Saleen S7R

[Patrick2]

one more correction. rotary engines do not have valves of any sort to control air/fuel and exhaust gasses. they use ports on the housing of the engine. valve timing is controlled by the position of the ports as well as the rotor (i.e. covered, not covered as the rotor goes through it's cycle) However, rotaries are still considered 4-stroke engines because each cycle is still independant unlike a two-stroke. I guess you could consider the latest renisis rotary in the rx-8 as having valves. However these valves only control which ports are recieving air (this is on the 250hp version) there are three intakeports for each rotor and certain ones are fed air at various rpm levels. obviously at high rpm all ports are open. The air control is controlled inside the intake plenum by various sets of valves which can open and close different intake runners. I'm not sure if the details are on mazdas website, but I think I read about it in an issue of sport compact car. If I had a scanner I would post it put unfortunately I don't Again I don't mean to be anal or condecending. The only reason I wrote that last sentance is that I don't want people thinking I am trying to discredit anyone else.

Take care guys and I hope this answers some questions

[Anzeige eBay]

Hallo thepolarfoxqx,

 

kennst du schon Saleen S7R (Anzeige)? Dort ist vieles zu finden.

 

US Cars Ersatzteile (Anzeige) | US Cars Zubehör (Anzeige)

[izzyloveslizzy]

Yes that does answer a few questions. Thanks for the info Patrick. And no we definitely don't think that you're being condecending. In fact that's very informative and clears up a few things. Do you do any work on engines? How do you know so much about the details and specifics of engines? I think you would be a welcome addition to the site. I for one enjoy reading people's posts (especially when they know about something more than I do). I'd very much appreciate it if you could continue posting what you know about engines, engine valves, cams, mechanics, electronics, designs/design-flaws, etc.. Don't worry too much about being "condescending". You're not.

I know a bit about the renesis rotary wankel, but there are many things I didn't know that you just explained in fair detail. The information about how the RX-8 rotary works can be found in various places and on various websites. I've read one review explaining in medium detail all the specifics and working parts of the rotary engine. That, I believe was either in "Road & Track" or "CAR".

Your usual "valves" can't be found in the RX-8 engine in their customary form, but as you said ports do exist that at one time or another more or less take on the same task as valves. Basically, in a way the ports ARE valves. And what shapes similarities between ports in rotary engines and valves in contemporary cylinder-based engines is the fact that by programming the ports (say, for fuel flow), you can get more efficient widening and closing of the ports at the right time, so when the engine revs high, for instance, the amount of fuel flow and air flow increases accordingly, and if you press the gas pedal fully forward, the fuel port doesn't open all the way. I know that sounds very "elementary" in explanation, but you'll have to forgive me, that's the best I an do when it comes to rotary valves. Since I don't know the exact mechanics and technicalities of the rotary procedure I can only write what makes sense to me. I hope I don't misinform anyone. I only do know for a fact that Mazda tried quite a bit and poured resources into developing a system similar in need of programming of engine cycle processes, which means they clearly know the importance and necessity of "valve-timing", even in an engine that doesn't have valves per se. I hope you understand what I mean. Can't quite put it into better words. At the moment I have yet to even understand some of the functions of different types of engines. But what I do know I will argue about.

By the way moi hasn't worked on any engines, V8, straight6, falt4, conv3, whatever. I'm guessing you were addressing Fox on that last one. He HAS worked on engines, and I'll bet he knows and would probably confirm most of what you said.

By the way, join the other discussions in the other threads if you can. Sounds like you could put in more than your 2¢.

Edit: I noticed in your car pool it says BMW M3, Patrick. Do you by any chance know about the rocket-acceleration trick?

__________

- izzy

[Patrick2]

thank you for the kind words izzy and yes I was addressing fox on the v8 correction. I'm glad no one takes these thiings the wrong way it is a welcome releif. As for working on engines.....Haven't done a lot of work on different engines. Most of the work I have done was from my high school days (which were not all that long ago as I am only 21). I read a lot about cars and because of my interest in them and my natural mechcanical inclination (or so I think) I have been able to learn a lot maybe when I get the money I will have a car oof my own to work on. As for the M3.....I wish I owned one, I put the car there for fun. Right now I am driving a Pontiac Grand Am GT, a far cry from the M3 but it does get me around and in enough trouble as it is. I'll see what I can fnid out about that acceleration trick, I haven't heard of it myself. Is it an engine thing?? or something specific to the SMG equipped cars? I have read that the standard trans. M3's are a little quicker off the line and can post slighty better 1/4 mile times, even though the SMG has faster shift times. SO maybe that's what the trick is, a faster way to get the SMG off the line. Anyways, that was all just idle conjecture, which means it is time for me to do some research. I always enjoy a good challenge.

Thanks again and take care

[izzyloveslizzy]

Hey no problem Patrick. You're welcome to express as much of your opinion here as you want (as long as no offensive language is used; not that I'm saying you did...).

To make things seem a bit more positive for you, I'm only 18. Not only that, but I've been interested in cars for only about 2 years! What I do know, however, I know it because I've been VERY interested in cars and everything car-related! (Not that I'm trying to make it sound like I know alot about cars, because I know there are people here who would put me to shame).

I also read a lot about cars solely because of my interest in them, be it on the internet or in magazines or newspapers or wherever.

A Pontiac Grand AM GT (though no match for an M3 as you said yourself) is still better than nothing, which is what I own right now. The cars in my car pool are my dad's, so I've basically never been fortunate enough to drive a car I can call my own!

As for the "acceleration trick", it has less to do with the engine itself, and more to do with the software BMW uses in combination with their SMG in the M3. Though it may only work in the European E46 and up, because as Fox (thepolarfoxqx) tells me, he's tried it numerous times on American M3(s) but he couldn't get it to work. Since you live in Canada I guess it wouldn't work for you either because the laws in Canada are even more strict (most of the time) than in the U.S., meaning that if their M3s are regulated to exclude the feature, then Canadian M3s will definitely have the same disadvantage. Anyhow, refer to my post in "" for information on the feature. It's definitely more than just an SMG acceleration advantage, however, as most people actually call it an "easter egg". I guess you may have read up on it quite a bit though by the time you read this.

Have fun.

-izzy

[thepolarfoxqx]

Of course a pushrod style engine has the pushrod that move connect the cam to the rocker arms in the head that connect to the lifters, but on an overhead cam engine (most V8s i've worked on are pushrod, some although have been OHC) the cam is in the head, and in SOHC, the cam presses on rocker arms that press on the lifters (usually hydraulic), in the DOHC the cams (2 in the head) each press on their respective lifters, solid lifters are more common in DOHC motors.

[izzyloveslizzy]

Not to get off-topic, but you three need to get together and write a book about this stuff. You could!

[Patrick2]

Fox: oh yeah I know that stuff about various engine designs (sohc, dohc, etc.). It was just that your previous post mentioned the lifters by the rocker arms in a non-ohc engine which does not hold true (I thought that was the engine you were refering to). A slip up no worries. Just wanted to make the correction. I was not saying you didn't know what you were talking about. I never doubt your expertise though. You seem to know a lot.

[Patrick2]

Sorry fox, just read your post again (the latest one). are you telling us the lifters in a non-ohc engine are in the cylinder head?? if so that is NOT true. All V8's (american) I have worked on have the lifters riding on the cam shaft and the rods sitting on the lifters. Again not trying to start a fight here just need some clarification on your part

[thepolarfoxqx]

alright:

in any engine - the lifter touches the cam.

in a pushrod - the cam is in the block - so are the hydraulic lifters. sorry about the confusion. It's been a while since I tore down a pushrod engine. I am so used to thinking about the mechanics in an OHC style valvetrain.

[Patrick2]

alright thanks dude, now the confusion has been lifted.

[Anzeige eBay]

Hallo thepolarfoxqx,

 

schau doch mal hier zum Thema Zubehör für US Cars (Anzeige)? Eventuell gibt es dort etwas Passendes.

[thepolarfoxqx]

sorry about all of it. I am a horribly visual thinker - I put picture the engine in my head - and i don't always put it together right.

Question to all:

Was the 7.0L Old style pushrod V8 the right path to pursue for the S7 - or should saleen have perhaps tuned a more sophisticated 5.4L V8 or 6.8L V10 for the job?

[Patrick2]

interesting question. I guess you could argue thta the current engine gets the job done (if it ain't borke don't fix it). But it is, after all, a supercar. Something more sophisticated would have been much more interesting. V10 would have been cool and would have added to its exotic appeal. a high hp/L 5.4L V8 would also be a good choice. Especially a high revving (naturally asperated of course) flat plane crank engine. I love the sound of a V8 with a flat plane crank. But the engine they choose was a good idea in the end. It was cost effective and helped keep the S7's price down, which compared with other supercars is a relative bargan. Plus large displacement V8's are what america is known for in their high performance cars and this is americas "first" supercar (we could argue that forever I think). well that is my opinion. fox what are your thoughts on the subject? I want to hear other people's opinions as well.

[thepolarfoxqx]

Well, the 7.0 is high winding, powerful, and palettable.

But it represents an engine at its absolute limits (naturally aspirated).

And the 7.0 was made from a 351 bored out.

If you took the 5.4 with 32V Cobra heads, maybe bored the engine a bit (there is room an a 5.4), and worked it like he worked the 7.0, I think you would have gotten an engine that would be overall better.

The 6.8L V10 is of course only available with the 2V SOHC heads - which is an issue, but they could have made an awsome engine with that just the same (port the heads perhaps). That engine would have breathed fire.

I would have liked to see the ford 6.8 get put to its potential, the 5.4 would be cool, but ford is already doing that in the GT, so I would like the 6.8 - tuned for better than 650hp naturally aspirated.

[Patrick2]

Good point about the V10. it has never really been utilized in a performance application which is a shame, as are the two valve heads. Porting would help like you said or maybe they could convert it to a DOHC set-up. Unfortunatly the DOHC setup is probably cost prohibitive and may make the engine unreliable as it was not designed for this type of setup. BUt if designed properly I don't see why not.

[thepolarfoxqx]

the 32V heads that they have been using on cobra and navigator for years aren't all that expensive, and have proven rock solid. I wish they'd stretch them one cylender longer for the V10. Then you'd have an amazing engine. No doubt.

[Patrick2]

good point. It would be very nice to see some domestics put out some higher tech engines. actually GM looks to putting out a new V6 that should be very good here is some info: General Motors has released details of a new range of V6 engines that are intended for global use by the world's number one vehicle manufacturer. To be built at both St Catherines at Ontario in Canada and Port Melbourne at Victoria in Australia, the all-new engines will all be all-aluminium, have dual overhead camshafts, 4-valves per cylinder, roller-finger follower valvetrain, continuously variable cam phasing, electronic throttle control, durable forged-steel crankshafts, piston-cooling oil jets, coolant-loss protection software, the GM Oil Life system, 32 bit microprocessors, and coil-on-plug ignition. Initially the range will comprise 2.8 litre, 3.2 litre and 3.6 litre variants, with a 3.8 litre version to follow. Horsepower will vary from 200 hp to 370 hp. How's that for a domestic eninge?

[thepolarfoxqx]

they are designed to be flexible with turbocharging configurations. They were co-developed by Opel and GM North America with help from Saab (engine control and turbo integration). They are an impressive line of engines. Finally GM has something worthy of going up against engines from ford and daimler chrysler. Let's face it, GM's pushrod V6s aren't that special. I hope these will represent a new way of thought for GM.

[imported_felix]

Is the s7 the car jim carrey drives in his new film, Bruce Almighty? I think someone said it on a different forum. id never seen it before, so i voted for the murcielago, but if i had i would have voted for the s7. has it got good performance? someone post stats please. thnx

[thepolarfoxqx]

7.0L All Aluminum 16V Pushrod Ford V8.

550hp @ 6,500

520ft/lb torque @ 4,000

Redline @ 7,000

Weight: 2,750lbs

6 Spd Stick Shift

40:60 weight distro.

Dry Sump Lubrication (12.6 quarts of oil!)

4 Plate 5.5" Clutch

355/20/R20 rear tires.

Yes, 355/20!

Steel Space frame construction

0-60 3.6

Top Speed: 230

Slalom: 1.03g

This is a street legal race car!

[imported_felix]

Thanks. Does any one know about bruce almighty though?

[thepolarfoxqx]

what about bruce almighty?

[imported_felix]

id probably go with the s7

[izzyloveslizzy]

Bruce drove an S7. That lucky bastard....

[thepolarfoxqx]

if you were god (or jim carey) you could have an S7 - easy as that.

[LateNightCable]

YELLOW is the only color I have seen that S7 in. I'm sure it's fast and all, but it has the same wide pancakey look the Ferrari F-50 has making it appear sluggish, and could they make the nose and ass any longer?

It's one of those cars that could use a darker color. I don't think it's worth the ludicris price they want for it. I like my hamburger cooked and put on a plate so I would go with the Lamborghini. Where do you get the idea that the Lambo V-12 is fragile? No production engine producing that much force could afford to be.