BRC 1976 - Under Pressure [E8-Q]

That’s even a small engine by aviation standards; the Pratt and Whitney R-4360 radial engine from late WWII had a displacement of 71.4 litres, and made up to 3800 horsepower (and one version that never flew that produced 4300).

For those with a love of technical specs, the R-4360 was a fuel-injected, supercharged, 28-cylinder air-cooled radial engine (with four rows of seven cylinders each) and weighed 3670 pounds (1665 kilograms). Also its specific fuel consumption was 261.5 grams/kilowatt-hour of fuel and, interestingly enough, 14.7 grams/kilowatt-hour of oil.

But we’re getting seriously off-topic now… :wink:

3 Likes

that’s freakishly low O_O. especially for that time

Love that engine.

It was a high altitude bomber / transport engine. Used on aircraft like the Convair B-36, Hughes H-4 Hercules (commonly known as the “Spruce Goose”), Boeing B-50 Superfortress and the Fairchild C-119 Flying Boxcar, oh and the Guppy line of aircraft. It’s huge, and used small amounts of fuel, but it used 115/145 Aviation Gasoline, which is potent stuff. Good engines, but… Piston engines become more and more complex the larger you make them, and thus harder to service and more unreliable, and this was the main reason they use turboprops instead of large piston engines.

Though personally, I prefer a large turboprop like the NK-12, which has an output of 11,033kW at 219 grams/kW hr of fuel (source was wikipedia, don’t quote). It’s only 2900kg dry as well…

The R-4360 was also used in a low altitude interceptor version of the F4U Corsair called F2G.

#[color=#ffee00]Race 4 P&Q[/color]

Here are the results for the preparation sessions of race 4 at the Hockenheimring. Don’t forget to adapt your race strategy if necessary. You have at least until Sunday, October 2, 6 p.m.

BRC_Statistics.zip (120.0 KB)

5 Likes

As of 1:08pm CST (GMT -6) still processing

So, my car is the only one with fuel left after 20 laps, in the Top 25?
I like where this is going. :wink:

4 Likes

Could have qualified better, but feeling confident about this one. And as long as that rain doesn’t vary too much, it should be a one stop race.

I hate you :stuck_out_tongue:

I ran out of fuel on last corner of last lap…so close :smiley: one stop it is…Just hope for no weather spikes.

I ran out ON the finish line :wink:

But, for the fact that my car is based off of a car that was built for just this track - I suck. Did expect at least low 10’s in qualifying.

Your lap times haven’t kept up as well as elsewhere though. 10 extra laps on fuel is great, but if they’re 4 seconds off pace it might become an issue.

What really stings is that my car was faster than Bob’s in the dry. I might have gotten a qualifying point in better conditions. Oh well. It’ll be an interesting race to watch, that’s for sure.

Oh snap, I might manage a two stop race… It’s risky, but it’s an option. @Der_Bayer, do I understand correctly that fuel consumption in the rain is likely to be lower because the drivers have to hold off on gas? Not accounting for drafting and such of course.

If i lose 4 seconds after 66% of the race without a pitstop, that’s ok with me, because i won’t be driving that long anyway.
But driving with a light fueltank is appealing to me. :stuck_out_tongue:

And i just noticed, that the tire wear in the qualifying was way worse than in practice.
Kind if strange. Full fueltank, dry with slicks, higher speed … and less tire wear?

Rain means more wheelspin and possibly more brake lockups…

“wheelspin” again … tired of that argument …
There is a thing called “throttle” in the car. Even wet F1 tires wear less in hard rain, than the hardest slicks do in the dry. And they do not have traction control either. :wink:
I would expect, that the driver learns the track and grip situations in the different braking zones and corners, and almost never get any wheelspin after the first 2-3 laps.

And a spinning wheel on a wet track does hurt the tire WAY less than in the dry.

I’d really like to see double digits after a coma for the tire wear, to see where it actually wears tires. Atfer 2 straights 2% tire wear? Wtf? Sounds like one long burnout. :stuck_out_tongue:

Edit: ok after a rewatch.
out of the pits in quali - first straight and braking for very first chicane -> BAEM 1% tire wear.
But that seems to be an issue when driving out of the pits, because the flying lap has lower wear.

Well, let’s hope it’s not worse than 1.5% per lap. :slight_smile:

2 Likes

Surprised to see my car in the top 10 here, I guess it still has enough corners for the aero to pay off.

@HowlerAutomotive also tempted to try a 2 stop strat, although I have a slightly larger tank than you with the same consumption. If you want to see the effect the wet track has on consumption compare Diepholz practice with actual usage (watch a lap and see how much you used).

I just heard possibly the longest turbo blow-off valve noise ever. It must have lasted 5 seconds. it came from a toyota 86. (not on the internet, when i was walking my dog.)

^ Objection, relevance.

2 Likes

Makes good sense. Though I’d say it’s not just the lighter car, but also the shorter time you spend refueling. Probably earned me four points last race, that did.

Yeah, I’m going to be cutting it pretty close to the wire. At least considering the length of a lap on Hockenheim.