RE: 1.0-litre Formula Ford laps Norschleife in 7:22

[ewenm]

Prof Prolapse said:

I know that... Article says it averages 57mpg at 75mph, not 105mph

So are you looking for another catch or will that do?

[Hoygo]

Surely on a car that weights 500kg any small capacity engine can work,and i was expecting the production ford 1.0 engine, boosted to 205 hp may we see that on a road car but than it will suffer from horrible low-down torque.

Anyway great achievement,on higher capacity engines can be worked way more to squeeze out hp if a 999cc manages 205.

[Bill]

julian64 said:

Hmmmm.

500Kg, and only 200hp. I think that equals the fastest motorcycle that runs about 200bhp and weighs about 170kg.

Can I be the first to say don't believe it.

Four flat contact patches... so vastly better braking and cornering.

[julian64]

ewenm said:

julian64 said:

Hmmmm.

500Kg, and only 200hp. I think that equals the fastest motorcycle that runs about 200bhp and weighs about 170kg.

Can I be the first to say don't believe it.

Figures including 75kg of rider/driver? I'd guess the difference would be cornering speeds.

Well I think the differences would be the motorcycle dissapearing into the distance on any sort of straight by means of its vastly better power weight ratio, and the ford having to catch up with truely collosal cornering speed on tread pattern tyres.

I don't see it myself. Ionly posted up the bike info because it shows that the ford has a Power to Weight of 400bhp/ton. I should think there are rather a lot of cars now approaching that sort of power to weight with nowhere that sort of time.

In my mind it doesn't seem to fit.

[John145]

I saw this lapping on the Monday (27th) on the trackday they were having. Was very loud!

[dingocooke]

julian64 said:

Hmmmm.

500Kg, and only 200hp. I think that equals the fastest motorcycle that runs about 200bhp and weighs about 170kg.

Can I be the first to say don't believe it.

Made me smile, nice one!!

Seems Ford are finally catching onto the performance potential of 1 litre engines that anyone with a bike, or BEC, has known about for many years.
Take a look at the spec of a new 1 litre R1, blade or ZX10, and then remember theyre normally aspirated!

[DanDC5]

If Ford could make these at £20k they'd clean up. Can I have one please Ford?

[Prof Prolapse]

ewenm said:

Prof Prolapse said:

I know that... Article says it averages 57mpg at 75mph, not 105mph

So are you looking for another catch or will that do?

Well, yes actually. I still think 57mpg @ 75mph with an apparently usable 200 bhp in reserve is very impressive.

Motorcycles with 200bhp/litre really struggle for those sort of figures with half the weight (although naturally aspirated of course).

[hufggfg]

interfacezero said:

Wonder if / when we will see the engine in a Caterham instead of the sigma block?

Tbh, I don't think turbocharging really suits a Caterham. Hence Caterham themselves supercharging that R300.

It's a car all about driver involvement and feel, any lag in throttle response can really ruin the driving experience.

[DazBock]

Please release it ford. I would so much rather have one of those than a Caparo T1!

[Captain Muppet]

8vFTW said:

doogz said:

8vFTW said:

What kind of MPG would it get in something with doors and a roof?

Lots of power for such a small engine but do Ford really expect these to last as long as a equivalent, larger capacity, N/A setup? Surely your going to be forever melting bits and blowing up turbos?

205bhp/litre?

I know Evos, Sierras, Escorts, Imprezas, etc that run that daily, and whilst they require regular servicing, aren't 'forever melting bits and blowing up turbos'

I just asking about the reliability of these new small capacity, high output engines because I've never owned anything like that. Genuinely curious as to their reliability. If they do turn out to be decent then I'm all for them. Less tax, less petrol, more power. Everybody wins.

The new engines will have passed the same durability tests as the old engines. There is no reason to assume they won't be as reliable as anything else ford have made.

[Captain Muppet]

julian64 said:

ewenm said:

julian64 said:

Hmmmm.

500Kg, and only 200hp. I think that equals the fastest motorcycle that runs about 200bhp and weighs about 170kg.

Can I be the first to say don't believe it.

Figures including 75kg of rider/driver? I'd guess the difference would be cornering speeds.

Well I think the differences would be the motorcycle dissapearing into the distance on any sort of straight by means of its vastly better power weight ratio, and the ford having to catch up with truely collosal cornering speed on tread pattern tyres.

I don't see it myself. Ionly posted up the bike info because it shows that the ford has a Power to Weight of 400bhp/ton. I should think there are rather a lot of cars now approaching that sort of power to weight with nowhere that sort of time.

In my mind it doesn't seem to fit.

So you're saying Ford are lying? That it can't be true because you don't understand it?

[Prof Prolapse]

julian64 said:

Well I think the differences would be the motorcycle dissapearing into the distance on any sort of straight by means of its vastly better power weight ratio, and the ford having to catch up with truely collosal cornering speed on tread pattern tyres.

I don't see it myself. Ionly posted up the bike info because it shows that the ford has a Power to Weight of 400bhp/ton. I should think there are rather a lot of cars now approaching that sort of power to weight with nowhere that sort of time.

In my mind it doesn't seem to fit.

Bikes don't fair that well at the ring mate. It's pretty twisty.

I also think they'd be quite careful to make sure it could be independently verified before making such a claim.

[BoRED S2upid]

Well done Ford. Id love to see the cost of this development against what Ariel has spent over the years developing the Atom.

[Dave Hedgehog]

this is my kind of eco car

now make it sound like a V8

[julian64]

Captain Muppet said:

So you're saying Ford are lying? That it can't be true because you don't understand it?

Thats right muppet. All there in the words for anyone to read.

However, now you've called me on it muppet, I can see Ford have absolutely no reason to lie, so I don't know what could have come over me.

Do accept my sincere appologies for believing Ford might just have a motive for telling a few porkies here.

[900T-R]

doogz said:

Power to weight ratio is irrelevant in a corner.

Weight itself is much more relevant.

Unless the track is predominantly made out of long straights (where outright power pretty much only battles drag coefficient x frontal aspect), a 400 bhp/tonne car that weighs 500 kgs will always be faster than a 400 bhp/tonne car that weighs two tonnes.

Well, except if the former would be unbelievably crap and the latter a dynamic work of art par excellence that is...

[VladD]

RobCrezz said:

900T-R said:

OK,

Buy well used Formula Ford £ 5-10K
Engine install £5K?
IVA stuff (lights, mirrors, cycle wings etc) - £3K?

Sounds a 'cheap' way to get into an extreme track day toy...

I reckon 5k is optimistic for that engine + install. But its a good idea!

Or used MX5 - 1K
Engine install £5K?

[The Wookie]

My barn door of a C400 Caterham can just about crack 150 with 230bhp, I would have thought with 205bhp, minimal frontal area and some semblance of slipperyness that thing would be cracking some pretty frightening speeds for a Formula Ford down the straights!

[Captain Muppet]

The Wookie said:

My barn door of a C400 Caterham can just about crack 150 with 230bhp, I would have thought with 205bhp, minimal frontal area and some semblance of slipperyness that thing would be cracking some pretty frightening speeds for a Formula Ford down the straights!

According to PH (who I assume quote the Ford press release) "nearly 160mph"