Diesel Engines at Indy?

[Quixfire]

I was reading the October Issue of Car & Drivers and they have a great article on Cummins Diesels racing at Indy and it's online. Link

The very last paragraph raised a very interesting question.

The Cummins assault on Indianapolis is ancient history. But what of today? With excellent diesels being produced by BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and others, a new set of technical rules might reopen the oil burner's door to the Indy 500. With it might come a revived interest in the "greatest spectacle in racing" and serious developments in making diesels even more useful for everyday passenger cars.

Do you think modern diesel engine could content with their gasoline or alcohol counter parts?

 

[Demon-Xanth]

A diesel's problem currently would be that it couldn't be competitive given the modern restrictions. Weight is also an issue.

Banks has a street Dakota w/ a 5.9 Cummins diesel pushing 735HP and 1300LB/ft of torque, it did 220MPH at Bonneville and did 12.01 in the quarter with a guy that had never gone drag racing behind the wheel. It gets 22MPG.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Btw, ever notice a trend that when an alternate engine setup comes around it's regulated out of competition? (turbine engines had thier inlet size reduced by 75%, and Mercedes Pushrod engines weren't even attempted to be modified to comply with the modified rulings.

 

[EyeMWing]

Yes. The international success of the VW TDI line has shown that modern diesels are capable (superior?) competitors to their gasoline counterparts. I don't see why a racing engineered diesel would be any different.

 

[filmmaker]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Yes. The international success of the VW TDI line has shown that modern diesels are capable (superior?) competitors to their gasoline counterparts. I don't see why a racing engineered diesel would be any different.

My sister would hug her VW TDI and agree.

 

[MichaelD]

Modern-day diesels are superior in many aspects to their gasoline-burning competitors. Clean, quiet and powerful, they outsell gas-powered vehicles in most markets overseas.

Stateside, the problem is with the FUEL. Gasoline is rated by Octane level. Diesel is rated by Centane level. The Centane level in the states is absurdly low compared to European diesel.

Why is that, you ask? Gee, I dunno. Ask Mobil, Shell and the other conglomerates why.

it's all about profits.

I tell you this:

My next vehicle will be an American pickup truck (most probably)
My next vehicle, no matter who makes it, will be diesel powered.

Nuff said.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

I agree, I've driven three different diesel trucks ('99 4x4 Ram 6 speed, '03 4x4 Ram auto, '00-'02 International chassis 24' truck) and they've all performed quite well. Even with a 9000LB 35' travel trailer the '99 did *insert_illegal_speed* with ease, and the '03 was an excellent around town and highway cruiser on our trip to LA. The 24' truck handled hills suprisingly well and was able to cruise right upto it's speed limiter (65MPH). And they get gas milage better than many midsized SUVs even though they punch holes through the air the size of small houses and can have small cars placed on thier backs.

 

[BadgerFan]

Originally posted by: Quixfire
I was reading the October Issue of Car & Drivers and they have a great article on Cummins Diesels racing at Indy and it's online. Link

The very last paragraph raised a very interesting question.

The Cummins assault on Indianapolis is ancient history. But what of today? With excellent diesels being produced by BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and others, a new set of technical rules might reopen the oil burner's door to the Indy 500. With it might come a revived interest in the "greatest spectacle in racing" and serious developments in making diesels even more useful for everyday passenger cars.

Do you think modern diesel engine could content with their gasoline or alcohol counter parts?

It will never happen in racing. Diesel fuel burns way to slow, it is nearly impossible to make a high rpm run on diesel, and in order to make huge power you need to be able to spin the piss out of the engine. If anyone tries to tell me that torque wins races I am gonna cry.

 

[MichaelD]

Originally posted by: BadgerFan

Originally posted by: Quixfire
I was reading the October Issue of Car & Drivers and they have a great article on Cummins Diesels racing at Indy and it's online. Link

The very last paragraph raised a very interesting question.

The Cummins assault on Indianapolis is ancient history. But what of today? With excellent diesels being produced by BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and others, a new set of technical rules might reopen the oil burner's door to the Indy 500. With it might come a revived interest in the "greatest spectacle in racing" and serious developments in making diesels even more useful for everyday passenger cars.

Do you think modern diesel engine could content with their gasoline or alcohol counter parts?

It will never happen in racing. Diesel fuel burns way to slow, it is nearly impossible to make a high rpm run on diesel, and in order to make huge power you need to be able to spin the piss out of the engine. If anyone tries to tell me that torque wins races I am gonna cry.

Heh, depends on the length of the race! 1000ft/lbs of torque will get you thru 1,320 feet very quickly!

 

[BadgerFan]

Originally posted by: MichaelD

Originally posted by: BadgerFan

Originally posted by: Quixfire
I was reading the October Issue of Car & Drivers and they have a great article on Cummins Diesels racing at Indy and it's online. Link

The very last paragraph raised a very interesting question.

The Cummins assault on Indianapolis is ancient history. But what of today? With excellent diesels being produced by BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and others, a new set of technical rules might reopen the oil burner's door to the Indy 500. With it might come a revived interest in the "greatest spectacle in racing" and serious developments in making diesels even more useful for everyday passenger cars.

Do you think modern diesel engine could content with their gasoline or alcohol counter parts?

It will never happen in racing. Diesel fuel burns way to slow, it is nearly impossible to make a high rpm run on diesel, and in order to make huge power you need to be able to spin the piss out of the engine. If anyone tries to tell me that torque wins races I am gonna cry.

Heh, depends on the length of the race! 1000ft/lbs of torque will get you thru 1,320 feet very quickly!

NO NO NO NO.

It does not depend on the length of the race. Torque is a unit of force x distance it has nothing to do with time. I will tell you what, I will race you for one hundred dollars. You can have a steam engine that runs at 5RPM but makes 300Ft*lbs of torque, and I will take a ten speed huffy and my measly estimated leg output of perhaps 1/2hp. Come on man, easy money, its all about the torque...

 

[Quixfire]

Originally posted by: BadgerFan

Originally posted by: Quixfire
I was reading the October Issue of Car & Drivers and they have a great article on Cummins Diesels racing at Indy and it's online. Link

The very last paragraph raised a very interesting question.

The Cummins assault on Indianapolis is ancient history. But what of today? With excellent diesels being produced by BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and others, a new set of technical rules might reopen the oil burner's door to the Indy 500. With it might come a revived interest in the "greatest spectacle in racing" and serious developments in making diesels even more useful for everyday passenger cars.

Do you think modern diesel engine could content with their gasoline or alcohol counter parts?

It will never happen in racing. Diesel fuel burns way to slow, it is nearly impossible to make a high rpm run on diesel, and in order to make huge power you need to be able to spin the piss out of the engine. If anyone tries to tell me that torque wins races I am gonna cry.

Well it has happen and still does today. And I'll agree that most types of racing are won using horsepower over torque, with the exception being drag racing. But taking a race like the Indy 500 where a diesel engine could compete for the long haul, why couldn't they build an engine to go 500 miles and maintain a speed over 200+ mph?

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: BadgerFan

Originally posted by: MichaelD

Originally posted by: BadgerFan

Originally posted by: Quixfire
I was reading the October Issue of Car & Drivers and they have a great article on Cummins Diesels racing at Indy and it's online. Link

The very last paragraph raised a very interesting question.

The Cummins assault on Indianapolis is ancient history. But what of today? With excellent diesels being produced by BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and others, a new set of technical rules might reopen the oil burner's door to the Indy 500. With it might come a revived interest in the "greatest spectacle in racing" and serious developments in making diesels even more useful for everyday passenger cars.

Do you think modern diesel engine could content with their gasoline or alcohol counter parts?

It will never happen in racing. Diesel fuel burns way to slow, it is nearly impossible to make a high rpm run on diesel, and in order to make huge power you need to be able to spin the piss out of the engine. If anyone tries to tell me that torque wins races I am gonna cry.

Heh, depends on the length of the race! 1000ft/lbs of torque will get you thru 1,320 feet very quickly!

NO NO NO NO.

It does not depend on the length of the race. Torque is a unit of force x distance it has nothing to do with time. I will tell you what, I will race you for one hundred dollars. You can have a steam engine that runs at 5RPM but makes 300Ft*lbs of torque, and I will take a ten speed huffy and my measly estimated leg output of perhaps 1/2hp. Come on man, easy money, its all about the torque...

As long as you have to pull as much weight as the steam engine does (ie, pull it behind you), I'll take that bet.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: Quixfire

Originally posted by: BadgerFan

Originally posted by: Quixfire
I was reading the October Issue of Car & Drivers and they have a great article on Cummins Diesels racing at Indy and it's online. Link

The very last paragraph raised a very interesting question.

The Cummins assault on Indianapolis is ancient history. But what of today? With excellent diesels being produced by BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and others, a new set of technical rules might reopen the oil burner's door to the Indy 500. With it might come a revived interest in the "greatest spectacle in racing" and serious developments in making diesels even more useful for everyday passenger cars.

Do you think modern diesel engine could content with their gasoline or alcohol counter parts?

It will never happen in racing. Diesel fuel burns way to slow, it is nearly impossible to make a high rpm run on diesel, and in order to make huge power you need to be able to spin the piss out of the engine. If anyone tries to tell me that torque wins races I am gonna cry.

Well it has happen and still does today. And I'll agree that most types of racing are won using horsepower over torque, with the exception being drag racing. But taking a race like the Indy 500 where a diesel engine could compete for the long haul, why couldn't they build an engine to go 500 miles and maintain a speed over 200+ mph?

Don't most drag cars (top fuel, for example) still have horsepower in the thousands? Saying that torque is more important, even in drag racing, seems contradictory to the specs put out by those vehicles.

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: Quixfire

Originally posted by: BadgerFan

Originally posted by: Quixfire
I was reading the October Issue of Car & Drivers and they have a great article on Cummins Diesels racing at Indy and it's online. Link

The very last paragraph raised a very interesting question.

The Cummins assault on Indianapolis is ancient history. But what of today? With excellent diesels being produced by BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and others, a new set of technical rules might reopen the oil burner's door to the Indy 500. With it might come a revived interest in the "greatest spectacle in racing" and serious developments in making diesels even more useful for everyday passenger cars.

Do you think modern diesel engine could content with their gasoline or alcohol counter parts?

It will never happen in racing. Diesel fuel burns way to slow, it is nearly impossible to make a high rpm run on diesel, and in order to make huge power you need to be able to spin the piss out of the engine. If anyone tries to tell me that torque wins races I am gonna cry.

Well it has happen and still does today. And I'll agree that most types of racing are won using horsepower over torque, with the exception being drag racing. But taking a race like the Indy 500 where a diesel engine could compete for the long haul, why couldn't they build an engine to go 500 miles and maintain a speed over 200+ mph?

Don't most drag cars (top fuel, for example) still have horsepower in the thousands? Saying that torque is more important, even in drag racing, seems contradictory to the specs put out by those vehicles.

HP is a function of torque and RPM.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Top fuelers have 8000HP and spin at 7500RPM. Thier rear end ratios and tires are spec'ed in by the NHRA rulebook, if they want to go faster they have no choice but to spin faster. They can't just drop the ratio or put a taller tire.

Some things to consider:
A Mustang 5.0 and Hyndai Tiberon have a similar power to weight ratio, but the Mustang does the 1/4 a full second faster. Anyone wanna guess why?

HP can win over torque, but when you make alot of HP over a very small RPM range it's easy to get out of range. Torquey engines tend to have reletively flat curves that let them pound down the torque for a very long time.

Example:
A 180HP 2700LB Celica GTS (6 speed) makes 130LB/ft peak at about 6800RPM and does the 1/4 in low 15's.
A 230HP 4200LB Dakota (5 speed) makes 295LB/ft peak at about 3500ROM and does the 1/4 in low 15's.

The 1500LB advantage is completely lost by the fact that the power band is so narrow that it gets lost when compared to the (reletively) mile wide curve that the Dakota has. When it comes to street starts, the Celica gets creamed by virtually everything (even cars in it's class) because of the lack of torque. By the time it gets to it's sweet spot the race is over.

But gearing can keep a car in it's range! That's why they have 6 speeds on cars like that. Not because they enjoy the insane overdrive ratios that the Corvette, Viper, and F-bodies have (calculated theoretical redline in top gear speeds are often above 250MPH vs. 140MPH).

So you have a car with a 100RPM wide power band, you get a slick 8 speed transmission, you enter races that have starts that are above 30MPH. To avoid being slowed down by the shifts you get a sequential clutchless transmission. GREAT! Now you're fast!

Then the bill comes in the mail. In the form of the guy beside you with a torquey "low tech" engine. He had the same budget. He got a beefy 4 speed manual for 1/10th the price of your trick transmission, the rest of his money went into an engine program that made a 358 small block chevy push 925HP and spin upto 9600RPM (yes, I do know someone that had an engine like this). And he has money left over.

So how do you win?

The rulebook.

In comes intake restrictions that odviously favor the smaller+lightweight setup, minimum weighs are kept very low so light weight torquey setups cannot exist.


In comes a debate:
If a 800HP Indy car came to Bristol w/ an extra 1800LBs on board, could it beat a NASCAR car? Could an Indy car's engine be placed in a NASCAR chassis and be competitive?



My view:
Torquey engines will win when wide powerbands are required and minimum weights aren't featherweight. They will also win when the budget comes into play.

High reving engines work when budgets are near limitless and speeds are kept high.

 

[ElFenix]

my view: torque is everything. 1000 HP at 18000 RPM merely means that you have 292 lb-ft of torque. since your peak HP occurs at the point where the decline in torque can't be made up for by increased rpm that is your max speed. if you have pretty much the same torque from, say, 5000 rpm to 18000 rpm you've got a really wide power band, allowing you to take advantage of 13000 RPM in each gear.

tbe problem isnt' that a diesel can't produce the torque to move a race car, its that to keep up with a high rpm gas or alcohol engine would require 15 gears.