In what me and my teammate have discovered so far, anything above 400 HP tends to be about the same
when put around the track. It all comes down to tuning at that point. The most important aspect of the BRC 1100 class for us is the power band and weight balance.
This is the part where I make an extremely ballsy statement:
We also believe that our Super 1000 machine might be one of the fastest here. No pictures, no more details, we’re still excitedly working on things.
[quote=“RoninGT21”]Yeah, I hope so too. I just finished up my super 1000 car, and it is kind of pathetic in terms of an engine - 55kW =(
The rest is not bad.[/quote]
You should aim for 100+ kW to be competitive [/quote]
Yeah, I didn’t spend much time refining my tiny inline 4 engine… Hopefully time spent doing the rest paid off…
I was quick to submit my car and probably could have built something better given time but I’ll tell you what I found.
This afternoon is was messing around with the engine and built a 1.8L V8 Turbo for the BRC 1100 that put out 492kW (660hp) and 533Nm.
It wasn’t any faster than my 430kW (580hp) and 520Nm 1.8L I4 I submitted. I really is more about powerband and although a good engine can make your car a LOT quicker it’s not just about those peak stats, as demonstrated by my little example here.
From what I’ve seen so far, my 1000 machine should be at the higher end of the spectrum… whereas my 1100 machine is mediocre at best. I can’t seem to get better than 410 HP from my NA engines, and I apparently suck at making turbo engines, my MTBF is always way too low.
Yes, but 580hp from a 1.8L, your power band must look like a pencil stood on end surely?[/quote]
Maybe I’m being a complete idiot and showing just how little I know, but that doesn’t look very bad to me. Obvious massive turbo gap but it never really drops that low in revs.
To be honest, you are all wasting too much time on a semiofficial challenge in my humble opinion. My cars aren’t the best, but took me very little time to make. Pictures are below.
Is it right for me to be worried about my considerably lower power output than some of the stats already posted here, my vehicle seems to perform decent enough. But these 400-500hp stats are making my sub 400hp seem irrelevant.
This is the BRC1100 class i’m talking about by the way. NEED ADVICE plz [/quote]
if you have an NA engine then something in the 300s is good enough. However, if its a turbo engine with a narrow power band then you really do want over 400bhp to make up for the lack of driveability and lower tameness
edit
oh, there’s another page… i knew that
[quote=“DaMasK”]This afternoon is was messing around with the engine and built a 1.8L V8 Turbo for the BRC 1100 that put out 492kW (660hp) and 533Nm.
It wasn’t any faster than my 430kW (580hp) and 520Nm 1.8L I4 I submitted. I really is more about powerband and although a good engine can make your car a LOT quicker it’s not just about those peak stats, as demonstrated by my little example here.[/quote]
I found the same thing. My 681bhp engine was actually slower than the engine I entered which had considerably less power
I broke 400 hp with my 1100 engine fairly easily, but it did stop rather abruptly after that. My 1000 engine is sub-100kW range with just over 115hp. I agree balance of weight is key in both classes, and cornering…and responsiveness!
My NA V8FP was making 450-460 HP, while the submitted I6T was pushing 557 HP. Honestly, the biggest issue for speed is going to be which car body you chose, hence why I believe the body I have used for both classes is the best… so long as the competition doesn’t allow bigger than 275 mm fronts and 285 mm rears. Weight balance was not much of an issue for me at all either so long as you keep in mind the balance of aero for each end to allow the best cornering without using too much downforce to lower speed by an extreme. There is also a point where more downforce from the undertray actually does NOTHING to corner better, but WILL slow your top speed by up to 1-2 mph.
What I can say is that I believe that I have figured out the optimal suspension setup for the car body I use in basically every situation, ignoring the car weight and weight distribution, at least for an overall setup. </ >
[quote=“OCAdam”]My NA V8FP was making 450-460 HP, while the submitted I6T was pushing 557 HP. Honestly, the biggest issue for speed is going to be which car body you chose, hence why I believe the body I have used for both classes is the best… so long as the competition doesn’t allow bigger than 275 mm fronts and 285 mm rears. Weight balance was not much of an issue for me at all either so long as you keep in mind the balance of aero for each end to allow the best cornering without using too much downforce to lower speed by an extreme. There is also a point where more downforce from the undertray actually does NOTHING to corner better, but WILL slow your top speed by up to 1-2 mph.
What I can say is that I believe that I have figured out the optimal suspension setup for the car body I use in basically every situation, ignoring the car weight and weight distribution, at least for an overall setup. </ >[/quote]
You do realize 265mm is the maximum width for both front and back tires, right?
Yes, which is why said car body is good for the challenge. What I was meaning was if there was a competition that allowed LARGER than those two widths that my car body might become a bit less useful.
In most cases, actually it’s less a factor than just a good setup. I found a lot of times where the ratio was worse, but the times were much better. There is a certain point, of course, where it’s too far and times start to increase.
[/quote]
[/quote]
>
