Mazda LMP2 diesel engine

[truebeliever]

Originally Posted by joeb

Speedsource were able to get the motor to work in the GTX car last year. I have no idea what the power figures were, but they got the car to last for the typical 2:45 races. Heck I think one car even lasted for the 6 hours at the Glen.

I suspect you are correct knighty and they simply cant get the power they need for prototypes out of the 4 cylinder. That would explain the reliability problems they have been having. I hope they get the beast sorted enough to at least make it to the end of some of the races this season, but I don't see them as being competitive.

The GTX cars were never remotely competitive with other GT's, so aside of the lack of horsepower, it seems there are also other fundemantal issues going on with the Team.

[wdave0]

Originally Posted by truebeliever

The GTX cars were never remotely competitive with other GT's, so aside of the lack of horsepower, it seems there are also other fundemantal issues going on with the Team.

Once they got the engine systems to work they had driveline problems because of too much torque for parts designed for gas engines. Apparently that's one of their bigger problems still. They also have apparently dialed back power to help with this but so far the result is just a slow, unreliable showcar. Unfortunately diesel specific transaxles etc. don't exist and bespoke stuff (a la Audi/Pug) costs a large fortune.

[Tim240z]

Originally Posted by wdave0

Once they got the engine systems to work they had driveline problems because of too much torque for parts designed for gas engines. Apparently that's one of their bigger problems still. They also have apparently dialed back power to help with this but so far the result is just a slow, unreliable showcar. Unfortunately diesel specific transaxles etc. don't exist and bespoke stuff (a la Audi/Pug) costs a large fortune.

Is the engine also being used as a stress member in the P2 chassis?

[knighty]

Originally Posted by wdave0

Once they got the engine systems to work they had driveline problems because of too much torque for parts designed for gas engines. Apparently that's one of their bigger problems still. They also have apparently dialed back power to help with this but so far the result is just a slow, unreliable showcar. Unfortunately diesel specific transaxles etc. don't exist and bespoke stuff (a la Audi/Pug) costs a large fortune.

really it does, Ian Dawson solved the problem via using an old IndyCar based gearbox, which I believe was easily available from Hewland with a big selection of ratios and options etc......it was easily enough to handle the 1100NM generated by the VW based 5.0L V10 turbo diesel.......yet again another piece of poor preparation for something obvious that was going to happen.

From the engine bay images I saw in the race car engineering article recently, the Mazda I4 2.2L engine is not fully stressed, it uses side A-frames, and has a unique lower sump that was reduced by 100mm in height, I think its fair to assume its semi-stressed......fully stressing such a narrow engine in an LMP based car will always end in tears, they just dont have enough section like a V-type engine, but even with a V-type engine you still need to be very careful when fully stressing it without A-frames

[truebeliever]

Originally Posted by wdave0

Once they got the engine systems to work they had driveline problems because of too much torque for parts designed for gas engines. Apparently that's one of their bigger problems still. They also have apparently dialed back power to help with this but so far the result is just a slow, unreliable showcar. Unfortunately diesel specific transaxles etc. don't exist and bespoke stuff (a la Audi/Pug) costs a large fortune.

One assumes the engine does not put out prodigeous amounts of BHP, so why would it then produce enormous torque to break things? Don't believe that was the case with the GT unreliability issues.

[chernaudi]

The Mazda engine is a diesel, and diesels tend to have a significantly higher torque output than an equal-sized gasoline engine. For instance, the 3.7 liter TDI V6 out of the Audi R18 or the 3.7 liter HDI V8 out of the second generation Peugeot 908 made about the same power and same torque as the 7.0 liter V8 out of the Corvette C6R GT1 car, which is about 600bhp and 650+lb/ft of torque.

It's logical that stuff designed for a "normal" LMP2 engine might not stand up to the torque of a "small" stock block diesel engine even.

Marshall Pruett said that the Oreca/Xtrac LMPC gearboxes were built as if to be used in dump trucks or tractor trailers, so it should be adequate for the Mazda diesel. Clearly the Lola/Hewland gearbox isn't. And even the Lola powered by the VAG 5.0L TDI V10 mated to a a beefed up Lola/Hewland gearbox (using Champ Car internals) still broke a lot of gearbox parts, especially half shafts. I saw that car race at Le Mans and it had all kinds of problems, and it was a broken gearbox that killed it. You need some beefy parts to handled the increased torque of a diesel.

[Richard117]

Originally Posted by truebeliever

Hello people, no diesels permitted in LMP2, so far as I am aware?

Diesel is allowed in LMP2, take a look at page 19:
http://www.24h-lemans.com/wpphpFichi...tions-lm-p.pdf

[Maelochs]

Another thing to consider is that the Dyson AER/Mazda 2-liter I4 won the ALMS P1 title in 2011, and when it was running was apparently more powerful than the HPD 3.4 used by Muscle Milk.

Whether Mazda/SpeedSource can harness the torque and develop the power remains to be seen, but the idea that the engine is too small ... I seem to recall some fairly quick cars using 1.4-liter turbos winning at Le Mans.



(Not my photo---wish I had been there but in those days all my sports car racing was done via magazine several weeks after the event.)

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

I seem to recall some fairly quick cars using 1.4-liter turbos winning at Le Mans.

psstt.. 2.0l (1997cc) V6 turbo for the A442, 2,138cc for the A443. 1.4 was the turbo vs. NA multiplier.

[nkoske]

Originally Posted by truebeliever

Hello people, no diesels permitted in LMP2, so far as I am aware?

I thought 8.0 liter V-10s were not permitted in GT2.

oh wait...

You've heard of waivers right ?

[Lanky Turtle]

Here's one that made 600+HP with a 2.1L 4cyl, as well the subsequent Probe.

[cmk]

Perhaps the difference between a 2.2L 4-cyl heavily production-derived diesel and a ~2L 4-cyl purebred race motor needs to be considered here? It's not really the architecture of a small displacement 4-cyl, period, that's the real issue here. It's the nature of this specific engine, for these specific rules.

I mean, the BMW M12/13 1.5L I4 turbo F1 engine cranked out something well north of 1000bhp in qualifying trim if asked to, but that's not exactly relevant to the Mazda lump, is it?

[knighty]

Originally Posted by truebeliever

One assumes the engine does not put out prodigeous amounts of BHP, so why would it then produce enormous torque to break things? Don't believe that was the case with the GT unreliability issues.

I was thinking about this last night.......to accompany the 457bhp power figure "Mazda" have also quoted a torque figure of 580Lb/Ft......or in other words 786NM......really this is not such a high figure when you look around the pit-lane, both the HPD 2.8L and Ford Ecoboost 3.5L V6 twin-turbo engines are generating fair torque also which is in the region of 800NM.......and like said above by chernaudi, the GT engines are generating huge torque, 650lb/ft = 881NM

So my conclusion is there is nothing wrong with the gearbox, they are just using it as an excuse for their poorly planned engine that keeps failing, I also heard they are breaking driveshafts as they underestimated the higher driveshaft angles that occur on the daytona banking........which again is not strictly a gearbox problem......smoke and mirrors + BS I say

[TF110]

Excuses aside, I hope they solve the problems and make waves. Mazda has always been a favorite of mine. They need help, hopefully they make a revelation.

[Maelochs]

@Fogelhound: Arghhh! I feel extra-stupid for having forgotten that one.

@cmk: Didn’t BMW use used stock blocks for that project? I recall hearing about how the engineers looked for old blocks in junkyards to build the F1 motors.
http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=46870
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe...ticle14981527/

Obviously, whether or not ther 72% (quoted figure) stock SkyActiv motor can put out the power and handle the stresses is not related to what other engines have done or can do.

No reason to think Mazda will be able make this one perform, and equally no reason to think they won't.

I'd like to see them succeed just for the oddity and variety.

[truebeliever]

Originally Posted by knighty

I was thinking about this last night.......to accompany the 457bhp power figure "Mazda" have also quoted a torque figure of 580Lb/Ft......or in other words 786NM......really this is not such a high figure when you look around the pit-lane, both the HPD 2.8L and Ford Ecoboost 3.5L V6 twin-turbo engines are generating fair torque also which is in the region of 800NM.......and like said above by chernaudi, the GT engines are generating huge torque, 650lb/ft = 881NM

So my conclusion is there is nothing wrong with the gearbox, they are just using it as an excuse for their poorly planned engine that keeps failing, I also heard they are breaking driveshafts as they underestimated the higher driveshaft angles that occur on the daytona banking........which again is not strictly a gearbox problem......smoke and mirrors + BS I say

Again my friend, touche

If the engine puts out anywhere near those figures quoted, on their dyno, then one can assume the dyno doesn't show the right figures.

Todays drive line, shafts, tripods and so on, are off the shelf products which have become fairly bullet proof, used by most people and *IF* prepared and assembled correctly, will do the job asked of them.

One has to wonder how long Mazda wants to keep funding this team with very poor results? The GT cars were a joke, it would seem that they perhaps should have done sufficient *private testing* with these P2 cars before they brought the cars out in public to be so far off the pace?

A variety of equipment is always welcome and wanted, but doesn't actually serve too much purpose when it performs in this manner. With a whole year to get the engine/team sorted and seemingly failed to do so, what prospects are there over the horizon?

[Speed-King]

I also heard they are breaking driveshafts as they underestimated the higher driveshaft angles that occur on the daytona banking........which again is not strictly a gearbox problem......smoke and mirrors + BS I say

To be fair, Porsche/CORE were reported to have had the same problems. If it can happen to Porsche...

[wdave0]

This may all be an inexpensive proof-of-principal exercise. If it looks possible to make it work full out without embarrassment Mazda might really belly up to the bar - say (my dream deal) Dyson/AER - Dyson know that chassis and AER is a full on engine company. The problem with Speedsource is that they are completely outside their experience or specialty other than the Grand Am/Daytona/Florida connection.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

To be fair, Porsche/CORE were reported to have had the same problems. If it can happen to Porsche...

Wasn't this (extreme drive shaft angles at Daytona) also a problem for the Porsche DP from a few years ago. Point being... It is known gotcha. It shouldn't be catching teams out.

Richard

[CyberMotor]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Wasn't this (extreme drive shaft angles at Daytona) also a problem for the Porsche DP from a few years ago. Point being... It is known gotcha. It shouldn't be catching teams out.

Richard

At the first Road Atlanta race for Panoz, I was in the Panoz paddock and they had just broken another 'prop shaft' and did not have a spare. Don got on the phone and found that they had one in the UK. He then asked, "Has the Concorde left London yet? If not, get it on the Concorde and we'll have a jet in NYC to meet it and have it back here in the morning."

Wow! I thought, "It must be amazing to be able to have options like that!"

So, yes it seems to be a problem that has given many teams headaches. Seems like I remember Corvette having issues with prop shafts a few years back when they transitioned in a new car.

[wdave0]

Originally Posted by CyberMotor

At the first Road Atlanta race for Panoz, I was in the Panoz paddock and they had just broken another 'prop shaft' and did not have a spare. Don got on the phone and found that they had one in the UK. He then asked, "Has the Concorde left London yet? If not, get it on the Concorde and we'll have a jet in NYC to meet it and have it back here in the morning."

Wow! I thought, "It must be amazing to be able to have options like that!"

So, yes it seems to be a problem that has given many teams headaches. Seems like I remember Corvette having issues with prop shafts a few years back when they transitioned in a new car.

Prop shaft is different from driveshaft in this case - driveshafts would more correctly be called half-shafts. Propshafts connect engine to rear and don't change angle much if at all but - that said I remember an in car of a Mazda 6 throwing a propshaft late last season. The Porsche DP half shaft issue was Penske's first race with the DP, their approach was to run the snot out of it and see what would break. Their aggressive set up made them much faster than everyone else but overworked the half-shafts (hardly massive torque from the NA Porsche 6). The fact that Speedsource is having half-shaft angle issues is simply a sign of their inexperience with this kind of car.

[chernaudi]

The Corvette prop shaft issues were from '07 when they were trying to run a cylinder deactivation system to be used under caution and with the pit road speed limiter. Trying to run a 7.0 liter V8 like a 3.5 liter four cylinder--and with a crossplane crankshaft--wasn't the brightest of ideas in execution, though the concept was sound, and a lot of car companies do that today with road cars, just not with racing engines. Engine in deactivated mode just made too many vibrations and shook apart propshaft fittings.

It took a while for Speedsource and Mazda to overcome problems with the engine when used in GX--neither organization have the advantages of say Audi or Peugeot, such as working with a bespoke engine mated to a bespoke chassis and seemingly limitless amounts of dollars and euros and an equal litany of technical resources to work with.

Maybe trying to coax an extra 100hp to be competitive with the DP/LMP2 cars is asking too much for a tiny stock block diesel...

[Maelochs]

"• Porsche put thousands of miles on its Le Mans-winning 991 GTE-Pro chassis last year with a two-car WEC program, but the muscular cars were never subjected to the kind of driveshaft angles and loadings that Daytona International Speedway presents. Multiple driveshaft failures kept the Nos. 911 and 912 GTLM cars off track and in the garage as Porsche and their partners at CORE autosport sought answers to the problem. Look for the cars to return with beefier solutions connecting the transmission to the wheels."
(http://www.racer.com/imsa-roar-befor...icle/328298/3/)

Mazda had never run a mid-engined car at Daytona. Porsche had. Yet even Porscher had some issues--and that's Porsche North America, not some guy who bought a Porsche.

Propshaft issues are something else entirely--not sure why the propshaft couldn't handle the loading, but apparently ...

I see Mazda's efforts here to be similar to their GX debut--using the race as a test, not caring about winning, in fact using as much of the season as needed to test, rather than renting a track and doing private testing.

I don't think they aren't serious; more like they (like Toyota) have a limited budget but hope for big results.

[nkoske]

Hopefully this Mazda doesn't end up like this



Guess a top gear test got out of hand.

http://www.topgear.com/uk/photos/maz...ire-2013-11-29

[Matra-simca]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Another thing to consider is that the Dyson AER/Mazda 2-liter I4 won the ALMS P1 title in 2011, and when it was running was apparently more powerful than the HPD 3.4 used by Muscle Milk.

Whether Mazda/SpeedSource can harness the torque and develop the power remains to be seen, but the idea that the engine is too small ... I seem to recall some fairly quick cars using 1.4-liter turbos winning at Le Mans.



(Not my photo---wish I had been there but in those days all my sports car racing was done via magazine several weeks after the event.)

I was at Le Mans in 1977. Renault's assault was a dismal failure but the single turbo V-6 engine was a fantastic sounding beast, especially on the Mulsanne Straight and thru the Porsce Curves. Renault put things right the next year following extensive endurance at Ohio's Proving Ground where they could mimic the nature of the Mulsanne Straight and stress the V-6 like no other.

For the fans, single turbos are the way to go as jamming all those exhaust pulses through one exhaust pipe produces a wonderfully crisp and somewhat louder sound. The Porsche 962 as run in GTP/Group C is a perfect example. Both effectively putting out the same power but oh so much different in character. To hear the 962s spool up on as they launched onto Daytona's banking was sheer magic, unlike Le Mans where the twin turbos sounded rather indifferent. On another note, it's too bad but Ford's Ecoboost V-6 in single turbo trim could have been a real crowd pleaser.

Todd