RE: Driven: Caterham R300 supercharged
Discussion
300bhp/ton said:
suffolk009 said:
So is the suggestion that the supercharger will produce a car with over 300bhp?
That's man maths!
As the article says - 175bhp engine + 60bhp supercharger = 235bhp. So the duratec will still require full bespoke (presumably) steel internals AND a supercharger to make 300bhp.
How much will that cost? How much are people prepared to spend on a Caterham?
I think it refers more to power to weight.That's man maths!
As the article says - 175bhp engine + 60bhp supercharger = 235bhp. So the duratec will still require full bespoke (presumably) steel internals AND a supercharger to make 300bhp.
How much will that cost? How much are people prepared to spend on a Caterham?
Lads over there have had their supercharged, one guy was running 328bhp on standard internalls bar a set of 200spec cosworth cams. Okay so there was a new inlet manifold, ceramic coated manifold and big bore at 3", larger throttle body, quiafe diff, etc etc.
Easily done from the 2L Duratec, but then again you need to know how to drive it properly or they sort of, well, blow up a bit!
Well spotted Suffolk - a little man maths creeping in there. The claimed figure for this green machine in this spec is, and I quote, "around 260-ish". For some inexplicable reason I was thinking the R300 was 200bhp, not 175bhp, as I'd written not 2 minutes before. I've emailed the PH crew, hopefully an edit will help it make sense.
Just to add; This car is using standard duratec internals. The SP300R uses the same engine but with rods, pistons and much trickness. Consequently more boosts can be crammed in without premature excitement in the Ford spare parts department. That costs more, I guess...
Just to add; This car is using standard duratec internals. The SP300R uses the same engine but with rods, pistons and much trickness. Consequently more boosts can be crammed in without premature excitement in the Ford spare parts department. That costs more, I guess...
rohrl said:
The 1.6 is being replaced in the Focus AIUI by the 1-litre, which is smaller and lighter and makes the same power for less petrol. Seems like a no-brainer.
The Sigma is far from heavy though, and the one litre has all the extra gubins like an intercooler, turbo and cast intake, plus all the extra hosing/cooling routing. I'd imagine there wouldn't be much in it. As it is, the Sigma is pretty torquey, sounds good and is cheap to buy. It's also pretty robust (great for racing) and easy to work on.
OlberJ said:
BusaMK said:
I hope a good race performance on the ring doesn't pull development away from where these cars are truely great - on twisty tracks like cadwell and NSL A and B roads. Perfect example of reasoning for the longer diff - perhaps more than 130 would be a nice(if brave requirement) at the nurburgring but for road use or any UK track a longer diff just wouldn't make much sense and would slow you down due to reduced torque and hp at the wheels.
Not sure about that.130mph top speed means anything post 100 will be buzzy. If it's 150bhp then those times you do get a chance to stretch it's legs it will be a much nicer road experience.
We do all stick to 70mph m'lud but a car geared higher is nicer on the road than a track car setup.
I have a 175bhp, 6-speed, 3.9, 13" wheel set up Caterham which can hit the limited in top - acceleration is rapid, but crusing at over 5,000rpm on the motorway loses it's appeal after about 10 miles.
As much as I like my car on track, getting there and back can be a bit of a headache!
Matt UK said:
Agreed, on the road it's not all about being geared around v-max.
I have a 175bhp, 6-speed, 3.9, 13" wheel set up Caterham which can hit the limited in top - acceleration is rapid, but crusing at over 5,000rpm on the motorway loses it's appeal after about 10 miles.
As much as I like my car on track, getting there and back can be a bit of a headache!
I would just soften off the shocks and then sit behind a lorry. I found my 7 a surprisingly good car at motorway miles after doing Aberdeen to brands Hatch in a dayI have a 175bhp, 6-speed, 3.9, 13" wheel set up Caterham which can hit the limited in top - acceleration is rapid, but crusing at over 5,000rpm on the motorway loses it's appeal after about 10 miles.
As much as I like my car on track, getting there and back can be a bit of a headache!
300bhp/ton said:
It's ued by lots - it's cheap and improves performance over n/a. But it's not the last word in superchargers, not even the latest 4 lobed rotor version.
The Ford GT used a twin screw Whipple blower. When Ford launched the Shleby GT500 it used pretty much the same engine, but for cost cutting purposes used a cast iron block and a Heaton. End result was less power, less torque for a given boost level and less tunable.
It was still good and still impressive, and I do like Roots blowers, they are iconic. But dynamically a twin screw or centrifugal blower is superior.
Also i think the new Ally engine used in the GT500 is probably as good as the GT version (Gt still has better heads and cams). Also the new GT500's are pushing ovr 100bhp more power than the GTs!
I wander if this is a hint of a future for Caterham. Maybe they will have resort to lowering engine capacities like the mainstream manufacturers and going to engines like a forced induction 1.4 or 1.6s?
I'd be quite happy with an ancient Caterham pushing out 150bhp let along 250 plus!!
I'd be quite happy with an ancient Caterham pushing out 150bhp let along 250 plus!!
Fish said:
My CSR260 is quite sensible noise wise at 80.... Now I wonder what we could get with a supercharger on that!
What sort of CR does it run? You might need to drop it down if you want to run any meaningful boost. Also lary cam might cause a bit of boost bleed if there's enough overlap.bakerstreet said:
I wander if this is a hint of a future for Caterham. Maybe they will have resort to lowering engine capacities like the mainstream manufacturers and going to engines like a forced induction 1.4 or 1.6s?
I'd be quite happy with an ancient Caterham pushing out 150bhp let along 250 plus!!
With the weight of the car they're going to have pretty good mpg anyway so the only thing to go small engine boosted would be weight really.I'd be quite happy with an ancient Caterham pushing out 150bhp let along 250 plus!!
I think this would be more aimed at the upgrade for R300 owners and the likes as opposed to a replacement model for the R500.
Am I alone in thinking supercharger + R500 = 348 bhp = 700 bhp/tonne = mental genius!!!
In this tune you get the same power for probably half the price of an R500 engine though (and probably better reliability) which makes it ideal to widen profit margins.
From personal experience 115 mph in a Caterham feels seriously fast never mind 130 or 150!!
What race series will this engine be used in next year? Above the R300's and below the Lola?
WMP said:
What race series will this engine be used in next year? Above the R300's and below the Lola?
I think the plan is an upgrade for the R300 race cars to fill the gap that was R400. R400 died a death due to huge running costs vs minimal gain in performance/laptimes over R300, so the 'relatively' cheap addition of a Supercharger and sequential 'box for those who race an R300 will be a welcome addition.I for one will watch with interest. I'm quitting racing for a year or two this year to save for a season in 300s....however, if this looks like it's only a little more expensive, I'll be very tempted for sure!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff