Gran Turismo 7 Engine Swap Compatibility

  • Thread starter Thread starter Famine
  • 6,165 comments
  • 5,179,202 views
@Greycap is probably right. Just a quick check on Wikipedia on the 3.0L Ferrari V10 F1 engines and you get this:
"Torque output approx. 241.5–305 lb⋅ft (327–414 N⋅m)[3]"
Yes, I know that's Ferrari not Renault. Yes, I know that's the 3.0L engine not the 3.5L Engine. No, that doesn't make an argument against this any more valid.

That era of engines was still fairly free in terms of fuel use and engine consumption and their only concern was making it rev more freely and thus turn torque into power. And without those restrictions, you're still looking at (rounding up) 140 Nm/L at the end of 2005, and only 110 in 1996.

How they would have gone from 200+ Nm/L in the Renault 3.5 to 100 the year after, in the same family of engines, is very odd.
Here's the wikipedia page on that engine family btw:
en.wikipedia.org

Renault RS engine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Nothing shows anything like 700Nm anywhere, max of 461...


Another weird example of this, and with only Gran Turismo as the source as far as I can tell, is the 2008 Honda NSX SuperGT Engine. 3.5L NA V6 and it makes over 600Nm? As if. ~500Nm is more believable.


For anyone interested in trying out the numbers to see if anything makes sense, have a look at this website:

Power Torque Speed Conversion Calculator - Binsfeld

Use these free calculators to convert torque to power or power to torque. Calculate the torque of a motor using engine horsepower and engine RPM.
binsfeld.com binsfeld.com
 
Last edited:
EaztZide_84
What's the meaning of the exclamation marks in the list? Sorry if this was asked before, i couldn't find it.
Click to expand...
It's at the end of the post:
Famine
Number of exclamation marks in parentheses denotes my own comparative level of "what the actual" ness
Click to expand...
I was going to remove it at some point, but it's another one of those useful indicators of someone just copying and pasting the list for their own content.
 
TBR 427
How they would have gone from 200+ Nm/L in the Renault 3.5 to 100 the year after, in the same family of engines, is very odd.
Here's the wikipedia page on that engine family btw:
en.wikipedia.org

Renault RS engine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Nothing shows anything like 700Nm anywhere, max of 461...
Click to expand...
One thing that hasn't been brought up yet is the engine availability limit.

There was no limit initially. An engine could be built to last 1 race. When they went to 3 liters, they limited the teams to 8 engines, requiring a degree of de-tuning so that you didn't burn through all the engines before the season was over.
 
I don't know why people keep coming up with theories that somehow explain an NA engine with 200 Nm per litre. None of the preceding or the succeeding Renault engines, or any other F1 engine in the history of the sport for that matter, has had that much torque. Or in any other racing series. For one simple reason - it's not physically possible. The only proof is the figure on Renault's website and nobody seems to have thought about the chance of it being simply a mistake.

I'll be happy to be proven wrong if someone comes up with evidence that such a torque is possible from a naturally aspirated engine running on something even distantly related to pump fuel, but even 150 Nm is an extremely long shot and 200 would be another 33% on top of that. If it could be done every F1 team would have had it in those years but nobody else did and that alone tells enough.
 
Hey all, happy 2026! Quick question. I've got both of the F3500-A and B engines and in the first post it says they're compatible with the Espace F1. I've hopped into the Espace and neither shows as compatible. Am I missing something??
 
MidnightRun85
Hey all, happy 2026! Quick question. I've got both of the F3500-A and B engines and in the first post it says they're compatible with the Espace F1. I've hopped into the Espace and neither shows as compatible. Am I missing something??
Click to expand...
Scratch that. I've just re-read the post through the second part of the list (by car) and it makes way more sense. I've got the engines for the F3500's, not the Espace engine... 🤦‍♂️
 
Greycap
I don't know why people keep coming up with theories that somehow explain an NA engine with 200 Nm per litre. None of the preceding or the succeeding Renault engines, or any other F1 engine in the history of the sport for that matter, has had that much torque. Or in any other racing series. For one simple reason - it's not physically possible. The only proof is the figure on Renault's website and nobody seems to have thought about the chance of it being simply a mistake.

I'll be happy to be proven wrong if someone comes up with evidence that such a torque is possible from a naturally aspirated engine running on something even distantly related to pump fuel, but even 150 Nm is an extremely long shot and 200 would be another 33% on top of that. If it could be done every F1 team would have had it in those years but nobody else did and that alone tells enough.
Click to expand...
So everything that I've found is simply quotes from Renault on the concept, but nothing from independent sources. It could very well be "concept" numbers rather than real world numbers.


BTW, mated to the race gearbox (sold separately ;)) it makes one heck of a car. Here I swapped it into the F3500B to simulate the Ferrari V10 of Schumacher's F1-2000

 
Last edited:
Voodoovaj
So everything that I've found is simply quotes from Renault on the concept, but nothing from independent sources. It could very well be "concept" numbers rather than real world numbers.

BTW, mated to the race gearbox (sold separately ;)) it makes one heck of a car. Here I swapped it into the F3500B to simulate the Ferrari V10 of Schumacher's F1-2000
Click to expand...
Either concept numbers, or a simple unit mistake. If it was 520 Nm it would still be a stretch at 148 Nm per litre, perhaps somehow doable, but it probably can't be ruled out that whoever made the description had a massive brain fart and wrote lb·ft since it's a British website. What's certain is that when installed in the car and Prost driving, it didn't have that much.

I may have to do one of those combinations myself. 800 bhp, 700 Nm and ~500 kg sounds like a recipe for an X2019 killer.
 
Voodoovaj
One thing that hasn't been brought up yet is the engine availability limit.

There was no limit initially. An engine could be built to last 1 race. When they went to 3 liters, they limited the teams to 8 engines, requiring a degree of de-tuning so that you didn't burn through all the engines before the season was over.
Click to expand...
That likely wouldn't affect torque however. The way these engines work is that you spin them faster to make that extra power. If you only have to last 1 race instead of an entire race weekend (8 engines in an early '90s season is still only 1-2 races/engine?) you just make it rev higher and accept it'll blow up sooner. You generally don't focus on peak torque rpm, you sit on peak power.

Looking at the other engine specs, they're showing about ~420Nm peak which is far far more reasonable. 120Nm/L, perfect! Converted (roughly) torque to Nm because I'm not a filthy animal.

Engine 1:
799hp @ 14,000rpm
720Nm @ 8,000rpm (?!?)

Engine 2:
773hp @ 14,000rpm
~415Nm @ 12,000rpm

Engine 3:
719hp @ 13,500rpm
~415Nm @ 11,000rpm

Some more math that could be interesting!
If you assume a constant power and a constant final road speed (so after different gearing), 420Nm @ 11,500rpm is the same as 600Nm @ 8,000rpm. So their value suggests that engine is 20% more powerful in the ~8,000rpm range?
 
TBR 427
That likely wouldn't affect torque however. The way these engines work is that you spin them faster to make that extra power. If you only have to last 1 race instead of an entire race weekend (8 engines in an early '90s season is still only 1-2 races/engine?) you just make it rev higher and accept it'll blow up sooner. You generally don't focus on peak torque rpm, you sit on peak power.

Looking at the other engine specs, they're showing about ~420Nm peak which is far far more reasonable. 120Nm/L, perfect! Converted (roughly) torque to Nm because I'm not a filthy animal.

Engine 1:
799hp @ 14,000rpm
720Nm @ 8,000rpm (?!?)

Engine 2:
773hp @ 14,000rpm
~415Nm @ 12,000rpm

Engine 3:
719hp @ 13,500rpm
~415Nm @ 11,000rpm

Some more math that could be interesting!
If you assume a constant power and a constant final road speed (so after different gearing), 420Nm @ 11,500rpm is the same as 600Nm @ 8,000rpm. So their value suggests that engine is 20% more powerful in the ~8,000rpm range?
Click to expand...
Ya, as I said later in the thread, the numbers are likely "concept" numbers rather than real numbers. Even when Ferrari put their F1 based engine in the F50, they couldn't achieve that big torque number that Renault claims.
 

Latest Posts

Back