|
Oh dear, there I go again quoting facts of which I don't have the complete 100% grasp.
But my understanding is that F1 engines have much shorter piston strokes, while the S2000 engine has a more normal street car stroke. So while the piston might be going up and down roughly half as often as an 16,000 rpm F1 engine's, the stroke is roughly more than twice as long. This would result in a greater piston speed between BDC and TDC, and more stresses on the con rods and piston as it speeds up and slows down from this peak velocity over and over.
Detailed specs on F1 cars aren't given out freely but I found a few here and there on the 'net.
1998 Mercedes Ilmor engine (not as high revving as newer engines) 91.00 mm x 46.09 mm
Honda S2000: 87.0 mm x 84.0 mm
Just crunching those numbers
84 / 46 = 1.826 times the piston travel
1.826 * 9000 = 16,434 rpm - the Ilmor engine would have an equivalent peak piston speed at 16,434 rpm as the Honda would at 9000.
And the trend since 1998 in F1 has been towards larger bores (allows more/larger valves) and shorter strokes (higher RPMS and displacement rules) so the strokes are almost certainly less than 46mm in a 2002 F1 engine.
Metal compatibility problems aside I think a normally aspirated 2.0 liter with 240 HP and a sweet 6 speed manual would be more un to drive around than a turbo Volvo.
Although to be honest, if I had spent $6,000 and gotten that neat engine and tranny I'd be more likely to want to put it in a Lotus Super 7 than into a Volvo. 1200 lbs/240 HP? Yahoo!
|
