> In SM, the tires act as an engine power/money fuze.
>What do you figure, roughly, that fuze is rated for, in power terms?
Lets see, my FS Camaro puts down ~.65-.7g accel on "skinny" 245 tires. Figure
with bigger tires and suspension mods a RWD SM car can pull ~.8g. Next, lets
say on a typical course, there is some benefit to acceleration at the traction
limit up to about 60mph. This point is obviously debatable. There is a law
of diminishing returns here that will be highly course dependent, but even if
the advantage is smaller on some courses than others, a skilled driver should
be able to gain a (small) advantage.
Then .8G at 60mph in a 3100 lbm car (reasonably achievable weight?) requires
404 hp at the wheels. This seems reasonable, but I don't really see this type
of car dominating the class.
Lets consider the extreme: A 2700 lbm AWD car at 60mph and 1.2g acceleration
requires 528 hp at the wheels. This equates to nearly 660 bhp at the crank.
I know of several 2.0 liter motors with big turbos making this kind of power,
but to get low turbo lag and good drivability as well, this could be an
expensive proposition. You could transplant a 3.0l V6 into a Talon, but this
would probably mess up the weight distribution, so maybe a bored and stroked 4
cyl with high compression ratio, a smallish turbo (using race gas of course)
and stratospheric redline, not to mention a beefed up drivetrain with custom
gearing, variable valve timing, and a rally car style anti-lag system for the
turbo.
Sure, there may be more cost effective ways to make the car faster, but once
you've exhausted all of these (and so has your competition), you'll be forced
to go after more power to stay competitive.
Jim Fossum
|