Robin Shute explains how his next Pikes Peak racer will be powered
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 лют 2025
- 4x Pikes Peak International Hill Climb winner, Robin Shute goes into detail explaining why he thinks an Internal Combustion engine will be the fastest way to go up the Mountain.
The new racer is being created with the intent to go and break the overall record at the Pikes Peak mountain. This is a multi-part series going into the design, engineering and building details, sharing with us what it takes to make what could be the fastest race car ever to exist on a circuit or hill climb.
Huge thank you to Airshaper for supporting this project! Aerodynamic simulation made easy:
airshaper.com/
and also:
Alcon Brakes
www.alcon.co.uk/
Mountune USA
mountuneusa.com/
BorgWarner Turbos
www.borgwarner....
Motorsports Electronics
www.motorsport...
Sadev Transmissions
www.sadev-tm.com/
A conversation we had with quite a lot of people so far, to their incredulity in many cases, but happy to see someone with such credentials backing it up 👊
I first heard about the Sendy Club from Supserfast Matt's video on Pikes Peak racing. Then this video came up in my recommendation, piqued my interest, loved listening to this video. I am just a casual motorcycle trackday guy, but I do love reading and watching stuff about engineering that goes behind motorsports. Pikes peak is definitely on my bucket list to visit.
Brilliant proper nerdy engineering by someone who really knows his stuff and just explains without hyperbole. Wishing I was in the TSC.
So glad this channel got recommended to me, a rare good recommendation from the algorithm
This sort of unique insight is an amazing privilege, love to see everything you all are doing.
VERY excited to hear Robin's thoughts on powertrains. The fastest man on the mountain must have figured a lot of this out.
I’m excited to see more of this projects. Thanks for the deep dive info
really happy to hear the breakdown of ev vs ice. I didn't really realize how quarter mile times don't translate to track and hillclimb performance. really appreciate your breakdown of design choices overall as well.
Turbo rocket antilag! Excellent front electric AWD! Excellent!!
Can't wait for more engineering details.
Great video, keep giving us technical insight into the developmental decisions you're taking, there's nothing like this on youtube!
Thank you for sharing your thought process. Very high quality
Great stuff! I'm looking forward to the series. You and the TSC team are heroes to grassroots racers everywhere. Keep up the good work! 👍
I am so looking forward to the whole series!
I like the fact u don't agree with 61. You are such an honest person who shares not just some bits of knowledge always available everywhere but also nearly all your experiences which are impossible to get. I feel you share so much and this is why you get championed by your people.
Please keep up with that kind of content, in a few minutes you explained what usualy take people years to learn
I can't believe one of the most successful teams in Pikes Peak is here talking us through how he develops the car. What a time we live in! When you were talking about trying to make an ICE almost act like an EV or a hybrid, was a CVT transmission considered? A CVT was the first thing that came to my mind when it came to having a broad powerband at the wheels, since theoretically you can always keep the engine RPM at its ideal range. Would love to know your thoughts on this
i think the answer lies in "engineering vs tech": buying a ready to use racing cvt to my knowledge is a no go so i don't think we would be hearing the v8 ripping at 8k the whole way
@@vercingetorige400 I see. No one did play with racing CVTs after the one with Williams. I also forgot he said exactly that at the start haha.
@@vercingetorige400 Correct, I don't know of a CVT that would fit the bill. Something too satisfying about a sequential shift also...
I nearly cheered out loud and woke my family at 8min when you said you hate the quoted big EV torque numbers. Diesel people do this all the time too and coming from a rural area I cannot tell you how many times I’ve had to explain to people that the main reason diesel powertrains have ever made sense is because of their efficiency, NOT because there’s something inherently special about the torque characteristics and how they relate to towing, or *barf* “going through walls”
To be fair to diesels the Jetta TDi I had drove really nicely despite the relatively low 109 hp it had.
There's the old saying that people buy hp but drive torque. It's a vast oversimplification but the thing that made that Jetta a good road car was the pretty much flat power curve. Unlike a gas car you basically had 109 hp under your right foot anywhere you'd normally be in the rev range. A gas car with similar hp would need to be revved out to get the rated power, putting your foot to the floor at 2000 rpm would probably get you half the rated hp. Horses for courses of course, it wasn't a fun back roads Sunday drive car but diesels aren't just about efficiency.
@@Surestick88 That's not a diesel vs gasoline comparison that you're making, you're making a turbo vs naturally aspirated comparison. Turbocharged gasoline engines are often capable of having superior torque output at any rpm, especially in racing (thanks to racing fuels). With engines like the Ford Ecoboost, they even tow better than diesels of similar displacement, while also operating in the same rpm range as the diesels.
@@Surestick88 one factor you are missing is the main reason for the increased efficiency is the fact that diesel fuel has 17% more calories by weight and the engine has very high compression ratio which increases the efficiency also it burns a lot slower increasing combustion volume at a steady rate.
The reasons diesels are torquey is because they generally come in pickup trucks, which means high duty cycle such that large capacity and slower speeds reduce wear. Drives me a bit nuts that people ascribe engine torque as necessary to tow a load. You could power a semi truck with a turbocharged K20 if you wanted, it just wouldn't last long at all before it explodes at that duty cycle.
@@neilmchardy9061the reason diesel is more efficient is fundamental to the operating cycle. The Diesel cycle is more efficient than the Otto cycle. The efficiency of the former is also dependant on the expansion ratio, not just compression.
Thank you. By taking me on your journey, sharing the results of your research and guiding me through your decision making process you have make a complex project an educational experience
I'm so glad you're making these videos! Go Sendy Club!
Hello Robin, I appreciate all of this, these conversations are very familiar to me (us), your engineering based frankness about EV, HEV and ICE was refreshing, just nice clinical truth, not that you're capable of anything else but please keep its up...oh and most importantly: Second car for me :D
Excellent analysis! Thanks!
Thank you Robin, very clear presentation. Beyond expressing thanks for 'bringing us all allong" I haven't an intelligent comment to make excecpt a commendment to you for making the only watchable 'VLOG' style content on the internet. 😂. Keep up the good work, both yourself and all the other sendy club folk.
12:59 And now I really want to see a torque vectored EV 'Wild Willy' it up Pike Peak...
You haven't mentioned the power fall off with altitude. This impacts the EV vs IC choice. I'm sure you thought about it but it does add another dimension to the trade off.
Additionally while an MGU-H is likely too complex and electrically assisted turbocharger may not be a bad choice. The E-turbo technology could open up possibilities for larger turbos that would support power at altitude but have unacceptable spool times. Super interesting design challenge!
You can fit a bigger turbo than you other wise would for sea level and underboost it for the lower half. The big about ev/hybrid that he didn’t mention is regenerative braking. For the first few corners you can’t do it but after that you can recover a lot of the energy in the braking zones.
EV power falls off as well due to reduced cooling availability. That said, pike's peak is a uniquely perfect race for - specifically - lithium batteries. It's hard to believe an ICE vehicle could be convincingly faster, but I supposed we'll find out.
@@andrewbrowning6357 I don't see why it's hard to believe. 919 Evo bitchslaps the ID.R everywhere
If battery tech continues to improve, then EV will overtake ICE, at least for short duration races.
I like the front hub motors idea. (I might of suggested that after video#1,???). I came up with an anti-lag idea once but have never tried it out.
Quite simply you inject water into the inlet manifold (just at the right time) it goes into the cylinder but won't turn to steam as the pressures are too high but once the exhaust valve opens (and the cylinder pressure drops) the water "explodes into steam" this massive increase in gas volumm spins up the turbo. On telling a mate about it he said SHIT YES. He used to rally a turbo Mazda and told me that a few times after going through a water spash the car would take off with uncontrolable power when a bit of water got sucked in the air-box. To the point were he once screwed off a turbo shaft becuase of it, then he worked out what was happening and corrected it.
Don't bother with running through the engine. spray the water into the exhaust manifold directly behind the turbo. A nice mist will flash boil it in the exhaust gasses.
Without doing the math, I expect this would be a net loss in terms of generating boost. Any energy that goes into vaporizing water will come from somewhere, and in this case, you're just cooling down the exhaust, which will decrease the performance. There might be a moderate increase in air density to make up some of the loss; it's been a while since I did the math for turbine performance and it probably will come down to the relative properties of exhaust vs. water vapor + exhaust. Water injection *can* be valuable in cooling charge air and letting you run higher boost/higher compression ratios without knock, but that's a different effect.
@@thecma3 exhaust gasses leave the turbo still at a few hundred degrees Celsius but at atmospheric pressure. Injecting water would be able to convert that heat into more gas volume for the turbo to use. It would be an anti-lag device to aid in spool-up.
With anti-knock water injection it is better to avoid the intake entirely and inject directly into the cylinders. That simplifies the tuning for water pressure/ droplet size.
injection into the manifold typically has drops too big to be entrained by the flow or too small to avoid vaporization before ingestion by the cylinder. The point of water injection is to let the heat of compression go into evaporating the water in-cylinder rather than igniting the fuel.
an electrically controlled direct water injection system could inject water during compression to prevent knock and during exhaust to increase gas volume for the turbo.
@@JaneDoe-dg1gv the exhaust is above atmospheric pressure; you have a drop in temperature and pressure from turbine inlet to outlet even in an ideal, isentropic turbine (and especially so in a real-world turbine). If you had no pressure gradient across the turbine, you wouldn't extract any useful work from the fluid.
@@JaneDoe-dg1gv True. But I just wondered about dealing with a super hot manifold and the heat then travelling up the water injector and the water feed pipe etc. It might want to boil long before it gets to the manifold????
Clear thinking. Thank you for the briefing
I found this interesting, and insightful. Thank you.
Have you considered a continual variable transmission? Like the 1984 Honda F1.
Possibly a way to get around having continual power.
Interesting video.
🇦🇺🤜🏼🤛🏼😎🍀☮️☮️☮️
I haven't actually. I don't know of any that have been reasonable developed for motorsport. I think it could have potential though!
The issue is having it survive high torque output for ten minutes
This is an ideal option: a cvt can make an IC engine almost electric in performance, even if the peak torque range is quite narrow. And perhaps even ordinary modern cvts can withstand about 8-10 minutes in a race.
@@s4hilgun they cannot withstand 600 ft lbs of torque for that long. The limit has been tested with the Subaru CVTs which are the most performance oriented CVTS from an OEM
@@Shadowboost Well, maybe it’s not so bad if we’re talking about something that weighs in the range of 500-600 kg. And there is always some possibility of improving the design, perhaps due to more suitable materials.
Amazing video, thank you for sharing your knowledge and experience. Suspension design is an importent component in the car behavior, but there are so much different setups, for caster, bump steer etc.. I am really curious to know what settings you chose and how you design them!
How about the system by British racer Nic Mann, he uses a small gas turbine off a helicopter generator to give a constant level of boost.i believe it’s called the mean beenie
Had to go and have a look into this, looks like it's called the Mannic Beattie, only a couple of seconds slower up Shelsey Walsh than the record set in a single seater Judd powered car!
@@nelsonglover3963to be fair, in a hill that's less than 25 seconds, 2 seconds is quite a lot. Still mega quick, but not really in the same vein
This got shared by Alex Summers on instagram - I will cover in the antilag video ;)
@@thesendyclub if you can afford ( technically it doesn't need to have the air-certificate's ect as it's land power and or not in a power-plant/hospital settings ) jet-power ie turboprop 2000hp out of a light GA application ( surplus hellys out of a bell and or Alison 300 as some other teams use them for tractor pulling and boat-races ect and there super light vs my e85/m100 dodge 540-hemi+TR6060 platform ) and add a ford-1-ton 10R140 + hybrid and or front-E_hub's and possible 4X4 as ford has a transfer-case/PTO-drive opportunity
jets losse less power than pistons at altitude and historically possible and almost won Indy ect the main problems was higher power and or bearing's/lubricants-70's~era and with the hemit teamsters in can-AM/le-mon's was lag but they were forced into using a gm400/727 style-transmission that didn't lock-TC and 2 to 4-gear's vs ford's newest 10-gearing ect and there now ( 1960's technology was way to heavyweight and lower reliability to be practical for hybrid's or BEV aka lead-acid chemistry isn't it ) battery's/capacitors that can be used for starters and torque-filling
The power and torque curves shown (at 5:39) are roughly realistic for typical production EV motor, controller, and battery systems... but not for the motor itself. The motor power will increase to some optimal point then drop again; the controller is programmed to a power limit to protect the electronics, the motor (due to cooling limits) and mostly the battery. This is easily seen in the published performance data for motors which are sold separate from the controller.
Thanks for the details and explanations. About a semi hybrid solution what Porsche just brought out, having the turbo be electric vs. dependent on exhaust gases, is that still too far off? If reducing any turbo lag whatsoever, there is a huge potential there, isn't that so?
Really enjoy your bi-weekly talks, thanks a lot! 👍💪✌
The are a few setups like this that are a mild hybrid (48v). They are really neat systems that will continue to get refined. But for this application there would be a whole extra electrical system to carry, looks to be around 30-50kg to do that. I think I can get the same response from a conventional antilag or nitrous but with far less mass
An issue with a hybrid configuration using electric drive at only the front as an anti-lag solution is that the distribution of drive power between rear (ICE) and front (electric) would rapidly and significantly change. That's a handling challenge, even with active control of left-to-right torque distribution (commonly and nonsensically called "torque vectoring").
Great conversation - I enjoyed that like many teams (and even businesses), you are managing to constraints - you have to choose which is the BEST use of your limited resources (time, money, etc), along with compromises around performance, reliability. etc. This is the real secret to success - you need both a good design, AND good constraint management around that to be successful. Even F1 has the same problem, especially in the budget cap era - where do I spend my $175 mil?
Great explanation.
I love this series.
Look forward to you sharing details on the engine you selected.
Fascinating. Would love to see some of the CAD work and building of the parts when you can talk about them. How are you funding this program? Is it just through sponsors?
Omg I was going to buy one of those frames. Good pick, super jealous.
What is it?
@@lowside67 USF-2000 frame which are very similar to older Indy cars.
Thanks Robin, love the open and honest communication with fans ❤
I’m sorry that you spent so much time and effort on the ev route for it be almost for nought. I’m confident what you build will be awesome anyway.
I’m guessing there are no rules enforcing crash testing of chassis’s for pikes? Have you done any deformation simulation of the cad model? Obviously the wolf was built to comply with European race series that suspect had higher safety standards. I hope you design in plenty of margin as the car being able to protect yourself in an incident is very important to me and I’m sure the rest of your fans.
Hopefully you went to cosworth for the engine. They have a lot of experience building single seat stressed member engines. For induction a pure ev driven compressor would be cool. You could have a crank powered generator for a small high voltage pack. Might be still be outside of your budget to develop. At least energy could be harvested under braking.
What about a flywheel energy storage device as light as possible but the diameter / hi speed needed to give back to the system in a linear power delivery to the wheels coming off the turns and doesnt rob engine power to spool up but uses the braking system or is the braking system . Also possibly have the flywheel change axis when turning to assist car turn in or roll. Just a thought. A motorcycle engine has a small flywheel counter balancer and spins twice as fast as the crank. The engine can spin to crazy 14000 rpm so the flywheel is almost at 30 k !! And engine is electric like in smoothness and retaining energy
As an indication of the technical level of Peter Wright's book _Forumla 1 Techonlogy_ I'll note that it is published by SAE. Although it is now almost a quarter century old, I expect that it remains very relevant.
As a Lotus guy I'm all for light weight and simplicity. You mentioned aero a lot so I'm curious if you have been considering underbody aero for less drag and / or active aero, which might even be useable as a way to vector the car in turns in addition to creating downforce? Great project, will be following it to the end.
my car project is not as cool as yours, but I do like weight reduction and increases power output. Keeping things simple and trying things out one at a time to see if progress is increasing one step at a time.
It's the best and most rewarding way I think. Step by step, forward progress
Using the front hub motors would be the same thinking as Ben Bowlby had with the Nismo GTR-LM. The intent was for the electric motors to give that shove out of the slower corners. Shame Nissan canned that project before it had a chance.
Looking forward to the optimised ICE unit, going to be fun times
I love the front hub motor hybrid concept. The benefit of AWD for corner exit, but with fewer components, and regenerative braking.
But pikes peak probably isn’t the best application, because the road is so bumpy, and the hub motors are all unsprung weight?
Did you consider a gas turbine engine?
Should have good power-to-weight ratio.
Throttle response isn’t good enough?
Nice to see the Elan in the workshop.
What you need is an old turbonique supercharger. Runs off its own tank of rocket fuel, so no lag and no parasitic power loss. Granted it's not what you'd call safe...
Great stuff! 👍
I'm glad there are subtitles 😅
Hi I'm really enjoying following along on this journey, but I do have a question. Have you explored adding a supercharger to improve engine response, as either a complete replacement for a turbo or in addition to a turbo as a twin charge system?
I’m guessing that the ideal gear/belt ratio for the supercharger would change at different altitudes (testing, bottom of the mountain, top of the mountain), so the response effect would taper off as the shaft speed becomes insufficient to get the same engine pressure ratio (intake/exhaust absolute pressure). Turbos can increase shaft speed for a given boost level at higher altitudes allowing them to maintain engine pressure ratio while working harder by increasing its own pressure ratio. There’s also probably a bit more complexity (in the form of not just software/additional maps but also big pipes and big valves because you need two intake air paths) compared to using fresh air or other anti-lag systems which could, when controlled well, be a more efficient and lighter way to achieve the same response.
A real shame because twin charging looks and sounds so cool and it’s been in the back of my mind as a project that I can’t justify for a while…
@@mitchellsnider4198I know variable speed drive superchargers technically exist, but have you seen them used for this sort of application before?
@@nelsonglover3963 I hadn't heard of them and have no experience so I had to look it up - thanks for the interesting google session! I found a couple types of these things, 1: multi-speed where they just basically put a planetary gear stage just like an automatic transmission in front of the supercharger, 2: CVT where they're using belts or toroids to get infinite ratios, and 3: Electric.
Considering Robin basically addressed 3 in favour of anti-lag I think that's an indication of his complexity tolerance. Developing and/or testing a toroid or belt based CVT instinctively sounds risky in the sense that to make it reliable enough they might have to add too much weight vs an anti-lag equivalent. All CVT solutions except those involving electric motors require some amount of slip between surfaces that mate imperfectly which makes me nervous that lots of iterations would be required to get reliability. If you're Nissan/Subaru/Honda and developing a CVT you can sell millions of times, that's fine, but I can't blame Robin for not wanting that. The multi-speed concept is more elegant, especially for packaging since you could stack another gear set to get 4 speeds, but I can't help but wonder if the disruption of "switching gears" would be too obtrusive on the driver. And it gets heavy and expensive etc. which again makes Anti-lag more appealing.
Definitely not shooting down the ideas/technologies and like I said I've always wanted to build a twincharge system or supercharged project myself (I had a B8 Audi S4 that I absolutely loved), but I can empathize with Robin on going the anti-lag route even though it feels less cool since there's a well-established community of people using it.
@@mitchellsnider4198 still hoping for a 80's renault style antilalag on the compressor wheel
My question is probably a very long answer but could you walk through your process/methodology of where to begin, track, and plan the designing process of a complete new car from scratch as you are doing now. I’m currently doing this right now in cad but as a one man team I also need to be my own “project manager.” It’s made me discover a new appreciation for this kind of thing so I’d love to hear from someone with real high level experience and any advice. It’s only been 2 videos but I’m absolutely loving these🫶looking forward to future videos!
lovely question , if you find anything about it please share
Been looking forward to this
What kind of lap time simulation do you use to make performance envelope decisions? Is it a simple spreadsheet based on kinematics or is it a more complex bespoke software?
All hail the algorithm, and the Sendy Club.
I would say that theoretically speaking, a jet turbine sending powet to the wheels will be by far the fastest thing for this. Both power to weight and the much lower loss of power as you get higher in altitude
Explore electric supercharging. Instant boost, full pressure control and no exhaust restriction. For a hill climb you don't need to load the alternator either. A small battery can hold enough energy to power the supercharger for the whole run.
Because there's no exhaust restriction and no power scavenging from the engine to drive it it can create more output per psi.
Have you considered 'rocket' anti-lag? I saw something about this old guy who put this truck turbo on a one point something litre engine and it made max boost at idle. It seems to solve turbo lag but also to eliminate the reduced power at lower rpm with turbos. I'd love to hear your opinion on it just because I'm not really sure how well it works but it seems hugely beneficial.
Thank you so much for taking the time to put this together, I got to turn my brain off for 15 minutes on 2x speed
Please do more of these!
What techniques have you considered to reduce turbo lag? Also, have you considered a supercharger or supercharger+turbo instead? If so, what are the tradeoffs as you see it?
Has he actually ever said what engine he's going to use? The rendering at ~0:32 suggests a small turbo V-8 - perhaps one made by bodging two motorcycle four-bangers together. But was that just a picture, or did it indicate his plans?
That's what it's gonna be. It makes sense when you consider the budget, weight, and size targets
It seems a lot of people felt like they weren't allowed to say this for a very long time. We are soooo back
Are you planning any active aero?
Have you considered an anti-lag system like the one on the 1983 Renault RE40 F1 car (variable air pre-rotation device)?
all i was think about watching the video, technically harder than a rocket antilag or similar but with some advantage with the lower O2 levels
If power to weight is important, would something like a supercharged 2-stroke make sense? Also, since you are sticking with internal combustion, what fuel do you plan on using? A CVT wouldn’t lose power while changing gear ratios, but since you didn’t mention it you must have rejected that option for a good reason.
I worked on some high-performance research two strokes back in the day. With electric supercharging they could be ground breaking. Still nothing proven yet though
What is the chassis you are using as a base for this that you showed at 21:05?
It looks like a F3 chassis, but I could be wrong. Like a 2012 Dallara or similar
Yes…my day has been made
Haltech just released the newest S3 ecu with built in circuit racing traction control/ torque vectoring which I thought you might like to look at
Interesting, very curious to see the powerplant you will put, something not conventional I hope: for instance an Inline 4, 2L about 8500 to 9000 RPM, Turbo-compounded with about 1000/1200 BHP at sea level
It looks like a turbo V8 out of 2 motorcycle engines. Synergy or RPE (Radical), I don't know. There's another Wolf chassis-driving hill climber named Dan Novembre and he's using an RPE V8 using Hayabusa heads. I'm curious on how a Synergy, and especially an RPE V8 will handle turbo torque, with the latter having a 72 degree v8.
@@rickcupola6262 I see about 2.7 to 3L with 450/550 BHP Naturally Aspired at 11 000 rpm, with 2 turbos about 1100/1300 BHP, the torque should be in the 750/850 Nm (550/650 ft lb).
@@julienboucaron9780 One concern with the RPE V8 is the inherent vibration issues with the unusual 72 degree V8 design, and the amount of more engineering needed to reduce the harmonics while keeping the bottom end durable enough for sustained high cylinder pressures, high engine acceleration, and high rpm. The Synergy V8 uses a conventional flat plane 90 degree V, so it might be easier to engineer for more power. On a 2.4L setup, you can have 367PS (269.9kW) at 10 000 rpm, and 268Nm at 8 000 rpm (~256Nm at 6000 rpm is also worth noting) out of the box.
@@rickcupola6262 I wonder for the 72 degree V8 if it is possible to create a crankshaft with offset crankpins to alleviate this issue. I remember something like that was done for the PRV V6 at 90 deg, to have the same firing order of a V6 at 60 deg
@@julienboucaron9780 Offset crankpins make a weaker crankshaft compared to a shared crankpin counterpart. Mitigating the harmonics issues can be detrimental to being able to handle the immense turbo torque, as a result. There's a reason why Cosworth in the F1 turbo era, and Ferrari's 296 GTB both utilize 120 degree V6's for their turbocharged engines, and it's to maximize crankshaft strength through having a shared crankpin because of their aim at reliability for very high engine loads while still having a balanced firing order (720 degrees of 4 stroke cycle/6 cylinders=120 degrees). A 90 degree V8 might be a better engine choice for a turbo build, for this reason.
If you want a be superfast you need downforce at lower speed, one of the most common ways is using fans and sucking the underfloor like the Brabham BT46 or the McMurtry speirling but with the bumps of pikes peak wouldn't be as effective, the other way is using little rockets on top of each wheel also that can work as a traction control helping more the wheels that don't have traction, it sounds crazy bat with 3d printing technology specially in inconel you can make a decent rocket nozzle, you can use ethanol and oxygen for fuel is quite common for amateur stuff, the only concern that I see is the LOX fuel cell, it has to be incredibly safe and in case of an accident it shut detach from the car you don't want a have fuel and oxidizer close, also you can mount 2 nozzles on the sides that can help with cornering and surpass the limit of the tires, obviously that would be a big project, but that would be a hell of a fast car.
build it, race it, proof it.
I wonder if you have any insights into how solid state batteries might change the equation in the future?
He’s probably seen more real quotes than any of us too so attaching the economics discussion to this would be really interesting. Basically “what price would a pack with the critical ICE-beating weight have to hit” analysis
Solid state only reduces a percentage of volume in the battery cell. It's a blended mixture and it is not a magic bullet. Solid state is also harder to recycle and in Europe/US cars must have their recycling paid when new. He could have more success with a capacitor that gives a short 10 second burst and regens just as quick.
@@fraserwright9482 the super capacitor would be a really interesting combination with the hub motors on the front, good point. Guessing controllers don’t take great advantage of their total energy because of the capacitors’ high slope linear voltage characteristics, but hopefully motorsports drive some development there
How do you know what perimeters to build to for things like suspension or power units? How do you know when enough is enough?
Ah, the chicken and egg dance of concept-phase engineering!
Dammit, when you said you were answering questions at the end, I waited with baited breath to see if you were reconsidering the red tunics and tricorn hat!!! 🙃 I'll let you off as long as you SEND IT !!!
🤣🤣
I have to say very interesting video, but I have a small disgrement, I believe in formula student (FSAE in america) EVs cannot be beaten by combustion. This is because we can have 4 indepent torques in each wheel creating a yaw controller like no where else. In the tracks we run, where turns are very tight, evs will always be better (if the best EV team is as competent as the best CV team). The tracion controll system is also at another level since we have very fast speed controller for each wheel, giving us absurd amount of straigth line acceleration. There is simply no match. But still I believe for more general race cars the energy required is so much that its quite hard to make EVs faster due to weigth.
I won’t make this a habit but I’m going to compare your philosophy to another engineer again! Last vid it was Chapman, this time Nic Mann.
His reasoning for having an APU driving the turbo on his BDT was the elimination of lag - response. He only did that because hill climbing banned nitrous.
The Manic Beattie was 4wd though so the similarities stop with the drivetrain.
My thoughts on electric mirror yours. Motors amazing, batteries not so much. Weight, as always, is the enemy.
Cheers.
I have the feeling Robin totally could nerd out with Rob Dahm for 3 hours and we totally would watch that video. 😁😎🤘
Will the new car leverage torsion springs to save weight over coil spring options?
Silly but cool idea for the antilag, rocket antilag? Used in rally until the rules caught up ^_^
I would be interested to see if anyone successfully use the hybrid turbo system from the new 911 and used it at Pikes. If they can make it work for a relatively high volume road car then it can't be that terrible to implement right?
A Koenigsegg LST style 9-speed transmission with near instant shifts and the ability to jump gears seems like it would be a great fit for Pikes Peak to keep the engine near peak power at all times.
Seamless shift is faster
@@Shadowboost Define seamless. Other than a CVT, all transmissions are not seamless because gear ratios are fixed.
@@hallkbrdz literally two gears are engaged at the same time. There is no shift time. Go read up on them in F1
@@Shadowboost You're describing every dual clutch gearbox out there (e.g. PDK, DSG). Yes two gears are engaged and two clutches allow the speed to change between the two gears (not instant). The downside with that system is that it pre-selects (physically moves) to the next highest or lower gear, but if you want to go from 6 to 2 (entering a corner), you normally run through the gears. The advantage of the LST is that with just 3 gears (3x3) you get 9 speeds and can change from 8 to 6 to 4 to 2 directly (such as when getting to a hairpin), or any combination in between because all the gears are always ready with only the 6 clutches separating them from the output. This makes the LST more compact and lighter than a dual clutch gearbox, shifts are as quick, or quicker if you want to skip gears since it can engage any gear at any time. ua-cam.com/video/MSxQtHOfljE/v-deo.htmlsi=eDtq2Bm0tjhEvk3J
Let’s go!
I am curious if you will be using some kind of active aero? I assume it is legal.
Is that a 3D printer running in the background? It took me way too long to figure out the sound was coming from this video.
Sounds like it came out too late for any overall architectural decisions on your car, but do you think we'll see the new Porsche 911 T-Hybrid MGUH on race cars, or is trying to take a complex system off a road car for a race car just not feasible?
It's still really heavy and needs a whole new electric system (48v I believe???)
love it
Instead of the complex mgu-h system could something like a Volvo or Audi turbo-electric make sense?
Get rid entirely of the turbine part and run the compressor directly from electric power. Some pitfalls I see with napkin math is the HV system being too heavy and expensive to just run the turbos, but maybe running the steering and other auxiliaries from electrical could help offset that weight
Gregoire Blachon's radical diesel used this system, he says it worked really well! Tri-turbo... I think I can get what I need with a conventional antilag system
If you where to go really unlimited, fastest would be gas turbine. Absolute best power to weight ratio. With an electric generator, 4WD electric drivetrain and probably a fast accumulator / supercapacitor for max burst of power. Add a fan for downforce and some active aero. You could use a plane too XD
I bet Cosworth has what you need. A smaller T50 maybe. Hey Cosworth help them and give them what they need (3+ engines) and don't charge them, be a partner and make it an all english car conquering the peak!
Hmmm broad power out of a lightweight motor... Long stroke compound turbo V10 based on a Judd or Cosworth? That sure would sound good.
What sort of engine are you looking at? I ended up developing my own lightweight billet 4cyl based off some proven parts. ~100kg for the motor is a huge difference.
Casually developing your own billet engine eh? You sound like those machinists I know who picked up cheap CNCs off of companies divesting in manufacturing back in 2008 and can make whatever they want. Jealous.
@@mitchellsnider4198 Oh I wish. I'm just designing it, having to get a CNC shop to fab it for me. That's costing a pretty penny...
is there a pikes peak race for regular people in there f150, full run.
I can’t wait to see what the engine is. I’m guessing 6 cylinders
While I understand the sentiment Robin, we already had ICE vs Hybrid in LMP1 and F1 and both times the Hybrid has come out as the better solution just for the torque fill. Of course none of those cars are as light as what you are proposing so there is a difference there.
Not picking a fight here but e.g. for F1 can we say without a doubt that hybrid is faster around a course? I mean, modern cars are faster but aero and ICE has improved on its own, too.
We have never seen those advances put into a super modern, pure F1 ICE car, which can be made hundreds of kilos lighter and a lot smaller. What if we did that and then pitted it against the truck sized F1 cars or today? Yes, it may need refueling for a whole race but around a lap or 20, would a hybrid still beat it?
@@AntiVaganza We had an era where it was an option was my entire point. When Kers was first introduced it was optional. Then all the teams realized it was faster and chose to have it.
@@cademckee7276you are still running into the limits of the rules though. You had to meet the same minimum weight requirement with or without KERS, and it was only partially adopted in 2009 when first intorduced, and then informally dropped in 2010. There were also significant teething issues with it, and while the technology as a whole is far more advanced now, you would still expect some initial issues with it, especially important as this car essentually has one goal of winning Pikes Peak, not a whole season of races to improve over.
@@AntiVaganza You're just doing a different apples to oranges comparison there. Yes you could build an unlimited pure ICE open wheeler that would be faster than a current F1 car. It doesn't prove anything in regard to what type of drivetrain is the best though, because you could also do the same thing with a Hybrid.
F1 and LMP1 both had open drivetrain eras. KERS was optional from 2009-2014, and was adopted very quickly. LMP1 was always contested by hybrid and ICE cars, but the championship title only went to hybrids. It does certainly appear that when given the option, it is better to go for a hybrid in series racing.
Electric vehicles are best in stop start traffic because it doesn't lose mileage while standing still. And you can charge the battery while braking so you can use that braking to get back to speed after a stop
Sounds like they need to set up a solar array with standardized charging at pikes peak to make electric sustainable.
😅😅😅
Calling out the ev scam you legend. In such a polite, English non defamatory way. What do you mean bring a generator just carry a wind turbine.
I have a very similair cad model on my computer using a custom v8 that will never see the light of day ahah, surfaces for body inspired by x1 and but with ground effect instead of fans
2:55 this is basically a Coyote Wells open wheel design.
What about literally just powering the turbo with an electric motor? Just put a leafblower into your inlet basically. It seems like that would be similarly "bolt-on" as hub motors.
Needs a very powerful motor and electrical system to do that, over 100hp!
Not trying to be argumentative but taking the Pikes Peak use case specifically - how do you combat the sheer lack of combustible O2 the higher you go? Perhaps the answer is... There's enough O2
You combat it with forced induction. What exactly are you trying to imply here?
@@karl0ssus1 but even forced induction needs combustion. Does anyone know what's the average loss of power from the start of the PP race vs at the top?
@@RyuMoto it’s about 0.8bar pressure at the base of the mountain vs 0.6bar at the top, compared to 1bar at sea level. So all else being equal (cow=sphere assumption here) an NA engine with 1000 peak hp at sea level would make around 800hp at the start of the race vs 600hp at the peak. The beauty of turbos is that you can hold the waste gate shut more at higher altitudes to fight the power loss, at the expense of turbo efficiency which leads to heat (which makes you have to pull timing generally depending on fuel) and also a loss of response when coming back on-throttle which is why this is particularly an issue that TSC is putting resources into solving
@@mitchellsnider4198 appreciate the knowledge share. Thank you