Close

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 43 of 43
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    68
    Rep Points
    45.6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    only a few years ago rumours were 1500bhp, in another 5 years rumours will be that they were making 2000+bhp......the way i look at it is the M10 block was too far over designed as a production block and this isnt what engineering is about at all given it was never intended for these power levels. you could have saved another 10kg off the block thats the way a modern engineer would look at it. that's my alternative view and opinion on it......

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,727
    Rep Points
    31,540.7
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by digger Click here to enlarge
    only a few years ago rumours were 1500bhp, in another 5 years rumours will be that they were making 2000+bhp......the way i look at it is the M10 block was too far over designed as a production block and this isnt what engineering is about at all given it was never intended for these power levels. you could have saved another 10kg off the block thats the way a modern engineer would look at it. that's my alternative view and opinion on it......
    I think you're insane.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    6,217
    Rep Points
    6,741.9
    Mentioned
    73 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    68


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by digger Click here to enlarge
    only a few years ago rumours were 1500bhp,
    You're forgetting one important thing here.
    Qualifying at that time was done in 3 sessions spread over the friday and saturday.
    There were no engine restrictions in terms of max amount of engines used, so the engines used for qualifying were only meant to last one qualifying session at most.
    And some (most at the early turbo times) didn't even make that and blew up.

    These engines had an over 3 Atm boost and unlimited fuel supply so yes, in the end they made just about 1500 hp.
    For the races the race-engine was highly detuned to last the 300km race distance, and these engines had an output of around 800hp, although that can not be verified
    But compared to the performance of the NA opponents they must have been around that power level.
    There are two theories to arguing with women. Neither one works

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,727
    Rep Points
    31,540.7
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    I don't know how anyone can complain about a block in the 80's being over-engineered.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    6,217
    Rep Points
    6,741.9
    Mentioned
    73 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    68


    Reputation: Yes | No
    He's overthinking this whole design thing IMO.
    The reason for the original design of the M10 cylinder part (they didn't use the whole block, just this part mainly) was so sturdy and overdesigned, was probably due to low production costs/ore prices and cast production limitations.
    The BMW F1 section never complained about the sturdiness of the bottom end of the M10.
    They needed the oldest blocks for the F1 engines.
    There ad to be a lot of miles on the engines, and rumor goes they were peed on a lot by the engineers.
    There used to be a big pile of the engines behind the development building and everyone was to do their no. 1 there.
    The acid in urine somehow helped hardening the blocks...
    There are two theories to arguing with women. Neither one works

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,727
    Rep Points
    31,540.7
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by DavidV Click here to enlarge
    The acid in urine somehow helped hardening the blocks...
    LOL wut

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    6,217
    Rep Points
    6,741.9
    Mentioned
    73 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    68


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    LOL wut
    Read and read

    There are two theories to arguing with women. Neither one works

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,727
    Rep Points
    31,540.7
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    This is the first time I have heard about peeing on engine blocks lolololol.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    6,217
    Rep Points
    6,741.9
    Mentioned
    73 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    68


    Reputation: Yes | No
    The wonders of engineering Click here to enlarge
    There are two theories to arguing with women. Neither one works

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    68
    Rep Points
    45.6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    i don't get my rocks off on things that are excessively over engineered and make pretty looking numbers.

    it doesn't take a good engineer to over engineer something. As a modern mechanical engineer i would lose my job if i did the same, everything would be too heavy

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,727
    Rep Points
    31,540.7
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by digger Click here to enlarge
    i don't get my rocks off on things that are excessively over engineered and make pretty looking numbers.

    it doesn't take a good engineer to over engineer something. As a modern mechanical engineer i would lose my job if i did the same, everything would be too heavy
    Well I mean BMW's engineers today just try to make the car last the warranty period. Is that good engineering? The M10 block is probably a better turbo candidate than any current BMW block. The new BMW blocks are lighter but which is more impressively engineered?

    I think your statement really depends on application.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    68
    Rep Points
    45.6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Well I mean BMW's engineers today just try to make the car last the warranty period. Is that good engineering? The M10 block is probably a better turbo candidate than any current BMW block. The new BMW blocks are lighter but which is more impressively engineered?

    I think your statement really depends on application.
    assuming newer blocks prove themselves not to fail prematurely outside staistical variations then newer blocks are without a doubt better engineered. in order to make something both lighter and suitable for the application intended requires more knowledge and better understanding of the possible operating conditions, loads in service, duty cycle etc and better understanding of mechanical properties so you dont get it wrong. you need a better understand how structures behave so that material is added in the right areas in an efficient manner. lots of stuff has been and is done by designers (non engineers) eye balling stuff, rules of thumb and that works very often but in the modern world you will never be the best at what you do with this approach

    stronger does not mean better unless of course that is a design objective.

    anyone can build a bridge, but to design and build something that is light, economical to proiduce and efficient is where engineering comes into it

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,727
    Rep Points
    31,540.7
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by digger Click here to enlarge
    assuming newer blocks prove themselves not to fail prematurely outside staistical variations then newer blocks are without a doubt better engineered.
    Nice edit. The newer blocks may be better engineered by certain standards but are they stronger? Are they better for use in F1?

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by digger Click here to enlarge
    in order to make something both lighter and suitable for the application intended requires more knowledge and better understanding of the possible operating conditions, loads in service, duty cycle etc and better understanding of mechanical properties so you dont get it wrong.
    Soooo.... like I said, based on application?

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by digger Click here to enlarge
    stronger does not mean better unless of course that is a design objective.
    So the M10 block is better for Formula 1 than say an N54?

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by digger Click here to enlarge
    anyone can build a bridge
    I wouldn't cross a bridge I built. Just saying.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    68
    Rep Points
    45.6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Nice edit. The newer blocks may be better engineered by certain standards but are they stronger? Are they better for use in F1?

    Soooo.... like I said, based on application?

    So the M10 block is better for Formula 1 than say an N54?
    the blocks weren't designed to be used for F1 when conceived, so who cares about F1 this doesnt make a block "good". they just raided the parts bin and found the M10 blocks were able to do the job without designing a new one specifically..... whoop dee do

    ive never said that the M10 block wasnt strong nor good at the F1 application

    if the M10 block is so good they would be using it on modern engines

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,727
    Rep Points
    31,540.7
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by digger Click here to enlarge
    the blocks weren't designed to be used for F1 when conceived, so who cares about F1 this doesnt make a block "good". they just raided the parts bin and found the M10 blocks were able to do the job without designing a new one specifically..... whoop dee do

    ive never said that the M10 block wasnt strong nor good at the F1 application

    if the M10 block is so good they would be using it on modern engines
    It makes the block good for F1 that it is strong right?

    Yes, they raided the parts bin and found an over engineered block that made for one of the best motors in F1 history.

    If you're not impressed so be it, I am.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    68
    Rep Points
    45.6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    It makes the block good for F1 that it is strong right?

    Yes, they raided the parts bin and found an over engineered block that made for one of the best motors in F1 history.

    If you're not impressed so be it, I am.

    in the modern world of F1 being strong is merely one aspect. hopefully it doesn't need to be said that it needs to be strong enough to withstand the loads it is subjected to, that is obviously a requirement.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    68
    Rep Points
    45.6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    IMO the rods are more of a marvel than the block. there would not be many applications that involve higher compressive loads. the rods looked very beefy as in topfuel beefy

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,727
    Rep Points
    31,540.7
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by digger Click here to enlarge
    IMO the rods are more of a marvel than the block. there would not be many applications that involve higher compressive loads. the rods looked very beefy as in topfuel beefy
    Definitely. I find the whole package impressive.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •