Can The Ultimate Ferrari Have a V8?

[roosterjuicer]

Ferrari has made wonderful 4 and 6 cylinders too.

I dunno if i would go so far as to say the 6cylinders were wonderful...mediocre at best perhaps.

out of curiosity what 4cylinders did they make?

[henk4]

I dunno if i would go so far as to say the 6cylinders were wonderful...mediocre at best perhaps.

out of curiosity what 4cylinders did they make?

500TRC, 500 F2, 625 TRC, 750 Monza, 860.....

and you obviously know little about the 6 cylinders too. (ever heard of the Dino engine or were you referring to the 118/121 LM)

[roosterjuicer]

500TRC, 500 F2, 625 TRC, 750 Monza, 860.....

and you obviously know little about the 6 cylinders too. (ever heard of the Dino engine or were you referring to the 118/121 LM)

a 180-200 horsepower engine was nothing to be proud of in the late 60's and early 70's.

I know about Dino's, they werent that great at all. I hear there was a joke at the time that basically said that Dino's got Dino badges, not ferarri badges because they they were so slow that they didn't deserve Ferrari badges.


(before you start being all snooty i know he named dino's after his son who died but the joke makes a valid point)

[henk4]

a 180-200 horsepower engine was nothing to be proud of in the late 60's and early 70's.

tell that to the then owners of a Porsche 911S.

[Ferrer]

a 180-200 horsepower engine was nothing to be proud of in the late 60's and early 70's.

I know about Dino's, they werent that great at all. I hear there was a joke at the time that basically said that Dino's got Dino badges, not ferarri badges because they they were so slow that they didn't deserve Ferrari badges.


(before you start being all snooty i know he named dino's after his son who died but the joke makes a valid point)

Despite agreeing with you (no six in a Ferrari, thank you) it was precisely Dino's V6 engine that gave Ferrari its first World Constructors Championship in F1.

[roosterjuicer]

was it the same exact motor though? and either way, i thought we were talking about production cars.

also, i never really gave my take to the question at hand...I think its a good question. because i believe the f40 is the ultimate ferarri but a lot of people associate v12's with ferrari. I remember when i was a little kid and i didn't know much about cars i asked my dad, "why does an f40 only have a v8?" for some reason it doesn't have the same cachet as a v12 does. so my ultimate answer to the ultimate question...yes, the ultimate ferrari has to have a v12.

[Wouter Melissen]

was it the same exact motor though? and either way, i thought we were talking about production cars.

Yes it was.

[LeonOfTheDead]

was it the same exact motor though? and either way, i thought we were talking about production cars.

also, i never really gave my take to the question at hand...I think its a good question. because i believe the f40 is the ultimate ferarri but a lot of people associate v12's with ferrari. I remember when i was a little kid and i didn't know much about cars i asked my dad, "why does an f40 only have a v8?" for some reason it doesn't have the same cachet as a v12 does. so my ultimate answer to the ultimate question...yes, the ultimate ferrari has to have a v12.

obviously, when you are a little kid, the most important thing is the bigger number you can have.
for as regards me, the ultimate Ferrari, as for any other sueprcar, it doesn't matter how much cylinders it has, it just need to be fast, sharp, lightweight, beautiful to look at and with an awesome sound, and for the lasr reason, I have to say I usually like V8's sound, apart from that of the BMW V12 of the McLaren F1

[jump15vc]

obviously the F2008 is the fastest and most technologically advanced Ferrari but the fact that it has a V8 has more to do with F1 regulations stipulating that all cars must run a 2.4L V8. The FXX does have a V12 but its not very pretty, something that the ultimate Ferrari would have to be in my book. The F40 is both good looking and has a V8 in addition to being a tremendous automobile so thats my ultimate Ferrari. But who knows; when the enzo replacement drops in a few years it could have a V12 and be amazing and make this thread irrelevant, or it could have a V8 or V10 and validate the argument, either way i cant wait

[LeonOfTheDead]

obviously the F2008 is the fastest and most technologically advanced Ferrari but the fact that it has a V8 has more to do with F1 regulations stipulating that all cars must run a 2.4L V8. The FXX does have a V12 but its not very pretty, something that the ultimate Ferrari would have to be in my book. The F40 is both good looking and has a V8 in addition to being a tremendous automobile so thats my ultimate Ferrari. But who knows; when the enzo replacement drops in a few years it could have a V12 and be amazing and make this thread irrelevant, or it could have a V8 or V10 and validate the argument, either way i cant wait

the number of cylinders, in a petrol engine, is strictly connected to the displacement because of the combustion process that require a relatively small volume per each cylinder. ideally speaking, the more cylinders you have, the more power you can obtain, but it's just a mathematical calculation, obviously more cylinders means also more frictions, but if you could reduce frictions, a V12 1.6 liter engine could be as powerful as a one cylinder with a displacement of 5.5 liter, for example...

[jump15vc]

the number of cylinders, in a petrol engine, is strictly connected to the displacement because of the combustion process that require a relatively small volume per each cylinder. ideally speaking, the more cylinders you have, the more power you can obtain, but it's just a mathematical calculation, obviously more cylinders means also more frictions, but if you could reduce frictions, a V12 1.6 liter engine could be as powerful as a one cylinder with a displacement of 5.5 liter, for example...

i was merely noting that F1 cars are running 2.4L V8's because they have to. I wasn't making any point about the technological advantages of either a V8 or V12, so i'm not sure what point your trying to make?

[LeonOfTheDead]

i was merely noting that F1 cars are running 2.4L V8's because they have to. I wasn't making any point about the technological advantages of either a V8 or V12, so i'm not sure what point your trying to make?

I quoted you yes, but I didn't mean to criticize it. sprry if yot got it in that way.
The fact that F1 is using a certain displacement and numbers of cylinders isn't relevant when talking of production cars. for example, a F1 engine use a bore/stroke ratio of 0.4 while a quite aggressive engine like that of the 4.0 V8 of the M3 is higher than 0.8, and a common car have a ration between 1 and 1.1.
They are using 2.4 liter engine with 8 cylinders for mainly two reasons: they were quite simple to make using the same fluid dynamics of the old V10 3 liters, and "simply" balancing the new inertia forces developed by the smaller number of cylinders, and then because, in the very particular world of F1 engines, a 0.3 liter displacement per each cylinder is working very well since almost 20 years I would say.
but in a road car such calculations can no longer be applied, so, even if it sounds quite obvious for a car enthusiast to connect the engines used in F1 to that of the top of the line Ferrari, is silly, because they are such different machines, even more now with the problems of the levels of pollutant emissions.

[f6fhellcat13]

the number of cylinders, in a petrol engine, is strictly connected to the displacement because of the combustion process that require a relatively small volume per each cylinder. ideally speaking, the more cylinders you have, the more power you can obtain, but it's just a mathematical calculation, obviously more cylinders means also more frictions, but if you could reduce frictions, a V12 1.6 liter engine could be as powerful as a one cylinder with a displacement of 5.5 liter, for example...

The 1c engine would have oodles more torque than the 12c, ehich is why, along with complexity issues, all cars are not H296s or V7834s
EDIT: also having an engine that is severly oversquare,like an f1 engine, makes massive power but again, not much torque.

The Chrysler Slant-6, in the most common 225 cubic inch (3.7 L) version, is a massively undersquare engine with a 3.40" (86 mm) bore and a 4.125" (105 mm) stroke, producing most of its power right on the peak of its torque curve. The achilles heel of this engine, otherwise known for its exceptional durability, is being over-revved by inexperienced drivers. Red line for a factory engine is under 4,500 rpm; red line with aftermarket connecting rods is about 5,500 rpm. On the other hand, a well-maintained Slant-6 can be made to idle as low as 75 rpm (though this is *not* a recommended speed, neither the alternator nor the oil pump will function adequately). In some circles, the Slant-6 is nicknamed "The Stump-Puller" for its diesel-like low-speed torque. Appropriate gearing and driving skill is required for performance use.

[LeonOfTheDead]

The 1c engine would have oodles more torque than the 12c, ehich is why, along with complexity issues, all cars are not H296s or V7834s
EDIT: also having an engine that is severly oversquare,like an f1 engine, makes massive power but again, not much torque.

I can't decipher those "H296" and "V7834" codes...?
also, I can't see why a singular cylinder engine would have more torque. a bigger cylinder implies a lower volumetric efficiency, for example.
they have the same power=torque*rev, and th 12 cylinder should have a rev almost double that of the mono cylinder, even because that cylinder is going to be huge and heavy. so I'm not sure it would develop much torque. I would say it wouldn't work either.
the torque is connected to the pressure inside of the cylinder, the extension of the surface of the cylinder, and the length of the crank.
even if the surface of the cylinder it's higher, the pressure would be quite surely lower. the cylinder is already slower, and trying to reach a high compression ration would probably slow the cylinder too much the crank could be exactly the same.
maybe I messed up something, but I think it's all quite accurate, or, correct me if I'm wrong

..and another post almost off topic I guess

[fisetdavid26]

I can't decipher those "H296" and "V7834" codes...?

I think he was trying to exaggerate the number of cylinders of an engine, as to say V12 is better than V8, then V7834 > V12.