Diesel Land Speed Record broken by JCB

  • Thread starter Thread starter daan
  • 17 comments
  • 1,496 views

daan

Salut Gilles
Moderator
Messages
36,840
Scotland
Scotland
Messages
GTP_daan
JCB DIESELMAX HITS 350 MPH AND BREAKS OWN DIESEL LAND SPEED RECORD

Bonneville Salt Flats: Today the record-breaking JCB DIESELMAX achieved a stunning 350mph (563kph)* to break its own land speed record for diesel-powered cars set yesterday by Andy Green.

On Tuesday, JCB DIESELMAX became the world’s fastest diesel when Green drove it to an FIA-sanctioned speed of 328.767mph (526.027kph). Today he improved on that significantly with a new record of 350.092mph (563.418kph) after two passes in opposite directions, within one hour.

image.jpg


Running soon after daybreak he recorded 365.779mph (588.664kph) on his first run and 335.695mph (540.248kph) on his return, giving the average of 350.092mph (563.418kph).

As he was feted by his jubilant crew, Green said: “I am so pleased that we have got the car to 350mph which was always our ultimate goal and that was with a slow start to the second run. There is so much more to come as the car is pulling like a train and we still haven’t used sixth gear!

“Today’s record proves the potential we have always believed JCB DIESELMAX to possess. This is another great result for a wonderful team and a testament to British engineering.”

"350mph is a fantastic speed for a diesel-powered car. To have built the world's fastest diesel in such a short timescale is a wonderful achievement for the JCB DIESELMAX team,” said Dr Tim Leverton, Project Director. “What is even more impressive is to set three records – 317.021mph, 328.767mph (526.027 kph) and 350.092mph (563.418kph) in only six days.

"Once again we have demonstrated the engineering and team effort that has gone into creating this extraordinary car.”

*subject to official ratification by the FIA.

Taken from here.

And now for a real photo :p

dl_800_1233_a74e.jpg


dl_800_1236_f1e7.jpg
 
Nice, that first pic gave me a laugh. Imaging the how hilarious it would be to see that tractor actually go 350mph.
 
Nice, that first pic gave me a laugh. Imaging the how hilarious it would be to see that tractor actually go 350mph.

That is everyone's first thought when they hear JCB. That's what they do.

Interestingly, Andy Green now holds 2 Land Speed Records, diesel and outright.
 
That is everyone's first thought when they hear JCB. That's what they do.

Interestingly, Andy Green now holds 2 Land Speed Records, diesel and outright.

And SSC didn't accelerate fast enough to get the British record - he ran out of runway at 270mph.
 
:lol: That's well cool, must have some power to carry that weight fast. Is it using nitrous oxide injection?
 
I read about this last week in Autoweek (I think, it may have been Motor Trend) and they think they could have went quite a bit faster. They decided to let this record stand because their tires were only rated to 300mph, though. :lol:
 
Source: AutoExpress

Recordbreaking JCB Dieselmax missed out on 'conventional' development

The awesome JCB Dieselmax broke the oil-burning land speed record last month without ever being tested in a conventional wind tunnel, it has been revealed.

The speed machine, driven to 350mph by Andy Green in the US, was too long to fit into any of the MIRA test facility's four wind tunnels. So designers had to use digital models on computers to generate 'virtual' winds of more than 300mph to check the car's stability.
 
Why? It's not a rocket anyway it's a diesel engine. There's not much that can go faster than that and most of what can is jet powered. The fastest internal combuston engines that I'm aware of are in the low 400's.
 
I'd expect such a rocket would go faster :irked:

Thats like saying a Formula 1 car would go faster if it had turbochargers or larger capacity, yes it would but then wouldn't be able to compete in Formula 1.

In this case the car was going for the diesel speed record (especially considering who funded/supplied the car), with a rocket engine it couldn't ;)
 
Why? It's not a rocket anyway it's a diesel engine. There's not much that can go faster than that and most of what can is jet powered. The fastest internal combuston engines that I'm aware of are in the low 400's.

409mph for Goldenrod & Spirit of '76. Goldenrod had 2400bhp so JCB did really well to get 350mph with "only" 1500bhp. The previous diesel record was 235mph!
 
Yeah. I'd suspect there's a lot more friction involved with rolling something on the ground than flying something through the air, thus the "low" speeds of piston-powered cars compared to say, "Rare Bear," the famous Reno Unlimited Bearcat (528.3 mph...on a closed course). Even Green's Thrust SSC is outrun by most modern jet fighters, a few bombers, and a retired passenger plane (Concorde). Don't even bring the SR-71 into this. A Cessna private plane cruises at WELL over 100mph, (130? 150?) where most of todays cars of the same horsepower must put far more effort forth.

Given that both types of vehicles use the same set of physics that all objects in our universe adhere to, one can coclude that Friction is a big factor on the ground, and that it will be very, very difficult to get a ground-contacting form of transportation to hit the high speeds their airborne counterparts are capable of.

and if it flies, it's not a car.

So, yes, this is an achievement.
 
Rocket cars roll on the ground, they can go a hel of a lot faster. It's not the friction, friction can be overcome by power, it's the power. There's a reason land speed record cars can travel at speeds well over 700mph, and they don't fly.

Rolling resistance isn't a big factor in a cars top speed, that's overcome at low speeds however the resistance of the car breaking through the air is the main factor. The reason some jets can go faster than Thrust SSC is because of thier shape, if you put the right engines on the SSC in theory it would go faster but you have other problems such as keeping the car on the ground, that's not easy at 700mph, that means the shape of the car must be right, and not the same shape as a jet plane.
 
You also must factor in rolling resistance. I don't think you realize how much reisitance you build up at 700mph in a jet or rocket car. Friction is always present in any system, either it's static friction (which can be overcome by power) or Kinetic friction (Which is supposedly constant and is ALWAYS present) The total Friction force on a Jet (or wheel-driven, for that matter) car is not just aerodynamic. If it was, then any car could go as fast as an airplane with the same horsepower, weight, and coefficient of drag.

The reason a car moving that fast on the ground must have devices to keep it on the ground is simple: there is no ability to control it's flight once it becomes airborne. YouTube the famous Mercedes CLK-LM crashes at Le Mans for a perfect demonstration of what happens when aerodynamic devices don't work.

As well, there's a rolling resistance, caused by the the ground "giving" slightly under a car's tire. (all objects have some elasticity) This is a rather abstract effect, and while it is most definitely not noticable to the eye, the tire and car certianly feel the ridge ahead of it caused by this "Give" in the pavement. I imagine that this effect is intense enough that, combined with static friction against the ground, Inertia force of the spinning wheel, and the kenitic friction of the axles, (and drivetrain, if it's wheel-driven) not to mention irregularities in the road/salt surface, that the total of the forces holding back a car is much higher than that of an airplane, only having to deal with wind resistance.

A final note: Thrust SSC, while rather large, has a better thrust-to-wieght ratio than some fighters, If i'm not mistaken, and yet those fighters can go faster.
 
Theoretically no, air is more dense at ground level, the higher up you are the less resistance you get, the faster you go with the same power and drag has a huge effect on speed. My point is that the drag coeficient of a jet plane is a lot lower anyway than that of any car, if you build a car the same way you build a jet it is not staying on the ground, so cars are limited in design in the first place, a point you seemed to have missed. The effects of rolling resistance to the potential top speed are minimal in comparison to the effects of the power and the aerodynamics, aerodynamics that ofcourse must be designed to keep the car on the ground unlike thoes on a jet plane. I'm not saying rolling resistance has no part to play in relation to the discussion, rather that it's only a relatively small one.

Saying yeah but this plane can go faster is daft, so what, that plane is travelling through thinner air and has a lower cD.
 

Latest Posts

Back