Design the fastest possible vehicle

Design the fastest possible vehicle

Author
Discussion

smithyithy

7,223 posts

118 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
If I designed one it'd have a 2 stroke engine. Twice the power of a 4 stroke for the size.. smaller engine = less weight = better power to weight, which is the most important factor.

Only reason we don't have them in cars / bikes now is the emissions laws!!

littleredrooster

5,537 posts

196 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
smithyithy said:
If I designed one it'd have a 2 stroke engine. Twice the power of a 4 stroke for the size.. smaller engine = less weight = better power to weight, which is the most important factor.

Only reason we don't have them in cars / bikes now is the emissions laws!!
Two-strokes don't take well to forced induction though, and a similar-sized four-stroke with blower will make far, far more power.

SturdyHSV

10,094 posts

167 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
jon- said:
Not sure why this isn't just taken as the end of the thread?

They asked this question to Adrian Newey, who probably knows a little bit more about it than we do, and the above is what he came up with. It's rather fast.

otolith

56,035 posts

204 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
I think the XKCD strip has it right, there are lots of ways to design a car which is too quick for a human to drive. The squishy bit is the weak point. You could take an F1 car and add more power and more downforce until the driver blacks out.

smithyithy

7,223 posts

118 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
littleredrooster said:
Two-strokes don't take well to forced induction though, and a similar-sized four-stroke with blower will make far, far more power.

littleredrooster

5,537 posts

196 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
smithyithy said:
littleredrooster said:
Two-strokes don't take well to forced induction though, and a similar-sized four-stroke with blower will make far, far more power.
Eh??

smithyithy

7,223 posts

118 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
I wasn't being serious dude, it was a bit of a wind up - '2 strokes are better because double power' etc wink

otolith

56,035 posts

204 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
Lots of ships powered by massive forced induction two strokes.

RobM77

35,349 posts

234 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
delboy735 said:


Just need a way to make the wheels lean, but not the body of the car......defo one for the engineering fraternity.
Where's the downforce and big tyre contact patch? Surely this would be as quick as a Formula Ford on skinny tyres, a narrow track and a high CofG?...

RobM77

35,349 posts

234 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
SturdyHSV said:
jon- said:
Not sure why this isn't just taken as the end of the thread?

They asked this question to Adrian Newey, who probably knows a little bit more about it than we do, and the above is what he came up with. It's rather fast.
yes Unless Gordon Murray posts, Newey's design is the answer smile

tharriso

108 posts

125 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
If a human driver would be kept, what could be done to make him stay concious through the high g forces?

I am thinking a swivelling cockpit might help so the g's are always downwards on the drivers body not sideways on the neck.

Also a very flat prone sitting position, head first.

An electric pump to assist the heart pumping blood might also help.

jon-

16,505 posts

216 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
tharriso said:
If a human driver would be kept, what could be done to make him stay concious through the high g forces?

I am thinking a swivelling cockpit might help so the g's are always downwards on the drivers body not sideways on the neck.

Also a very flat prone sitting position, head first.

An electric pump to assist the heart pumping blood might also help.
All discussed on xkcd.

PW said:
robbieduncan said:
http://what-if.xkcd.com/116/

That link, for when it's updated and an article to do with spaniels or the moons of Jupiter takes its place.

robinessex

11,050 posts

181 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
The theoretical maximum speed on any circuit is quite simple really. You're in 1 of 3 states at any given moment. Accelerating at 4-5g. Braking at 4-5g. Cornering at 4-5g.

RobM77

35,349 posts

234 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
robinessex said:
The theoretical maximum speed on any circuit is quite simple really. You're in 1 of 3 states at any given moment. Accelerating at 4-5g. Braking at 4-5g. Cornering at 4-5g.
Don't forget though that drag increases with the square of speed, so a theoretical car that pulls 4g in acceleration at a given speed will pull less at a higher speed. The resultant equation would still be possible though of course.

otolith

56,035 posts

204 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
RobM77 said:
on't forget though that drag increases with the square of speed, so a theoretical car that pulls 4g in acceleration at a given speed will pull less at a higher speed. The resultant equation would still be possible though of course.
Might be a bit more complicated if it has aero and is traction limited?

Also, I think the point was that you would need a 4g limit to protect the driver.

PHmember

2,487 posts

171 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
Sump said:
Que the bullst.
Less of the Spanish...

littleredrooster

5,537 posts

196 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
robinessex said:
The theoretical maximum speed on any circuit is quite simple really. You're in 1 of 3 states at any given moment. Accelerating at 4-5g. Braking at 4-5g. Cornering at 4-5g.
Or a combination of any two of the three.

It was explained to me many years ago thus: Take a circuit. Draw a line around it which represents the 'perfect' line, maximising corner radii and blending one corner to the next. Apply the maximum amount of force to that line at any point, so power to the point of wheelspin in a straight line, maximum brake force when not accelerating, diminishing braking during turn-in, increasing power out of corners to perfectly match the traction available.

The difficult bit is achieving that in real life. smile

littleredrooster

5,537 posts

196 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
otolith said:
Lots of ships powered by massive forced induction two strokes.
I think you'll find that you wouldn't get a lot of power in a heavy-oil two-stroke diesel in a size which would fit a car... smile

Catatafish

1,361 posts

145 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
littleredrooster said:
otolith said:
Lots of ships powered by massive forced induction two strokes.
I think you'll find that you wouldn't get a lot of power in a heavy-oil two-stroke diesel in a size which would fit a car... smile
otolith was obviously destroying your statement:

littleredrooster said:
Two-strokes don't take well to forced induction though smile
I would like to see autonomous high speed racing in the coming years... either on the ground or even in vacuum tunnels.

VeeDubBigBird

440 posts

129 months

Thursday 23rd October 2014
quotequote all
What about this as well as the Red Bull X-Car.

Also found this on a different site just for fun.

Wacky Races Overall Winner:

Formula 1 rules between 1960 and 1992 awarded 9 points to the first driver to cross the line, 6 to the second, 4 to the third, 3 to the fourth, 2 to the fifth and 1 point to the racer in sixth place.

So in the overall wacky standings, the Ant Hill Mob finish third on the podium with 74 points.

Lumberjack Rufus Ruffcut and his beaver buddy Sawtooth logged 79 points, taking the Buzzwagon to second place overall.

But the ultimate champions with 87 points, thanks to an unbeatable eight second-placed finishes. the champions of Wacky Races are cavemen Rock and Gravel Slag. In their Boulder Mobile the hirsute.