Where is the race car?
- Thread starter bitzman
- Start date
S/C'd engines suffer from heat soak, and increased parasitic losses from the rotors warming the incoming charge. Since the blower housing is bolted right to the top of the engine, it gets very hot, and becomes an air "warmer", as well as a compressor. As you know, warm air has less oxygen by volume than cool air, making for a weaker charge, and this leads to decreased engine output as temperatures go up. Placing the intercooler between the cylinder banks may mitigate this effect, as seen on the GT, but it is still not considered ideal for endurance racing. Who knows, maybe traditional thinking is wrong here, and the GT could do well. I know Ford did some awesome testing on the GT's engine, and it showed tremendous endurance. What is not clear, is what the torque and HP curves looked like, after full heat soak.
Both S/C'd and Turbo cars are allowed in ALMS, but no one runs a supercharger. They either go natural, or turbo. You don't see superchargers in F1 or Indy cars, either.
But I know what you mean, I'd love to see the GT on track, kicking some serious butt. There is a pic floating around the net, showing the GT in racing trim, but some say it was a chop.
Both S/C'd and Turbo cars are allowed in ALMS, but no one runs a supercharger. They either go natural, or turbo. You don't see superchargers in F1 or Indy cars, either.
But I know what you mean, I'd love to see the GT on track, kicking some serious butt. There is a pic floating around the net, showing the GT in racing trim, but some say it was a chop.
Last edited:
I have a new model E55 that I modified and currently produces 580 horse. The engine has a supercharger of the same design as the GT. The supercharger is mounted in the same spot as the GT; on the top of the engine. The intercooler on my E55 is between the engine and the supercharger to cool the air charger after it has been through the supercharger. This is a faulty set-up, however; and heatsoak is a significant issue which I had to addressed through a CO2 system which when activated cools the incoming air charge. The better set-up which is used on the SLR (The SLR uses the same engine block and supercharger as my E55) is to have a well designed intercooler that sits on top of the supercharger with direct exposure to air. My point is the heatsoak is always a concern on supercharged cars that needs to be addressed. I have not yet had the opportunity to push the GT yet so I don't know first hand if heatsoak is a major issue we need to deal with.
Coletti's car--what was it?
When you say Coletti's car, which car? His own personal Ford GT?
Where was the ice placed? Also when Coletti was in charge of some earlier concept cars I remember he patented some device for keeping incoming air cool, sort of like the "cool can" we used to use back in the '60s in drag racing. Coletti has been quoted in many interviews about his amateur career in drag racing. Like to hear about Coletti's car--whether it was a GT, what other modifications it had and if he still has it now that he retired from Ford.
When you say Coletti's car, which car? His own personal Ford GT?
Where was the ice placed? Also when Coletti was in charge of some earlier concept cars I remember he patented some device for keeping incoming air cool, sort of like the "cool can" we used to use back in the '60s in drag racing. Coletti has been quoted in many interviews about his amateur career in drag racing. Like to hear about Coletti's car--whether it was a GT, what other modifications it had and if he still has it now that he retired from Ford.
Mercedes falling out of love with the twin screw
I vaguely remember being surprised that, after making a big deal out of the beauty of the twin screw Lysholm type supercharger, Mercedes suddenly announced they were going to phase out of them and maybe go back to turbocharging and I am wondering if this is because of what you are talking about? They discovered something they didn't like about them.
Back during WWII, didn't they have airplane engines that were both turbo and supercharged simultaneosly,? I wonder if anybody is using both on a car at once?
Also going back to Coletti's toys, on an earlier Ford Concept car, a front engined one, he had a supercharger that could be shut off like the one in the plain wrapper police car in the film Mad Max, in effect a declutching mechanicism. Cool, but I guess it didn't actually work though some car magazines who drove the car repored it did. The problem I see is that, if you run a low compression ratio for the supercharger, then when you temporarily disengage the supercharger, you've got a really weak engine because of the low compression ratio. Or am I wrong about that? (The Mad Max car is around the U.S. someplace, I should ask the owner...)
I vaguely remember being surprised that, after making a big deal out of the beauty of the twin screw Lysholm type supercharger, Mercedes suddenly announced they were going to phase out of them and maybe go back to turbocharging and I am wondering if this is because of what you are talking about? They discovered something they didn't like about them.
Back during WWII, didn't they have airplane engines that were both turbo and supercharged simultaneosly,? I wonder if anybody is using both on a car at once?
Also going back to Coletti's toys, on an earlier Ford Concept car, a front engined one, he had a supercharger that could be shut off like the one in the plain wrapper police car in the film Mad Max, in effect a declutching mechanicism. Cool, but I guess it didn't actually work though some car magazines who drove the car repored it did. The problem I see is that, if you run a low compression ratio for the supercharger, then when you temporarily disengage the supercharger, you've got a really weak engine because of the low compression ratio. Or am I wrong about that? (The Mad Max car is around the U.S. someplace, I should ask the owner...)
FlorIdaho Chris
Yeah, I've got one.
Turbocharged and supercharged radial engines were used on a number of airplanes during and after WWII. The Douglas DC-7C and the Boeing 337 Stratocruiser and the Lockheed Super Constellation all used this setup in the late 50s and early 60s during the early airliner wars.
I cannot think of a production automobile similarly conifgured although there are some aftermarket cars so outfitted. I have heard of a few Mini Cooper S cars that have been so modified.
I cannot think of a production automobile similarly conifgured although there are some aftermarket cars so outfitted. I have heard of a few Mini Cooper S cars that have been so modified.
Interesting side note here- I was looking at a 1935 Daimler Benz, straight eight, supercharged. The blower was not bolted directly to the engine, but was driven by a p.t.o. from the crank. From what I could gather by oggling the blower housing, it had little pipes going from and to the blower housing, possibly radiator fluid flowing inside, apparently to cool the blower. Way back in the 30s, this issue had been adressed!
BLitzmanbitzman said:
Its a GT. As to if its personal car, who knows and to me it is of little interest. It was in the SVT fleet.
Whenever a car is single tested for a magzine at a drag strip the strip is specially prepared with a traction enhancing spray. It is so sticky and thick that if you were loafers your shoes will literally be pulled off your feet if you try to walk down the track.
Next the car is allowed to cool down between runs and ice placed, in this instance, on top of the supercharger between runs with several fans blowing the heat away from the engine. As you are aware this is because of heat sink. They allowed the car to cool between 45 mintutes to an hour and check temps before the next run. Even with back to back dyno runs a minimum of 30 minutes is needed to let the engine cool with fans blowing on it.
Colettis GT was modified, mine is almost identical - smaller pulley, changed belt, gutted cats, re-flashed computer (no re-flash on mine). The same people did the work on both cars.
The car dynoed at 595 RWHP, I do not know the torque. Mine did 580 on a 108 degree day at the dyno, thus I am probably making more power on a normal day.
The reflashing was done several times during the testing to get the lowest ET, which was 10.85. The driver was specially brought in for the test, Evan Smith who is acknowledged to be top notch.
Initially magzines and those that heard about the testing tried to pass it off as a stock GT, but the facts came out very quickly. Keep mind its only 45 more RWHP than a stock GT. The stock GT is extremely powerful and quick.
I think a stock GT on a sticky track can do low 11s without a problem.
Hope this helps you understand.
BLitzmanbitzman said:
Its a GT. As to if its personal car, who knows and to me it is of little interest. It was in the SVT fleet.
Whenever a car is single tested for a magzine at a drag strip the strip is specially prepared with a traction enhancing spray. It is so sticky and thick that if you were loafers your shoes will literally be pulled off your feet if you try to walk down the track.
Next the car is allowed to cool down between runs and ice placed, in this instance, on top of the supercharger between runs with several fans blowing the heat away from the engine. As you are aware this is because of heat sink. They allowed the car to cool between 45 mintutes to an hour and check temps before the next run. Even with back to back dyno runs a minimum of 30 minutes is needed to let the engine cool with fans blowing on it.
Colettis GT was modified, mine is almost identical - smaller pulley, changed belt, gutted cats, re-flashed computer (no re-flash on mine). The same people did the work on both cars.
The car dynoed at 595 RWHP, I do not know the torque. Mine did 580 on a 108 degree day at the dyno, thus I am probably making more power on a normal day.
The reflashing was done several times during the testing to get the lowest ET, which was 10.85. The driver was specially brought in for the test, Evan Smith who is acknowledged to be top notch.
Initially magzines and those that heard about the testing tried to pass it off as a stock GT, but the facts came out very quickly. Keep mind its only 45 more RWHP than a stock GT. The stock GT is extremely powerful and quick.
I think a stock GT on a sticky track can do low 11s without a problem.
Hope this helps you understand.
At the risk of revealing my ignorance...
I drive old tech cars so am not current with all the latest lingo or reasons for doing things.
May I ask a couple questions:
pulley--what does that do?
changed belt--what's the improvement on the new belt?
gutted cats--best not discuss that, I get the idea
"re-flashed computer" Does this mean setting certain points higher like fuel flow rate per minute? I am not familiar with the word "flash"
I saw a guy with a Pantera --Pat Mical of Future Auto--in a Pantera converted to EFI sitting there with a laptop recalibrating his fuel injection, was he "reflashing?"
So the good news is that rear wheel dyno reading of 580-595 confirms the hints that the car puts out over the advertised hp.with a little tweaking. This is better than when Ford put out a Mustang Cobra a few years ago that produced less than the adv. hp. and had to send out a kit to enable owners to reach the adv. hp.
Thanks for any elucidations,
I drive old tech cars so am not current with all the latest lingo or reasons for doing things.
May I ask a couple questions:
pulley--what does that do?
changed belt--what's the improvement on the new belt?
gutted cats--best not discuss that, I get the idea
"re-flashed computer" Does this mean setting certain points higher like fuel flow rate per minute? I am not familiar with the word "flash"
I saw a guy with a Pantera --Pat Mical of Future Auto--in a Pantera converted to EFI sitting there with a laptop recalibrating his fuel injection, was he "reflashing?"
So the good news is that rear wheel dyno reading of 580-595 confirms the hints that the car puts out over the advertised hp.with a little tweaking. This is better than when Ford put out a Mustang Cobra a few years ago that produced less than the adv. hp. and had to send out a kit to enable owners to reach the adv. hp.
Thanks for any elucidations,
wonkawonka
GT Owner
Don't take this wrong way but just about all of your questions have been discussed on various threads.
But let me try to answer your questions:
1. A pulley is on the supercharger the end nearest the passenger comparment. By changing its size, in this case making it smaller, it spins up quicker as well as spinning faster to produce more power. If made too small it spins too fast, produces excess heat and can create major headaches.
2. Changed belt - if you change the pulley you need to re-size the belt in this case a tad larger than stock.
3. Gutted cats - mean that the cat is removed from the car, the insides removed, including baffles, and placed back on the car. According to SVT this is the biggest flow restirctor on the engine.
4.. Reflash - may involve what you are discussing or other settings including boost level of the supercharger, rpm settings, timing, fuel tables, etc. Simply put its re-programming the computer that controls the engine management systems.
5. He may have been reflashing or doing something else.
6. There are two ratings for power and torque. First the advertised numbers are taken at the crank or flywheel. Second is commonly referred to at the wheels (rear wheels in the case opf a rear wheel drive car). This number is determined by placing the car on a chassis dyno or pulling the engine and placing it on an engine dyno. Due to drive train loss, etc. the #'s at the wheels are generally 15 +/-% lower than the advertised or crank numbers.
Ford advertises 550 HP, the car does 550 at the wheels (RWHP). 550 RWHP converted to flywheel or crank HP is calcualted by 550 / .85 (assumes 15% loss) = 647 HP at the crank versus the 550 advertised. If a 12.5% loss factor is used the numbers are as follows 550/.875= 629 HP at the crank. So yes you are correct Ford has learned their lessons after the Mustang fiasco.
Always calcuate back to flywheel and don't use the fadvertised / flywheel number and subtract 12.5-15% for a manual car.
A stock GT does 550/55 RWHP. Keep in mind that for acceleration the torque figures are far more important. The GT produces huge torque immediately and keeps it to red-line without dropping. This is what makes the car so quick.
Hope this provides you with some information that is useful. Others may correct or amend what I have posted.
Thank you for your candor.
But let me try to answer your questions:
1. A pulley is on the supercharger the end nearest the passenger comparment. By changing its size, in this case making it smaller, it spins up quicker as well as spinning faster to produce more power. If made too small it spins too fast, produces excess heat and can create major headaches.
2. Changed belt - if you change the pulley you need to re-size the belt in this case a tad larger than stock.
3. Gutted cats - mean that the cat is removed from the car, the insides removed, including baffles, and placed back on the car. According to SVT this is the biggest flow restirctor on the engine.
4.. Reflash - may involve what you are discussing or other settings including boost level of the supercharger, rpm settings, timing, fuel tables, etc. Simply put its re-programming the computer that controls the engine management systems.
5. He may have been reflashing or doing something else.
6. There are two ratings for power and torque. First the advertised numbers are taken at the crank or flywheel. Second is commonly referred to at the wheels (rear wheels in the case opf a rear wheel drive car). This number is determined by placing the car on a chassis dyno or pulling the engine and placing it on an engine dyno. Due to drive train loss, etc. the #'s at the wheels are generally 15 +/-% lower than the advertised or crank numbers.
Ford advertises 550 HP, the car does 550 at the wheels (RWHP). 550 RWHP converted to flywheel or crank HP is calcualted by 550 / .85 (assumes 15% loss) = 647 HP at the crank versus the 550 advertised. If a 12.5% loss factor is used the numbers are as follows 550/.875= 629 HP at the crank. So yes you are correct Ford has learned their lessons after the Mustang fiasco.
Always calcuate back to flywheel and don't use the fadvertised / flywheel number and subtract 12.5-15% for a manual car.
A stock GT does 550/55 RWHP. Keep in mind that for acceleration the torque figures are far more important. The GT produces huge torque immediately and keeps it to red-line without dropping. This is what makes the car so quick.
Hope this provides you with some information that is useful. Others may correct or amend what I have posted.
Thank you for your candor.
bitzman said:
B O N Y
MODERATOR & FGT OWNER
wonkawonka
GT Owner
I would have thought that the most obvious giveaway would have been the words "Gran Turismo 4" on the bottom right :biggrin
B O N Y
MODERATOR & FGT OWNER
:biggrin :lol Ok, you guys got me, I don't have a playstation yet. :lol Thought about it, but get enough grief from the wife as it is. :lol Maybe she will buy me one for Christmas?? :biggrin
B O N Y
MODERATOR & FGT OWNER
Well, somebody is getting in some track time. Just received this e-mail and I asked for more information:-
I was racing at Thunderhill last weekend
and there was a guy with a white ford GT like yours. He had an engine fire
and kept looping it ... He could not keep it on the pavement. After the 1st
incident I woulda put it on the trailer but he just kept at it. Gotta
admire his pluck ... I guess. P
Engine fire :confused :eek
I was racing at Thunderhill last weekend
and there was a guy with a white ford GT like yours. He had an engine fire
and kept looping it ... He could not keep it on the pavement. After the 1st
incident I woulda put it on the trailer but he just kept at it. Gotta
admire his pluck ... I guess. P
Engine fire :confused :eek
FGT4me
GT Owner
- Oct 19, 2005
- 95
I hope to get mine on the track next year... first I have to take delivery on it which will be in 10 days and then get the break-in miles.
I currently track my viper in the Viper Days series and can't wait to compare the two. I'm not sure I'll be able to strictly interpret lap times though since I doubt I will want to push the GT like I do the Viper (I usually have an off track excursion per weekend).
I should be able to get a sense for how it handles comparatively though.
I've also tracked a C5ZO6 and have the new ZO6 on order so it will be interesting to see how they all compare.
I currently track my viper in the Viper Days series and can't wait to compare the two. I'm not sure I'll be able to strictly interpret lap times though since I doubt I will want to push the GT like I do the Viper (I usually have an off track excursion per weekend).
I should be able to get a sense for how it handles comparatively though.
I've also tracked a C5ZO6 and have the new ZO6 on order so it will be interesting to see how they all compare.