Ha ha mario, to sum up how much of a disaster it was, it was abandoned before it hit the track because it was to complex
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
Did anyone want a clue.?
Mexicola wrote:shinji wrote:Mexicola wrote: I'd rather listen to a dog lick its balls. Each to their own, I guess.
Does listening to a dog licking its balls get you excited?
That's between me and my internet service provider.
roblomas52 wrote:
Ha ha mario, to sum up how much of a disaster it was, it was abandoned before it hit the track because it was to complex![]()
Did anyone want a clue.?
Faustus wrote:roblomas52 wrote:good_Ralf wrote:
This.
Ha ha mario, to sum up how much of a disaster it was, it was abandoned before it hit the track because it was to complex![]()
Did anyone want a clue.?
Yes please.
A 32 cylinder engine sounds insane. The BRM V16 had tiny pistons so it was more watch-making than engineering.
Mexicola wrote:shinji wrote:Mexicola wrote: I'd rather listen to a dog lick its balls. Each to their own, I guess.
Does listening to a dog licking its balls get you excited?
That's between me and my internet service provider.
kevinbotz wrote:Cantonese is a completely nonsensical f*cking alien language masquerading as some grossly bastardised form of Chinese
Gonzo wrote:Wasn't there some sort of communisim in the East part of Germany?
tommykl wrote:A complete stab in the dark there, but could it be an early plan for when Honda first entered F1 in the 60s?
Faustus wrote:I still can't think who it could have been but I am very curious to find out.
(edit)
Hah! Now I know! It was Honda! You mentioned it in the 'What If' thread.
Mexicola wrote:shinji wrote:Mexicola wrote: I'd rather listen to a dog lick its balls. Each to their own, I guess.
Does listening to a dog licking its balls get you excited?
That's between me and my internet service provider.
roblomas52 wrote:tommykl wrote:A complete stab in the dark there, but could it be an early plan for when Honda first entered F1 in the 60s?Faustus wrote:I still can't think who it could have been but I am very curious to find out.
(edit)
Hah! Now I know! It was Honda! You mentioned it in the 'What If' thread.
yes it was Honda.
Edit
that will teach me for posting the answer in annother thread
mario wrote:roblomas52 wrote:tommykl wrote:A complete stab in the dark there, but could it be an early plan for when Honda first entered F1 in the 60s?Faustus wrote:I still can't think who it could have been but I am very curious to find out.
(edit)
Hah! Now I know! It was Honda! You mentioned it in the 'What If' thread.
yes it was Honda.
Edit
that will teach me for posting the answer in annother thread
Can you post more details about the proposal? Like Faustus, I am very intrigued by that particular project.
Mexicola wrote:shinji wrote:Mexicola wrote: I'd rather listen to a dog lick its balls. Each to their own, I guess.
Does listening to a dog licking its balls get you excited?
That's between me and my internet service provider.
roblomas52 wrote:For sure, unfortunatly, not a lot is known about it but i will try and unearth some stuff about it.
(Edit)
I already knew it was a 3000CC engine with 4 vales per cylinder.
32x4=128 valves in the whole engine. Now is where things get complicated though.
In order to achieve this, each cylinder had a capacity of 93.75CC and the engine it was replacing; the 60-degree V12 from the RA271(which is the main comparisson to this engine) had a displacment 125CC per cylinder.
I then worked out that 2.66REC V12's would give the number of cylinders needed for the X32 so I then worked roughly how much power it had.
The V12 had 240HP at 11,000 RPM so to work this out, the RPM and HP were x2.66REC.
240x2.66REC=640HP.
11,000x2.66REC=29,333.33REC RPM.
Of course, the RPM answer sounds highly unlikley so divided it by 1.33REC to get 22.564.1026 RPM.
Based on what I know, the X32, like the V12 would have had twin choke carburettors and indirect fuel injection desighned by Keihin.
My best estimate on the power output is going to be 560HP at 16,000RPM and thats a conservitive estimate based on what I know.
Now these figures are guesses and it may be the closest we will ever get to finding out the true story as Honda abandoned the project because it was to complicated and unreliable.
(sorry if it turned into a wee bit of a lecture)
mario wrote:roblomas52 wrote:For sure, unfortunatly, not a lot is known about it but i will try and unearth some stuff about it.
(Edit)
I already knew it was a 3000CC engine with 4 vales per cylinder.
32x4=128 valves in the whole engine. Now is where things get complicated though.
In order to achieve this, each cylinder had a capacity of 93.75CC and the engine it was replacing; the 60-degree V12 from the RA271(which is the main comparisson to this engine) had a displacment 125CC per cylinder.
I then worked out that 2.66REC V12's would give the number of cylinders needed for the X32 so I then worked roughly how much power it had.
The V12 had 240HP at 11,000 RPM so to work this out, the RPM and HP were x2.66REC.
240x2.66REC=640HP.
11,000x2.66REC=29,333.33REC RPM.
Of course, the RPM answer sounds highly unlikley so divided it by 1.33REC to get 22.564.1026 RPM.
Based on what I know, the X32, like the V12 would have had twin choke carburettors and indirect fuel injection desighned by Keihin.
My best estimate on the power output is going to be 560HP at 16,000RPM and thats a conservitive estimate based on what I know.
Now these figures are guesses and it may be the closest we will ever get to finding out the true story as Honda abandoned the project because it was to complicated and unreliable.
(sorry if it turned into a wee bit of a lecture)
My initial gut feeling is that it might be better to wind the maximum revs down a bit more than that - most other engine manufacturers of the time were limited to around 12,000-13,000 rpm at most (issues such as fatigue were insurmountable at the time - it is one reason why pneumatic valve trains were so readily adopted once the technology was mature enough to be used in F1).
Honda did claim that they could rev the late season RA271 to about 14,000 over a single lap, but that abuse could only really be tolerated for a single qualifying session - most of the time it was limited to about 13,000 rpm. Even then, the idea of trying to make that many separate moving parts somehow work together without the engine simply tearing itself to bits seems like a very daunting challenge...
Mexicola wrote:shinji wrote:Mexicola wrote: I'd rather listen to a dog lick its balls. Each to their own, I guess.
Does listening to a dog licking its balls get you excited?
That's between me and my internet service provider.
roblomas52 wrote:mario wrote:My initial gut feeling is that it might be better to wind the maximum revs down a bit more than that - most other engine manufacturers of the time were limited to around 12,000-13,000 rpm at most (issues such as fatigue were insurmountable at the time - it is one reason why pneumatic valve trains were so readily adopted once the technology was mature enough to be used in F1).
Honda did claim that they could rev the late season RA271 to about 14,000 over a single lap, but that abuse could only really be tolerated for a single qualifying session - most of the time it was limited to about 13,000 rpm. Even then, the idea of trying to make that many separate moving parts somehow work together without the engine simply tearing itself to bits seems like a very daunting challenge...
My RPM figure was based on the theory that if an engine has more pistons, the pistons will be lighter due to the fact they will be smaller. Using the DFV as an example, because it has 8 large pistons in its 3L of capacity, the size of each piston would be 375CC. The X32 would have had a piston cappacity of 93.75CC. 375CC divided by 93.75CC is 4. Therefore it would take 4 X32 pistons to get the same piston capacity as 1 piston from a DFV.
In reality though, methinks the X32 would have revved to 14,500 in race trim but with the potential for more as the technology matured.
Faustus wrote:roblomas52 wrote:mario wrote:My initial gut feeling is that it might be better to wind the maximum revs down a bit more than that - most other engine manufacturers of the time were limited to around 12,000-13,000 rpm at most (issues such as fatigue were insurmountable at the time - it is one reason why pneumatic valve trains were so readily adopted once the technology was mature enough to be used in F1).
Honda did claim that they could rev the late season RA271 to about 14,000 over a single lap, but that abuse could only really be tolerated for a single qualifying session - most of the time it was limited to about 13,000 rpm. Even then, the idea of trying to make that many separate moving parts somehow work together without the engine simply tearing itself to bits seems like a very daunting challenge...
My RPM figure was based on the theory that if an engine has more pistons, the pistons will be lighter due to the fact they will be smaller. Using the DFV as an example, because it has 8 large pistons in its 3L of capacity, the size of each piston would be 375CC. The X32 would have had a piston cappacity of 93.75CC. 375CC divided by 93.75CC is 4. Therefore it would take 4 X32 pistons to get the same piston capacity as 1 piston from a DFV.
In reality though, methinks the X32 would have revved to 14,500 in race trim but with the potential for more as the technology matured.
The engine speed could have ended up pretty crazy, even back in the sixties. Weren't 50cc motorbike racing engines revving to 16000 rpm back then?
Mexicola wrote:shinji wrote:Mexicola wrote: I'd rather listen to a dog lick its balls. Each to their own, I guess.
Does listening to a dog licking its balls get you excited?
That's between me and my internet service provider.
Faustus wrote:roblomas52 wrote:mario wrote:My initial gut feeling is that it might be better to wind the maximum revs down a bit more than that - most other engine manufacturers of the time were limited to around 12,000-13,000 rpm at most (issues such as fatigue were insurmountable at the time - it is one reason why pneumatic valve trains were so readily adopted once the technology was mature enough to be used in F1).
Honda did claim that they could rev the late season RA271 to about 14,000 over a single lap, but that abuse could only really be tolerated for a single qualifying session - most of the time it was limited to about 13,000 rpm. Even then, the idea of trying to make that many separate moving parts somehow work together without the engine simply tearing itself to bits seems like a very daunting challenge...
My RPM figure was based on the theory that if an engine has more pistons, the pistons will be lighter due to the fact they will be smaller. Using the DFV as an example, because it has 8 large pistons in its 3L of capacity, the size of each piston would be 375CC. The X32 would have had a piston cappacity of 93.75CC. 375CC divided by 93.75CC is 4. Therefore it would take 4 X32 pistons to get the same piston capacity as 1 piston from a DFV.
In reality though, methinks the X32 would have revved to 14,500 in race trim but with the potential for more as the technology matured.
The engine speed could have ended up pretty crazy, even back in the sixties. Weren't 50cc motorbike racing engines revving to 16000 rpm back then?
Mexicola wrote:shinji wrote:Mexicola wrote: I'd rather listen to a dog lick its balls. Each to their own, I guess.
Does listening to a dog licking its balls get you excited?
That's between me and my internet service provider.
Allard Kalff in 1994 wrote:OH!! Schumacher in the wall! Right in front of us, Michael Schumacher is in the wall! He's hit the pitwall, he c... Ah, it's Jos Verstappen.
good_Ralf wrote:I don't know much about the history of rallying but my guess is 5
Mexicola wrote:shinji wrote:Mexicola wrote: I'd rather listen to a dog lick its balls. Each to their own, I guess.
Does listening to a dog licking its balls get you excited?
That's between me and my internet service provider.
roblomas52 wrote:Is it 6?
Biscione wrote:"Some Turkemenistani gulag repurposed for residential use" is the best way yet I've heard to describe North / East Glasgow.
Sebastian Vettel wrote:If I was good at losing, I wouldn't be in Formula 1
Wizzie wrote:Here's one for you:
Who were the last two drivers ever to officially drive a works-run Honda F1 car?
Salamander wrote:Hmmmm. I think I know one... didn't Takuma Sato do a demo run against an IndyCar in the RA07 once?
watka wrote:I find it amusing that whilst you're one of the more openly Christian guys here, you are still first and foremost associated with an eye for the ladies!
MCard LOLAdinizintheoven wrote:GOOD CHRISTIANS do not go to jail. EVERYONE ON FORMULA ONE REJECTS should be in jail.
Wizzie wrote:Here's one for you:
Who were the last two drivers ever to officially drive a works-run Honda F1 car?
takagi_for_the_win wrote:Wizzie wrote:Here's one for you:
Who were the last two drivers ever to officially drive a works-run Honda F1 car?
I can't shake off the feeling it's a trick question.
John Surtees and the late Jo Schlesser.
Freeze-O-Kimi wrote:takagi_for_the_win wrote:Wizzie wrote:Here's one for you:
Who were the last two drivers ever to officially drive a works-run Honda F1 car?
I can't shake off the feeling it's a trick question.
John Surtees and the late Jo Schlesser.
Me too. I don't want to say 2008
watka wrote:I find it amusing that whilst you're one of the more openly Christian guys here, you are still first and foremost associated with an eye for the ladies!
MCard LOLAdinizintheoven wrote:GOOD CHRISTIANS do not go to jail. EVERYONE ON FORMULA ONE REJECTS should be in jail.
AdrianSutil wrote:Anyway, Can someone please tell me if Prost got some sort of a penalty or a fine for using 5 drives in one season? (2001) They started with Alesi and Mazzacane and finished with HHF and Enge with a bit of Burti in the middle. We're they allowed to at the time?
Freeze-O-Kimi wrote:A few from the 2003 WRC Season
5 Why did Richard Burns not start the Rally GB?
watka wrote:I find it amusing that whilst you're one of the more openly Christian guys here, you are still first and foremost associated with an eye for the ladies!
MCard LOLAdinizintheoven wrote:GOOD CHRISTIANS do not go to jail. EVERYONE ON FORMULA ONE REJECTS should be in jail.
takagi_for_the_win wrote:AdrianSutil wrote:Anyway, Can someone please tell me if Prost got some sort of a penalty or a fine for using 5 drives in one season? (2001) They started with Alesi and Mazzacane and finished with HHF and Enge with a bit of Burti in the middle. We're they allowed to at the time?
At the time, teams were allowed one driver change for their first car, and three driver changes in the second car.
Ergo, Alesi was replaced by Frentzen in the first car, and Mazzacane was replaced by Burti and then Enge in the second car.
Freeze-O-Kimi wrote:A few from the 2003 WRC Season
1 Marko Martin won in Greece but what was the bizarre event he had midway through the rally?
2 Who did Harri Rovenpera crash into in Sweden?
3 Who was the only driver to crash on dry tires on a wet track in San Remo?
cretoxyrhina wrote:Freeze-O-Kimi wrote:A few from the 2003 WRC Season
1 Marko Martin won in Greece but what was the bizarre event he had midway through the rally?
2 Who did Harri Rovenpera crash into in Sweden?
3 Who was the only driver to crash on dry tires on a wet track in San Remo?
1. Bodywork-related problem, I think. Something about hood or doors.
2. Juuso Pykalisto
3. I vaguely remember it was one of the Peugeots... Gronholm?
Freeze-O-Kimi wrote:4 Who was the highest Finn in the rally of Finland and where did he finish?
Backmarker wrote:Freeze-O-Kimi wrote:4 Who was the highest Finn in the rally of Finland and where did he finish?
Tommi Makkinen?
Freeze-O-Kimi wrote:4 Who was the highest Finn in the rally of Finland and where did he finish?
takagi_for_the_win wrote:Freeze-O-Kimi wrote:4 Who was the highest Finn in the rally of Finland and where did he finish?
A 17 year old named Juha who, on the eve, bought enough "white powder" to stone a small elephant. Needless to say, Juha's view of the rally was somewhat different to everyone else's and he finished in a small pine forest on the outskirts of Helsinki, on the run from the bloody big dragon that had been chasing him since Stage 4.
Allard Kalff in 1994 wrote:OH!! Schumacher in the wall! Right in front of us, Michael Schumacher is in the wall! He's hit the pitwall, he c... Ah, it's Jos Verstappen.