Latest pictures of MM Enzo

Thank you for adding and sharing this wonderful information. I have found this entire thread to be a wonderful read. My best wishes to Mr. Losee and I hope to see and read more from him and his exploits. As a side note, I would LOVE to see a follow up article on MM Enzo to add to the one he did a few years ago in Car and Driver before the crash.



PDG

 

That hauler just completes the awesome'ness of this whole project!

 

The Cab-Over is powered by a Cummins Turbo, with a 5 speed Allison. More people want pictures of the truck than the Enzo!! We had several people tell us they like the car, but love the truck.

We are running C-23 (120 octane) the twin MoTeC's are working very well, the challenge has been getting the stock Bosch components and F-1 controller synced up. There are a few refinements that will be worked on over the winter. For racing purposes everything is working fine, but for street use we need those refinements.

Turbos are Precision 72mm.

 

Thank you for the kind words, we very much appreciate all the support here on FerrariChat.

Richard has a long and very favorable relationship with Road and Track.

Kevin

 

First off thanks for the response all of us are very excited for the car and to have someone like you on the board to answer our questions is awesome. What did the car put down rwhp. I think the dyno graph would be neat to look at. Not to downplay your knowladge about building cars but why 72mm's they seem large unless your really going to push the car? Underground racing is having excellent results with there twin billet 67mm gallardos putting down 1400whp.

 

Bill, thank you for the well thought out questions, I will try to answer individually.

My understanding is that the Enzo's stock wheels, tires, suspension (with the dynamic Skyhook system) and front bumper are all designed to work together for a safe 218 MPH.

Correct, but on a hard paved surface, not slick salt.

If you use different wheels and tires, I'd guess that would mess up the suspension and aerodynamics.

Wheels and tires only affect suspension geometry if for example you go with a smaller tire in the front and change the angle of caster. The tires we chose, both front and rear, are one inch taller than stock, so it did not change that angle. If we go to a smaller front, as now may be necessary, to get the narrow width tire we need, we will adjust suspension height or alignment to get the caster we want. Stock is 6.6 degrees, but speed racers prefer 10 to 12 degrees.

Did you see excessive front-end lift with the narrower tires and new bumper?

Just the opposite, the downward spring travel at 180 with the stock front bumper was about .020” with the modified bumper it was .675. We still to run the calculations of how much down force we created with the spring travel. As far as suspension, we are going straight for 5 miles, on a slick surface, that requires special tires rated for the record speed in our class. The major change aerodynamically with the tires size we must run, is lifting the car ½”, due to the larger diameter of the tires, which allows more air under the car. Something we do not want.

I'm sure you know the computer controls the flap in the stock front bumper. At high speed, the front flap is completely extracted.

The flaps are actually directly in front of the wheels, well back of the bumper. Quoting from Road and Track. (We have not found this information from any Ferrari source, so if anyone is aware of where to find it, please let me know)
Between 37 mph and 159 mph, the rear wing will extend fully, and the 1-foot-wide flaps hidden underneath the two split radiators up front stow flush with the car's underside. As speed increases, the wing will retract gradually as the front flaps are deployed. This ensures as little change as possible to the ride height and handling stability. Ferrari tells us that at 124 mph, the Enzo can generate 758 lb. of down force. The aerodynamic load tops out at 1709 lb. at 185 mph, then decreases to 1290 lb. for less drag so the car can reach its maximum estimated speed of 218 mph.
We have disabled the flaps and spoiler until we run more test runs. With the increase in power from adding the turbos, we can handle any additional drag created with the spoiler raised. What we need at higher speeds is more down force to keep the car on the course. Deploying the flaps in front, would add lift, not what we want.

Was Bridgestone OK running 45 psi in their tires at 200 mph+? Stock pressure is 32 psi.

Did we call Bridgestone and ask permission to run their tires at 45 pounds? No. Maximum pressure, as labeled on the tires, is 52 pounds. We put 45 to get more crown and lessen the contact patch with the salt. We are going in a straight line, with minimal sidewall load, and inflated under their maximum limit.

I'd be really interested in seeing what you record in the Enzo's stock configuration. Here's what's been published:
"At 124mph, the Enzo generates 758 lbs of down force. This rises to the maximum 1,709 lbs at 186mph, and then eases back to enable higher top speed. At 217mph, the down force is reduced to 1,290 lbs.”

I am aware of what has been published; frankly I am more concerned with what modifications we have to make to the car to perform on the Salt Flats. As has been discussed in previous posts, the configuration for the street will only get you so fast on the salt. To push the car faster requires aero changes, the front bumper modification, adding ballast, moving the center of force, in front of the center of gravity, limiting the air that gets under the car, adding more spoiler, etc. We already know what happens when you get air under the car at just over 200, and we do not want to repeat that on the Salt.

Thanks again for your interest,

Kevin

 

Sorry, I cannot elaborate on the dyno results, they will be disclosed in the near future. We intend to run additional dyno tests after we make some adjustments to the car, following the World Finals in October, so the first set although very impressive, will be outdated.

When the option of rebuilding the car, began to move into reality stage, Richard sought out the best people he could find for the design of the exhaust and turbo system. When we chose to work with Shane Techlenberg, we knew we had someone with multi faceted expierence in all types of racing and engine induction design, to assist with implementation of not only the turbo system, but also the electronic engine management.

Working with a company to provide computer mapping of the car, we determined the horspower required to reach our target speed. Knowing the HP needed, the 72s are the best overall choice.

The Motec's ability to contol boost levels, fuel rates, ignition timing etc, gives us the most versatile application for both our Bonneville expierence, as well as converting the car to street use later on.

One side note, on our first four runs, the highest level of boost was 1 pound, the majority of the time we were under vacumm. We have not used more than about 28 percent of throttle as well. The car is a rocket ship, but we still need to keep it on the ground!

Hope that helps answer your question.

Kevin
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Interesting ... an Alfa Spider (RWD, 105 series) has reached 250mph on salt with an engine based on the original but putting out 500hp, so one would think this car has a very long way to go.

Pete

 

Kevin, this has got me thinking: Does a driver, at any point on the salt, ever reach maximum throttle? I do realize that given the original engine's potential, not much throttle is required to reach even 150 mph (I think, technically, only around 200-250 hp is required to reach 150 mph in any case...I read that somewhere about BMWs and the 155 mph limiter they employ on their cars). You were travelling at 174-205~ish mph, and so 28% throttle with a pound of boost from an engine with quite large turbos making (I'm guessing, conservatively) around 700hp in a non-optimized state of tune makes perfect sense on a car that is as aerodynamically efficient as the Enzo, particularly in light of the body modifications your team made.

But I also know that beyond 200, increasingly more power is required for each incremental increase in speed. Your team knows that as well, as you based your initial power target on your final target speed.

Anyway, in light of my long-windedness: Is the salt so slippery that one cannot really ever use full throttle? Most of these cars, on a wet day, will, on tarmac, break traction in fourth gear at speeds high enough to make the best drivers think twice.

Thanks for your input.

Matt

 

Pete,

There are a couple of Alfa's running on the salt, one belonging to Mike Cook, a long time land speed racer. Mike had the car at Speed Week, and I am not aware of the speeds he ran, but know he has been north of 250. And there is a yellow version, that I believe has run in 230 range.

The Cook car has extensive aero modifications needed to keep the car stable, I will try to find a photograph to illustrate. The yellow car not as extreme, but still needed.

As far as our project having "a very long way to go". Perhaps so, but one small change can dramatically influence the handling of the car. We have the power, and with some minor corrections will have the stability for higher speeds. We would prefer to take small steps to keep the car and driver safe.

What you need to understand, and most land speed racers will confirm, is that this is a long process. Very seldom do veteran racers with new cars, go out there and reach the speeds to break records. For most it is a multi year process, and they are content with that, as are we.

 

Matt,

Thanks for the great question.

Yes, there are cars and motor cycles, that use close to, and even full throttle at Bonneville. The pit area is near the 3-1/2 to 4-1/2 mile mark on the course, and when cars go by on that portion of the track, you can tell by the sound of their engines, that many are close to max throttle and rpm. Factors such as final drive ratios, tire slip, weight, and a host of others all factor into the equation.

To clarify my point, we are what is described as "traction limited", meaning that we have more than enough power, the difficulty is putting it to the ground. Your observation that on tarmac on a wet day a car will break traction in fourth is accurate on the salt as well.

Richard really has to feather the throttle between shifts as the car simply wants to spin the tires, in the lower gears.

The logic behind running narrow tires, is that more weight is concentrated on a smaller surface, I know that sounds counter intuitive, as on pavement, when wet, logically you would want more tire surface contacting the ground. But the principle works. We had a streamliner run just before us that did 370, and the contact patch was 4 inches on the front, and about 5 on the rear.

The point I was hoping to relate, perhaps viewed this way, is that in 6th gear at 200 plus, we still have somewhere in the neighborhood of 72% throttle remaining. And have barely tapped the resourses of the turbos.

Thanks again,

Kevin

 

Thanks for sharing the adventure! Are there any plans for standing mile testing on pavement - or will this be strictly a salt effort?

 

Perhaps.

 

It's interesting that you haven't seen the narrower tire/wheel affect lift or drag. I thought there would be a significant difference in the air flow with the narrower configuration.

It's also interesting how the Enzo can maintain its geometry and integrity with what appears to be a much larger downforce with the new bumper.

I didn't even know about those flaps. Does the one in the front center of the stock bumper move as well?

It will be interesting to see how many changes you need to make in the end and what speed you reach. It will also be interesting to see how those changes affect the car's performance on the street. That is, is there anything you're doing for the salt that you also wouldn't want for the street?

 

1, The tires we are currently running are only 2 inches narrower than the stock tires.

2, The challenge we have now is equalizing the downforce by raising the rear spoiler to compensate.

3, The center "flap" is more of an inverted wing, and it is fixed. The modeling we had done actually shows a slightly lower pressure area where the air follows the flow of the channel behind that center opening. That is one of the reasons we blocked it off with the modified front bumper cover. For street use and curves, that area serves a specific purpose, but is problem at high speed, going straight.


4, After the speed runs at Bonneville, the plan is to remove all body mods, tame the boost on the turbos to make it more streetable, remove the fire system...well maybe not, as there seems to have been a few enzo's burn, install the stock seats, put the glass windshield back in, etc.

 

Thanks for the response. I would guess that the counterintuitive effect produced by smaller tires is similar to that of a speed boat on the water. A wider contact patch would disturb more water (and therefore more water would have to be displaced to overcome the resistance to forward motion), causing drag, whereas a smaller contact patch would disturb less water (less water displaced, etc.), causing less drag. The same applies to the salt, as salt is not completely...well, solid, as tarmac is solid.

Here's to hoping you can truly tap the resources of those turbos...

 

You are correct, it is the yellow one and I've double checked and I was wrong with the 250. He's up to ~230 as you say.

I actually meant with speed, ie. there is a lot more potential speed here .

And yes the yellow Alfa has been back over many years ...
Pete

 

Best analogy I've heard yet!! Very well stated.

Kevn

 

I can hardly wait to see the dyno graph for the car set on kill mode and in street mode. I also cant wait to see the car in street trim. For twin motecs does one control one side and the other controls the other side?

 

I am curious how fast a "stock" Enzo would be at the salts assuming the stock car does ~217MPH. You guys also talk about "years" of development to get these high speeds, what is your take on the Jaguar XFR doing 225+ with only "minor" tweaks.

http://www.worldcarfans.com/109011216143/jaguar-xf-r-is-officially-the-fastest-jaguar-ever-at-225mph

 

I honestly thought the car would be much faster. The idea of it not even exceeding its factory listed top speed is very interesting to me.
I'm curious about its estimated numbers on tarmac..


_J

 

To be honest the car with 72mm turbos depending on housing specs should put the car at near 2000hp on high boost (1700whp). The car being in vacum most of the time means it was just cruising not even in throttle. Where the jag was in it to win it. I see what you are saying but you are wrong. I belive this was just a testing excercise theres ALOT of issues that could go wrong with this car being what it is and a first of its kind.

 

What am I "wrong" about? I asked a pretty simple question, I wasn't "saying" anything...Anyone?

 

At the SCTA World Finals on the Bonneville Salt Flats, Richard Losee of RSL Racing qualified his twin turbo MM Enzo for the C\BGMS record with a down run of 221.316 MPH on 10/5/2010.

The vehicle is currently in impound and will be permitted to take to the course again tomorrow morning in an attempt for the record which was previously 213 MPH.

Shane T

 

That is super!!! I hope the record is broken and I will pray for a safe run Good luck!!!