I read with some interest that there are advocates for V-10 engines. V-10s require a 72 degree crankshaft and the things are inherently hard to balance properly. They are an abomination, really. Racers use them because they are marginally better than V-8s for getting a lot of piston area and a s;ightly better than V-12s for cost and complexity. But both the V-8 and the V-12 are better designs. They both have the ability to balance properly...maybe not so important in a short-lived racing engine, but important in a road car, for sure.

Also, someone mentioned the various engines available for manufacurers. Missing from the list was the original Honda S2000 engine. 240 HP at 9,000 RPM. All from a naturally aspirated four cylinder street engine.

It is a terrific motor. I know, I owned an '02 S2000. Easily the best car on its class and better than most every other car on the road. I put over 72.000 miles on mine in just five years. But man, what a car!

But to return to my original thought. 10s and 5s are really a horror. They cannot be made to work well. Some engineers can finess them, but it's like what Buick did to their 90 degree V-6. It needed split crank pins to make it work...sort of...

Stick with reliably conventional layouts and they will serve just fine. I-4s, 60 or 180 degree V-6s, or 90 degree V-8s, or 60 degree V-12s are all just fine. But 72 degree V-10s are just awful!

Don't loose any sleep about V10s... or V12s, for that matter. They'll not be in Indy Car's upcoming formula for 2011.

We're trying to cut costs and by adding cylinders only adds complications to cost factors.

Some are actually saying that V8's have to many cylinders to be relivant in today's times.

The sights and sounds of racing are a big part of the attraction.

Unfortunately, todays IRL has neither. The engine must have 8 cyls minimum. I would like to hear the current engine at 12-14K rpm. It might sound better. I like the v-10 idea. I don't get the vibration thing if they ran them @ 18000 rpm.

Gandretti - 29 June 2008 06:16 AM

The sights and sounds of racing are a big part of the attraction.

Unfortunately, todays IRL has neither. The engine must have 8 cyls minimum. I would like to hear the current engine at 12-14K rpm. It might sound better. I like the v-10 idea. I don't get the vibration thing if they ran them @ 18000 rpm.

Lets say that an 8 cylinder engine costs $100,000.00, just as a hypothetical example.

That's $12,500 per cylinder. Add two cylinders and you're looking at $126,000.00.

Who's going to pay the extra $26K for said engine and who's going to pay the additional 26% for the rebuilds? Now factor in that amount by the minimum of 18 races. You're talking some very, very serious money here and these numbers are hypothetical! You know the actual number is much higher than what I've represented and again, we're trying to cut costs, not increase them.

What an engine sounds like has never been the motivating factor that put fans in the stands. It's the candles, on top of the icing on the cake. It's by no means the Cake.

As I stated earlier, look for a maximum of 8 cylinders and very possibly fewer.

And you can take that to the bank.

Other than the various Cosworths, (IMO) the most legendary engine at Indy was the Offenhauser 4 cylinder family of engines.

For whoever may badge them, it all comes down to presentation. Though I was a fan of V12's a decade+ ago, I don't know that having V10's or V12's is going to wow anyone under the age of 30 these days. Personally I don't even see the need for a V8, from a marketing perspective. I think there's a lot more to work with using turbo 4 or 6's than a N/A V8. What I would most enjoy seeing is enough room in the specs to allow turbo I4's (or 6's) vs. turbo H4's (or 6's). For the younger set, I believe the kids would relate to such a forumla better than what might grab the eyes of us "old heads".

While keeping costs in mind, surely somone by now realizes that cost containment is but one side of the success equation. If there is little value or return seen from an effort, it really doesn't matter how little the effort costs. I see that as the bit that's been lost in AOWR over the past decade or so. NASCAR and F1 well understand that side of things. I'm not sure that anyone involved in AOWR has understood that since the mid to late 90's.

ChrisR - 29 June 2008 08:42 AM

And you can take that to the bank.

And you are?

jpetry - 14 April 2008 07:33 PM

TURBO DIESELS I think would be a possible option. Higher torque for street and road racing. Domestic and foreign manufacturers. I think it would increase the exposure of the series and I think Engine makers like BMW AUDI AMG VW Would do a great job of marketing there product through ICS. Domestic companies like Cummins or Detroit Diesel might also get involved.

Have you ever seen the Audi diesel racing at full speed in the ALMS series. There's no sound, you can hear the air rushing over the body work OVER the motor, is this what you want? Do you want a crime against the nature of racing. Maybe I'm old school, but I will never forgot the first time I heard a Matra 12 clyinder screaming at 13,000 and standing in a supermarket 4 miles away from the Long Beach Grandprix. I couldn't even hear the Audi at track side. Is this what racing is going to become, when the conversations in the crowd are louder than the racing..... what would Led Zepplin sound like, if they were diesel? Sorry seeing headlights coming at me at an insame amount of speed, and not hearing anything just isn't right.

Gandretti - 29 June 2008 09:34 PM

ChrisR - 29 June 2008 08:42 AM

And you can take that to the bank.

And you are?

Well,with all due respect, go back and read my posts for the last eight months or so and you'll pick it up.

speedsense - 30 June 2008 02:33 AM

Have you ever seen the Audi diesel racing at full speed in the ALMS series. There's no sound, you can hear the air rushing over the body work OVER the motor, is this what you want?

Have you? In person? Because I have on several occasions, and the R10 is not as quiet as it's made out to be, or as quiet as it seems on TV. Yes, it's quieter than any of the normally aspirated engines in other ALMS entries, but let's compare apples to apples. It's only a little quieter than the AER I4 turbo, and frankly not substantially quieter than the (admittedly a little quieter than average) gasoline-fueled turbo V8 in the old Audi R8's. I'd love to see a few oil-burners in the mix, although I don't think I'd want to see only Diesels.

Now take a deep breath, let go of the poor guy's collar, and back away.

mjj237 - 01 July 2008 10:20 PM

speedsense - 30 June 2008 02:33 AM

Have you ever seen the Audi diesel racing at full speed in the ALMS series. There's no sound, you can hear the air rushing over the body work OVER the motor, is this what you want?

Have you? In person? Because I have on several occasions, and the R10 is not as quiet as it's made out to be, or as quiet as it seems on TV. Yes, it's quieter than any of the normally aspirated engines in other ALMS entries, but let's compare apples to apples. It's only a little quieter than the AER I4 turbo, and frankly not substantially quieter than the (admittedly a little quieter than average) gasoline-fueled turbo V8 in the old Audi R8's. I'd love to see a few oil-burners in the mix, although I don't think I'd want to see only Diesels.

Now take a deep breath, let go of the poor guy's collar, and back away.

I have and, yes, it is very quiet. I like my race cars to have noise.