540HP NA 7L V12 3 seater
Discussion
Hi, I stopped updating that thread as it got very leggy with not a lot of progress.
Its coming along but I don't plan to go into any great detail online until the car is completed, which is still some time away, once its finally finished I may do a retrospective build diary as I have been taking pics along the way.
We have most of the components now and virtually all have been refurbished, just a case of having time to assemble, its always been a long term project, and other things in life have taken priority, and still do.
Its coming along but I don't plan to go into any great detail online until the car is completed, which is still some time away, once its finally finished I may do a retrospective build diary as I have been taking pics along the way.
We have most of the components now and virtually all have been refurbished, just a case of having time to assemble, its always been a long term project, and other things in life have taken priority, and still do.
Indeed when Olas posted incorrectly on the 7th March in response to RoverP6B's comment back on 24th August I decided, given the brevity of their statement, that I would not draw any attention to it (although my pedantic nature put up a lot of protest!). I commend you Caddyshack for your attention to detail.
Edited by F1natic on Thursday 26th March 00:21
PAUL500 said:
We have a long term F40 LM version of what you are doing, based on a 355 chassis and running gear, but fitted with a 575 V12 engine.
Hi Paul, do you have any pics posted? (with a link perhaps?) I am always very interested in learning from others who have blazed a trail. Are you aware of the work that F40 Developments did here in NZ? They are one of my toolmakers and I have spent hours poking my nose into their car. The owner regularly attends the "Leadfoot festival" (which I hope to attend with my car when its done).
Edited by F1natic on Thursday 26th March 03:23
Nothing like bashing away at solidmodelling for a few hours only to find the catalytic converter clashes with the rear subframe. Two steps forward, one step back - still making progress though. Only one exhaust pipe is shown in the image of the "powerpack" assembly - the whole unit as shown will be unbolted for easy maintenance/inspection.
The rear panel is looking quite close.
First engine configuration will use the stock intake manifolds, but final goal is independant throttle bodies as shown, which will end up behind the passenger windows.
The rear panel is looking quite close.
First engine configuration will use the stock intake manifolds, but final goal is independant throttle bodies as shown, which will end up behind the passenger windows.
Great work!
I've gone from viewing the twin-engined concept as a cost-effective but mechanically complex approach to now seeing it as a unique & distinctive feature which differentiates your car from the original F1 & indeed stops it from being merely a pastiche or replica. The twin-engines gives your project its provenance.
If you had just put a BMW M70/73 or Mercedes M120/137 in there (which would be challenging to cost-effectively use with a manual gearbox) - it would be great - but still be a budget copy of the original.
As a fellow Kiwi who's been based in the UK for almost 25 years - it always warms my heart to see guys back home in sheds taking on ambitious projects in economical ways.
What I always liked about Kiwi motorsport was that due to the small number of enthusiasts & the lack of big money - it was always eclectic. At classic car meetings you could see British classics, Japanese '70's stuff, Aussie & US muscle, small European (Alfa's, Lancia's etc) & older high end European cars all going head-to-head and it's amazing how even they could be.
In the UK, motorsport & indeed Track Days has generally been less about talent & more of a cheque book war.
Don't get me wrong - the UK has a fine & proud tradition of "Men in Sheds" - but the modern age has been less sympathetic to their projects.
I've gone from viewing the twin-engined concept as a cost-effective but mechanically complex approach to now seeing it as a unique & distinctive feature which differentiates your car from the original F1 & indeed stops it from being merely a pastiche or replica. The twin-engines gives your project its provenance.
If you had just put a BMW M70/73 or Mercedes M120/137 in there (which would be challenging to cost-effectively use with a manual gearbox) - it would be great - but still be a budget copy of the original.
As a fellow Kiwi who's been based in the UK for almost 25 years - it always warms my heart to see guys back home in sheds taking on ambitious projects in economical ways.
What I always liked about Kiwi motorsport was that due to the small number of enthusiasts & the lack of big money - it was always eclectic. At classic car meetings you could see British classics, Japanese '70's stuff, Aussie & US muscle, small European (Alfa's, Lancia's etc) & older high end European cars all going head-to-head and it's amazing how even they could be.
In the UK, motorsport & indeed Track Days has generally been less about talent & more of a cheque book war.
Don't get me wrong - the UK has a fine & proud tradition of "Men in Sheds" - but the modern age has been less sympathetic to their projects.
shalmaneser said:
Would be interested to see what it looks like!
I have spent years designing the internal gubbins of the Tbox, so am a little hesitant to show any detailed engineeering views, however I did a quick sketch of the concept that hopefully makes the "simple" mechanism clear. 
The standard dual mass flywheel and standard clutch feed the 344Nm of torque into each pinion (nearside clutch not shown for clarity), which drive their respective sides of the crownwheel. The crownwheel is connected to the input shaft of the corvette gearbox. The corvette box is designed to withstand the inertia of a long cardan shaft and its synchronisers are suitably robust. The inertia of the 2 pinions is of a similar level to the cardan shaft.
With both clutches engaged and the gearbox in a gear the engine torque path to the roadwheels is reacted on each respective side of the crownwheel. The engines do not drive each other or resonate with each other due to crank windup because the crownwheel and rolling resistance dampen the output. Even in neutral the oil drag losses of the gearbox should prevent destructive geartrain rattle. The tbox has it own separate lubrication system.
It is just like a tandem bicycle, the front riders' pedaling does not force the legs of the rear riders legs around as the rear wheel absorbs the pedal effort, but the pedalling effort can be doubled if the rear rider puts in some legpower!
If one engine was to have a fueling or spark issue then the malfunctioning motor will also get driven by the good engine, but with 2 healthy engines each running on independant and identical ECU's they should both contribute to driving torque equally.
Edited by F1natic on Friday 3rd April 08:20
F1natic said:
I have spent years designing the internal gubbins of the Tbox, so am a little hesitant to show any detailed engineeering views, however I did a quick sketch of the concept that hopefully makes the "simple" mechanism clear.
The standard dual mass flywheel and standard clutch feed the 344Nm of torque into each pinion (nearside clutch not shown for clarity), which drive their respective sides of the crownwheel. The crownwheel is connected to the input shaft of the corvette gearbox. The corvette box is designed to withstand the inertia of a long cardan shaft and its synchronisers are suitably robust. The inertia of the 2 pinions is of a similar level to the cardan shaft.
With both clutches engaged and the gearbox in a gear the engine torque path to the roadwheels is reacted on each respective side of the crownwheel. The engines do not drive each other or resonate with each other due to crank windup because the crownwheel and rolling resistance dampen the output. Even in neutral the oil drag losses of the gearbox should prevent destructive geartrain rattle. The tbox has it own separate lubrication system.
It is just like a tandem bicycle, the front riders' pedaling does not force the legs of the rear riders legs around as the rear wheel absorbs the pedal effort, but the pedalling effort can be doubled if the rear rider puts in some legpower!
If one engine was to have a fueling or spark issue then the malfunctioning motor will also get driven by the good engine, but with 2 healthy engines each running on independant and identical ECU's they should both contribute to driving torque equally.
Do you think synchronisation of clutch engagement/disengagement will me an issue? One clutch biting before the other.The standard dual mass flywheel and standard clutch feed the 344Nm of torque into each pinion (nearside clutch not shown for clarity), which drive their respective sides of the crownwheel. The crownwheel is connected to the input shaft of the corvette gearbox. The corvette box is designed to withstand the inertia of a long cardan shaft and its synchronisers are suitably robust. The inertia of the 2 pinions is of a similar level to the cardan shaft.
With both clutches engaged and the gearbox in a gear the engine torque path to the roadwheels is reacted on each respective side of the crownwheel. The engines do not drive each other or resonate with each other due to crank windup because the crownwheel and rolling resistance dampen the output. Even in neutral the oil drag losses of the gearbox should prevent destructive geartrain rattle. The tbox has it own separate lubrication system.
It is just like a tandem bicycle, the front riders' pedaling does not force the legs of the rear riders legs around as the rear wheel absorbs the pedal effort, but the pedalling effort can be doubled if the rear rider puts in some legpower!
If one engine was to have a fueling or spark issue then the malfunctioning motor will also get driven by the good engine, but with 2 healthy engines each running on independant and identical ECU's they should both contribute to driving torque equally.
Edited by F1natic on Friday 3rd April 08:20
With the engines clutched independently, the engine note(s) will be invariably out of sync. I will sound interesting at times.
stevesingo said:
Do you think synchronisation of clutch engagement/disengagement will me an issue? One clutch biting before the other.
I was thinking the same. Not such an issue when changing between gears quickly once moving, but for pulling away I'd have thought any mis-match in the bite-point and the engaged engine would spin up wildly through the disconnected clutch before the second clutch engages. You'd get no drive to the wheels until both are engaged.A limited-slip link between the two input shafts would help, but might be difficult to engineer.
Thanks for the continued updates on this fascinating build!
threadlock said:
for pulling away I'd have thought any mis-match in the bite-point and the engaged engine would spin up wildly through the disconnected clutch before the second clutch engages. You'd get no drive to the wheels until both are engaged.
Sorry, but thats not how the mechanism works. Lets say we have selected 1st gear and both clutches are in, as the clutches are released you are right , inevitably one clutch will bite before the other, however the crownwheel between the pinions prevents "crosstalk" between the engines. One pinion cannot spin the other with out spinning the drive output, which is connected to the road wheels. There is no differential movement in this setup, plus I have built it in lego so I know it works!Edited by F1natic on Friday 3rd April 10:35
stevesingo said:
With the engines clutched independently, the engine note(s) will be invariably out of sync. I will sound interesting at times.
A friend was good enough to sample a honda V6 at full throttle and editted the audiotrack to give some overlap, it didn't sound wonderful like a V12 - more like a V6 with an echo. The sound of the powerplant has a massive influence on the driving experience (just watch Chris Harris driving an F50). However the sound of out of sych motors is not a prime consideration during early development testing - proving the reliability of the Tbox as soon as practical is my focus. Perhaps it may then be possible to synch the firing signal from one ecu and retard the other to match the 30 degree offset required during clutching events, however I don't believe this has ever been done so will probably just live with it "as is" and just get my enjoyment from the acceleration. Gassing Station | Readers' Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff