isn't the LX8 only on hold?
MRT6 was never intended for release (at least to my knowledge). LX8 was going to be, and I hope still will be, released.
Here are the FSAE rules: http://www.sae.org/students/fsaerules.pdf
As you can see, no rules that prohibit the use of wings, only some rules that say how big they are allowed to be.
As you can see, no rules that prohibit the use of wings, only some rules that say how big they are allowed to be.
Might be a nice idea to check the McGill Racing Team website as well 
Ok. Wings are allowed in FSAE. Many teams use them, especially many aussie teams. Yes they have to be really big to have an effect. Even this effect has to be proven.
The mrt5 has such a small turbo because of the less air our engines are allowed to intake. The max air intake in FSAE is 20mm in diameter - so the turbo's don't get enough air... I'm not an egine specialist in our team, so thats all i know. Theoretical 95hp are possible using an air intake of these 20mm in diameter, we do have about 85hp - which is a very good result. And of course without turbo. It's so more driveable on autocross circuits then the mrt5 
Greets,
Warper
www.lionsracing.de
The mrt5 has such a small turbo because of the less air our engines are allowed to intake.
The max air intake in FSAE is 20mm in diameter - so the turbo's don't get enough air... I'm not an egine specialist in our team, so thats all i know. Theoretical 95hp are possible using an air intake of these 20mm in diameter, we do have about 85hp - which is a very good result. And of course without turbo. It's so more driveable on autocross circuits then the mrt5 Greets,
Warper
www.lionsracing.de
I love rumours, especially from hackers.
He's not a hacker...apparently.
i've seen spoilers on FSAE cars on the videos mcgill has on their website
and like warper said about them having to be large... they HAVE to be LARGE lol, its almost rediculous looking how large they have to be; but i dont think they are really needed, how fast do those things even go during races? (which.. since its autocross that would probably be a top speed for the track rather than average) im sure you wouldnt be able to take those turns any better with downforce; i would think they are to sharp
and like warper said about them having to be large... they HAVE to be LARGE lol, its almost rediculous looking how large they have to be; but i dont think they are really needed, how fast do those things even go during races? (which.. since its autocross that would probably be a top speed for the track rather than average) im sure you wouldnt be able to take those turns any better with downforce; i would think they are to sharp
Adding a large wing would definitly make the MRT6 slower going straight though, because of the drag and all!
Well, the McGill Team explained why on their website but all i can find now is this small comment:
" The main objectives were to increase horsepower and torque by installing a turbo and fix many
small flaws the previous model had including differential, suspension and shifter problems."
I remember reading how they had to de-tune the engine to make it more usefull, it IS (was) a
high-revving motorcycle engine. They lowered the redline and peak power rpms considerably and
added a turbo to get some of the lost power back. A small turbo producing little boost should
have a quick spool up time and help torque as well as bhp. That LFS has issues replicating turbo
behavior is another thing.
Topspeed in FSAE: The rules say that the longest allowed straight is 75m. But if the you use the complete distance you have to build a relatively tight corner in front of and behind the straight. But nonetheless you can reach 120km/h with a nice FSAE car. But fast corners are very rare - so we say the same: The only downforce of these spoilers is there weight
DE-Tuning: Yes thats right, to build a nice FSAE car you have to de-tune the engine - we are even working on another camshaft - but exactly to get the opposite effect of normal tuning. We use a suzuki GSX-R 600 engine. In the motorcycle it had about 120hp, but because of the small intake diameter as i said, we do have about 85hp. But very important is, that we concentrated on a nice tourqe development. We do have over 50 Nm from 5000 to 11000 1/min - with a maxtourqe of about 60 Nm. Thats really broad for this kind of engine. But so, it's very easy to drive - you can drive nearly the whole track in second gear.
Greets,
Warper
Sorry for bad english
DE-Tuning: Yes thats right, to build a nice FSAE car you have to de-tune the engine - we are even working on another camshaft - but exactly to get the opposite effect of normal tuning. We use a suzuki GSX-R 600 engine. In the motorcycle it had about 120hp, but because of the small intake diameter as i said, we do have about 85hp. But very important is, that we concentrated on a nice tourqe development. We do have over 50 Nm from 5000 to 11000 1/min - with a maxtourqe of about 60 Nm. Thats really broad for this kind of engine. But so, it's very easy to drive - you can drive nearly the whole track in second gear.
Greets,
Warper
Sorry for bad english
I am not on the class 1 team of my university's team (class 3 here), but they are tuning the engine, instead of de-tuning. They use a 1 cylinder engine, so maybe that is the difference.
A year ago they drove the 2004 car on a landing strip on a military airfield, and reached about 140kmh iirc. The strip was built of large (3 by 3 meter) concrete plates, with considerable bumps, causing the car to get all four wheels off the ground at some moments...
BTW, who is going to England this year? I'll be there from the wednesday before the race weekend.
can someone explain to me what exactly de-tuning an engine is.. or is it what it sounds like; just lowering the output of the engine? dunno why you would want to do that but.. owell
as for a 1 cylinder engine.. we have one out back; its a lister too
if anyone wants to buy it, we will sell it as cheap as 5$ i believe.. but.. thing is you have to pick it up
oh.. just a little FYI.. it weighs as much as our john deere tractor down here lol (2+ tons afaik)
as for a 1 cylinder engine.. we have one out back; its a lister too
if anyone wants to buy it, we will sell it as cheap as 5$ i believe.. but.. thing is you have to pick it up
oh.. just a little FYI.. it weighs as much as our john deere tractor down here lol (2+ tons afaik)
Right...well I work on the Formula Student team at my university (University of Birmingham - UK) and more specifically the engine group.
With regards to wings...yes they are allowed, but it's very difficult to validate their usefullness. A BIG thing about the FSAE competition is you have to be able to tell the judges why you chose to do something a certain way. This usually means test data of some kind, or measurements that have been made. Proving wings are usefull is therefore very hard as it requires lots of expensive wind tunnel time and testing which is something very few FSAE teams have. Due to the low speeds you usually have to have very high angle wings which are heavy and produce a lot of drag. In the dry there is very little difference between a winged car and a non winged car. In the wet however, those with downforce are significantly quicker. What a few teams are starting to do now is to develop splitters and diffusers to help underbody flow. I personally think these are the nicest solution to downforce on an FSAE car.
Engine wise....we are hugely limited by the rules. A 20mm restrictor has to be placed BEHIND the throttle. This is the absolute worse case scenario when it comes to restrictors. Turbos are very difficult to add to this system as when the throttle is shut the turbo keeps spinning. It generates a huge vacuum in the air plenum and as we found out, tends to do things like suck the oil out of the bearings in the turbo. Normally the way round this is to have a huge air box which results in a large reservoir of air. In most motorsport where the restrictor is placed before the throttle(s) this is OK. However, when the restrictor is after the throttles you have all kinds of problems. If you have a a big airbox after the throttle, there are big issues with lag. If you imagine that every time the throttle is opened or closed the engine has to use all the air in the airbox first before the effect of the throttle is felt then you can see what I mean. Obviously maxiumum power and torque will increase slightly, due to the turbo, but at the expense of drivability. Because of the restrictor, max power is physically limited to around 80-90bhp and therefore torque becomes much more of a desirable characteristic. This is why there is an increasing move towards single cylinder endurance bike engines of a smaller capacity than the max 610cc. One paricular Honda engine we are looking at can be increased to 490cc with a power of maybe half the R6 engine but will have probably double the torque.
So...turbos are fun to do, and will give better bench results, but they're not that good in a FSAE car due to terrible throttle lag. There have been ways round it in the past, but the loop holes have been closed now. They included pourous airboxes and taking air from the crankcase breather last year I think it was fairly obvious there was 'cheating' going on when some teams had engines producing more than the theoretical maximum!
With regards to wings...yes they are allowed, but it's very difficult to validate their usefullness. A BIG thing about the FSAE competition is you have to be able to tell the judges why you chose to do something a certain way. This usually means test data of some kind, or measurements that have been made. Proving wings are usefull is therefore very hard as it requires lots of expensive wind tunnel time and testing which is something very few FSAE teams have. Due to the low speeds you usually have to have very high angle wings which are heavy and produce a lot of drag. In the dry there is very little difference between a winged car and a non winged car. In the wet however, those with downforce are significantly quicker. What a few teams are starting to do now is to develop splitters and diffusers to help underbody flow. I personally think these are the nicest solution to downforce on an FSAE car.
Engine wise....we are hugely limited by the rules. A 20mm restrictor has to be placed BEHIND the throttle. This is the absolute worse case scenario when it comes to restrictors. Turbos are very difficult to add to this system as when the throttle is shut the turbo keeps spinning. It generates a huge vacuum in the air plenum and as we found out, tends to do things like suck the oil out of the bearings in the turbo. Normally the way round this is to have a huge air box which results in a large reservoir of air. In most motorsport where the restrictor is placed before the throttle(s) this is OK. However, when the restrictor is after the throttles you have all kinds of problems. If you have a a big airbox after the throttle, there are big issues with lag. If you imagine that every time the throttle is opened or closed the engine has to use all the air in the airbox first before the effect of the throttle is felt then you can see what I mean. Obviously maxiumum power and torque will increase slightly, due to the turbo, but at the expense of drivability. Because of the restrictor, max power is physically limited to around 80-90bhp and therefore torque becomes much more of a desirable characteristic. This is why there is an increasing move towards single cylinder endurance bike engines of a smaller capacity than the max 610cc. One paricular Honda engine we are looking at can be increased to 490cc with a power of maybe half the R6 engine but will have probably double the torque.
So...turbos are fun to do, and will give better bench results, but they're not that good in a FSAE car due to terrible throttle lag. There have been ways round it in the past, but the loop holes have been closed now. They included pourous airboxes and taking air from the crankcase breather last year
I think it was fairly obvious there was 'cheating' going on when some teams had engines producing more than the theoretical maximum!I personally wouldn't call it de-tuning as it's really just tuning the engine for a difference purpose :P
As I said though....max power is limited by the restrictor, so there is no point in going for high power as you can easily reach it. Therefore, the aim is to get as much torque as possible, so getting new cams made that are lower lift (so the opposite of VTEC if that makes sense) helps low and mid range torque. In an ideal world you'd want a totally flat, very high torque 'curve' from 0-14000rpm. This won't happen, but it's what we try and do.
And with the restricter the engine can't 'breathe' as well, making higher revs pointless (and harder to achieve). Thus the engine is detuned to work at upto 8000rpm rather than 14000rpm. I have an idea on how to gain a few hp on a restricted turbocharged engine for FSAE, but my uni rejected it saying it was too hard to do (it's not). So if someone wants a competative advantage send an SAE and a cheque for £50 to "Tristan Cliffe's Beer Fund, PO BOX LFS, England". Thanks.
Next year there will be a lot of changes to the engine rules, I believe it will become allowed to place the trottle behind the restrictor. There will also be some sort of alternative energy-source class.
My uni got one of your FSAE cars lol (i go to UCE)I would of liked to get involved in the FSAE but seems there only one guy to run it so hard to get anything done. Oh well.
We are going to bruntingthorpe this year again of course. And thanks Arosa for explaining what i tried to say without enough technical english knowledge
We will meet there right? Maybe we should talk about a little meeting? Maybe at 6 o'clock p.m. in front of the main marquee (where you get the food and the results on sunday) on saturday for example...
tristan, maybe it's not only the main part of your turbo idea but also the increasing effort to applique such an engine. A known idea is a really small turbo for the low rev's, to get some more torque at 2000-5000 rpm....
We will meet there right? Maybe we should talk about a little meeting?
Maybe at 6 o'clock p.m. in front of the main marquee (where you get the food and the results on sunday) on saturday for example... tristan, maybe it's not only the main part of your turbo idea but also the increasing effort to applique such an engine. A known idea is a really small turbo for the low rev's, to get some more torque at 2000-5000 rpm....
Yeah...sounds like a plan
I may not be at one of the days as I have work commitments 
Could be the Sat too, but we'll see. I'll PM you next week or something. I'm supposed to be going with the team, although I haven't done an aweful lot this year as I'm 'only' 2nd year. I have a few project possibilities lined up next year, so I should be more involved in it again (the level of involvement increases with each year).Greboth - Yeah....I remember that we have one at UCE now. If you want to get a team started at your Uni, just try and get 10-20 people interested and a member of staff and write a proposal to your head of dept. That's how ours got started, and as long as you all put in the hours it'll get the whole thing running
It's hard work, but lots of fun I don't know what is the best solution (more power or wings), but I think it's a pity the MRT is not event the best car in LFS in its own speciality : autocross.
Most of the time, even in the twistiest layouts, the MRT is smoked by the FOX and in a lesser extent, by the UFR. This car is useless except in monotype races.
Most of the time, even in the twistiest layouts, the MRT is smoked by the FOX and in a lesser extent, by the UFR. This car is useless except in monotype races.
You must be joking!!! MRT is always the quickets at autocross.... or you must be playing layouts that aren't true layouts. (ie Too long of straights, simple easy layouts with no tight sections, etc).
Play ones with incredibly tight hairpins and narrow areas.... the FOX or UFR would never beat the MRT.
I always see people using the bigger cars trying to get faster times, and then they are surprised to see me beat all their times with the MRT by seconds!!!! MRT takes a lot of skill, a good setup, and a true autocross course to show its potential, it is very fast.
MRT in S2 is very tricky to drive
Maybe with your setup is easier
Where can I try a good one?show me a layout where it applies. We race in regular "slalom" using the french regulations of the real champs and the FOX is the ultimate car.
The MRT narrow tires just haven't enough grip in comparison.
The MRT narrow tires just haven't enough grip in comparison.
1
2
Where is the "MRT6" ?
(50 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG