Daddy Like...!!

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by porsche986spyder

Whatever, the engine block is still a Toyota. Look at the links I posted. My brother has a Toyota Celica GTS and the Lotus even has the Toyota stamp on the block. Its not visible when you pop the hood, but its still on there. I never said the entire engine was made by Toyota. Thats why I posted those links, did you even look at them? My point was that for the price you pay for the Regular Lotus Elis it is still underpowered. All those other exotic sports cars out there and Lotus could not put an engine in the car that could break the 250hp mark? To expensive of a car to pay for and only get 190hp. All show and no go. As for tubos, there is nothing wrong with the drivability on the track or off. Look at the cars that are famous for track records. Most have turbos. Subaru WRX, Dodge Neon SRT-4, Mitsubishi Eclipse GT or GSX, etc...I'm sure there are some turbo Porsches in there too.

Hi,

Again, your criteria is only for Horsepower. The engine provides enough power/torque for some very respectable numbers as is and an NA engine is more reliable, last longer, uses less fuel and it is more linear - more Driveable.

So what if the motor says Toyota? Toyota makes great engines. Lots of high-end Sports Cars use engines from other manufacturers - the McLaren F1 uses a BMW motor...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[Perfectlap]

McLaren wishes it had a BMW engine...instead it uses a woefuly unreliable and not-quiet Merecedes-- Ilmor. BMW has its own team now after buying Peter Sauber's team...don't get me started on McLaren those guys sure know how to waste billions(literraly) and not win championships going on 8 years in a row.


p.s. (historical note)
on lighter/less power v. more power/heavier cars...Ferrari established themselves in F1 using this approach at the 1951 British Grand Prix. Fangio's Alfa Romeo had more power but was heavier and consumed more gas so he had to stop more/longer for fuel giving Froilan Gonzales and Enzo Ferrari a historic win.

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

McLaren wishes it had a BMW engine...instead it uses a woefuly unreliable and not-quiet Merecedes-- Ilmor. BMW has its own team now after buying Peter Sauber's team...don't get me started on McLaren those guys sure know how to waste billions(literraly) and not win championships going on 8 years in a row.


p.s. (historical note)
on lighter/less power v. more power/heavier cars...Ferrari established themselves in F1 using this approach at the 1951 British Grand Prix. Fangio's Alfa Romeo had more power but was heavier and consumed more gas so he had to stop more/longer for fuel giving Froilan Gonzales and Enzo Ferrari a historic win.

Hi,

Sorry, wasn't clear enough I guess - the Mclaren F1 uses a BMW V-12 motor.

But, you are absolutely correct about Lotus Doctrine of being as lightweight as possible. This stemmed from their Racing Philosophy that a Larger Engine weighed more, burned more fuel, so you had to have a larger fuel capacity which weighed even more and this all but negated the extra HP to begin with.

Colin Chapman's famous quote: "If you want it to go Faster - add Lightness"

This philosophy worked well. Lotus, not Ferrari, has the greatest number of Formula One Wins as a % to Starts. Ferrari has the greatest total number of F1 wins, but not as a % of Starts - that Crown belongs to Lotus (for a regular Constructor).

Chapman didn't want any excess capacity (= weight) in his cars at all. He wanted them all to die on the Victory Lap. There are numerous examples of where they didn't quite calculate this correctly, because Lotus also has the greatest number of DNFs in F1 when leading on the Final Lap...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[porsche986spyder]

I like the Noble GTO. It looks cool and is very light too. Not so crazy about the big wing on the back. Seen them on the speed chanel. They are all hand made. Engine block is made from a Ford Turus V6, but is twin turbo. The 2968cc, twin-turbocharged V6 used in both Noble models is transversely mounted in front of the rear axle, directly behind the cabin. It features four valves per cylinder and double overhead cams to each bank of cylinders. The all-alloy engine is heavily modified from standard, with many bespoke components fitted during build. It produces 352bhp (357PS) at 6200rpm, and is redlined at 7200rpm.

On the road, 350lb ft (475Nm) of torque produced between 3500 and 5000rpm makes the car immensely flexible and easy to drive. Even at 3000rpm, the engine is producing 80 per cent of its available torque. There’s also very little lag from the twin Garret T25, water-cooled turbochargers, meaning a particularly linear response throughout the rev-range. The turbochargers run a maximum 0.7 bar of boost and are equipped with an air to air intercooler, centrally mounted at the rear of the car.

The car only weighs 2400bls.


Noble M12 GTO-3R
Vehicle type: mid-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door coupe
Price as tested: $76,400 (base price*: $76,400)
Engine type: twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement 181 cu in, 2967cc
Power (SAE net) 360 bhp @ 6200 rpm
Torque (SAE net) 358 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm
Transmission 6-speed manual
Wheelbase 96.0 in
Length/width/height 161.0/74.2/45.0 in
Curb weight 2457 lb
Zero to 60 mph 3.3 sec
Zero to 100 mph 8.1 sec
Zero to 150 mph 26.6 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph 3.9 sec
Standing 1/4-mile 11.8 sec @ 118 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph 167 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad 1.00 g
*Base price includes all performance-enhancing options.

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by porsche986spyder

I like the Noble GTO.

Hi,

Noble makes an excellent car, but personally, I prefer the M400 to the M12...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by MNBoxster

Chapman didn't want any excess capacity (= weight) in his cars at all. He wanted them all to die on the Victory Lap. There are numerous examples of where they didn't quite calculate this correctly, because Lotus also has the greatest number of DNFs in F1 when leading on the Final Lap...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

yes he wanted his car to die and his drivers didn't want to die in them!
He made them so light that they came apart and were suspect in the crash worthy department, even by the abysmal safety standards before this ultra safe era of long/narrow cars with huge crumple zones, onboard fire extinguishers,etc.

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

yes he wanted his car to die and his drivers didn't want to die in them!
He made them so light that they came apart and were suspect in the crash worthy department, even by the abysmal safety standards before this ultra safe era of long/narrow cars with huge crumple zones, onboard fire extinguishers,etc.

Hi,

That's not true, when I said Die, I meant mechanical failures - engine, gearbox.

Lotus were as robust on the track as any others, in fact safer than some what with the 1st monocoque chassis (Lotus 25), 1st mid-engined car (Lotus 18), Lotus 49 - 1st to have the engine as a stressed part of the chassis, Lotus 56 - the 1st Turbine powered Race Car - the STP Special (Indy), Lotus 60 - 1st mid-engine 4 wheel drive Race Car, Lotus 72 - 1st Aerodynamic Car, .

True Jochen Rindt died in a crash when a Brake shaft broke - common and not one of Chapman's lightened parts. Jim Clark was killed driving a Lotus at Hockenheim in a non-championship Formula Two event, but was attributed to tire failure, not a fault of the driver or the car...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99