Which would be the best race engine?

[Welshbeef]

If you had a race series where the engine capacity was 6.0 Ltrs and petrol but that’s as tight as the controls would be which of the following would be the best choice. Remember this is racing on track only on road utterly irrelevant.

V8
V10
V12
Rotary

And why?

Also it is N/A only and cost totally uncapped.

[HustleRussell]

Depends.

[delta0]

Rotary - by far the most power to weight compared to the other engines. The 26b was 700bhp and 2.6l capacity na engine (turbo 20b engines are 1000bhp).

[carl_w]

V12:

1) About 500cc per cylinder seems optimal, hence 2 litre 4's, 3 litre 6's and 4 litre 8's
2) Sounds best

[Welshbeef]

Given all are N/A would they all produce the same power and torque or would more cylinders give more torque?

I’m guessing BHp would be way north of 1,000 for any of he configurations.

[delta0]

Welshbeef said:

Given all are N/A would they all produce the same power and torque or would more cylinders give more torque?

I’m guessing BHp would be way north of 1,000 for any of he configurations.

V8 ~600bhp
V10 ~800bhp
V12 ~900bhp
Rotary ~1600bhp

[GroundEffect]

delta0 said:

Welshbeef said:

Given all are N/A would they all produce the same power and torque or would more cylinders give more torque?

I’m guessing BHp would be way north of 1,000 for any of he configurations.

V8 ~600bhp
V10 ~800bhp
V12 ~900bhp
Rotary ~1600bhp

Based on what?

A flat plane V8 could produce way in excess of 600BHP at 6 litres in a racing environment. Even road car V8s can exceed that - the 4.5 litre in the 458 Speciale was 610PS.

Generally the more cylinders the more power however there's so much more to it than that. Fuel consumption and size/package/weight are just some. There's a reason Ferrari moved from V12 to V10 in the 3.0 litre F1 era. The V12 produced a bit more power but was bigger and heavier and used more fuel. For those regulations a V10 was preferred.

[Haltamer]

Hmm; I'd love to see / hear a 6l rotary "wafting" past whilst bouncing off a 9000RPM Limiter

[RobDickinson]

2.6L 4 rotor 787b produced 700bhp and you want a 6L version? It's hard to sensibly equate a rotary to a piston engine.

[ManOpener]

RobDickinson said:

2.6L 4 rotor 787b produced 700bhp and you want a 6L version? It's hard to sensibly equate a rotary to a piston engine.

Quite. There's also a variety of different displacement multipliers applied to rotaries in various forms of racing- that is, where they're not outright banned.

AFAIK, in the same way that the "1.3" 13b is actually double or triple that effective capacity, the R26B is only nominally 2.6L if you measure based on s single shaft revolution rather than a single power cycle.

[Mandalore]

ManOpener said:

RobDickinson said:

2.6L 4 rotor 787b produced 700bhp and you want a 6L version? It's hard to sensibly equate a rotary to a piston engine.

Quite. There's also a variety of different displacement multipliers applied to rotaries in various forms of racing- that is, where they're not outright banned.

AFAIK, in the same way that the "1.3" 13b is actually double or triple that effective capacity, the R26B is only nominally 2.6L if you measure based on s single shaft revolution rather than a single power cycle.

Isn't it 3x capacity, based on the 3x rotors and their swept capacity for revolution?

So the 13b is treated as 3900cc.

[Bill]

Are we talking drag, sprint, oval, circuit or endurance?

It's a bit small for tractor racing so I'm discounting that.

[RobDickinson]

For tax purposes it's double, that's probably as close to sensible as you'll get.

[Grrbang]

carl_w said:

V12:

1) About 500cc per cylinder seems optimal, hence 2 litre 4's, 3 litre 6's and 4 litre 8's

Agreed, would that be because lower cc enables longer stroke without excessive piston speed, which shifts the torque curve towards higher rpm? Also, lower cc is better for mixing?

However, a V12 may be the least reliable as it has the most parts.

[Exige77]

It all depends on the type of racing.

“Racing” is too general a term.

[anonymous-user]

Clearly a 535d, by all accounts they’re stupendous.

[thebraketester]

yonex said:

Clearly a 535d, by all accounts they’re stupendous.

Good shout. And they rev to 5000rpm too so perfect for racing.

[SonicShadow]

Mandalore said:

ManOpener said:

RobDickinson said:

2.6L 4 rotor 787b produced 700bhp and you want a 6L version? It's hard to sensibly equate a rotary to a piston engine.

Quite. There's also a variety of different displacement multipliers applied to rotaries in various forms of racing- that is, where they're not outright banned.

AFAIK, in the same way that the "1.3" 13b is actually double or triple that effective capacity, the R26B is only nominally 2.6L if you measure based on s single shaft revolution rather than a single power cycle.

Isn't it 3x capacity, based on the 3x rotors and their swept capacity for revolution?

So the 13b is treated as 3900cc.

2x, because a wankel rotary has 2x the amount power strokes per complete rotation of the output vs a 4 stroke piston engine.

[Welshbeef]

Bill said:

Are we talking drag, sprint, oval, circuit or endurance?

It's a bit small for tractor racing so I'm discounting that.

To answer this let’s say endurance - specifically 24hours.


So far it sounds like the rotary engine would have a massive power advantage over all others (remember N/A only).



Lol on the 535d - sorry petrol only in this thread

[aeropilot]

Bill said:

Are we talking drag, sprint, oval, circuit or endurance?

It's a bit small for tractor racing so I'm discounting that.