend on motors.

Bret
Hmm, I remember reading a book that explained the motor specs. I could swear that the chambers were limited as well as the valve sizes. However, you are from a very experienced field so I take your word on it. :)

The Engine Masters competition is another thing altogether. First, they can't )(by rule) use the kind of specialized heads that the Cup motors do. Just as important, the competition is about average power from (I think) 3000 - 6500 RPM. A Cup motor would lose that competition, badly, because they're designed to run from about 7000 to 9000 or so. But because HP is a function of torque and RPM, they make more power at those higher RPMs.
I thought it was max power numbers? They added the peak HP and TQ together to get a final score? I'm probably wrong.
Philip S.

The cams are expensive! On the order of 1000$+ for just the cores :D The lobes are welded to be able to withstand the abuse they take :)
Known as Hardsurfacing in the welding world. Wow, There's more to these engines than I was lead to believe.
Thanks for the discussion guys! :)

They use belt driven oil/scavenge pumps to create vacuum in the crankcase, they reduce tension of the rings, especially the oil scraper ring, gas ported top ringlands, oil squirters to cool the bottom of pistons, oil squirters to cool the valvetrain at 9000+ RPM, smaller bearings (Honda size) to reduce bearing speed, belt driven cams, huge solid lifters to reduce stress on cam lobes at high RPM, and ungodly amounts of money in the heads. There are creative little things you can do on track to to make a little extra power also. It's only cheating if you get caught.

like others have said, theres a ton of money for R&D in nascar. one of the main reasons why there is such a huge ford gathering for aftermarket parts- they have all those ford series.

i forgot where i read it, but they grind hundreds of cams and heads and just toss them out when they dont make the power of the previous "best" cam or head setup. must be nice to have that kinda research at your disposal :).

Only thing I know is an altenator and set of headers that we run on our Craftsman truck motor is more money than I have in my 408.... I do also know a cam and set of lifters for a cup motor is about 6 grand...

like others have said, theres a ton of money for R&D in nascar. one of the main reasons why there is such a huge ford gathering for aftermarket parts- they have all those ford series.

i forgot where i read it, but they grind hundreds of cams and heads and just toss them out when they dont make the power of the previous "best" cam or head setup. must be nice to have that kinda research at your disposal :).

What NASCAR spends is nothing compared to F1 teams. They spend millions upon millions just in engine R&D, not to mention the chasis. The F1 guys are using memory alloys for their cams, that when hot the cam lobes grow, and then upon cool down they go back to their original specs.

the cash they have on hand to spend is inconciveable, and there are hundreds of teams that are spending like that too

And nobody mentions F1 cars?

If you want to be amazed by engine technology take 3.0L NA (183 cu in) and put out 900+ hp and pushing 20,000 rpm

Its all about optimizing all of the components to work together. You can actually design engines to create over 100% volumetric effiency without forced induction.

Not to be a stick in the mud, but nascar engines do not have the enigneering power (and $$) behind them like F1. But the nascar rules prevent technology from filtering into the sport of carburation and 9" rears... (zzzzzz)

I would like to see some cam specs on these. I drove a stock car in Florida last year, a SBC making 650+ HP and the lopiness at idle was shaking like crazy. Idle speed was between 900 and 1800 RPM, just flucuating back and forth. What a blast to drive though!

I'd rather watch modified versions of an engine I can own myself. F1 cars might as well use jet engines since they use such drastically different technology.

Don't kid yourself, there is tons of technology in the N.A.S.C.A.R. world. The alloys and materials used for diffrent components are incredible and the cylinder head and camshaft technology is ridiculous. Remember, most of us here are most akin to the roller cam, these engines run with a flat tappet camshaft with nearly 1" of valve lift and still manage to spin over 9000RPM for what might as well be an entire day. Believe me, there is some technology there for sure. We build some pretty bad little engines for our local circle track guys and even a Super late model is a pretty impressive piece, making 450ish HP from 360" through 2 1.5" holes in the restrictor plate is a pretty tricky process!!

-Bryan

And nobody mentions F1 cars?

If you want to be amazed by engine technology take 3.0L NA (183 cu in) and put out 900+ hp and pushing 20,000 rpm

Its all about optimizing all of the components to work together. You can actually design engines to create over 100% volumetric effiency without forced induction.

Not to be a stick in the mud, but nascar engines do not have the enigneering power (and $$) behind them like F1. But the nascar rules prevent technology from filtering into the sport of carburation and 9" rears... (zzzzzz)
Wow OVER 100% volumetric efficiency would mean you would have to stop every once in a while to drain some fuel out of the tank right?

Wow OVER 100% volumetric efficiency would mean you would have to stop every once in a while to drain some fuel out of the tank right?
Humm, no....it would mean you'd have to stop sooner to fill up the tank.

Nascar engines are very efficient engines, between the cam timing, and alot of R&D in headers/exhaust scavenging. They are limited to carb size, and they make alot of power with a small carb. I had a friend that worked at a nascar team engine shop. They dyno'd one of the engines with my 1050 CFM Braswell Dominator, and it only gained 15 HP across the board. For almost double the airflow capability, it wasn't a huge gain in power.

Wow OVER 100% volumetric efficiency would mean you would have to stop every once in a while to drain some fuel out of the tank right?


volumetric efficency = how much air is placed in the cylinders vs. actual displacement of engine

The cams are expensive! On the order of 1000$+ for just the cores :D The lobes are welded to be able to withstand the abuse they take :)

Well that's how some of them do it the old fashioned way. Either way they all cost a arm and a leg.

I do not believe the 12:1 is the limit on comp. I think it is much higher. The engines do not make 750 hp with the restrictors in the carbs. The information about the 1050 carb making 15 more hp is not even close to correct. One of the top teams bolted on a larger dominator (unrestricted) on one of the cup cars and the speed went from 178 to 230 and that was without tuning the carb to the engine. Those cars are incredibly aerodynamic and will go 200 mph with 500 hp. I have read that the exhaust systems are so good that they get a very good pull on the intake charge because of the vacuum effect the exhaust creates. They are not as complicated as F1 but probably have more tricks applied, do to the same basic engines for past 30 plus years were as F1 rule changes make them start over every decade or so.

just to give you guys a taste, in one of our schools project motors. Romco late model series motor. (Bowtie block and bowtie heads, 390 cfm carb, carillo rods, custom cut JE's 9:1 compression) spinning to 9000rpms makes 604 hp on the engine dyno. It is basically a mini cup motor. Cup cars do not run near the 13 or 14:1 compression ratios like they used to. I believe 12 to 1 is where they are at now.

12.00:1 compression ratio is the limit in the rule book. The 15 HP gain was on a dyno engine, using a stock Edelbrock SB2 intake with the dominator adaptor. No carb tuning, with it setup for my drag car. The cars can go alot faster than 200, but the body template and spoiler rules for the races limit them.

Dont forget the NHRA pro stock trucks ran basicly the same engine except 2 dominator carbs on a sheet metal intake and made over 900hp.

Dont forget the NHRA pro stock trucks ran basicly the same engine except 2 dominator carbs on a sheet metal intake and made over 900hp.


Damn right! Those were some IMPRESSIVE motors!

I do not believe the 12:1 is the limit on comp. I think it is much higher. The engines do not make 750 hp with the restrictors in the carbs. The information about the 1050 carb making 15 more hp is not even close to correct. One of the top teams bolted on a larger dominator (unrestricted) on one of the cup cars and the speed went from 178 to 230 and that was without tuning the carb to the engine. Those cars are incredibly aerodynamic and will go 200 mph with 500 hp. I have read that the exhaust systems are so good that they get a very good pull on the intake charge because of the vacuum effect the exhaust creates. They are not as complicated as F1 but probably have more tricks applied, do to the same basic engines for past 30 plus years were as F1 rule changes make them start over every decade or so.

12:1 is the rule... period

The Cup motors are on par if not more complicated in some areas compared to F1 motors, actually they are suprisingly similar.

F1 rule changes force the teams to change the motors yearly. Over the last 4 years they went to unlimited engines per weekend, to one engine per weekend, to one engine for 2 weekends to now dropping displacement from 3.0L to 2.4L. Not to mention the little things in there like rules on the materials used in the motors and the banning of variable length intake manifolds.

Them Pro Stock truck motors also tried to run the Splayed Valve heads, what junk they are.... that's why the Little Chief heads were designed.

Bret

And nobody mentions F1 cars?

If you want to be amazed by engine technology take 3.0L NA (183 cu in) and put out 900+ hp and pushing 20,000 rpm

Its all about optimizing all of the components to work together. You can actually design engines to create over 100% volumetric effiency without forced induction.

Not to be a stick in the mud, but nascar engines do not have the enigneering power (and $$) behind them like F1. But the nascar rules prevent technology from filtering into the sport of carburation and 9" rears... (zzzzzz)

DanO, you are very correct about optimizing components. That works for every good engine.

Look at the BMEP at power peak rpm for F1 (183 cu.in.), NASCAR Cup (358 cu.in.) and Pro Stock (500 cu.in.) engines. You might be surprised how close they are, and which has the highest.

BMEP (Brake Mean Effective Pressure) is a good measure of how much an engine gets out of the air it pumps. IOW, it indicates how much torque the engine gets to the flywheel from each cubic inch of displacement. Because hp = torque x rpm (and a conversion factor of 1/5252 to get the units correct), it's very important to get the highest torque/cube and then go for rpm while not losing much torque/cube as you up the revs.

Of course doing it at near 20,000 is much more expensive than doing it nearer 10,000.

Comparing a ps/t motor to a cup motor is well...kinda like comparing a new c6 to a vw bug. Cup motors by design are technology limited. The effective teams are spending more money using the power they have, and making it durable, then trying to make more. You can make all the power in the world off of the plate, but if you are racing restricted, all bets are off. If you are racing in a bowl, all the power does little good, while recovery is king.

Imagine how fun nascar would be if they could use un-restricted 500" P/S motors....I might actually watch then!


Dennis

Imagine how fun nascar would be if they could use un-restricted 500" P/S motors....I might actually watch then!


Dennis

I don't think those chassis would be able to deal with that kind of power and would make for a bunch of high speed bumper cars, ha ha. Would be more exciting though, that's for sure.

Dont forget the NHRA pro stock trucks ran basicly the same engine except 2 dominator carbs on a sheet metal intake and made over 900hp.

And a solid-roller camshaft.

PST engines used to make closer to 975 - 985.

Its called unlimited R&D budgets. When I first went to work for Stef's we had just finished 3 x R&D pans. These were for testing only and not legal by todays standards but they were built to help understand other things going on. Cost was $9000. They aren't scared of failure down there so they will try stuff, even if it is off the wall.
Even the oil pan has specific guidelines that we must follow or the pan is deamed illegal. 1/8" of an inch more depth can mean more power.

Sweeping engine rule changes will take place in '07. Stay tuned.

What changes?

Nascar engines are very efficient engines, between the cam timing, and alot of R&D in headers/exhaust scavenging. They are limited to carb size, and they make alot of power with a small carb. I had a friend that worked at a nascar team engine shop. They dyno'd one of the engines with my 1050 CFM Braswell Dominator, and it only gained 15 HP across the board. For almost double the airflow capability, it wasn't a huge gain in power.


They are limited to carb size , but as everything else thats been exploited throughout the engine to optimize it...carb is no different..for ex. a 380 cfm carb can be made to flow damn near 750 cfm,,, Part of the reason restrictor plates where in place...alot of my personal engine is based off a nascar engine, without the killer head and bigger bore they use..I actually run a solid roller ,thats similiar in spec to the solid flat tappets cams they run on short tracks... what would throw alot of people for a loop is for 8800-9500 rpm the cams are not as big as one would think as far as duration is concerned...but there again efficiency is what those engines are all about...

the engine is spinning at 9K rpms :eek2:

the engine is spinning at 9K rpms :eek2:

They can but they usually stay in the mid 8 range on short tracks , mid 7's on long..

They can but they usually stay in the mid 8 range on short tracks , mid 7's on long..

Huh? They are spinning to 9500+. That is why nascar is limiting the gear so that they can NOT spin that high. Watch the telemetry they are still well over 9000rpm.

Huh? They are spinning to 9500+. That is why nascar is limiting the gear so that they can NOT spin that high. Watch the telemetry they are still well over 9000rpm.

Unrestricted (open) Cup engines do spin to 95-9700 on some 1.5-2.0 mile tracks where NASCAR hasn't set a gear rule. I'm not sure what NASCAR's "gear-rule" rpm is, because it may change with the track, but it's probably around 95-9700. The valvetrain can take more, but there are compromises and larger expenses associated with more rpm. It's not necessarily more hp or even more top speed.

Unrestricted engines at Martinsville were just abut 9000 or a tad more on the cars which had telemetry. They also had a 4500 rpm band, so I suspect power peaks weren't as high as tracks with a 1500 rpm band.

Restrictor plate engines ("plate motors") are run in the low 7's for a lot of reasons, but mainly because airflow is severely restricted by the plates. Of course they are only used at Daytona and Talladega. The plate chops about 300-350 hp off the open engines which operate in a 300 rpm band or less when at speed. When/if a current car ran at Daytona with an unrestricted engine, the max speed gets up to around 230 or so. The plates (and some aero things) keep the speeds just shy of 200, someone's magic not-to-be-exceeded figure.

Carbs are the basic 850 (or maybe 830) 4150 series but they flow LOTS of air. That's not really a big restriction.

My guess is that there are a number of different shaped torque/power curves for the different tracks (with open engines), especially when the rpm range varies so much.

When we ran IRL back in the early nineties.

We had between 900-1,100 rwhp on 3.5 liter. Depending on whether it was a, "whipple (qualifying motor) or a 500 mile motor."

If the driver, let it idle less than 6,000 rpm when stopping for pit change it would die.

For all of you that think you are running a lot boost, mind you we were restricted to 58 lbs.. This was over twelve years ago.

Real, "Professional," race teams play and pay serious $$$$.

You want to win with the big boys, you better bring your A+ game, have some major support and some big cubic dollars.

Although there are no certified published figures. An F1 team, takes about 30-100m to run a year and is by far the most expensive series.

Brent Tyler Ritz

What changes?

Brett,
I'm sorry, I can't comment on them.

Although there are no certified published figures. An F1 team, takes about 30-100m to run a year and is by far the most expensive series.

Brent Tyler Ritz

For the bigger players, I believe you are WAY low. Top budgets may be 4-5+ times your 100mil.

400 to 500 million per season if you want to run good... I thought IRL was always N/A Champ car was boosted ...

NASCAR engines actually have dished pistons to see 12 to 1 with their tiny chambers. They have virtually no friction and they have near perfect cylinder seal. They have awsome manifolds both intake and exhaust and the heads are extensively developed in every way they can be. The valvetrain is where it's at as far as the newer found power allowing breathing at higher and higher rpm every year. The make in the 8xx horsepower range with all brands now and they have a whole lot of money and really smart people to find more.

I thought they had 16:1 compression. For Chevys, a derivation of the SB2.2 head. Lots of work on the combuston chamber, ports, intake, and exhaust. Individual cylinder ignition timing (check the MSD site for info). Jesel or T&D rockers with big ratios, very light, TI valves, very, very aggressive cams (fresh springs all the time, even with oilers, dry sump pulling close to 20psi vacuum (instead of a breather the have a relief to prevent to much vacuum), around 45psi oil pressure with tight clearences and thin (5-20, 5-30) synthetic oil,very light rods (steel and around 500gm I think, or at least the old qualifing rods where), light pins, etc.

The last 50-100 hp comes from little details in assembly, clearences, ports, combustion chamber, and tune.3-5hp may not change a lap time much, however it can be the difference between making a pass and not making a pass.

An F1 team, takes about 30-100m to run a year and is by far the most expensive series.



sounds more like an f1 driver's salary. :jest:

F1
http://www.fastmachines.com/archives/f1/001603.php
Hmm. Inflation.

Ferrari had the huge budget. Schmacher is supposely the highest paid athlete in the world.

Champ and IRL are fraction of this. Like 30M to my knowledge. Although I have not been in the scene for years.

Yes, to guy that asked about IRL. Took out F/I a long while back.
This year I believe 2.4 N/A. The rules change so much, they are driving the costs the moon. The cars keep going faster and faster, so they keep trying to slow them down.

EG. The C6R has two restrictors with opening the size of a quarter in each tube.

I cannot remember, butI think it was Champ, that they tried to run on Daytona. The drivers were pulling to many g's to be considered safe. Going unconcious in a car. 5g's is the norm.

For the bigger players, I believe you are WAY low. Top budgets may be 4-5+ times your 100mil.

Toyota's engine program alone is rumored to be 400m. With more ready if need be. Toyota wants to win and quickly. They better learn to get a primo driver or all that money is a waste.

Nobody mentioned the nascar slug prices? Aren't they around 50-60K per?

For the teams that don't built them the engines are usually leased, I believe with a don't open rule. The engine builders buy there parts in fairly large batches since they may go through 40-100 (or more) rods & pistons/week.

So does that mean if i wanted to i could buy a motor from DEI?

When we ran IRL back in the early nineties.

We had between 900-1,100 rwhp on 3.5 liter. Depending on whether it was a, "whipple (qualifying motor) or a 500 mile motor."

If the driver, let it idle less than 6,000 rpm when stopping for pit change it would die.

For all of you that think you are running a lot boost, mind you we were restricted to 58 lbs.. This was over twelve years ago.

Real, "Professional," race teams play and pay serious $$$$.

You want to win with the big boys, you better bring your A+ game, have some major support and some big cubic dollars.

Although there are no certified published figures. An F1 team, takes about 30-100m to run a year and is by far the most expensive series.

Brent Tyler Ritz

f1 sux, especially with all the traction control and retarded engine rules and stuff. the only one i like is the 2 weekend rule. hell the one set of tires the whole time is retarded as hell..
on the rule change thing, is it good or bad for nascar?

i follow various forms of racing of all types. between NASCAR with carbs and F1 with 1/2 billion budgets, its gotten out of hand for the most part. what has really impressed me is the various off road racing, rally, Dakar, Baja. i like motorsports where a hammer and duct tape are used.

We were running two Ferrari 333 SP Lemans cars in 97' at 5M. Worked well, could get sponsers to cover the rides.

Then Mercedes came with four cars and 60M. Mecerdes money goes a little futher. They have a huge R&D department, their own track, etc., etc..

Then Toyota came in with 100M. The F500 Company sponser that was going to sign with us, "You have to be kidding."

What could we say?

I like NASCAR. Its cool to see all this information. NASCAR might not be the most entertaining form of racing to some, but I dig it mostly because I have a driver from my town (J.J.) and the drama is awesome. The 'cheating', the 'payback', the 'rubbing'. But hey, I'm a southern californian redneck, what can I say.

To me open wheel racing is a lot like motorcycle racing, pretty cool to watch sometimes but not enough to make me want to tune in to every race.

Back to NASCAR though, do you think these supposed rule changes are going to suck?

also are you sure on the compression? They are spinning these motors pretty high, nothing like IRL cars though
What are you talking about, IRL motors are limited to 10,500rpm

well i would chime in and talk about F1 cars and their 19.5Krpm engines, but the session is over and it was only a little more intresting than last year! but next year their 2.4 ltr V8s will be spining to over 20K!!!!!

but as said before, thats because millions are spent developing these engines!

Chris.

PS. do you guys get MotGp over there? i think that this top level motor sport at its very best! supper claose action and some of the maddest moves you have ever seen! all they need to do now is make Rossi start half way up the grid to give everyone else a chance!!

So does that mean if i wanted to i could buy a motor from DEI?
actually you can if you want. when we were running dirt late models we bought an engine from richard petty enterprises and it was an animal. it couldnt be touched on the track. the bad thing about it is it was like 30k and when it needed to be ''freeshened'' up it was like 10k.

Hey BUYAMERICAN:

Can you please clarify:

"For all of you that think you are running a lot boost, mind you we were restricted to 58 lbs.. This was over twelve years ago."

I would assume this is a CART spec 2.65 liter V8 that you are referring to? Is this pressure in actual pounds per square inch at the intake manifold?

Thanks

Compression ratios used to be unregulated in Cup up until the early/mid 90's. As I heard it they were running 16:1, and possibly as high as 18:1 (I believe on plate motors). The rule first came in at 14:1, then 12.8 or 13:1, and finally 12:1.

IRL was always a NA motor rule. The 4.0 Aurora "based" motor was GM's initial entry.

IRL has only been around for a few years on its own. until the early 90s(might have been late 80s) IRL and CART were together. now the jap engines are basically ruling IRL(the jap drivers suck). what does amaze me is how prestigious the indy 500 still is, attracting some F1 drivers as well as nascar and drivers from other forms of racing.

F1.
Ferrari 18,000 rpm
(PUG) Peugeot Citroen, is now running at 28,000 rpm's.

Clearwater, I do not know. This what I was told at the time. I was an co-owner through a private JV as a non-managing partner. This how we do it, to stop personal liability. I was concentrating more on our sponsers, potential sponsers and various eye candy. :)

Indy is very well marketed and has been over a long period of time.
EG. Coke, the company. Tide, the soap. etc.

Also, as was said above; Stock car is now at 12:1. At least that's what it said on the sign in front of the, "GM Racing," Nascar motor I saw two weeks ago. Nascar has a lot of popularity and a lot surface area to advertise on the cars.

Of course this week, it's probably different on the compression. :jest:

F1 isn't the only one with traction control. It may be illegal, but Nascar has had traction control for many years. They used to have it on them, and it would plug into the MSD box so that when they tech'd the car, they couldn't find it. Then they would build it into the MSD box, then they hired the best MSD cheat to be an inspector. Last I heard, they had it in the tachometers. There have been many races where you see someone change a tach after tech/qualifying. How often do you really think a tach goes bad? Nascar dosen't have the money of F1, but they definitely have some very smart people working around the rules.

racin has always had those that bent the rules. i believe it was the Sonoco team that had a second hidden gas tank so they could run longer. they also acid dipped the car to lighten it.

is there any racing organization that forces teams to use real cars? i like the fact that f1 keeps challenging their teams to build more reliable engines that have to last and perform, and i like that motorcycle racing features bikes closer to what you would be able to buy, unlike nascar and f1. but none are very fun to watch, especially f1 since you got an idea who's gonna win the season before it starts. and the thing i dont like about nascar is that there has never been a rear drive v8 ford taurus, or the new fusion. in a racing sense it is fun to watch these crazy vehicles compete, but i think we need something based more on real cars to step up.

It was Smoky Yunick that was one of the first to run, maybe just to get caught, running an acid dipped car. He is also the one that ran a 2" fuel line over 10 feet through the car in 1966. After the race, they said he was cheating, so they pulled the gas tank out of the car, he jumped in, started it, and drove it to the pits. He is the person that most of the rules in the Nascar rule book were for. Some of the things he did were just amazing. He is the reason for body templates also. In '66, he built a 7/8 scale Chevelle. Nobody noticed the smaller car until it was placed next to a real car.

I cannot remember, butI think it was Champ, that they tried to run on Daytona. The drivers were pulling to many g's to be considered safe. Going unconcious in a car. 5g's is the norm.


That was when the series formerly known as CART (now CHAMP CAR) was supposed to come to Texas Motor Speeedway, but due to the high g-loads, they cancelled that race.

You wana talk about boost. I have a customer with a 426 CID 6cyl Allis running a custom built 3 stage turbo system. . .. lets try on 140PSI of BOOST!!! With a custom solid roller camshaft she makes about 3500HP at 4000 rpm.

You wana talk about boost. I have a customer with a 426 CID 6cyl Allis running a custom built 3 stage turbo system. . .. lets try on 140PSI of BOOST!!! With a custom solid roller camshaft she makes about 3500HP at 4000 rpm.

Ask that crazy guy what his back pressure is!

You wana talk about boost. I have a customer with a 426 CID 6cyl Allis running a custom built 3 stage turbo system. . .. lets try on 140PSI of BOOST!!! With a custom solid roller camshaft she makes about 3500HP at 4000 rpm.

must be talking about a pulling tractor, those things run crazy boost. I saw one crack the block at the top where the head bolts on and the head, and all 4 turbos and piping came through the hood and almost landed on the flag man. :eek2:

You wana talk about boost. I have a customer with a 426 CID 6cyl Allis running a custom built 3 stage turbo system. . .. lets try on 140PSI of BOOST!!! With a custom solid roller camshaft she makes about 3500HP at 4000 rpm.

is that with diesel?

I thought they had 16:1 compression. For Chevys, a derivation of the SB2.2 head. Lots of work on the combuston chamber, ports, intake, and exhaust. Individual cylinder ignition timing (check the MSD site for info). Jesel or T&D rockers with big ratios, very light, TI valves, very, very aggressive cams (fresh springs all the time, even with oilers, dry sump pulling close to 20psi vacuum (instead of a breather the have a relief to prevent to much vacuum), around 45psi oil pressure with tight clearences and thin (5-20, 5-30) synthetic oil,very light rods (steel and around 500gm I think, or at least the old qualifing rods where), light pins, etc.

The last 50-100 hp comes from little details in assembly, clearences, ports, combustion chamber, and tune.3-5hp may not change a lap time much, however it can be the difference between making a pass and not making a pass.

no there connecting rods are ti as well or at least thats what i had read

is that with diesel?

gotta be, especially if they are talking pulling tractors. 3500 HP at only 4000 rpms.

Nascar must run solid steel connecting rods. Alot of Nascar tech is using a magnet, because most of the metals are to be magnetic steel. Nascar trys to limit the exotic materials and expense, and also it makes it easier to tech. It dosen't take long to put a magnet up next to something and see if it sticks.

you talk about limiting expenses but with every rule they ad to nascar to limit the hp of the motor the teams just spend even more money and get the same or even more hp out of the motor .... one nascar engine builder told me that some of the new rules made him look at parts of the motor that he would have never looked at before ...... also these builders sell off the stuff that has been outlawed and sometimes even build motors for drag cars with some of it ....... one I know of built with leftovers made 850 hp on the dyno with out any tuneup and when I left they said 900 hp should be there when they where done with there junk motor ...... I also asked what a plate motor would do without the plate and a good carb and was told " it would blow up"

you talk about limiting expenses but with every rule they ad to nascar to limit the hp of the motor the teams just spend even more money and get the same or even more hp out of the motor .... one nascar engine builder told me that some of the new rules made him look at parts of the motor that he would have never looked at before ...... also these builders sell off the stuff that has been outlawed and sometimes even build motors for drag cars with some of it ....... one I know of built with leftovers made 850 hp on the dyno with out any tuneup and when I left they said 900 hp should be there when they where done with there junk motor ...... I also asked what a plate motor would do without the plate and a good carb and was told " it would blow up"
a 10-11krpm 350+ cid motor with 100+ hp would be really cool. although i think they should go back to the "stock" car theme and just let the teams use what they have... hell let em use new shit.. can we say 10k rpm ls1 with 1000 or more hp. nascar, the orginization, isnt really keeping up with technology. im so sick of new rules being implemented on a weekly basis. give em there 1-2 inches of spoiler back and make the tires not so suseptable to blow outs.

you get the speed to high and the drivers will not last long ..... but I agree that I am not sure they are going about it the right way ...... the nascar rulebook has so much in it I do not know how the builders remember ..... as for me I will stick to drag racing ........and I think there is some true stock car racing out there but it does not have the fan base the big boys do ....

Yep no Ti rods for NASCAR!

its like all forms of motorsport, the teams (with the money they have) will allways try to make a car faster! and for the teams with really big budgets this means they will pull the rule book apart looking for the smallest loop whole that will give them an advantage! take a look at F1 this season. less down force, engines made to last TWO race weekends, tires to last the whole race (and qualifing) less driver aids, etc, etc. and yet there where still lap records broken!

this is why there are soo many rules in motor sport these days, to try and keep the speeds to reasonable! otherwise teams would be getting through drivers nearly as fast as cars!!!!!

Chris.

Yep no Ti rods for NASCAR!

There are no titanium rods for ALMS (C6R team) either. Although they are trying to get them approved.

you talk about limiting expenses but with every rule they ad to nascar to limit the hp of the motor the teams just spend even more money and get the same or even more hp out of the motor .... one nascar engine builder told me that some of the new rules made him look at parts of the motor that he would have never looked at before ...... also these builders sell off the stuff that has been outlawed and sometimes even build motors for drag cars with some of it ....... one I know of built with leftovers made 850 hp on the dyno with out any tuneup and when I left they said 900 hp should be there when they where done with there junk motor ...... I also asked what a plate motor would do without the plate and a good carb and was told " it would blow up"

This one guy told me that he had junk parts laying around making 1200hp :gay: ..... I meet far to many "bench racers" sorry..

nothing annoys me more than storys that beging... "this one guy told me"

First off... he could be embellishing... then you post it on the internet, another opportunity for embellishing.. (not razzin you, just in general)

Then again... this is the internet... everything is fact

OK. From what is known, NASCAR engines are making around 750+ HP. Some people on this forum say they are running ungodly compression ratios. No they aren't. They're limited to 12:1. They must have a cast iron block and have a choice of aluminium heads or cast iron. The engines are around the 350-355ci mark right? Aren't the combustion chambers limited to 61CC? ( I know they are limited), Cam specs are limited etc. I know items such as the oil gallery are polished smoothe for improved oil flow, etc.
But in all possibilites, it's impossible for a 350CI engine to run the HP they are running N/A right?? Engine masters are only making 600HP and up with a max restriction of 366ci in the small block competition. Although they are restricted to pump gas. But still, John Kasse was running in the upwards of 35 degrees of timing on his winning pull (it was detonating though, but that's why he has coatings).
Am I missing something?
Thanks,
Philip S. :) LOTS of Money and R&D ! http://www.howstuffworks.com/question588.htm

is that with diesel?

Yes, he won't go alcohol because of principle. Manifold back pressure I don't know Erik, but I do know the intake temp was around 1100 degrees. The thing has a primitive water injection unit on it to help cool the intake charge. The oil pan serves as a main girdle also. It is about 1.5" plate steel that has main supports in the pan. Takes a cherry picker to put the oil pan on. It has blown a hole through the side of the block about a 1ft in circumference. I would always stand far away when these pulling tractors fire up.

It was Smoky Yunick that was one of the first to run, maybe just to get caught, running an acid dipped car. He is also the one that ran a 2" fuel line over 10 feet through the car in 1966. After the race, they said he was cheating, so they pulled the gas tank out of the car, he jumped in, started it, and drove it to the pits. He is the person that most of the rules in the Nascar rule book were for. Some of the things he did were just amazing. He is the reason for body templates also. In '66, he built a 7/8 scale Chevelle. Nobody noticed the smaller car until it was placed next to a real car.

Hell yes, I was wondering when Smokey would come up in this thread. He was awesome.

RIP Smokey. :hail:

a 10-11krpm 350+ cid motor with 100+ hp would be really cool. although i think they should go back to the "stock" car theme and just let the teams use what they have... hell let em use new shit.. can we say 10k rpm ls1 with 1000 or more hp. nascar, the orginization, isnt really keeping up with technology. im so sick of new rules being implemented on a weekly basis. give em there 1-2 inches of spoiler back and make the tires not so suseptable to blow outs.

And get rid of those damned restrictor plates. Nothing but problems on the big tracks. The wrecks have gone up substantially on those plate tracks since they implemented that bass ackwards rule.

Let em haul ass :drive:

Just out of curiosity would anyone know what kind of time a car would do on an 1/8 or 1/4 mile,

It was Smoky Yunick that was one of the first to run, maybe just to get caught, running an acid dipped car. He is also the one that ran a 2" fuel line over 10 feet through the car in 1966. After the race, they said he was cheating, so they pulled the gas tank out of the car, he jumped in, started it, and drove it to the pits. He is the person that most of the rules in the Nascar rule book were for. Some of the things he did were just amazing. He is the reason for body templates also. In '66, he built a 7/8 scale Chevelle. Nobody noticed the smaller car until it was placed next to a real car.YUP,SMOKEY was a great guy I bet---imagine some other tales we don't know about... :jest:

First off the plates are never going to come off the cars and the trucks will be running them next season.. with no plates all you'd have is the same thing as now but with another 50 MPH added to it 90% of teams are pretty close on power so no team would have a huge advantage. Car and driver did a article on a cup car and it listed the standing 1/4 somewhere in the mid 11's beofre the clutch gave out if you had different tires and clutch screwed around with the suspension you should do alot better concidering a modern car is 750+ rwhp and 3400 pounds. I get a chance on a daily bassis to see these types of engine assembled and dyno'ed if I wasnt scared of loosing my job I might be able to share a little....Unfortunatley(sp) my buisness is the drivetrain and I get to see the kinds of havoc unleashed on transmission's driveshafts gears and axles...Some people asked about used parts...the good stuff is sitting on a shelf far from the prying eye and has a date with the blast furnace to avoid falling into the wrong hands if you buy a engine from a team..if they even sell one chances are its last years stuff...

YUP,SMOKEY was a great guy I bet---imagine some other tales we don't know about... :jest:


That black and gold 66 chevelle, nascar said you couldnt run bodypans under the car so he ended up making the floorpans even with the bottom of the frame, something about since the car was 7/8 scale he moved the engine back a couple inches too w/o detection. The 66 was a sweet car and what NASCAR should be about... not bitching and moaning because Chevy designed a better car (the Lumnia body) and cleaned house, until nascar made another 500 rules to make thigs "equal" again. I think that was the beginning of the end of Nascar for myself.

This is a great thread. I'm getting ready to go to NTI in 2 months to start learning....and after reading all this looks like that will be exactly what I'm doing. Thanks for all the info to the guys that are in the buisness have posted.

I just graduated NTI in June. There are alot of good teachers there that have worked in Nascar for a long time. One of them was building a Craftsman Truck in his garage. Mr. Fieste was a Daytona 500, Indy 500, and drag race winning engine builder. He is an engine GOD. Mr. Brewer is a god when it comes to camshafts/valve timing. Ask everyone every question you can while you are there, you will learn so much.

Lot's and Lot's of money.

It's been a while since I have touched a Nascar motor, the last one I touched was a Bowtie motor... not a SB2.

For starters the heads have an amazing amount of work in them...a shit load of work in them.

$1k connecting rods, $800 pistons, $2000 one off custom cranks, expensive bearings, big solid roller cams, $1000 rocker arms, etc etc etc etc.....

The last motor I worked on was my cousins dirt track motor, and it was built for a longer track..... the cam didnt start making power until after 4500rpms, and it peaked just after 9k..... we had to gear the crap out of his dirt track car to compensate, since the longest track he was usually on was 1/3mi......

here are some pics of us dyno'ing it after a rebuild... check out the 5 stage belt driven oil pump.... that oiling system is the wildest thing I have ever seen.... http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/mazoo_69/my_photos... the pics are under the folder dyno pics....

Lot's and Lot's of money.

It's been a while since I have touched a Nascar motor, the last one I touched was a Bowtie motor... not a SB2.

For starters the heads have an amazing amount of work in them...a shit load of work in them.

$1k connecting rods, $800 pistons, $2000 one off custom cranks, expensive bearings, big solid roller cams, $1000 rocker arms, etc etc etc etc.....

It has been a while. Your numbers are low if you mean Cup engines.

"R & D and part cost expand to fill the available money."---with apologies to C.N. Parkinson

Just out of curiosity would anyone know what kind of time a car would do on an 1/8 or 1/4 mile,

About 10 years on TV I witnessed a 750hp Winston Cup stock car turn a mid eleven second (11.5) quarter mile time with no chassis tuning. It was a demonstration between NHRA vs. NASCAR vehicals.

Cause there fuckin magic

The things on the internet that drive people nuts are ridiculous statements such as: a larger carb without restrictor plates only adds 15 hp to a restricted 750 hp Nascar engine. Either that carb was added with the restrictor plates in place or the statement is total bs. People do not have a basic understanding of how engines operate. Then they either get their facts twisted or are too ignorant to realize that their fantastic claims are incorrect. It is a shame there is not a stupid filter.

It is a shame there is not a stupid filter.

LOL then there would be much less humor in the forums!

LOL then there would be much less humor in the forums!
I wouldn't be allowed online anymore :(

You ever go to the TuckerMax forum? Now that place has the moderators on a tight leash and basically implimenting the stupid filter by hand.... not much of a place to learn.... which is the key to all of this stuff.

People do not have a basic understanding of how engines operate. Then they either get their facts twisted or are too ignorant to realize that their fantastic claims are incorrect. It is a shame there is not a stupid filter.
I think people do have a basic understanding of how engines work, I just dont think that everyone has a technical understanding of how engines work.

The carb wasn't added to a restrictor plate engine. Not all nascar engines run restrictor plates. This was a DYNO TEST ENGINE at Penske's engine shop in Concord, NC. I can give you the name of the guys that worked on the engine and the guy that rebuilt my carb. The carbs they run flow way more than there original CFM's, so a 1050 CFM isn't much bigger.

from what I have heard, its the lobe seperation on the exhaust and intake. I heard the intake to exhaust open and closed, was a 1 to 1 ratio.

I think people do have a basic understanding of how engines work, I just dont think that everyone has a technical understanding of how engines work.

Really its sad to say but this industry is based on more marketing BS then any other industry, or maybe I feel that way because I deal with it everyday. I guess they feed on our nations passion for cars and we just play right into it.

Over the years I have worked for companies that sold 5 different brands of of a similar product. Even when I worked straight commission I felt it was my job to get my customer the product that best suited his or her needs not what what made me the most money. In turn I have had customers that have followed me over 12 years and 4 different companies because they trusted me.

I feel when you build a performance combination you need to get with someone you can trust because down the road you will need that person.

Really its sad to say but this industry is based on more marketing BS then any other industry, or maybe I feel that way because I deal with it everyday. I guess they feed on our nations passion for cars and we just play right into it.

Over the years I have worked for companies that sold 5 different brands of of a similar product. Even when I worked straight commission I felt it was my job to get my customer the product that best suited his or her needs not what what made me the most money. In turn I have had customers that have followed me over 12 years and 4 different companies because they trusted me.

I feel when you build a performance combination you need to get with someone you can trust because down the road you will need that person.

I don't post much on these forums as my technical knowledge on cars is very limited, but I do read as much as I can to try and learn all I can. Every once in a while I will find a post that makes me want to say something. That is this post.

You are 100% correct on that statement. When I am going to be dropping thousands of dollars into something I want to make sure I get exactly what I want. I don't want to have to compromise or get something that I don't need. If someone can help me get what I want then I will be certain to come back to them later if I need anything else.

The carb wasn't added to a restrictor plate engine. Not all nascar engines run restrictor plates. This was a DYNO TEST ENGINE at Penske's engine shop in Concord, NC. I can give you the name of the guys that worked on the engine and the guy that rebuilt my carb. The carbs they run flow way more than there original CFM's, so a 1050 CFM isn't much bigger.


This is exactly what I am talking about...of course a reworked carb will flow as much as dominator carb. The discussion was about Nascar engines and how they make there power, with restrictor plates, 'cause that is what they race with. A top nascar team recently took the restrictor plate and nascar legal carb off and replaced them with a stock 1050 dominator. The same car that ran 190 mph in legal nascar trim ran 230 mph without any carb tuning. It takes a lot of hp to add 40 mph to a 3500 lb car. That is what the restrictor plates do...in is not about the carb...it is the plates.

The discussion was about Nascar engines and how they make there power, with restrictor plates, 'cause that is what they race with.

Chuck, the discussion was about 750+ hp unrestricted Cup engines, not 450 hp plate "engines". There are only 2 tracks (4 points races per season) where the plates are used. The other 32 points races are without plates (aka open or unrestricted). That's what you meant, right?

I picked up a set of nascar rods and a crank used. The Bryant crank was machined perfect and half the weight/size of a normal one, rods had honda journal sizes (small).

Half the rotating mass, twice the air flow and a bottom end made so perfect that it can handle anything.

358 cubes is correct. Max bore is about 4.180 or so, so strokes are down around 3.3. Max power on open engines (not plate) probably comes in the high 8's and holds on without dropping much past 9500. It depends on the track and rpm range. Martinsville today showed about 4500-9000. Some track have a gear rule imposed to limit rpm to maybe 95-9700.

The secret is making great BMEP at 8700-9500. IOW, pumping lots of air at those rpms. Cup engines have to use flat lifter cams. 9700 isn 't all that much problem for them now, but it is ungodly expensive to do.
The secret is always BMEP at high rpm for racing. I wonder why its still a secret :confused:

The secret is making great BMEP at 8700-9500. IOW, pumping lots of air at those rpms.


The secret is always BMEP at high rpm for racing. I wonder why its still a secret :confused:

se.cret (se'krit) --noun. 1. something known only to a person or certain persons and purposely kept form the knowledge of others. 2. something not revealed, understood or explained. 3. the true cause or explanation, regarded as not obvious.

Choose #3.

It then becomes, "The true cause or explanation, regarded as not obvious, is making great BMEP at 8700-9500." Personally I thought "secret #3" said it better in eight fewer words. ;)

Ain't grammar fun?

se.cret (se'krit) --noun. 1. something known only to a person or certain persons and purposely kept form the knowledge of others. 2. something not revealed, understood or explained. 3. the true cause or explanation, regarded as not obvious.

Choose #3.

It then becomes, "The true cause or explanation, regarded as not obvious, is making great BMEP at 8700-9500." Personally I thought "secret #3" said it better in eight fewer words. ;)

Ain't grammar fun?
I like math. 6 is always 6. there are no alternate meanings of 6. you cant confuse 6 with 17. 6 has a value unique to only the number six.

Bah, its this late at night and you're going to hold me to a typo!?

Bah, its this late at night and you're going to hold me to a typo!?

Nope.

There's always the edit function. :)

F1 cars dont have cams since their valves are phenmatic; right?

Anyway, nowone has mentioned the racing engines and series that make the most power - NHRA at 6000 HP with a limit of 500 cubic inches.

Their notro engines are about $100K each and last one or two rounds - approximately 8 or 9 seconds!).

They are also the fastest cars at 340 MPH!

Therefore, F1 and NASCAR engines are pathetic WIMPS!

F1 cars dont have cams since their valves are phenmatic; right?

Anyway, nowone has mentioned the racing engines and series that make the most power - NHRA at 6000 HP with a limit of 500 cubic inches.

Their notro engines are about $100K each and last one or two rounds - approximately 8 or 9 seconds!).

They are also the fastest cars at 340 MPH!

Therefore, F1 and NASCAR engines are pathetic WIMPS!

F1 cars right now still have cams just like any other car but the springs are an air bag type deal.

Nitro engines are burning liquid TNT so they aren't regular "engines" really!

wow.. this came back from the dead...

F1 cars dont have cams since their valves are phenmatic; right?

Anyway, nowone has mentioned the racing engines and series that make the most power - NHRA at 6000 HP with a limit of 500 cubic inches.

Their notro engines are about $100K each and last one or two rounds - approximately 8 or 9 seconds!).

They are also the fastest cars at 340 MPH!

Therefore, F1 and NASCAR engines are pathetic WIMPS!

Its better to keep your mouth shut and let people think your an idiot rather than open it and remove all doubt...

F1 cars dont have cams since their valves are phenmatic; right?

Anyway, nowone has mentioned the racing engines and series that make the most power - NHRA at 6000 HP with a limit of 500 cubic inches.

Their notro engines are about $100K each and last one or two rounds - approximately 8 or 9 seconds!).

They are also the fastest cars at 340 MPH!

Therefore, F1 and NASCAR engines are pathetic WIMPS!

im sorry but you cant diss F1 engines like that! you try making a 2.4ltr V8 that will spin to over 20,000rpm (limited to 19K) and make over 750bhp. thats not bad going is it??

also a few things about just how well built these things are. at cold they are effectively solid as the clearances are that tight. they are increadably light and small for their size. they are not just designed to last 9 seconds like a top fueler but more like 3hour plus full race speeds. they dont get to use nittro but have to use normal fuels (they are still pretty special! ;) ).

finally you shouldn't look at just the engine. a F1 car is a total package and that includes the driver!

a recent topgear program over here put a good driver into a ranault F1 car (one of the V10s) to see what he could do. he couldn't even drive the thing fast enough to keep the tires and breaks warm!

now this is just F1 but im sure for all the others you listed there is the same about of detail and time taken to build them.

thanks Chris.

PS using your way of thinking, top fuel dragers are cr*p cos they cnat pull over 3gs in the corners and upto 6 on the brakes! ;)

im sorry but you cant diss F1 engines like that! you try making a 2.4ltr V8 that will spin to over 20,000rpm (limited to 19K) and make over 750bhp. thats not bad going is it??

also a few things about just how well built these things are. at cold they are effectively solid as the clearances are that tight. they are increadably light and small for their size. they are not just designed to last 9 seconds like a top fueler but more like 3hour plus full race speeds. they dont get to use nittro but have to use normal fuels (they are still pretty special! ;) ).

finally you shouldn't look at just the engine. a F1 car is a total package and that includes the driver!

a recent topgear program over here put a good driver into a ranault F1 car (one of the V10s) to see what he could do. he couldn't even drive the thing fast enough to keep the tires and breaks warm!

now this is just F1 but im sure for all the others you listed there is the same about of detail and time taken to build them.

thanks Chris.

PS using your way of thinking, top fuel dragers are cr*p cos they cnat pull over 3gs in the corners and upto 6 on the brakes! ;)

But neither of them can make left turns for 3 hours straight!:eyes:

F1 is the epitomy of handling cars and longevity, while Top Fuel just holds the title of most badass motors on the planet! (20,000 RPMs is a close second to 6,000HP in my book..)

But neither of them can make left turns for 3 hours straight!:eyes:

F1 is the epitomy of handling cars and longevity, while Top Fuel just holds the title of most badass motors on the planet! (20,000 RPMs is a close second to 6,000HP in my book..)

i see where you are coming from, and they are great for pub talk, but yuo wont see anything from them on a road car.

now F1 is pushing boundries in design and engineering. you only have to look how good some of these paddle shift boxes are these days. all that tech has come from F1. god only know how much aero thats on cars these days is thanks to them. and have i mentioned carbon brakes??? im just waiting for a carbon fiber gearbox to be built for road cars! ;)

there is no right or wrong aswers as its just our opinions, which is why is good to talk about this cr*p! lol :)

cheers Chris.

They use belt driven oil/scavenge pumps to create vacuum in the crankcase, they reduce tension of the rings, especially the oil scraper ring, gas ported top ringlands, oil squirters to cool the bottom of pistons, oil squirters to cool the valvetrain at 9000+ RPM, smaller bearings (Honda size) to reduce bearing speed, belt driven cams, huge solid lifters to reduce stress on cam lobes at high RPM, and ungodly amounts of money in the heads. There are creative little things you can do on track to to make a little extra power also. It's only cheating if you get caught. Everything in these engines is specialized. Those heads, which have been redesigned for this coming year flow about 410-420 cfm. The 2.072 estimate for maximum power is for average compression and RPM. That max goes out the window when the rpm goes through the roof. The engine masters is limited to pump gas and uses a rpm range of 2500-6500 rpm. The NMCA Pro Stock class cars are turning up near 10K also and make 1140 H.P. out of 525 cubic inches. The light rings and vacuum pumps are worth 55 H.P. on a mid size engine. My son said you could rope start his 598" BBC. Some of the more technical engines use multiple vacuum pumps, spray bar cooling on the valve springs and underside of the pistons, oil management and all use dry sump oiling systems. They are probably all using using ceramic bearings at every critical wheel and rear end bearing position. Lots more things we mere mortals don't know about.

BMEP is a tougher nut to crack than horsepower. Therefore I respect the classes where the formula has been kept the same for years, yet the gains keep coming. That's talent. I'd say the components in a NHRA pro stock engine or Cup engine are better optimized than those in F1 as a whole because they've been working against the same formula longer. Knowledge of materials between the 3 camps is about the same, but the rulesmakers have limited their usage.

2 strokes, rotaries, turbines, OHV vs. uhv, OHC vs. UHC, coil springs versus airsprings, injection versus carb, the number of combinations is endless. What would happen if you gave a 5 horse briggs to Warren Johnson, Robert Yates, Heinz Paschen and said here's $5000, I'm giving you the month off, and we'll have a dyno test in a month. Do you think they would beat the guy currently building the best 5 horse briggs race motors today for go-carts?

BMEP is a tougher nut to crack than horsepower. Therefore I respect the classes where the formula has been kept the same for years, yet the gains keep coming. That's talent. I'd say the components in a NHRA pro stock engine or Cup engine are better optimized than those in F1 as a whole because they've been working against the same formula longer. Knowledge of materials between the 3 camps is about the same, but the rulesmakers have limited their usage.

2 strokes, rotaries, turbines, OHV vs. uhv, OHC vs. UHC, coil springs versus airsprings, injection versus carb, the number of combinations is endless. What would happen if you gave a 5 horse briggs to Warren Johnson, Robert Yates, Heinz Paschen and said here's $5000, I'm giving you the month off, and we'll have a dyno test in a month. Do you think they would beat the guy currently building the best 5 horse briggs race motors today for go-carts?

thats a good point about keeping it the same. i read a artical a Coswroth Engineer wrote regarding the swtich from running the old V10 engines for just the race weekend to runing them for two weekends. he said "everything needs redesigning"!!!!

the problem with F1 is the ruels dont sit still for long enough. whenever the rules change the big teasm pile money into them to maximise them as much as possable. this means that the engines at the start of the seasson are cr*p compeared to the ones at the end!

im not sure how it is in nascar but in F1 its not allways about all out power. due to the way the engines run, hugely high rpms more than what GP bikes run(!!), its the way they map the engines aswell. like the GP bikes its about making the power useable and driveable. comoing out of a tight hairpin bend and just spinning the rear tires dose nothing for lap times! ;) traction controle (andother thing that F1 has really pushed forward on road cars) helps but its not the answer and a well tuned engine thats easy to drive will always be more effective!

anyway hope you have all had a nice Christmas.

Chris.

The F1 fuel is not real pump gas,the % of each chemicals is totally diffrent

Comparing F1,NASCAR & NHRA is just like comparing Apples,Oranges & Bananas

Well lets see now , A top fuel dragster puts out ( 750 horse power ) out of each of its 8 cylinders , right ?
Case closed ! Say no more !

:nod: :D :chug:

Dan O, I'm glad to see this thread revived as it is a good one.

Brian, you make some excellent points. I would want to know though, if you want the modified B&S engine to run for 30 seconds or several hours? Do you want a narrow or broad powerband? All of these things have to be considered differently in the various racing games.

Z Roadster, you can say no more and consider the case closed if you choose, but I would encourage you to keep an open mind! There are things to be taught and learned by all . . . you and me included.

I think that it's important to consider that reliability/durability and power to weight ratios are important in all racing engine design. However the balance points of these considerations influence the overall design goals and execution. First consider that a top fuel dragster is mainly focused on maximum power output and transferring that into straight line acceleration. Then, the whole game changes when you have to consider handling in turns, fuel economy and braking (any oval track motor sport) and again when you have to add full spectrum handling (SCCA/F1/etc).

Steve

From my understanding the older turbo F1 cars were to dangerous, and thats when they started putting a lid on things

Just like group B rally, cars were getting to fast to be safe so they started limiting them

From my understanding the older turbo F1 cars were to dangerous, and thats when they started putting a lid on things

5-6Bar on 2l engines making 1500hp+,using "pump fuel"

The Fuel rule was that you could only use chemicals fond in pump fuel but he mix was 97% toluene and 3% N-heptine,or close to that,so that´s not really pump fuel :)

I think that to understand the engine you have to understand the rules which govern the series... NASCAR teams have been working with the same basic foundations for 30 years... 358 inches 1 830 carb... Heads and blocks supplyed by the manufacturer... Its the perfect example of refinement....back when it was 18 and 23 deg stuff 600 hp was a big deal.. then 600 to the tire... now its creaping up on 900 horse and 750+ to the tire..New heads and new mfg's have raised the bar... Chevy with the SB2 in 97 98 99 then Dodge with the R5 Ford with the SC1 Toyota with the phase 11 now chevy with the R07. Materials have gotten better than anyone would of thought 10 years ago allowing lighter more reliable packages....If there were no rules then Im sure a cup motor aould be a 2500 hp twin turbo something or other.... but theres lots and lots of rules...If you have even been to a post race tear down you'd see this...When you think of what they are.... 358 inches single 830 carb... pushrods .... on race gas making well over 800 hp 9300 RPM's (they would be over 10,000 if not for gear ratio rules)

Its rapidly getting to the point where humans are the limiting factor. F1 cars are slower than they need to be due to driver controlled shifting for instance. The sick thing about those cars as a whole though is that while the newbies who have been running around in Formula 3000 do learn to harness the acceleration of the F1s OK after a time, they have massive troubles dealing with the deceleration under braking.

Imagine 5Gs around a tight oval track. 25 laps in you would start seeing drivers pass out and become grease spots on the wall.

Its sad, but the regs are there for a reason. I wish I had been born to see the days when the drivers needed all the power and handling and breaking they could get.

Pretty soon we will need genetically engineered drivers to handle this stuff. It'll have massive inner-ear parts for balance and equilibrium, shorter extremities and a bigger heart for circulation under Gs. Probably run at the metabolism of a rabid humming bird. They will feed it sucrose and protein or something.

5-6Bar on 2l engines making 1500hp+,using "pump fuel"

The Fuel rule was that you could only use chemicals fond in pump fuel but he mix was 97% toluene and 3% N-heptine,or close to that,so that´s not really pump fuel :)


They were 1.5 liter engines and BMW was putting out over 1400 hp in qualifying trim. BMW actually used production car blocks that had mileage on them for longevity reasons.

They were 1.5 liter engines and BMW was putting out over 1400 hp in qualifying trim. BMW actually used production car blocks that had mileage on them for longevity reasons.

i heard that BMW used production blocks to. it was the 2002ti engine wasn't it?? they slanted it right over to get the weight as low as they could and then reduced the stroke and strapped a turbo on! ;) lol

also guys its worth noting that the F1 car back then where pushing thecnolagy as much as they are today! turbocharging back then was new to that platform and that those kind of power levels. the turbos used would be classed as CRAP these days and the engine managment (did they even run any??) wouldn't be enough to operate a digital watch these days!

the same gose for the Group B rally cars. everything was new back then! turbos wehre still in there infancy on racing cars, elctronics where still pants, materials where nothing like we have today. even the 4WD system where best discribed as agriculturely! compeard to a new WRC car, i think they would be slow on a rough and twisty gravel surface.

Cheers Chris.

The F1 fuel is not real pump gas,the % of each chemicals is totally diffrent

Comparing F1,NASCAR & NHRA is just like comparing Apples,Oranges & Bananas

i was only joking and its nothing like real pump fuel! i think the rules say they can only use the same chemcials as whats in pump fuel but they can mix them how they like. not sure though.

its something else thats really fasonating about F1 i feel and is something else they push as hard as they can. shell even sell fuel over here that is supposed to be dirived from F1 fuels (yeah right!). lol.

you are right on the F1, NASCAR, NHRA and apples, oranges and bananas thing, they all teast good to me! :)

Chris.

Pretty soon we will need genetically engineered drivers to handle this stuff. It'll have massive inner-ear parts for balance and equilibrium, shorter extremities and a bigger heart for circulation under Gs. Probably run at the metabolism of a rabid humming bird. They will feed it sucrose and protein or something.

i think the Germans have already tired that with Schumacher. ;)

I rememberd it as 2l,but you both are probably right

Yes they used prod. blocks that where used to get internal stress out of them or sum like that

Yes they sell the Formula V-power 99octane here, :lol:

the same gose for the Group B rally cars. everything was new back then! turbos wehre still in there infancy on racing cars, elctronics where still pants, materials where nothing like we have today. even the 4WD system where best discribed as agriculturely! compeard to a new WRC car, i think they would be slow on a rough and twisty gravel surface.



You are more right than you know. Remember the crazy old Audi Quattro cars? A lot of that AWD has its origins in a Swiss Military APC that VW helped build. No joke. I forget where I read that. The Group B drivers joke about how it took about 100M from the launch to get any boost. Even the 1000WHP GT42R guys get better spool than that in 2L apps, let alone the relatively small turbos (both compressor and turbine) that WRC cars run nowadays.

I think that to understand the engine you have to understand the rules which govern the series... NASCAR teams have been working with the same basic foundations for 30 years... 358 inches 1 830 carb... Heads and blocks supplyed by the manufacturer... Its the perfect example of refinement....back when it was 18 and 23 deg stuff 600 hp was a big deal.. then 600 to the tire... now its creaping up on 900 horse and 750+ to the tire..New heads and new mfg's have raised the bar... Chevy with the SB2 in 97 98 99 then Dodge with the R5 Ford with the SC1 Toyota with the phase 11 now chevy with the R07. Materials have gotten better than anyone would of thought 10 years ago allowing lighter more reliable packages....If there were no rules then Im sure a cup motor aould be a 2500 hp twin turbo something or other.... but theres lots and lots of rules...If you have even been to a post race tear down you'd see this...When you think of what they are.... 358 inches single 830 carb... pushrods .... on race gas making well over 800 hp 9300 RPM's (they would be over 10,000 if not for gear ratio rules)

Great post CTS. I think after you comprehend the rules and regulations you can then begin to understand the engine. I think 800+ HP out of a NA 358c.i. pushrod v8 with 12:1 CR says a lot. And its only going to increase until NASCAR mandates new rules that would limit them.

They were originally two liters but destroked to 1.5 liters per the F1 period rules.

And all that hp is with 98 octane unleaded gas!!! At most tracks, they get between 4-5 mpg, not too shabby considering the setup.

What is typically the B.S.F.C and VE% in the Nascar engines now at?

What is typically the B.S.F.C and VE% in the Nascar engines now at?

ve is probably up near 110-115%. a well built performance motor in a street car will be 90-95%. a high dollar street/strip motor can tag 100%, its kind of difficult but very doable. then comes the all out race motors like cup engines that try to use every part of physics possible to get that little bit more.

Alot of the shit on these LSX engines is filtered right out of NASCAR. The beehive valve springs and a whole host of others are right out of restrictor plate racing.

What is typically the B.S.F.C and VE% in the Nascar engines now at?

A race team would never divulge fuel consumption information like that because their competitors would get an edge.

Alot of the shit on these LSX engines is filtered right out of NASCAR. The beehive valve springs and a whole host of others are right out of restrictor plate racing.

Be careful about getting the cart ahead of the horse. Beeheive spring design is older than NASCAR and development of the current ones was aimed at OEMs who put a LOT of money into it. Nevertheless, we all benefit.

There is a very good chance Cup plate engines do NOT use beehive springs. With the new larger restrictor plates for the high drag COT, power and rpm is up considerably. Guess which engine had the most power at Talladega?

Jon

well this comes from from a 17 year gm master engine builder,i have came up with deep pockets on several hi horse/torque builds,morethan i can count,have any of you builder/talkers /ever looked outside the rules,such as having zabbat eng have rollerbearings installed at the cam journals,gear to gear timing sets w/ roller bearing or crank & polished&rodds set up for roller bearing for ease of rolling resistance//alluminum heads r a must for heat disapation,a air gap intake/holley 780 continous 4 bbl,w/smaller primary jets &delayed secondarys.intake blueprinted to heads ,and heads to intake,clearance intake gskt to heads/intake/&carb 198 exhaust/218intake/backk face valves,trim guides to head,,deck block then bolt head & measure for amount of head facing,and thickness of headgasket//then ck cc of head to block/ck clearance on valve to block,clearance headers to block and use sacavaging header/x pipe to exit on pass. side.i have with chevrolet 17 plus yearscert. master builder ,hope you know can get 1100 horsepower from
2.2liter read up on it,parts are avilable at chevrolet and book on how 2////hopethis helps the masses[[[:bang::engarde:]]]

form what i have read NASCAR engines are VERY restricted on what materials they can use for things like pistons. F1 guys (and some mad Greek EVO tuners) are running Berillium. This gives much higher heat transfer rates than ally form what i have been told.

Lesplay2 i like the ideas of reducing restriction. i think you could achive this with material selection alot easier. for example there are some titamium compersites rods (yes compersites!!) that done need to run big or little end bearings. this is because the coficent is lower than that of the bearing material! lol

as for 1100hp form 2.2ltr, i know of one 4G63 tuner that is looking to push 1750bhp from a 2.0ltr engine! He is running somehttng like 18-1 comp. raito and about 50psi of boost! this is using a stock cylinder head (obliously with work done to it). The guys have a billiet head being designed that should enable them, to push 2000bhp from 2.0ltr. THis would be on par with what F1 engiens of the 80s where running (reputed 1500bhp from a 1.5ltr engine) with greater pumping losses. Also this 2.0ltr engine is running oover 400bhp N/A! he has a VE well over 100%. This engine is achiving a BHP to L similar to a 1000cc bike engine.

well this comes from from a 17 year gm master engine builder,i have came up with deep pockets on several hi horse/torque builds,morethan i can count,have any of you builder/talkers /ever looked outside the rules,such as having zabbat eng have rollerbearings installed at the cam journals,gear to gear timing sets w/ roller bearing or crank & polished&rodds set up for roller bearing for ease of rolling resistance//alluminum heads r a must for heat disapation,a air gap intake/holley 780 continous 4 bbl,w/smaller primary jets &delayed secondarys.intake blueprinted to heads ,and heads to intake,clearance intake gskt to heads/intake/&carb 198 exhaust/218intake/backk face valves,trim guides to head,,deck block then bolt head & measure for amount of head facing,and thickness of headgasket//then ck cc of head to block/ck clearance on valve to block,clearance headers to block and use sacavaging header/x pipe to exit on pass. side.i have with chevrolet 17 plus yearscert. master builder ,hope you know can get 1100 horsepower from
2.2liter read up on it,parts are avilable at chevrolet and book on how 2////hopethis helps the masses[[[:bang::engarde:]]]

Yeah, that sounds like it came from a 17 year GM master engine builder. If there was such a thing. :eyes:

Probably off a little here but you can pick up top end packages from some of these engine builders sb2 and what not for very reasonable. It will be a couple years old but 4 years ago when I did cylinder heads and intakes for these motors they are still better by far in design then what is available to most of us.

well this comes from from a 17 year gm master engine builder,i have came up with deep pockets on several hi horse/torque builds,morethan i can count,have any of you builder/talkers /ever looked outside the rules,such as having zabbat eng have rollerbearings installed at the cam journals,gear to gear timing sets w/ roller bearing or crank & polished&rodds set up for roller bearing for ease of rolling resistance//alluminum heads r a must for heat disapation,a air gap intake/holley 780 continous 4 bbl,w/smaller primary jets &delayed secondarys.intake blueprinted to heads ,and heads to intake,clearance intake gskt to heads/intake/&carb 198 exhaust/218intake/backk face valves,trim guides to head,,deck block then bolt head & measure for amount of head facing,and thickness of headgasket//then ck cc of head to block/ck clearance on valve to block,clearance headers to block and use sacavaging header/x pipe to exit on pass. side.i have with chevrolet 17 plus yearscert. master builder ,hope you know can get 1100 horsepower from
2.2liter read up on it,parts are avilable at chevrolet and book on how 2////hopethis helps the masses[[[:bang::engarde:]]]

Have you ever been to high school? Jesus, I know it's just an internet forum, but your post looks like something between a bowl of alphabet soup spilled on my monitor and an ADD 4th grader's "what I did this summer" paper. Holy crap, that was terrible.

One word answer.


RPM.

One word answer.


RPM.

that's three words.

that's three words.

No, Nows thats Three words

One word answer.


RPM.

that's three words.

No, Nows thats Three words
Epic win.

First off i feel like i learned A LOT from reading this thread.

Secondly, can you link me to where i can read more about this EVO build please?

form what i have read NASCAR engines are VERY restricted on what materials they can use for things like pistons. F1 guys (and some mad Greek EVO tuners) are running Berillium. This gives much higher heat transfer rates than ally form what i have been told.

Lesplay2 i like the ideas of reducing restriction. i think you could achive this with material selection alot easier. for example there are some titamium compersites rods (yes compersites!!) that done need to run big or little end bearings. this is because the coficent is lower than that of the bearing material! lol

as for 1100hp form 2.2ltr, i know of one 4G63 tuner that is looking to push 1750bhp from a 2.0ltr engine! He is running somehttng like 18-1 comp. raito and about 50psi of boost! this is using a stock cylinder head (obliously with work done to it). The guys have a billiet head being designed that should enable them, to push 2000bhp from 2.0ltr. THis would be on par with what F1 engiens of the 80s where running (reputed 1500bhp from a 1.5ltr engine) with greater pumping losses. Also this 2.0ltr engine is running oover 400bhp N/A! he has a VE well over 100%. This engine is achiving a BHP to L similar to a 1000cc bike engine.

I'll be happy to sell anybody on here one of my rental SB-2's. Most are roller engines as they ran in BGN, CTS and ARCA. I got about 20 of them sitting in the floor ready to go.

As far as how is the power made it is pretty simple. You have to match the fuel burn rate, to the piston speed you are running. This is consistent with every competition engine on the planet.

The build sheet is not trick and the engines are not that expensive $25-50K depending on how extreme you get and how many parts are new or used. HP will range from about 750-850 depending on how good your heads are and how high you want to turn the engine.

Heads flow 425+ CFM ( I flow at 25" ), cams 270* range, / .800+ lift, rockers 1.7-2.2, 750 & 830 carbs ( pretty trick to get more than 1HP per carb cfm ). Intakes are about $5K for a good one. Bryant 3.33 crank, 6.2" Carr rods, CP/Mahle/JE pistons with a dish or whatever to make 12:1 with 40-50cc heads. 2.180 intakes 1.625 exhausts, stainless headers about $5k Set for good ones. Uni-Boring blocks with 50-65mm cam bearings, 4.100-4.200 bores, if you want to get really trick you get a Twisted block if you want to make 850hp range as the cylinders start to distort ad lose ring seal when you get above 800hp ( compacted graphite about +50# ) .

We qualified at Charlotte and Atlanta over 10,000 rpm a couple times with some pretty cool test stuff from PRS and HMS. Those engines were junk after 200 miles.

We were able to get 4 practices and races out of engines held under 8500rpm and they still made 750-800hp.

As far as flat tappet cams they used to be welded stellite, now they are made out of VAR 8620 Billet, pretty funky alloys and treatment to last a race. The big core billets are $1000+ if you buy 50 at a time. Grinding them is a real pain and expensive but there are a couple guys out there really good at it.

I think that is about it, not real trick just a SBC with good parts. The key is matching everything together to get the system to work, but that is a given with any proper race engine.

If you need any parts, hit me with an e-mail.

Thanks...You sir know what you are talking about.

The camshaft bearings diameter, looks like 3 1/2", the crankshaft bearings diameter looks like 1 3/4" diameter, looking at the heads the push rods are inside the head in what looks like it just fits in there, and off the top of the heads it sticks out about 1/4 inch, the intake ports are square and corners are rounded, and looks like 2" by 2", the blocks are steel the heads are aluminum, and the secretsy larger than an air craft carrier

True that racemman14.

I know this is a Chevy forum, but we got over 700 RWHP out of.....310 cubic inches using a small block Ford block. We used LBP, Lozano Brothers Porting out of Texas for our engines and they were, as you said, not all that expensive. Around $25k some ten years ago. Lots of details, but nothing really outrageous. 12.5 CR, 8500 redline. Think it's really more about using the right parts and processing them in the right way. I hear they are pushing well over 800 now with the new Trans Am rules.

That said, I am looking to build close to 600 with an LS3, stock bottom end and heads on 91. Looks doable and the engine goes to dyno next month...if I can get the sensor pin outs!

I need:

Cam
Crank
Oil Press
MAP
DBW TB
DBW Pedal

Anybody throw me a bone on those?

BTW- Here a pick of the LS3:

need to edit the title of the thread and bump it up 200 or so hp

Nascar 358 c.i. small block 1 4 barrel carb = 2.45 hp/ci and almost 10,000rpm

NHRA 500 c.i. Pro Stock big block 2 4 barrel carbs = 3.0 hp/ci and almost 11,000 rpm

Those pro stock engines are the most developed pushrod engine on the planet.
typical 4.700+ bore and 3.55 stroke


Nothing sounds cooler than 500 c.i. at 11,000 rpm going through a clutch and 5 gears

Cup engines run a flat tappet cam, i'd rather see them run roller cam. Nationwide/Trucks/sprint car run roller cam.

I'm sure cup cars would have more power with roller, so Nascar would probably choke the engines power down, with restrictor plates on all tracks, or something. If the cars just ran factory body panels they wouldn't be as fast, more power + less aero = better driver.

more power + less aero = better driver.

haha true true

Another thing to consider is that NASCAR engines push the limits of the engines. I mean just look at how many guys blow engines during races. And generally the engines are trashed after every race, so the life of the engines are not great. That is a completely different goal then most of us because sure we want max power, but we also want them to last.

I am sure there will be lots of changes as they move into fuel injection (next year I believe). This thread made me want to did into some of my old engine building books where they speced out some cup motors.

And generally the engines are trashed after every race, so the life of the engines are not great. That is a completely different goal then most of us because sure we want max power, but we also want them to last.

Uh... :confused:

Uh... :confused:

After a Nascar race the engines are completely torn apart and any item that wears is replaced due to high stress that is put on them.

Cup engines run a flat tappet cam, i'd rather see them run roller cam. Nationwide/Trucks/sprint car run roller cam.

I'm sure cup cars would have more power with roller, so Nascar would probably choke the engines power down, with restrictor plates on all tracks, or something. If the cars just ran factory body panels they wouldn't be as fast, more power + less aero = better driver.

If you look at a GOOD ARCA engine you'll get your answer they run big carbs and roller cams... And as far as the rest goes I wont get into that..

Uh... :confused:

Ya +1. I would love to see someone on here, run there engine for 500 miles at 8k rpms and see what it looks like, if it makes it 100 miles.

Ya +1. I would love to see someone on here, run there engine for 500 miles at 8k rpms and see what it looks like, if it makes it 100 miles.

You probably could relatively easily, but I don't think it would be impressive as far as power is concerned.

Nascar 358 c.i. small block 1 4 barrel carb = 2.45 hp/ci and almost 10,000rpm

NHRA 500 c.i. Pro Stock big block 2 4 barrel carbs = 3.0 hp/ci and almost 11,000 rpm

Those pro stock engines are the most developed pushrod engine on the planet.
typical 4.700+ bore and 3.55 stroke


Nothing sounds cooler than 500 c.i. at 11,000 rpm going through a clutch and 5 gears

Formula 1 146 c.i. Direct Injection = 6.2 HP/ci 18,000 RPM. I've heard both Pro Stock and F1 in person. F1 through a clutch and 7 gears sounds much more impressive than a Pro Stock engine...in my opinion of course.

this thread is JASON. it keeps dying then its back for the sequel!!!

i havent seen this mentioned, that nascar engines have a raised cam block so it would be less stress on push rods n valvetrain

Formula 1 146 c.i. Direct Injection = 6.2 HP/ci 18,000 RPM. I've heard both Pro Stock and F1 in person. F1 through a clutch and 7 gears sounds much more impressive than a Pro Stock engine...in my opinion of course.

i believe F1 does not use DI yet.

i believe F1 does not use DI yet.

There is no yet about it! they need all the time they can to get the fuel and air to mix. So the injectors are mounted ABOVE the inlet horns. Also if you every look at the intake track of an F1 engine you will see its totally straight to the valve. No bends at all!

Also note that F1 engines are RPM limited. give them another 2000rpm and the power figures will increase!

Chris.

There is no yet about it! they need all the time they can to get the fuel and air to mix. So the injectors are mounted ABOVE the inlet horns. Also if you every look at the intake track of an F1 engine you will see its totally straight to the valve. No bends at all!

Also note that F1 engines are RPM limited. give them another 2000rpm and the power figures will increase!

Chris.

they are going to DI in 2014 when they go to V6's :(

they are going to DI in 2014 when they go to V6's :(

Yeah but they get turbos again then :) although i dont cant see them power slding 1000++bhp trubo charged monster like they did in the 80's!

Chris.

For those of you who are interested, here is an article comparing a Nascar cup engine to a Formula 1 engine. Very technical, and very interesting to see just how similar these engines are, given their vastly different technological allowances.

http://www.epi-eng.com/piston_engine_technology/comparison_of_cup_to_f1.htm

Great article, thanks.

I'm curious to see how the 2012 fuel injected NASCAR engines will compare to the current carbed 2011 engines. Is any information out there yet pertaining to how the fuel management (computer) will be done?

I retract my previous posts regarding the fuel injection..I was talking to a friend of mine who works for McClaren Group,the suppliers of the systems.. and much to my amazement the teams will have full control over the mapping of the ECU... NASCAR can also monitor the systems via their own software..The cost break down was roughly 30,000 per system... so the cost will take awhile to absorb...

You spelt McLaren wrong...

(if you read his biography by Eoin Young you will understand)

sorry, I'm not trying to be a pain :smokin2: