What car would you put the Diglett engine in? 🤔Click here www.hellofresh.co.uk/HELLODRIVE60 to enjoy an exclusive offer of 60% off your first box, a 25% discount for the following two months and FREE dessert for life!
I your engine holds up too long some part is too strong and you are giving away power. Depends what the engineers have in mind. Rebuild every race? Go for it 😅
@@spudgunn8695 if you actually watched the video, it is the transmission that broke. That does not mean the engine has a 500 service interval. UA-cam comment section Armchair engineers are so cringe 🤢
4:15 it is worth noting that the often quoted (and unofficial) "1250-1500bhp" that grows every time it is mentioned was only possible for one hot lap before wrecking the engine. Race output was more in the 900bhp range.
Hence they were called 'grenade engines'. It's important you've pointed it out, though. This Nissan engine appeared as a 3 cylinder powerhouse at the time F1 began its 6cyl turbo era. 2x DIG-TR in an F1 chassis?
It's such a shame that Nissan didn't put a chilled out 150-200bhp version into production, would have made for an amazing platform and being so small you'd be able to swap it into almost anything if you can custom fab some engine mounts Also _Diglett dig, Diglett dig, Trio Trio Trio_
Triumph speed triple. 130-180hp depending on vintage, 70kg including a gearbox that doesn't explode, and fits into anything. It also sounds amazing with the T-plane crankshaft
To confuse as many people as possible. A person's weight is commonly measured in both stone and kg Speed in mph Distance on roads uses miles and yards Smaller stuff uses mm
@@Markknightexeter it looks like it's weight 40kG is just the engine. Doesn't count all the parts to make it run. Like a water pump, alternator, intake, exhaust manifold.
@@danowens7145 From chat Chat GPT, "The engine from a Suzuki Hayabusa, without the running gear and accessories, typically weighs around 60 to 65 kilograms (approximately 132 to 143 pounds). This weight can vary slightly depending on the specific model year and any modifications or removals." It also said this, "The Suzuki Hayabusa's engine produces around 190 to 200 horsepower (about 142 to 149 kW) and approximately 150 to 155 Nm (about 110 to 114 lb-ft) of torque. These figures can vary slightly depending on the specific model year and any modifications or updates made to the engine." If you were to calculate the weight compared to power, the Nissan engine would thrash it, then again if you were to take the turbo off I've no idea what the power would be, I'm guessing 200hp+ from just 2/3 of the weight.
@@jtaylor8606 He's mixing up "small engines" with "small turbo engines" which was true of all the American stuff not to long ago... but the street version of this engine ended up in the new Rogue, and its amazing
in my opinion, it's more a problem of downiszing to the bare minimum materials thickness and quality which often crosses the threshold of reliability in the wrong direction, old engine block were machined out of a large block with thick walls now they are cast and hollow with some really thin walls on the cylinders and engine block, I can tell you in computer hardware it followed the same direction, they sold you processors that could run half faster just like they sold us engines in cars but after 2000 they realized they could either save money on the part or upsell it as another more powerful but more expensive component, if you know nothing about computers check Intel 13th 14th gen 2024 problems and you'll see the exact same thing car engines experience, they reduced the safety margins so much intel cpus self-destruct (my 13900k just did blue screens nonstop am typing this on a new amd pc >
@@fredEVOIX This. SO MUCH this. You want an engine that will last half a million km, have the displacement of a motorcycle and the power of an american muscle? Totally doable. Just be ready to pay a kidney and liver for it.
9:00 An engine is not pre-heated to "maximize lubrication". A racing engine is pre-heated so that clearances and other dimensions are within design tolerances. When the engine is cold, due to negative thermal expansion some parts will be out of design specs. Even systems which do not require any lubricants may need to be run only at operating temps for clearance reasons.
Weeelllll ... "Pre-heat" is essentially the same as warm-up, but without the run-time/parts wear time factor. It aids in lubrication by reducing the viscosity of the oil, allowing it to be distributed to parts quicker. ;)
Possibly a million dollars more due to the TFG being a freak of mechanical engineering in all the right ways… and only assuming that Nissan isn’t tiptoeing into the hyper car market with their engine.
Agreed the koenigsegg gemera 2L 3 cylinder twin turbo freevalve has some great stats, but has been a will arrive next year car since 2020. I like the freevalve concept but will they ever get it to work reliably in a production car let alone will it ever make it into a production car for the masses.
@@neilmowles9581 I’m like FV #1 fan boy, love it, ready to get the tat… but it’s been said that there are simpler more reliable ways to get the “same” (close enough) and I’m gonna… wait on that tattoo 😔
This video just seemed a bit confused, I never got what point it was presenting or what cool and interesting thing we were being shown. "Here is this high power-per-weight engine. A turbo 3-cyl making 400 HP and weighing in at 40 kg/88 lb. PS: it's a race engine and was never available to the public." I can think of another fairly light-weight three cyl that makes ridiculous power for its weight. The G16E-GTS from the GR Toyota models, which is a 1.6L 3-cyl making 300 HP in street trim, and capable of over 450 HP when custom tuned. Which is available to the regular consumer, and can be bought as a crate engine. "Here's an alternative high power-per-ton engine. It's also for racing use only and not yet available despite being in development for over a year and a half." At this point you might as well point out the JFC Racing Monobloc v8, which comes in two flavors, a twin-turbo 2.8L weighing under 300 lbs with the turbos, intake, and headers and producing 765 hp; and a naturally-aspirated 3.2L weighing in at 200 lbs with an output of 460 hp. Or any of Judd's offerings, or any of the half-dozen or so other motorcycle-derived engine variants made by various boutique engine manufacturers. Each of which will set you back the cost of a very nicely equipped sports car.
theres also honda K20/K24 race engines, with a 2.5l block they get like 350-400HP NA, and they weigh about 100kg. fairly inexpensive too, for a race engine. set you back about 15k. so if you don't have judd money...
The Ariel 500 Atom engine is 90kg and makes 500 HP naturally aspirated Liter bike engines make 200 HP weighing 60kg I've always been obsessed with those tiny monsters, it's my dream to put one in a Cappuccino
I wasn't surprised to hear that photo was a fake - 40kg may be super-light for an engine but it's still 40kg :) Having said that, if you'd like to put one in the post for my MX-5 I'd be eternally grateful :D
maybe 40kg for the block, and another 40kg for ''all the extra bits that connect TO IT to MAKE IT AN ACTUAL ENGINE... ;) ??? eh... kinda my thought about it... ;) but if it was all titininiamium or some superlight alloy , eh, would be awesome to feel one in a 260z or wutever or other some OOOOL*Z*car...
Sadly, too few customers picked the 3-cyl Koenigsegg Gemera over the added V8 option, so the 3 isn't happening for a while :-(( I think it would have saved over 100 kg which would really impact performance off the line and around bends. If (after all the decades) they really manage to make FreeValve and this light 600 hp engine work, it's perfect for basically anything. Even the GMA T.50 and T.50S might even get faster with it. Imagine it in an Ariel Atom or Nomad. A Formula 2 car. Indycar. Nascar. GT3. Hypercar. If it really works and works reliably and efficiently, there's no end to the applications and it's just a matter of making it affordable in larger production volume.
it's truly incredible how candid Darren is. A really incredible peek behind the curtain in an industry where that level of transparency is, like he alludes to, often met with crazy litigation haha. What a great opportunity to interview him!
@@Atom224 no sir, with a turbo, the ceiling would be very high, I'm guessing in the 30k ft range. Engine management and a turbski gives ICE engines great performance, and is how the turbo got invented to begin with. And the straight thing? What are you even talking about? Control surface sizes on the wings and tailsection determine maneuverability, along with weight, so once again, no you're wrong, it would be great for an aerobatics aircraft as well.
Gotta say Nissan has never been afraid to experiment and do something different... hats off to their racing department.. they have built some real excellent cars for the track...
Well apart from that weight being dry and without any of the ancilliaries such as that massive turbo and intercooler which it had to have to make the power (so in practice it was nowhere near 40kg), its also a one off billet race engine which not only costs a fortune but can also be designed to run on race fuel and not worry about any emissions regs. The reason we don't see things like that in road cars is because if you want 400hp something like a 2.0T 4 cylinder adds a relatively insignificant amount of weight over a 3-pot with the usual cast parts, is in a lower state of tuen so easier to get through emissions and longevity testing and doesn't need to be made of unobtanium to deal with it. When its in a car thats over 1.5t in the first place an extra 50kg for ease of manufacturing, cost, longevity, economy, emissions and all the rest is the obvious trade off. Oh and on normal fuel its not making 400hp unless its also making a lot of heat. More like low-mid 300's at best. This is why the Yaris GR engine is getting close to its limits too - 280hp is great but its also only about 50hp away from being right on the edge on road fuel and with road emissions equipment.
Motorcycles are going down to parallel twins now for emissions reasons, cars for four to 3 cylinders. The gap between the piston and the cylinder lets hydrocarbons past and ruins the emissions.
I think the overhead compartment reference was more for the physical envelope rather than the weight. To your point, I have no idea how strong those compartments are, but I certainly wouldn't want that weight over my head, dynamically loading the bin in a turbulent patch of air. 😳
@@tmatsci -- Actually, it's 88 lbs, and cement comes in 94 lb. bags. It's about halfway between a bundle of old-style roof shingles (81 lbs.) and a bag of cement. When I first started in construction, we had to carry those bundles up a ladder, about 40 bundles for the smallest roofs we did, and up to 150 of them on the larger houses. As for the overhead compartment, if you put 4 25-lb. carry-ons into one of those compartments, you're already heavier than the engine.
@@grizzlygrizzle cement bag weights depend on where you are in the world. In Australia where I am it is now 40kg per bag of cement and has been since 1973 when we changed from the old imperial measures to metric. Before metric the cement base was nominally I cubic foot of cement and weighed 94 pounds. Now that it is metric it is 40 kg or 88.1 lbs in the old measurement. One cubic foot of cement was chosen so that you could easily batch concrete by volume for example a typical foundation mix was 1 bag of cement, to 4 bags of clean sand and 7 bags of gravel aggregate. From what you posted it would appear that you live in the USA which is still using the old system.
Nissan did the same on NA Engines. The SR16VE N1 was used in the limited-production Pulsar VZ-R N1, produced from 1997 to 1998. These cars were tuned by Autech Japan. It made 200 PS (197 hp; 147 kW) at 7800 rpm and 134 lb⋅ft (182 N⋅m) at 7600 rpm. Redline of the N1 Version 2 (1998) is at 8600 rpm. This is also claimed to be the most powerful production 1.6 L naturally aspirated engine.
Electric cars basically get 200mpg. Ice vehicles actually get less mpg if the engine is to small and has to work harder. Always need the right size engine for the condition.
My Alpine A110s is 300hp and manages 40mpg ... just because it can do 165mph (ish) doesn't mean I have to .....unless on the Autobahn where parts are not restricted where 75mph can be exceeded 😊
A 2.7 litre 4 cylinder NA racing engine isn't as unusual as you may believe, in the British Hillclimb Championship throughout the 80s the engine of choice was a Hart 2.8 litre 4 cylinder that made similar power.
@@goodale1812 can’t just make them for without knowing who will buy and if the made too much they might not sell or too little and the buyers look elsewhere.. Also don’t forget dealers mark up prices etc
I have a twin cylinder Suzuki 1100cc arctic cat snowmobile that has 300hp with a simple ECU flash. Some people make more power than that with a few more mod. I can hold engine it in two hands no problem. The 1000 cc Yamaha - arctic cat same thing make 300 hp no problem with ecu flash.
1:35 No, they would have (rightly) thought photoshop.. The engine is 40KG.. Totally liftable (and an amazing engineering feat) and maybe effortlessly so for someone like Eddie Hall but just in case you didn notice, that engineer isn't Eddie 😅
This is so cool I don't know how I didn't learn about this engine when reading about the delta wing. Another awesome little engine is the 3 cyl 1.0L ecoboost in the Formula Ford, I just remember that Chris Harris was blown away by it.
No, the F1 BMW turbo did not produce 1500hp. Just because people keep saying it doesn't make it true, even if it is said by ex-F1 drivers with a fading memory. Some people agree that it made somewhere between 1300 and 1400hp in qualifying trim, with qualifying fuel. At one point, not even the BMW dyno could measure numbers as high as 1500.
But, as far as I understood that bit of automotive history, they didn't have the dyno tech and capacity to test at those insane power levels. The power levels were estimated based on comparison of lap times in qualifying trim vs. race trim. In the end the problem wasn't so much the power but the cooling. The 1400-1500 horsepower at, give or take, a third mechanical efficiency, meant that there was roughly 2 Megawatt of thermal load to be moved from engine block to outside air. That was impossible to realise in the F1 car package of the time. Those engines, when in qualifying trim, simply overheated after one or two laps driven in anger.
@@Hydrazine1000 Bigger heat exchangers could've been used in qualifying, plus fans for cooling purposes were still allowed, if I'm not mistaken. There was simply no need for the engines to last more than a few laps, therefore thermal stress and fatigue were taken to extremes. Sometimes teams got it right, other times the engines would smoke-signal their disagreement.
I mean the power:weight is better than what's in my car but I'll take my LS3 on 6 pounds of boost to daily all day any day. I've driven my Corvette cross country without concern, I don't think this engine would get me out of California let alone to NY and back.
No to mention the powerband on your engine will be MUCH nicer to actually use on the street. People obsess over hp per liter sometimes dont take powerband and drivability into account. Nice car mate 💪
1.3L rotary is not equal to 1.3L in a piston engine. To make that 240bhp, you're moving fuel and air equivalent to a piston engine twice that size. 240bhp out of a 2.6L NA V6( a 2 rotor has 6 'chambers') is much less impressive.
I think it is disingenuous comparing the V10 and V8 screamers, as they are Naturally aspirated where as the BMW is a closer representation being that it and Nissans are both Turbo Charged / Forced Induction. People have taken honda B and K series to near the 1500 hp range like the BMW, and they were also Turbo Charged.
@@deanjdk Yeah hp per kg is much better than hp per liter, as an engine with much more displacement can be lighter (depending on engine design and material). Either one only takes how much power the engine makes at a specific rpm into account though, when an engine operates over a range of rpms.
I like the 4 cylinder for aircraft usage. 400 HP for take off then dial back for cruse. It could also be mildly turbocharged to maintain HP at altitude...
I've been racing autocross for most of my life , and my faverite chassis is the spriget family . I can only imagine how this engine would make enemies ....
couple of questions, 1. how much hp does it make without the turbo charger ? 2. what is its headroom for expanding hp ? 3. how much torque does it make? 4. what's its reliability ? really banging on about hp when its the turbo carrying the load isn't really 400hp, is it flat out at 400hp and isn't viable in racing, 3 cyl wouldnt be making very much torque and it is more important than hp, how long can it keep up in a long race squeezing 400hp from small engine usually become a hand grenade, is that why it never went into production
I’d love to put one of those into a Skoda Fabia, but with all wheel drive. Not the hatchback, but the spacious one. Keeping all the space but adding the fun of an engine like that
I remember Yamaha making an F1 engine that was absurdly light at some point, I think in the 90s. I don't think it was powerful enough or reliable enough to succeed, but it would be fun to find out what the real story was.
With peak torque at 280 lb ft, the absolute minimum RPM that it would need (if peak HP and peak torque are at the same RPM - which almost never happens) is 7,500 rpm to make 400 hp. According to several articles on this, the engine redlines at 7,500 rpm.
07:00 that isn't at all how frontal area works. The ENTIRE front surface is frontal area, not just the tip of the nose. Stand in front and look at the car. Everything you can see, is frontal area. But yes, it is very sleek.
Surely the amazing technology used to create the Nissan "Diglett", could be applied to build super-lightweight and efficient road car engines? If the car manufacturers REALLY wanted to, we could have lightweight, powerful and yet frugal cars. We need not go the EV-route at all. I'd be over-the-moon with a 150hp "only" version of that Diglett engine, if that means that it would translate to reliable road car engine power. Imagine a 150hp Diglett in a small 2-door car, like a 1960's Mini (I love those), and it you'd have a real fun little go-cart! Even in a more practical car like a VW Polo, it would still be amazing.
I'd put it in a Honda Jazz/Fit chassis, the second US generation 2009-12. It has the most rigid chassis, great handling, and amazing cabin volume for a subcompact lightweight car. The engine would be perfect coz the Jazz/Fit has a small engine bay space. If I wanted a sports car instead of a daily driver, Mazda Miata ist two generations, also for it's handling.
You may also want to look into the Toyota 503E 2.1L 4cyl Turbo, a purpose built racing version of the common 3S-GT 2.0L, with an increased bore (89mm vs 86mm) to accommodate larger valves to achieve better breathing from the cylinder head. It was originally from TRD USA and used in IMSA, but eventually made it's way into the JGTC/SuperGT Winning Mk IV Supras (Toms, Sard etc) in mid-90's Japan where it put Skyline GT-R and NSX alike to complete shame, considering what it was. It was not uncommon for it to produce well over 1,000 HP at the wheels for qualifying runs, then run around 600-800 for actual racing. It was eventually restricted back to 2.0L and the original 86mm bore after becoming too dominant and also handicapped with inlet/boost restriction. Just thought this engine might have also been interesting to you, since this was back in 1995.
What car would you put the Diglett engine in? 🤔Click here www.hellofresh.co.uk/HELLODRIVE60 to enjoy an exclusive offer of 60% off your first box, a 25% discount for the following two months and FREE dessert for life!
Maybe something weird like a 97 Toyota Startlet or a Civic Wagovan
The Fiesta, obviously. 😊
Put it in a sports bike, people would say, Hayabusa who?!
That engine in an old Mini would be interesting, maximum FWD fun. And an MR2. Oh yes. I'd like to put it in an Atom or a Caterham style RWD too.
Reliant robin
"How did that work?" I should imagine without 500 mile service intervals, and regular rebuilds, quite briefly!! Lol
I your engine holds up too long some part is too strong and you are giving away power. Depends what the engineers have in mind. Rebuild every race? Go for it 😅
They did lemans with it, so about 2k miles
@@jonathanedwards8913 didn't he say it broke down after 6 laps?
@@spudgunn8695 that was a gearbox issue though so they didnt get to test how long it would last
@@spudgunn8695 if you actually watched the video, it is the transmission that broke. That does not mean the engine has a 500 service interval.
UA-cam comment section Armchair engineers are so cringe 🤢
4:15 it is worth noting that the often quoted (and unofficial) "1250-1500bhp" that grows every time it is mentioned was only possible for one hot lap before wrecking the engine. Race output was more in the 900bhp range.
well at that time every car was pushing over 1200hp in qualifying but 800-900 in the race
Only 900 lol.
Hence they were called 'grenade engines'. It's important you've pointed it out, though. This Nissan engine appeared as a 3 cylinder powerhouse at the time F1 began its 6cyl turbo era. 2x DIG-TR in an F1 chassis?
yeh, the current F1 engines basically make more power, more of the time, with half as much fuel
Well, that's still 600hp/L and 12hp/kg, so...
It's such a shame that Nissan didn't put a chilled out 150-200bhp version into production, would have made for an amazing platform and being so small you'd be able to swap it into almost anything if you can custom fab some engine mounts
Also _Diglett dig, Diglett dig, Trio Trio Trio_
There's a Nissan nismo note E-tech which uses a 3 cylinder hybrid. But iirc the power output is nowhere near the 200bhp.
Triumph speed triple. 130-180hp depending on vintage, 70kg including a gearbox that doesn't explode, and fits into anything. It also sounds amazing with the T-plane crankshaft
Just like the Yaris 3 cyl, people are getting 888hp from it at the wheels, but that isn't daily driver.
They did. Its in every new Rogue. 201hp/225tq, non-hybrid, and its amazing.
There's a rumor that Nissan made a prop driven plane. It crashed at an airshow. Unconfirmed. Maybe happened late 80s early 90s.
Why do the Brits measure capacity in liters , weight in kilograms but torque in pound and feet???
To confuse as many people as possible.
A person's weight is commonly measured in both stone and kg
Speed in mph
Distance on roads uses miles and yards
Smaller stuff uses mm
We also used stones and feet and grains in 5000 bc. But we moved up since then
Because they created the Imperial measurement system.
A 500ml bottle of cola but a pint of beer :)
I could also include WHY the yanks drop letters from words and have wrong names for car parts etc ???
Suzuki Hayabusa Says " hold my beer" and hand me a turbocharger. It might be heavier but it's because transmission is integrated into it.
Exactly my thoughts, including the transmission bit. Really strange that he didn't think of turbo bike engines.
This was still much lighter.
That hyabusa engine gets turned into a V8. Someone makes cams so you can rotate one head.
@@Markknightexeter it looks like it's weight 40kG is just the engine. Doesn't count all the parts to make it run. Like a water pump, alternator, intake, exhaust manifold.
@@danowens7145 From chat Chat GPT,
"The engine from a Suzuki Hayabusa, without the running gear and accessories, typically weighs around 60 to 65 kilograms (approximately 132 to 143 pounds). This weight can vary slightly depending on the specific model year and any modifications or removals."
It also said this,
"The Suzuki Hayabusa's engine produces around 190 to 200 horsepower (about 142 to 149 kW) and approximately 150 to 155 Nm (about 110 to 114 lb-ft) of torque. These figures can vary slightly depending on the specific model year and any modifications or updates made to the engine."
If you were to calculate the weight compared to power, the Nissan engine would thrash it, then again if you were to take the turbo off I've no idea what the power would be, I'm guessing 200hp+ from just 2/3 of the weight.
That engine NEEDS to be in a Caterham. =D
I'd put it in a Daihatsu Cuore lol
Excellent! It was my first tout!
I'd put it in a Ford Ka. Just to build the perfect sleeper car to really annoy all the BMW owners at a traffic light.
That engine would fit in a motorbike.
No, that engine deserves a Suzuki Cappuccino. Imagine the bhp/kg stats
The lighter and smaller the quicker they go pop! We are seeing that in all engines across all manufacturers.
I'd not heard that before. Which engines/manufacturers specifically?
I was gonna say my Toyota engine is heavy and weak but it’s also at 292,000 miles with zero major maintenance
@@jtaylor8606 He's mixing up "small engines" with "small turbo engines" which was true of all the American stuff not to long ago... but the street version of this engine ended up in the new Rogue, and its amazing
in my opinion, it's more a problem of downiszing to the bare minimum materials thickness and quality which often crosses the threshold of reliability in the wrong direction, old engine block were machined out of a large block with thick walls now they are cast and hollow with some really thin walls on the cylinders and engine block, I can tell you in computer hardware it followed the same direction, they sold you processors that could run half faster just like they sold us engines in cars but after 2000 they realized they could either save money on the part or upsell it as another more powerful but more expensive component, if you know nothing about computers check Intel 13th 14th gen 2024 problems and you'll see the exact same thing car engines experience, they reduced the safety margins so much intel cpus self-destruct (my 13900k just did blue screens nonstop am typing this on a new amd pc >
@@fredEVOIX This. SO MUCH this. You want an engine that will last half a million km, have the displacement of a motorcycle and the power of an american muscle? Totally doable.
Just be ready to pay a kidney and liver for it.
9:00 An engine is not pre-heated to "maximize lubrication".
A racing engine is pre-heated so that clearances and other dimensions are within design tolerances. When the engine is cold, due to negative thermal expansion some parts will be out of design specs. Even systems which do not require any lubricants may need to be run only at operating temps for clearance reasons.
The oil has to be warmed up as well.
Clearances for oil passage, less friction, and warmer, less viscous oil. It's all related.
Weeelllll ... "Pre-heat" is essentially the same as warm-up, but without the run-time/parts wear time factor. It aids in lubrication by reducing the viscosity of the oil, allowing it to be distributed to parts quicker. ;)
And don't forget the Lower Compression to enable the Engine to not get Knocked to pieces. 😆
Koenigsegg`s Tiny Friendly Giant Engine, Twin Turbo Freevalve 3-cylinder is 600 hp and 70 kg / 154.3 lb 🤩
Possibly a million dollars more due to the TFG being a freak of mechanical engineering in all the right ways…
and only assuming that Nissan isn’t tiptoeing into the hyper car market with their engine.
Agreed the koenigsegg gemera 2L 3 cylinder twin turbo freevalve has some great stats, but has been a will arrive next year car since 2020. I like the freevalve concept but will they ever get it to work reliably in a production car let alone will it ever make it into a production car for the masses.
@@neilmowles9581 I’m like FV #1 fan boy, love it, ready to get the tat…
but it’s been said that there are simpler more reliable ways to get the “same” (close enough) and I’m gonna… wait on that tattoo 😔
Except you cant get that engine. The gemera will only be available with the v8.
Königsegg is abandoning that engine because no one wants it.
This video just seemed a bit confused, I never got what point it was presenting or what cool and interesting thing we were being shown.
"Here is this high power-per-weight engine. A turbo 3-cyl making 400 HP and weighing in at 40 kg/88 lb. PS: it's a race engine and was never available to the public."
I can think of another fairly light-weight three cyl that makes ridiculous power for its weight. The G16E-GTS from the GR Toyota models, which is a 1.6L 3-cyl making 300 HP in street trim, and capable of over 450 HP when custom tuned. Which is available to the regular consumer, and can be bought as a crate engine.
"Here's an alternative high power-per-ton engine. It's also for racing use only and not yet available despite being in development for over a year and a half."
At this point you might as well point out the JFC Racing Monobloc v8, which comes in two flavors, a twin-turbo 2.8L weighing under 300 lbs with the turbos, intake, and headers and producing 765 hp; and a naturally-aspirated 3.2L weighing in at 200 lbs with an output of 460 hp. Or any of Judd's offerings, or any of the half-dozen or so other motorcycle-derived engine variants made by various boutique engine manufacturers. Each of which will set you back the cost of a very nicely equipped sports car.
This should be the top comment
Fairly light in general terms but compared to the Nissan engine the Toyota triple is 3 times heavier but probably has 20 times the durability.
Agree, great analysis for an overly drawn out video
600 hp today for 1.6 toyota (carwow channel)
theres also honda K20/K24 race engines, with a 2.5l block they get like 350-400HP NA, and they weigh about 100kg. fairly inexpensive too, for a race engine. set you back about 15k.
so if you don't have judd money...
The Ariel 500 Atom engine is 90kg and makes 500 HP naturally aspirated
Liter bike engines make 200 HP weighing 60kg
I've always been obsessed with those tiny monsters, it's my dream to put one in a Cappuccino
Quick, put it in a Miata!
Put it in EVERYTHING miata sized! 😂
Put it on a motorcycle
See you mispronounced that. "Motorcycle" is the correct pronunciation.
Put it in the frunk of a Tesla. Or even the frunk of a Cayman. Voila, AWD.
Shelby roadster 2: Electric Boogaloo
I wasn't surprised to hear that photo was a fake - 40kg may be super-light for an engine but it's still 40kg :) Having said that, if you'd like to put one in the post for my MX-5 I'd be eternally grateful :D
What would be wild would be Koenigsegg 80kg Dark Matter Electric motor with 800hp lol
maybe 40kg for the block, and another 40kg for ''all the extra bits that connect TO IT to MAKE IT AN ACTUAL ENGINE... ;) ??? eh... kinda my thought about it... ;) but if it was all titininiamium or some superlight alloy , eh, would be awesome to feel one in a 260z or wutever or other some OOOOL*Z*car...
Koenigsegg finally found a worthy opponent
recently, a tuning shop got a GR Yaris engine to over 1,000hp. kinda wild
Sadly, too few customers picked the 3-cyl Koenigsegg Gemera over the added V8 option, so the 3 isn't happening for a while :-(( I think it would have saved over 100 kg which would really impact performance off the line and around bends. If (after all the decades) they really manage to make FreeValve and this light 600 hp engine work, it's perfect for basically anything. Even the GMA T.50 and T.50S might even get faster with it. Imagine it in an Ariel Atom or Nomad. A Formula 2 car. Indycar. Nascar. GT3. Hypercar.
If it really works and works reliably and efficiently, there's no end to the applications and it's just a matter of making it affordable in larger production volume.
The 3cyl is probably gonna be the more desireable of the two cars
The 3cyl is probably gonna be the more desireable of the two cars
@@andyMutale But it's not sold anymore. Maybe later special editions.
"Uh sir what do you have in the bag?"
"An Engine"
"Sir What?!"
*"DID I STUTTER?!"*
*_"Stu-tu-tu-tu-tu"_* - Turbo (probably)
@@Rose.Of.Hizaki 😂 😂 😂
😂😂😂👌👌👌@@Rose.Of.Hizaki
it's truly incredible how candid Darren is. A really incredible peek behind the curtain in an industry where that level of transparency is, like he alludes to, often met with crazy litigation haha. What a great opportunity to interview him!
I want this engine in a motorcycle!
BMW HP4 weighs 194KG and has 215HP, that is a complete motorbike.....
Or as an aircraft engine, man what a great airplane engine this could be.
@@izzyplusplusplus1004 Eh, only if you fly straight and very low. You would also need to service it every 100 flight hours or so, lol.
@@Atom224 no sir, with a turbo, the ceiling would be very high, I'm guessing in the 30k ft range. Engine management and a turbski gives ICE engines great performance, and is how the turbo got invented to begin with. And the straight thing? What are you even talking about? Control surface sizes on the wings and tailsection determine maneuverability, along with weight, so once again, no you're wrong, it would be great for an aerobatics aircraft as well.
Its not that special when you actually look at motorcycle engines ?
Gotta say Nissan has never been afraid to experiment and do something different... hats off to their racing department.. they have built some real excellent cars for the track...
Well apart from that weight being dry and without any of the ancilliaries such as that massive turbo and intercooler which it had to have to make the power (so in practice it was nowhere near 40kg), its also a one off billet race engine which not only costs a fortune but can also be designed to run on race fuel and not worry about any emissions regs.
The reason we don't see things like that in road cars is because if you want 400hp something like a 2.0T 4 cylinder adds a relatively insignificant amount of weight over a 3-pot with the usual cast parts, is in a lower state of tuen so easier to get through emissions and longevity testing and doesn't need to be made of unobtanium to deal with it.
When its in a car thats over 1.5t in the first place an extra 50kg for ease of manufacturing, cost, longevity, economy, emissions and all the rest is the obvious trade off.
Oh and on normal fuel its not making 400hp unless its also making a lot of heat. More like low-mid 300's at best. This is why the Yaris GR engine is getting close to its limits too - 280hp is great but its also only about 50hp away from being right on the edge on road fuel and with road emissions equipment.
Motorcycles are going down to parallel twins now for emissions reasons, cars for four to 3 cylinders. The gap between the piston and the cylinder lets hydrocarbons past and ruins the emissions.
Okay...wait...so 40Kg in an overhead compartment? I think folks dont apreciate how heavy 40Kg really is.
I think the overhead compartment reference was more for the physical envelope rather than the weight. To your point, I have no idea how strong those compartments are, but I certainly wouldn't want that weight over my head, dynamically loading the bin in a turbulent patch of air. 😳
40 kg is the same weight as a bag of cement (except in Japan where bags of cement are 50 kg)
@@tmatsci -- Actually, it's 88 lbs, and cement comes in 94 lb. bags. It's about halfway between a bundle of old-style roof shingles (81 lbs.) and a bag of cement. When I first started in construction, we had to carry those bundles up a ladder, about 40 bundles for the smallest roofs we did, and up to 150 of them on the larger houses. As for the overhead compartment, if you put 4 25-lb. carry-ons into one of those compartments, you're already heavier than the engine.
@@grizzlygrizzle cement bag weights depend on where you are in the world. In Australia where I am it is now 40kg per bag of cement and has been since 1973 when we changed from the old imperial measures to metric. Before metric the cement base was nominally I cubic foot of cement and weighed 94 pounds. Now that it is metric it is 40 kg or 88.1 lbs in the old measurement. One cubic foot of cement was chosen so that you could easily batch concrete by volume for example a typical foundation mix was 1 bag of cement, to 4 bags of clean sand and 7 bags of gravel aggregate. From what you posted it would appear that you live in the USA which is still using the old system.
@@tmatsci -- Right you are, Ken.
Infomercial ends at 2:58
I've always wanted to swap a 10,000rpm 4cyl like an F20 into an RX-8. You could keep the factory center-mount tach 💪🏼
This video reminded me of the small output V10 you all planned to put in the Miata. Any new updates on that?
I'd be interested in putting that katech in an MGB GT
That Katech is just half a 5.3L LS or LT V8 motor. That's why the 2.7L displacement.
True.
Surprised that they dont know.
@@jareknowak8712they said it
@@guy_autordie
Does not count.
They said it after i wrote it.
🤪
That Katech engine is badass. Its basically just a super highly strung Chevy LT which has been chopped in half.
Nissan did the same on NA Engines. The SR16VE N1 was used in the limited-production Pulsar VZ-R N1, produced from 1997 to 1998. These cars were tuned by Autech Japan. It made 200 PS (197 hp; 147 kW) at 7800 rpm and 134 lb⋅ft (182 N⋅m) at 7600 rpm. Redline of the N1 Version 2 (1998) is at 8600 rpm. This is also claimed to be the most powerful production 1.6 L naturally aspirated engine.
That photo of him holding the engine is fake. I assume this engine is too.
Sounds like it could be a great aircraft engine!
Holds up 10kg electric motor that's the size a cooked chook "This carbon fibre composite electric DC motor puts out 1000 BHP"
3:14 uhh Fernie, you missed the fact that most airlines only allowed maximum of 7 kg for carry on luggage. Not 40.
NHRA Top Fuel engine: 10,000hp, 500lbs (226kg) = 44.2 hp/kg. 'Merica drips the mic.
That is correct however it produces that level of power for 10 seconds at a time then after about 60 seconds of running needs a rebuild.
the video starts at 3:30
It is a dry sump, not an issue with preheating. you can install a heating blanket to bottle.
Let me guess.........The usable HP is attained between 18,000 and 18,200 rpm.
my peugeot 205 with a cracked engine block would cry of joy with this little thing
Perhaps manufacturers should develop engines that do 200 mpg rather than 200mph in a world where you cannot legally exceed 70-75mph!!
Electric cars basically get 200mpg. Ice vehicles actually get less mpg if the engine is to small and has to work harder. Always need the right size engine for the condition.
You’re no fun 😊
My Alpine A110s is 300hp and manages 40mpg ... just because it can do 165mph (ish) doesn't mean I have to .....unless on the Autobahn where parts are not restricted where 75mph can be exceeded 😊
It's only illegal if you get caught
Where’s the fun in that
A 2.7 litre 4 cylinder NA racing engine isn't as unusual as you may believe, in the British Hillclimb Championship throughout the 80s the engine of choice was a Hart 2.8 litre 4 cylinder that made similar power.
This could have revolutionized Nissan's lineup
@@goodale1812 can’t just make them for without knowing who will buy and if the made too much they might not sell or too little and the buyers look elsewhere.. Also don’t forget dealers mark up prices etc
and it connect to CVT.
variable compression nissan
@@ouch9326 as in, holes burned through somewhere?
@@izzyplusplusplus1004 some of them were reliable , some were not due to mass production quality control
I have a twin cylinder Suzuki 1100cc arctic cat snowmobile that has 300hp with a simple ECU flash. Some people make more power than that with a few more mod. I can hold engine it in two hands no problem. The 1000 cc Yamaha - arctic cat same thing make 300 hp no problem with ecu flash.
1:35 No, they would have (rightly) thought photoshop..
The engine is 40KG.. Totally liftable (and an amazing engineering feat)
and maybe effortlessly so for someone like Eddie Hall
but just in case you didn notice, that engineer isn't Eddie 😅
Yeah I don't think I could even lift 40KG like that, never mind pose in a relaxed manner. But PR is PR!
This is so cool I don't know how I didn't learn about this engine when reading about the delta wing. Another awesome little engine is the 3 cyl 1.0L ecoboost in the Formula Ford, I just remember that Chris Harris was blown away by it.
No, the F1 BMW turbo did not produce 1500hp. Just because people keep saying it doesn't make it true, even if it is said by ex-F1 drivers with a fading memory.
Some people agree that it made somewhere between 1300 and 1400hp in qualifying trim, with qualifying fuel. At one point, not even the BMW dyno could measure numbers as high as 1500.
Say things by their proper name, Christ almighty. BMW M12/13- Was that so hard?
But, as far as I understood that bit of automotive history, they didn't have the dyno tech and capacity to test at those insane power levels. The power levels were estimated based on comparison of lap times in qualifying trim vs. race trim.
In the end the problem wasn't so much the power but the cooling. The 1400-1500 horsepower at, give or take, a third mechanical efficiency, meant that there was roughly 2 Megawatt of thermal load to be moved from engine block to outside air. That was impossible to realise in the F1 car package of the time. Those engines, when in qualifying trim, simply overheated after one or two laps driven in anger.
@@Hydrazine1000 Bigger heat exchangers could've been used in qualifying, plus fans for cooling purposes were still allowed, if I'm not mistaken. There was simply no need for the engines to last more than a few laps, therefore thermal stress and fatigue were taken to extremes. Sometimes teams got it right, other times the engines would smoke-signal their disagreement.
I think it’s not that impressive… that turbo does like 250hp alone remove the turbo and it’s much more reasonable to see as a achievement
Imagine this thing in a Nissan Figaro.
And then proceed to the nearest runway or airport for take-off......
gma t50, vw xl1, fake engine sound , prius compact handling car like connaught 2 liter v10 engine placement
The Tesla Plaid powertrain: hold my electric beer!! 🙂
I mean the power:weight is better than what's in my car but I'll take my LS3 on 6 pounds of boost to daily all day any day. I've driven my Corvette cross country without concern, I don't think this engine would get me out of California let alone to NY and back.
No to mention the powerband on your engine will be MUCH nicer to actually use on the street. People obsess over hp per liter sometimes dont take powerband and drivability into account. Nice car mate 💪
@@lorddoobsworth144 Thanks! 😃
I immediately thought.."classic Mini"!!! Can you imagine the 40kg or Katech in one of those???? 😂😂
My son is currently building a classic mini with a Fiat 500 Abarth engine. Lots of work, but he owned a 3.5L V8 FWD mini in the past so .........
Talking about engines: Any news about the tiny V10 for the MX-5?
Great video. Keep making these deep dives.
Any V10 updates, Mike? Like, any of em?
The 400bhp Suzuki cappuccino I would build would be a very safe and normal car to drive
Toyota put 2.7l petrol 4cyl engine into Fortuner and Hilux. What's so weird about it ?
Its about the limit capacity wise for a inline 4 cyl petrol motor due to harmonics.
And Porsche had a 3.0 4cyl!
@@TC-V8 yeah, flat 4 different again
@@williamporter7495 no, the 944 S2 3.0 is an inline 4 - M44
I believe largest capacity 4 cylinder passenger car.
@@TC-V8 forgot all about him, 928 or 944 or whatever it was. True
A car guy who has old jags. I'm subscribing.
You forgot the Mazda Rotary engine. 240bhp from 1.3 L, naturally aspirated.
Not an apples to apples comparison as the rotary guzzles fuel at the rate of a big block V8
1.3L rotary is not equal to 1.3L in a piston engine. To make that 240bhp, you're moving fuel and air equivalent to a piston engine twice that size. 240bhp out of a 2.6L NA V6( a 2 rotor has 6 'chambers') is much less impressive.
Just looks like a turbo motorbike engine without the gear box
I think it is disingenuous comparing the V10 and V8 screamers, as they are Naturally aspirated where as the BMW is a closer representation being that it and Nissans are both Turbo Charged / Forced Induction. People have taken honda B and K series to near the 1500 hp range like the BMW, and they were also Turbo Charged.
Why disingenuous? It's a discussion about Hp per kg of engine weight. Completely legit comparison for the points being made
@@deanjdk Yeah hp per kg is much better than hp per liter, as an engine with much more displacement can be lighter (depending on engine design and material). Either one only takes how much power the engine makes at a specific rpm into account though, when an engine operates over a range of rpms.
I wish I looked as chill carrying 40kg
yeah i felt like more of a man again when i realised its fake 🤣
Not when you’ve got a Nissan GTR 😂
I don’t have a Nissan GTR… 🥲
@@AlchemistRL only if your transmission could take it😊
I don’t have a transmission 🤣
Or a 500hp 300ZX Twin Turbo like I do. Manual like man ofcourse.
Yeah I’d be happy with anything 😂
I remember seeing this engine at tokyo auto saloon at the nismo display. The engineering was artwork.
I like the 4 cylinder for aircraft usage. 400 HP for take off then dial back for cruse. It could also be mildly turbocharged to maintain HP at altitude...
We bikers need it in our bikes....
I was thinking aircraft applications too!
That would be fun mounted in a sunbeam stiletto 😁👍
I've been racing autocross for most of my life , and my faverite chassis is the spriget family . I can only imagine how this engine would make enemies ....
put two of em in a Mx-5
DIGLET DIGLET DIGG
Billet block, billet crank, forged pistons and hi performance rods and cam, plus vales and springs etc.. and reasonbly high boost, easy 400hp
Would be an excellent engine for an AE86! I want one.
Blew our minds, then blew up
Now pair it with a cvt to make it bulletbroof
The Tacoma uses a 2.7 as well. It's probably the biggest 4 cylinder engine
I would put that in an old Mini resto mod. Light, compact, powerful. It would be awesome
Chilled down to 150-200bhp and stuck in a 2006 Micra :D
Hey Mike, great video. WHERE IS THE V10 MX5!?
couple of questions, 1. how much hp does it make without the turbo charger ? 2. what is its headroom for expanding hp ? 3. how much torque does it make? 4. what's its reliability ?
really banging on about hp when its the turbo carrying the load isn't really 400hp, is it flat out at 400hp and isn't viable in racing, 3 cyl wouldnt be making very much torque and it is more important than hp, how long can it keep up in a long race squeezing 400hp from small engine usually become a hand grenade, is that why it never went into production
The Diglet engine would be perfect in a small trophy pick-up truck, one in the front, one in the truck bed.
I’d love to put one of those into a Skoda Fabia, but with all wheel drive. Not the hatchback, but the spacious one. Keeping all the space but adding the fun of an engine like that
That Katech engine would mage my MGB GT scream!
I like it when Mike gets the chance to nerd out a bit :)
That engine in a Datsun 1200 coupe would be sick
The package almost makes 1 engine per wheel possible.
Perfect swap for my 1970 Datsun 521 pick up!
I wonder how many other manufacturers have engines this potent that never saw mass production?
To answer your last question Mike, there really is only one answer..... Classic Mini
I remember Yamaha making an F1 engine that was absurdly light at some point, I think in the 90s. I don't think it was powerful enough or reliable enough to succeed, but it would be fun to find out what the real story was.
Whats the torque? Whats the efficiency? Whats the service intervals? Whats the weight with accessories and fluids? Whats the rev limit?
Both of these engines are probably maintenance nightmares, but at least engine out servicing won't be so bad (LOL).
Karting will be peaked with this
With a PWR like that and economy of scale to reduce costs, it seems perfect for the Aero-car market.
That engine would need massive external oil cooling and waterjets to mist the oilcooler
In 2003-2005 the best F1 V10's was around 940-950hp and weight around 84-86kg. So F1 V10 was around 11hp per kg and not "only" around 8hp/kg
With peak torque at 280 lb ft, the absolute minimum RPM that it would need (if peak HP and peak torque are at the same RPM - which almost never happens) is 7,500 rpm to make 400 hp. According to several articles on this, the engine redlines at 7,500 rpm.
07:00 that isn't at all how frontal area works. The ENTIRE front surface is frontal area, not just the tip of the nose. Stand in front and look at the car. Everything you can see, is frontal area. But yes, it is very sleek.
My North American mind immediately thinks what happens if we take this platform size it up, and make it into a v8?
Surely the amazing technology used to create the Nissan "Diglett", could be applied to build super-lightweight and efficient road car engines? If the car manufacturers REALLY wanted to, we could have lightweight, powerful and yet frugal cars. We need not go the EV-route at all. I'd be over-the-moon with a 150hp "only" version of that Diglett engine, if that means that it would translate to reliable road car engine power. Imagine a 150hp Diglett in a small 2-door car, like a 1960's Mini (I love those), and it you'd have a real fun little go-cart! Even in a more practical car like a VW Polo, it would still be amazing.
I'd put it in a Honda Jazz/Fit chassis, the second US generation 2009-12. It has the most rigid chassis, great handling, and amazing cabin volume for a subcompact lightweight car. The engine would be perfect coz the Jazz/Fit has a small engine bay space. If I wanted a sports car instead of a daily driver, Mazda Miata ist two generations, also for it's handling.
The Katech isn't based on the "LT four cylinder" it's based on the LT V8. As in, the Corvette engine.
You may also want to look into the Toyota 503E 2.1L 4cyl Turbo, a purpose built racing version of the common 3S-GT 2.0L, with an increased bore (89mm vs 86mm) to accommodate larger valves to achieve better breathing from the cylinder head. It was originally from TRD USA and used in IMSA, but eventually made it's way into the JGTC/SuperGT Winning Mk IV Supras (Toms, Sard etc) in mid-90's Japan where it put Skyline GT-R and NSX alike to complete shame, considering what it was. It was not uncommon for it to produce well over 1,000 HP at the wheels for qualifying runs, then run around 600-800 for actual racing. It was eventually restricted back to 2.0L and the original 86mm bore after becoming too dominant and also handicapped with inlet/boost restriction. Just thought this engine might have also been interesting to you, since this was back in 1995.
Now that would be a great motorcycle engine.
my 2000 subaru impreza 2.5rs 5 speed. I like that non turbo 4 cylinder engine.