Thanks for the update, tjs1. It looks like someone is planning to race the Enzo. Wow!!! Also thanks to Napolis for this nice shot of his P 4/5. I realy like those 'under the skin' shots. In fact, if I may... Here are 2 threads with loads of similar interesting shots: http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=234588 - http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=227108
That's a very clean integration. What about shear strength? That is, the bolts tearing through the carbon fiber in a side impact. I suspect a steel plate would be embedded in the carbon to help that.
It's plated on the bottom and glued and sandwiched as well as through bolted. The bars that attach to the rear suspension are plated and bolted to the rear roll hoop as well which ties it all together. Even though the diameter of those tube seems smaller than what the MM Enzo uses it's built from a very high strength alloy and if P 4/5 is dropped on it's roof it deflects less than .5 of an inch. Best
I had no idea that was there.. I think I would have to nominate that for the slickest cage install I've ever seen, it's just too bad you don't have a removable panel to show it off.
Off topic, but wanted to ask: Jim, why wasn't this included in the original structure? Is it simply not necessary for normal crash regulations, or did your custom cabin design necessitate stronger roll-resistance? It just seems like a pretty simple, common-sense part of a hi-performance car. Cool picture nonetheless. And keep the updates on MMENZO's rebuild coming, please!!
By original structure I assume the Enzo. Not required and VERY expensive to fabricate in the alloy we used which is thin enough to fit within the structure. Beryllium is also very toxic when welded or machined, (Not when that's finished) and very few are able to fabricate it safety. http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/beryllium/index.html "beryllium is a critical component of many military and aerospace applications, and though it is expensive to produce, costing more than silver, it is not often replaced by other materials."
Hehe. I may have to make a trip down next Monday if you will be there. Thanks for the updates and good to hear from you. It looks like it's going well!
Crikey that sounds the business. Jim, I imagine you've been asked this already but do you think the 458 is in any way influenced by your car? To me it is, just having a quick look at the two tone 458 pictures i saw, Ferrari have clearly introduced beauty back into their cars as a matter of priority. Obviously i dont know what Im talking about but short and sweet, my opinion is that your car and the 458 have 'the look' of a supercar and ooze beauty, something that has been missing since the F50. Each to their own though regards, Matthew
While this wasn't addressed to me I agree. And do think it was influenced by it. With that said I am still hoping for a modern day Testarossa. MSRP $350k without options...low 4's fully equiped. Something more exotic and supercar looking to slot in between the 599 and the actual super ferrari (F40, F50, Enzo).
The main problems we found with the Enzo in the wind tunnel was too much inlet and not enough outlet. Because of outlet restrictions the inlet air actually backed up and created drag. Another issue was unbalanced downforce. It will be very interesting to see how your CAD program sees it vs what we saw. IMO an issue you have to address is getting more tire especially with your HP increase. I'd pay a lot of attention to this. Please keep us up!
Bugatti has a 365mm rear tire. I am guessing the stock enzo is 335 or 345. That wouldn't be a bad start.
If I may ask, what do you two petrol heads mean with 'non-balance in the car'? My knowledge of aerodynamics is just enough to understand the importants of it. And that small changes to the shape of a car can have a huge effect on the handling at high speed or low speed for that matter. Do you mean it is very unstable and lacks proper grip at a range of specific speeds? Is the Enzo perhaps not realy thought through enough? Or is it like form above function (a proper aero-package) instead of the other way around, like most people would expect with the Enzo. I might blow this whole thing up way bigger then it actually is, but I remember that people where saying the Murciélago was instable as well. One guy even has a website claiming the car is dangerous. He crashed his car and tells all about it: http://www.lambounfall.de/indexe.html If you think even further, it might even explain some accidents, perhaps... Maybe more supercars are not all that aero-ballanced out so not to harm the design. Just my 2cents.
There are several issues here. An imbalance between inlet and outlet into the engine compartment for example can cause aerodynamic drag and poor engine cooling but in most cases will not unsettle the car. An imbalance between front and rear downforce can cause real handling issues. Here's a good discussion of some of these issues: http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=232922
Not the best pics, but a few taken in 2004 at the Monterey Historics (Laguna Seca). If my memory serves me correctly, Losee was doing a few laps in support of the Make-A-Wish Foundation. Back then I was thrilled to see the very same Enzo I had read about in July 2003's R&T. Little did I know that it would become even more famous with the chop and second R&T article, the tragic accident, and now the rebuild/TT. So happy to see its peaks and valleys didn't end in a valley. My best to Richard. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login