2021 Engine thread

[hurril]

A hot-vee engine is also possible with the current 90° V6, but it is prohibited by the regulations (don't really know why)

I think wuzak is referring to an old conversation.
Interestingly though, the latest Audi v6 is a 90° V6 6 throw hot-v engine... Road relevance anybody?

Their V8 turbos and V6 diesels also run a hot-V configuration.

[AJI]

Their V8 turbos and V6 diesels also run a hot-V configuration.

The last few LMP1 cars were hot-v diesel, but v8 petrol? Which one?

[hurril]

Their V8 turbos and V6 diesels also run a hot-V configuration.

The last few LMP1 cars were hot-v diesel, but v8 petrol? Which one?

RS7 at least.

[AJI]

Their V8 turbos and V6 diesels also run a hot-V configuration.

The last few LMP1 cars were hot-v diesel, but v8 petrol? Which one?

RS7 at least.

I didn't know that. I'll check it out.
I've never really understood why there aren't more hot-v turbo engines out there, it just makes sense. And a 120° v6 BT hot-v makes total sense for a race engine

[AJI]

Their V8 turbos and V6 diesels also run a hot-V configuration.

The last few LMP1 cars were hot-v diesel, but v8 petrol? Which one?

RS7 at least.

I didn't know that. I'll check it out.
I've never really understood why there aren't more hot-v turbo engines out there, it just makes sense. And a 120° v6 BT hot-v makes total sense for a race engine

[hurril]

The last few LMP1 cars were hot-v diesel, but v8 petrol? Which one?

RS7 at least.

I didn't know that. I'll check it out.
I've never really understood why there aren't more hot-v turbo engines out there, it just makes sense. And a 120° v6 BT hot-v makes total sense for a race engine

Yeah! I agree! Things I heard around here is that it would be hard to balance the throttling between the banks but I don't buy that. That's orthogonal to the directionality of the gas flow and has more to do with individual plenum chambers which is _not_ something specific to a Hot V-configuration.

[Santozini]

The last few LMP1 cars were hot-v diesel, but v8 petrol? Which one?

RS7 at least.

I didn't know that. I'll check it out.
I've never really understood why there aren't more hot-v turbo engines out there, it just makes sense. And a 120° v6 BT hot-v makes total sense for a race engine

Also next year's Formula 2

https://www.motorsport.com/all/photo/ma ... /?a=947258

[roon]

Hot vee in the 2014 engine formula was likely not pursued because of CoG disadvantages. CF pressure vessels lighter than Inconel, or whatever alloy, exhaust pipes. The people that make these cars for a living have a say in writing the rules, so for the same reason they championed a 90* bank angle (structurally ideal; firing order/spacing/sound of less concern to the designer) they would have been against a hot vee, although it's currently a more aesthetically intriguing solution. But too much weight up high, perhaps also concern about locating the H motor between six exhaust headers.

Porsche, Audi, BMW and Merc all make hot vee TT V8s currently, and some do single and twin turbo hot vee V6s. I don't think any of the big German brands make a V8 for production cars larger than 4 liters anymore.

[AJI]

Hot vee in the 2014 engine formula was likely not pursued because of CoG disadvantages.

That's another reason why it should be a 120° v6.
That said, the current PUs all carry the turbo and H in more or less the same place as a hot-vee design would, but with the added complexity of spaghetti exhaust headers and the disadvantage of having the enormous plenum and intercooler setups plonked on top, so i doubt there's much difference in CoG? Looking at the side views of the PUs they are really tall. I'd even posit that the current PU, even in 90° bank angle configuration, would have a higher CoG than a hot-vee version of the same spec.

[roon]

Yeah, bank angle would help there. But as I said they may have ruled that out early in preference of a 90* bank angle. So 90* bank + inside headers would have been nixed in favor of 90* bank + outside headers.

Only Ferrari had the topside intercooler. In '17 it become more "front-side." The "enormous" plenums are made of thin wall CF, and even thinner on the intake side of the compressor. Voluminous they may be, but not necessarily heavy.

There's also turbine entry to consider. It's seems pretty good with the outside vee exhaust, they can easily get two entries dialed 180* from each other, without any sharp bends.

[AJI]

...There's also turbine entry to consider. It's seems pretty good with the outside vee exhaust, they can easily get two entries dialed 180* from each other, without any sharp bends.

Just for the sake of absurdity, how about a triple baby turbine setup, all twin entry aligned directly with the ports.

[roon]

...There's also turbine entry to consider. It's seems pretty good with the outside vee exhaust, they can easily get two entries dialed 180* from each other, without any sharp bends.

Just for the sake of absurdity, how about a triple baby turbine setup, all twin entry aligned directly with the ports.

How about six turbines.





Or twelve, two per cylinder. Or twenty-four, or... A box full of silicon platters etched with thousands of microturbines.





But why stop at thousands if we can have millions?

[AJI]

How about six turbines.

Okay.., wow!

I was thinking 3 turbines on a common shaft driving one compressor.

[Singabule]

Ferrari phased out 120 deg Hot vee decades earlier because in favor of 90 deg for aero reason and COG. In sport car racing or lmp1, 120 deg engine plus huge side plenum make sense because it didnt require coke bottle rear end

[Holm86]

The reason they went with 90° V6 is because of the mechanical strength, as the engine is a structual member.
90° is stronger than 120°, so the 2021 regulations will probably still keep that bank angle.

I just hope they will losen up the regulation that mandates only 3 throws, so we can have an even firing engine, that sounds better than the current one.