bmwz4coupe
Subscriber
It will not be on the street before 2022??!! Will be interesting to see the effect of the fan...
GMA Gordon Murray's T50 hypercar
- Thread starter StartYourEngines
- Start date
-
- Tags
- gordon murray hypercar
Gordon Murray Automotive (GMA) is a British automobile manufacturer of sports cars based in Shalford, Surrey, England. Founded in 2017 by former Formula 1 and McLaren F1 designer Gordon Murray, the company's initial focus is on limited-run hand-built supercars. Its T.50 car entered production in 2023. Official website: Gordon Murray Automotive
- Status
Some cutaways of all the MR2 models. The engines are all ahead/front of the rear structs/axles.
Ferrari 308 GTB:
Porsche 911 engine behind rear axle:
Mercedes McLaren SLR (front mid engined):
CrunchSlaughtered
RPM Ruler
When the engine is longitudinally mounted everything is clear, but with a transverse engine is not that easy. You should not look at the caps of the shock absorbers, because they are also inclined. It's the center of the tire that determines the axis. Officially the Smart and the Twingo are rear engined but their engine is in front of the axis between the rear tires. How would you classify the Smart and The Twingo?
CrunchSlaughtered
RPM Ruler
The Smart and the Twingo have the same layout like the Alpine 110. A drivetrain directly taken from a fwd car and implanted in the rear.
KiwiRob
Autotechnik Ace
The smart and twingo have the engine mount slightly behind the axle, so they are rear engined, the A110 is like the MR2 the engine is mounted in front of the axle, so it's clearly mid engined.
CrunchSlaughtered
RPM Ruler
Look again at the Smart. A tip:check the exhaust for determining the possition of the engine.
The Alpine engine is installed almost right behind the driver and passengers backs, it looks very close to the cabin.
The original Alpine A110 from the 60's and 70's was definitely rear engined.
CrunchSlaughtered
RPM Ruler
As is the case with the Smart and the Twingo
bmwz4coupe
Subscriber
I think it you guys should first of all agree on the conditions, what part of the engine should be placed behind or in front og the axle? The whole engine? The middle point of the engine block? The center of gravity of the engine (weight)?
CrunchSlaughtered
RPM Ruler
Or the cranckshaft
KiwiRob
Autotechnik Ace
I'm agreeing with you re the Smart and Twingo, both Mercedes and Renault call them rear engined.
CrunchSlaughtered
RPM Ruler
The question is: Why does Renault call the Twingo rear engined and the A110 mid engined, when the layout is the same?
Bridster
Oversteer Expert
Here is a fun thing to ponder: Is the 980kg listed weight dry or kerb?
I would say it's more likely a dry weight. After all, if it lost/gained the same amount the F1 did (which was 1018kg dry and 1138kg kerb), it would mean that at 980kg kerb the dry weight would be 860kg, which just seems a bit too good to be true. However, is weight saving of 158kg compared to the F1 impossible?
What we know so far is that the T.50's Cosworth V12 is gonna weigh 50kg less than the F1's BMW V12. It's also gonna produce less torque - 450Nm compared to 650Nm for the F1 - so some of the drive train components, clutch, gearbox, drive shaft need to be slightly less beefy and therefore can be made lighter. Let's say this saves 20kg. Then we have brakes. The F1 uses steel dics, but the T.50 will almost certainly use carbon ceramic ones. This saves up some 5kg per disc, so another 20kg. This leaves 68kg to be made up by taking advantage of all the new technologies and materials that weren't available 30 years ago. Which could be possible, if still a bit hard to believe.
On the other hand, if the 980kg weight was dry, why is the T.50 only 38kg lighter, especially when the engine already weighs 50kg less, not to mention all the other stuff. Unforunately, there is a possible explanation for that. For one, more stringent safety regulations, and also the T.50 is slightly bigger than the F1. It's 12mm taller, 30mm wider and 60mm longer. Not a huge amount but it still probably adds at least a couple of kgs of material.
But to end on a high note, there is actually some evidence that the 980kg might be kerb. Gordon Murray mentions in one of the interviews that the T.50 has better power to weight ratio than the P1 GTR. The P1 has been weighed at 1547kg and the P1 GTR is supposed to be 50kg lighter, which would mean 1497kg for the GTR. So with 986bhp, that comes to 658hp/ton. If the 980kg was dry, and 1100kg would be kerb, the T.50 would only have 590hp/ton. But if the 980kg was kerb, then it would have 663hp/ton - 5hp/ton more than the P1 GTR.
This is super exciting, although I still can't quite believe the T.50 could weigh 860kg dry - it just seems totally outrageous. So I am keeping my expectations low... But WHAT IF, right?
I would say it's more likely a dry weight. After all, if it lost/gained the same amount the F1 did (which was 1018kg dry and 1138kg kerb), it would mean that at 980kg kerb the dry weight would be 860kg, which just seems a bit too good to be true. However, is weight saving of 158kg compared to the F1 impossible?
What we know so far is that the T.50's Cosworth V12 is gonna weigh 50kg less than the F1's BMW V12. It's also gonna produce less torque - 450Nm compared to 650Nm for the F1 - so some of the drive train components, clutch, gearbox, drive shaft need to be slightly less beefy and therefore can be made lighter. Let's say this saves 20kg. Then we have brakes. The F1 uses steel dics, but the T.50 will almost certainly use carbon ceramic ones. This saves up some 5kg per disc, so another 20kg. This leaves 68kg to be made up by taking advantage of all the new technologies and materials that weren't available 30 years ago. Which could be possible, if still a bit hard to believe.
On the other hand, if the 980kg weight was dry, why is the T.50 only 38kg lighter, especially when the engine already weighs 50kg less, not to mention all the other stuff. Unforunately, there is a possible explanation for that. For one, more stringent safety regulations, and also the T.50 is slightly bigger than the F1. It's 12mm taller, 30mm wider and 60mm longer. Not a huge amount but it still probably adds at least a couple of kgs of material.
But to end on a high note, there is actually some evidence that the 980kg might be kerb. Gordon Murray mentions in one of the interviews that the T.50 has better power to weight ratio than the P1 GTR. The P1 has been weighed at 1547kg and the P1 GTR is supposed to be 50kg lighter, which would mean 1497kg for the GTR. So with 986bhp, that comes to 658hp/ton. If the 980kg was dry, and 1100kg would be kerb, the T.50 would only have 590hp/ton. But if the 980kg was kerb, then it would have 663hp/ton - 5hp/ton more than the P1 GTR.
This is super exciting, although I still can't quite believe the T.50 could weigh 860kg dry - it just seems totally outrageous. So I am keeping my expectations low... But WHAT IF, right?
bmwz4coupe
Subscriber
Oh I am curious about this car!
Bridster
Oversteer Expert
cosworth.com/powertrain/case-study-t-50/
Full engine specs revealed by Cosworth.
Highlights:
- 663 PS (652bhp) at 11500 RPM
- 467 Nm at 9000 RPM (with 71% available from 2500 RPM)
- 166 PS/l
- Titanium valves, conrods and clutch housing; Titanium+Inconel exhaust
- 178kg
Global premier of the car is on August 4th!
Full engine specs revealed by Cosworth.
Highlights:
- 663 PS (652bhp) at 11500 RPM
- 467 Nm at 9000 RPM (with 71% available from 2500 RPM)
- 166 PS/l
- Titanium valves, conrods and clutch housing; Titanium+Inconel exhaust
- 178kg
Global premier of the car is on August 4th!
- Status
