|
That image is missing any and all glare. I don't think you'd be able to clearly see the driver with the reflection that should be coming off of the windshield.
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 23:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 23:33 |
|
|
Isn't it shot from the RSR supra which is RHD? Then just a polariser for windscreen reflections.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 00:04
|
|
|
LO, Get your prescription checked.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 00:46
|
|
|
84 London Roadster kit car running vw 1600 dual port   
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 01:07
|
|
|
echoplex posted:Rowan Atkinson's F1 has been repaired: For now. Is this the third or the fourth time he's totaled it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 02:58
|
|
|
DrPain posted:84 London Roadster kit car running vw 1600 dual port Pretty sure that is the kit for an MG TC late 40's early 50's .....
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 03:52
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:For now. Is this the third or the fourth time he's totaled it? He's only totaled it twice, but this last bill for his insurance company was insane. £900,000 ($1,400,000 for us 'Muricans) was the total cost.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 04:57
|
|
|
It isn't car poo poo, but it's pretty AI. This engine makes its best fuel economy at 53,244 horse power at 90 rpm. Big engine.  Big turbo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 08:17
|
|
|
You've got to be hitting limits based on the pure tensile strength of metals at that scale, right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 08:25
|
|
|
I was thinking along the lines of: does it have head bolts/studs, cam retainer bolts/studs in the traditional sense? Surely it must just have large, multicomponent structures which distribute the forces along the same lines as actual large bolts do in smaller engines.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 08:31
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:I was thinking along the lines of: does it have head bolts/studs, cam retainer bolts/studs in the traditional sense? Surely it must just have large, multicomponent structures which distribute the forces along the same lines as actual large bolts do in smaller engines. I can't find a picture for some reason, but no, they do have actual head bolts. They're several feet long, with a shaft eight inches or so in diameter and a head the size of a basketball.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 08:41
|
|
|
Krakkles posted:
Is that from Project C.A.R.S?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 09:12
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:I can't find a picture for some reason, but no, they do have actual head bolts. They're several feet long, with a shaft eight inches or so in diameter and a head the size of a basketball. I can re-send those pictures if you want.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 13:52
|
|
|
Not only is the car just amazing visually, the chassis design is quite innovative for it's time even compared to factory works teams in F1.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 15:04
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 15:08
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:I can't find a picture for some reason, but no, they do have actual head bolts. They're several feet long, with a shaft eight inches or so in diameter and a head the size of a basketball. Here's some pics, including one of the pistons and rods - http://gcaptain.com/emma-maersk-engine/ Measuring a bearing shell:  (I wonder what they run for bearing clearance and oil viscosity? Do they use grease pencils as plastigauge?) gently caress your puny double timing chains.  Here's your head studs. Definitely studs. There's a dude standing on the crankcase for scale.  You know it's a big engine when there is a diamondplate walkway down the inside of the intake manifold.  IIRC the 14 cylinder edition of this engine (now that's a proper engine, inline 14!) puts out over 100 thousand horsepower, and achieves greater than 50% thermal efficiency. Mostly shamelessly stolen from here: http://www.yachtforums.com/forums/technical-discussion/11290-what-makes-big-boats-go-wartsila-sulzer-rta96-c.html kastein fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Feb 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 16:06
|
|
|
I was looking up stuff on Shusei Nagaoka since he did an ELO album cover and found these:   Having ELO music stuck in my head makes these so much better too 
Zeether fucked around with this message at 17:24 on Feb 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 17:17
|
|
|
kastein posted:IIRC the 14 cylinder edition of this engine (now that's a proper engine, inline 14!) puts out over 100 thousand horsepower, and achieves greater than 50% thermal efficiency. That's ~100,000hp at 105rpm, mind you. Meaning over 5,000,000nm of torque.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 17:31
|
|
|
front wing flexing posted:Not only is the car just amazing visually, the chassis design is quite innovative for it's time even compared to factory works teams in F1. Dan Gurney himself is also cool as hell. But yes, that Eagle is probably the prettiest F1 car of the last pre-wing era - and that's saying a lot when you're comparing it to the Lotus 49 and the Ferrari 312.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:That's ~100,000hp at 105rpm, mind you. 105rpm? Easy there, don't want to wind it out for too long...  I love how slow those things turn, 105rpm means 24.5Hz firing rate, assuming 14 cylinders.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
How do you even mount an engine like that without shaking the foundation apart? I can't imagine an inline 14 is well balanced.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:26
|
|
|
Memento1979 posted:It isn't car poo poo, but it's pretty AI. This engine makes its best fuel economy at 53,244 horse power at 90 rpm. About 25,000liter or 1.5 million cubic inches.  My 390 no longer looks too big.Burns about 28 gallons per minute. At current fuel costs it's about $4K/hour to run or $300K for a typical 3 day ocean crossing. I'll stop whining about my old dual Mercruiser boat that used 10-15 gallons per hour.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:41
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:How do you even mount an engine like that without shaking the foundation apart? I can't imagine an inline 14 is well balanced. 105 rpm isn't fast enough to matter. That's REALLY slow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:50
|
|
|
VolumeOverTalent posted:So where did they take it from? If it's just taken from the leading car, then yeah, cool photo, but what am I missing? Guinness posted:That looks like a render, not a photo. That, or it's been post-processed to all hell. joat mon posted:A video game? EightBit posted:My thoughts exactly. Lightbulb Out posted:I don't think it's a video game. It's just neat that it's shot from the drivers side of a car in tandem. EightBit posted:That image is missing any and all glare. I don't think you'd be able to clearly see the driver with the reflection that should be coming off of the windshield. Zlatan Imhobitch posted:Isn't it shot from the RSR supra which is RHD? Then just a polariser for windscreen reflections. West SAAB Story posted:LO, Get your prescription checked. Puddin posted:Is that from Project C.A.R.S? It was taken at Irwindale Speedway, and Zlatan posted the key pieces of information that y'all are apparently lacking. http://vaughngittin.com/gallery/?album=12&gallery=101 I'm sure it's heavily post-processed, but still, y'all are pretty dumb. Here's another screenshot from Forza: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 18:57
|
|
|
So it is a photo of a drifting car taken from another drifting car which looks exactly like a photo of a drifting car taken from another drifting car, Krakkles? In that case, what the gently caress is there to "realize" about "where [it was taken] from"? I think people were confused because they couldn't see how anyone would (for even a second) not see this, and assumed (based on your spoiler text) there must be something more going on with the picture. Their mistake was that in their rush to examine the posted photo, they forgot to examine the photo's poster. Also, spoiler tag misuse is gonna get that poo poo removed again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
emf posted:So it is a photo of a drifting car taken from another drifting car which looks exactly like a photo of a drifting car taken from another drifting car, Krakkles? In that case, what the gently caress is there to "realize" about "where [it was taken] from"? I think people were confused because they couldn't see how anyone would (for even a second) not see this, and assumed (based on your spoiler text) there must be something more going on with the picture. And How about instead of trying to get a sweet burn, you post some awesome AI car poo poo?  DON'T WORRY GUYS, I DON'T HAVE ANY OPINION ABOUT WHERE THIS WAS TAKEN FROM. IT MIGHT BE FROM A VIDEO GAME, I DON'T KNOW. Krakkles fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Feb 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 20:36
|
|
|
Krakkles posted:When I first saw the photo, I didn't notice the lower left edge where the other car is visible. But yes, you're right, I'm a huge human being and I should just stop posting. Thanks for pointing that out. Relax my man. Take a walk outside. We're all friends here, until you call us all collectively stupid.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 20:43
|
|
|
It just feels like we've been together too long, and been through too much for me to just say "Shut the gently caress up, Krakkles." You know I love you. edit: VVV = It was supposed to just be a sweet burn about how you used to be a really terrible poster, but it came off shittier and meaner than that. My bad. I was just gonna say "Shut the gently caress up Krakkles" but I thought that would be taken the wrong way. Oh well. Again, my bad. And ... shut the gently caress up, Krakkles. emf fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Feb 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 20:48
|
|
|
Bob NewSCART posted:Relax my man. Take a walk outside. We're all friends here, until you call us all collectively stupid. I said that people who assume a well-taken and fairly well post-processed photograph is from a videogame (and take it to the point of telling someone to get their eyes checked) because "a reflection should be coming off the windshield" are pretty dumb. The displeasure you're thinking you see is because emf thought it would be clever to try to get a sweet burn in about how I'm a terrible poster, because I happened to use a spoiler tag (which I would maintain wasn't incorrect - I realized something about the photo after looking at it a second time, and I was attempting to preserve that for other people by spoiling what I was pointing out ... which emf thinks makes me stupid or something I guess because I didn't realize it right away) and thought that a cool picture was worth posting in this thread.  I'm going to keep posting pictures because I like looking at cars, but if you guys want to keep talking about my posting, I'm cool with it. emf posted:It just feels like we've been together too long, and been through too much for me to just say "Shut the gently caress up, Krakkles." You know I love you. Sorry, guys, this is a bike, not a car. Please don't be too mad, ok? 
Krakkles fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Feb 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 20:49
|
|
|
Edit out the word f** so you don't get probated in these sensitive forums!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 20:50
|
|
|
Woah, it's really not nice to call yourself something like that because there's nothing wrong with being that and it shouldn't be insulting. for content and to end the derail: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 20:55
|
|
|
Everyone shutup and look at this thing. Just popped up on my Facebook feed from Top Gear. http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/bugatti-veyron-volkswagen-beetle-render-2013-02-07
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 20:59
|
|
|
emf posted:...  rcman50166 posted:Everyone shutup and look at this thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 21:02
|
|
|
That Bugatti-Beetle thing is pretty awesome 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 21:29
|
|
|
A good mate of mine is working at the Liqui-Moly Bathurst 12 hour this weekend, pit crew for the Aston Martin St. Gallen team. They're racing a Vantage GT4, seen here having just had new front rotors in the pits.  This morning he posted this picture to the Facebooks.  Aston Martin One-77. Apparently it has the most powerful naturally aspirated production engine in the world; I don't know about that, but it does have seven hundred and fifty horsepower. edit: you can stream the event here: http://new.livestream.com/itvl/bathurst12hour Memento fucked around with this message at 02:02 on Feb 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2013 01:45
|
|
|
Astons always look like they're about to turn into submarines
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2013 01:47
|
|
|
Makes sense when they've been sporting the filter feeder look longer than anyone else. The 177's V12 is a monster, but I wonder how it would fare against the SRT Viper's V10 if they were placed in identical vehicles. While it has a clear horsepower advantage, the pushrod has more torque, which is available throughout most of its rpm range.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2013 02:04
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:How do you even mount an engine like that without shaking the foundation apart? I can't imagine an inline 14 is well balanced. The way I understand it, any inline 4 stroke engine with an even number of more than 4 cylinders is perfectly balanced, because the movement of each piston is perfectly offset by another piston. You need more than 4 because of the 4 strokes of the combustion cycle each piston can only fire once every 720* of crank rotation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2013 02:11
|
|
|
Tekne posted:Makes sense when they've been sporting the filter feeder look longer than anyone else. Who knows how fast the 177 actually is? Has it ever been tested or driven in anger by anyone? I think they could probably wring more power out of the viper engine if they wanted to, but the Viper already has bigger tires than a Veyron, on a RWD car with a conventional manual transmission I think you're hitting limits other than the engine. I think the horsepower figure on the Aston is more bragging than actually useful, it is like $2 million dollar or whatever car.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2013 02:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 23:33 |
|
|
86 Notch 2500lbs HRE wheels Inboard cantilever formula style coilovers. DOHC 5.0L aluminum v8 with a vortech JT trim, and nitrous. Apparently from friends at SEMA it isn't exactly finished yet.  http://www.speedhunters.com/2013/01/rollin-in-my-5-0-the-fox-redefined/
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2013 02:19
|
|