The Indy 500 engine they had to outlaw
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 07. 2024
- In 1994 Indycar powerhouse Penske exploited a loophole in the engine regulations to dominate the Indianapolis 500. How did they do it? Our technical expert Jake Boxall-Legge explains the story of how the engine that would be dubbed the Mercedes-Benz 500I was created - a project so secret that many of Penske's employees had no idea it was being developed until it was almost time to take it to the Speedway
- Sport
"They called it 'The Beast,' but just what was so special about it?"
The world may never know.
exactly ....clickbait is so gay
@@kravmaga7070 lol
Yeah I rewound the video to see if i missed something. WTF
More cubic inches, more boost, more horsepower.
It had so much power. More displacement and more boost. Because of the old tech, pushrod design, it was allowed in the rules. For one year!
Can you do a video about the engine next?
Yeah - what a wanky video.
H
Amen to that.
I will preface my comment with the view that i massively appreciate anyone producing motorsports videos/content....
Sadly i wouldn't think that these kind of channels would make a video from an engineering perspective as they would be too scared it may be too specialised and (more crucially) wouldn't attract enough views. Although a video telling us nothing at all new is also massively disappointing.
Or maybe they aren't so mechanically inclined as to even want to explain what made the engine what it was.
Im gutted to be honest.
Hope you're all well and good and staying safe.
Kay Mann engineering explained has shown us that that’s not the case. There’s a market for in depth looks at the automotive industry. This kind of video gives nothing to enthusiasts and is just relying on the cool story in the title and thumbnail to make you think it’s going to be worth watching. Agreed. Total waste of time, and I’ve set this channel to do not recommend.
"Short pushrods" isnt enough for you?
wasted almost 4mn of my life for a video that was so light in details it could float away.
No joke man it was like the valve float on push rod engines
lol! true
put on your skinny jeans and have a sip of soy milk. then you'll understand the vid.
@@taurusmonkey8780 understand the video??? What does that have to do with him not telling us any specs
@@oofman1920 Get with the program. That's the first sacrament of the Millennial. Why worry about OHC vs OHV when a new beard oil is coming out? When you can start up a Dot.Com and be worth 50 billion over night, the true value of things are irrelevant. This generation doesn't have a passion for cars. They are disposable. Things like "engine specs" will never cross their minds. And, a 30 year old girl wouldn't appreciate a Ferrari 288 GTO. Unless it had Red Bull paint job. Come on, you're showing your age. chant with me..."Click, Like and Subscribe." that's what gets the ladies!
Wow, short pushrods and slippery bearings.....don't get too technical with us!
It's all ball bearings nowadays.
Jeshkam Preferably Prestone, no make that Quaker State
:-D
@@jeshkam And you have built how many engines? And less than 50% of electric motors have ball or roller bearings. Many two cycle engines use roller bearings.
Friction robs 25% of power from the engine. Cooling system another 25%. Of bearing/ring friction only about 35% can be retrieved. But that is about 9% increase over all. In the 600 HP realm that equates to 54 HP increase, without increasing thermal load. Higher RPM means higher HP. Lighter PR's mean higher RPM. There is a lot of power available if you know how to take advantage of the rules. Petty had to deal with it in NASCAR with the 392 Hemi. Before banned. That motor put him and Garlitts in the history books. I had one in a 17' Drag boat. Wicked.
That would be closely guarded specs owned by Penske and probably adapted by MB.
Aside from the pros and cons of whether or not Penske used a "loophole" for the design and building of the 500i engine; I always admired the guy for his innovative work that could take non-competitive racing cars and make them competitive. If the Mark Donohue book is still available, "The Unfair Advantage," I highly recommend that book which gives insights into the early years of Penske Racing. Penske challenge in NASCAR was making the American Motors Matador sedan competitive. He succeeded to get a victory for American Motors at the Riverside 500 stock car road race . . . not from some magic with getting more horsepower out of the engine, but to install the largest disc brakes possible in the sedan . . . while all the other NASCAR regulars were still using drum brakes, the disc brakes were not subject to fade late in the race . . . so the Donohue driven Matador was still racing the last 25 laps at the same speeds as it was in the first 25 laps. Penske took the brakes one step further with installing a quick-change apparatus on the car so that all the brake pads could be changed in a minute.
When I read that book some 40-plus years ago, it inspired me to approach challenges from "outside the box" to solving issues . . . where it served me well in various workplace projects; as I approached them to handle them in unique ways aside from the conventionally accepted methods. I was awarded a sizable financial bonus for one project as management was amazed with its innovativeness and how it did not disturb the workplace employees . . . where the approach was something never seen before by company management, nor by the coordinated outside vendor.
I really wish people would stop saying that Penske used a “loophole” or found a way to “bend the rules”. I know it gets headlines to say that. But if you really think about it, Penske was under the exact same rules as EVERYBODY ELSE in 1994. The rulebook specifically allowed two distinct engine formulas to be used .... a “purebred”, overhead cam engine and a “stockblock” pushrod engine (with larger displacement of 209ci and more boost). The conventional wisdom was that the pushrod engine would never be able to be successful in a race (look at all of the Buick stock blocks that grenaded ).Just because the “conventional wisdom” used by the majority of teams that year was to use the “purebred ” doesn’t mean that Penske “bypassed” the rule book. All of the other teams had the EXACT same opportunity and chose not use it.
PS
1. The engine had a single turbo, not twins
2. Penske did not have to convince ILMOR to take the project .... he was one of the owners
3. There was NO ... NO .... Mercedes Benz money involved in the project (read the excellent book by Jade Gurss titled “The Beast). It was all Penske money and he went to MB late in the project and offered them a “gift” of branding the engine (There were some big $$$$ benefits post-race as a result the “gift”. Mercedes would eventually acquire Detroit Diesel from Penske Corp for a very substantial sum).
3. The engine was not ever banned. USAC lowered the allowed boost levels immediately after the race.
4. Mercedes didn’t know the engine would be banned. In fact ILMOR had built blocks (valued in the millions ) in anticipation of large orders for 1995 stockblock engines. Then USAC unexpectedly lowered the boost levels again making the engine ineffective and turning those blocks into large paperweights.
Correct, the Buick\Menard engines fell under the same category.
its the new in thing. Anything that is perfectly legal is a 'loophole'
@@1320crusier Well said!
Despite all this, it's undeniable that they made the better engine and won - Only to have their engine (effectively) banned from the competition. "Lowering the boost level to make it uncompetitive" is no different than telling them flat out they weren't allowed to use it.
Rules or no rules, I still think it's a shitty decision on the part of the race organizers to put restrictions on what is supposed to be incredibly advanced engineering and racing. Telling me I can't use 4 wheel steering and high boost pressure to go faster is such a stupid tactic of allowing otherwise useless teams a chance at winning.
Personally, I believe that if a company finds it worthy to dump millions of dollars into a specific engine, then there should be no stopping them.
@Peters6221 That's not my point - The fact is that they still changed the regulations to make this no longer a useful design. They could use a DMB 1100 if they wanted to, there's zero regulations preventing them from it, and it's completely legal, but it has no advantage and it *might as well be banned.*
For a piece that promises to be about and engine I have to say that there is very little about the engine. Here was I thinking that Autosport was detail oriented and demanding their readers/viewers to be into the technical stuff, yet this video is just lightweight talk and no real details on the enigine - not even specs on how it ran with like revs and power.
zzzzz
that's what wikipedia is for, dude
@jerry metcalf Which is unfortunate, but still they made a video which promised to be about an engine only it is more about what the engine meant.
Is because there probably isn't any technical information they kept everything a secret
There is a whole book about it by Jade Gurss, titled The Beast. He even posted in the comments below. And there is a couple of pages about it in Karl Ludvigsen's book "Classic Racing Engines." The engine made 1040 Hp at 9800 rpm according to Ludvigsen's book. The big trick that they pulled in the design of the valvetrain was the use of oscillating cam followers instead of the typical reciprocating followers. The engine's combustion chamber design was unique being sort of a Hemi with a rotated valve set.
A lot of factual info is wrong in this video (as is the norm with Autosport). That engine had a single Turbo, not twin. It wasn't banned either. They changed the rules for less turbo boost with that rule.
Max G - Correct👍
I was on one of the team's that "got crushed" by this display of engineering dominance. We had no clue at the time 😕
Those were some great years though...excellent memories 😊
@@billkattkatt1693 Engineering dominance? They just took advantage of a loophole in the rules, they didn't do anything significant from an engineering perspective.
@@PistonAvatarGuy But that is engineering dominance. Engineers are problem solvers. It's their job to look for loopholes, then design to exploit those loopholes.
@@bepis254 Rules aren't engineering, they're just rules.
Is there anything Autosport has been correct about this year? FeRraRi FaSTeSt CaR
It's a small world, I have a neighbor who was deeply involved in the development of this engine. It was fascinating to hear first hand the stories about the development of this engine. He even had some of the left over parts of the engines . Penske knew the engine was a rule beater that would only get one season before it would be banned.
i was really hoping to know more about that engine you didint even tell any specs of it
Which means it's still top secret and the design is still probably being used in R&D.
@@redhed6971
The engine itself is nothing special from an engineering standpoint: The regulations allowed a pushrod engine a greater displacement and higher turbo boost.
Without the requirement for stock blocks, Ilmor (not Mercedes!) could build an apt racing engine to take advantage of the regulations.
Short push rods and slippery bearings...what else would you possibly want to know???
WiKa There is a book called “Beast” by Jade Gurss that tells the entire story and has details and pictures of the engine.The failures as well as the successes are told.It was written as a tribute to Paul Morgan.
@@williamstanfield1216 It's a good read
This told me nothing. Enjoy your ad revenue
ad block plus
Next time they will give the dimensions, material, and weight of each part, as well as a downloadable dataset.
It wasn’t banned, USAC just lowered the max boost to make it uncompetitive.
@Lucas de Abreu No, the engine was still allowed to run MORE boost than the OHC engines, while also retaining its displacement advantage. So, even with more boost, and more displacement, it STILL couldn't compete.
Regulations were changed so that the engine in it's current form was no longer allowed i.e. it was banned
@@rockerlkj no, a ban is to say outright you are not allowed without changing the rules, as was done with Ford how many times...
What you are talking about is creative "banning". You can still run it, as long as you adapt to the new rules.
@@LeonKotze70 liek 2 strokes in MotoGP
@@1320crusier that affected every manufacturer. And at that stage, 2 strokes were banned from 90% of formats.
Here are the engine specs: The Mercedes-Benz 500I was a 3.43L (or 3430CC) V8 with a 6 speed transmission and mid-engine turbocharger. It produced 1024 horsepower which overshadowed many of the other Indy 500 engines at the time. The loophole mentioned concerns allowing stock-block and later purpose built pushrod engines in the Indianapolis race itself by the USAC which was a different governing body than CART who oversaw the other races. There's a book concerning the car this engine was mated to, the PC-23, and the fallout of its use by Jade Gurss called Beast.
Yes, the book is worth reading!
I think it would also have been worth mentioning that this engine had a displacement of 3.43 L instead of the 2.65 L of the overhead camshaft engines.
It was also allowed more boost from the turbocharger. Engines based on the Buick V-6 were very powerful but had endurance problems.
It was mentioned at the start of the video ffs
Shocking level of accuracy and research, which is becoming the Autosport standard :O
Is this sarcasm? They didn't even get the turbo amount correctly... Pathetic.
All I got from this was...
Someone read and understood the rules
And had good engineering skill to build a good engine.
What a misleading title.
And missinformed video. Engine was never banned, rules changed, it wasn't even a fkn twin turbo v8
Don't forget the short pushrods!
It was unable to compete for 2 seasons, even with 30% more displacement and 15% more boost, but it was a good engine designed by good engineers?
Sounds suspiciously like a chevy indy engine smokey yunick built for indy. Same 209ci, also pushrod 2v but with twin turbo not a single turbo. Allegedly in one configuration it made 1300hp but it was before the days of electronic fuel injection and of course it had fueling issues so maybe didn't make as much of a splash as penske and mecedes. a similar rule was exploited by BMW in f1 who took a 1.5l i4 and turboed it up to 1400hp using a stock block rule.
Sanctioning bodies should allow whatever mythical engine a team decides to build but regulate the air scoop and providing a restrictor plate. Sure you can have a 500ci v8 with a tunnel ram and 180degree headers... But you have to suck all your air through a straw! Power Specific air consumption doesn't really change much from engine to engine, the best teams would only be a few percent above in hp. The best way to cheat with a restrictor plate is to manipulate the incoming air so it forms a vena contracta in the right spot. If the sanctioning body wants to take it a step further they could use a venturi instead of a plate so the teams couldn't manipulate it too much.. No need for rules to be overly specific.
@@danieldimitri6133 I don't think that F1 had a rule requiring that a stock block be used, as Honda (who was dominating at the time) had a purpose-built V6 that was making around 1,400 hp. Also, BMW wasn't making 1,400 hp, 1,280 is what is claimed by the engine builders.
As author of the definitive book about the pushrod engine (BEAST from Octane Press), I can say that many of the facts in this feature are incorrect. But, thanks for covering the 25th anniversary of the last, great innovation at the Indianapolis 500.
I Really didn't get it. More turbo for pushrods or what?
Sounds like a great idea.
Got any further details or links about it.
Thanks.
@@troelsnielsen2848 In 1994 the push rod motors (lower RPM's) were allowed to run more boost that the over head cam motors (higher RPM's). It was a completely different animal, er, ah, beast.
I bought your book, literally bc of your reply. Thank you!!
wow holy shit talk about a brains trust,
thanks so much for sharing, Marc.
I hate seeing that so much when talented people put their heart and soul into something only to be shafted buy some talentless bean counters that run multi-nationals,
did they all live in Sydney, I live there myself.
is that where the golf ball looking intake port theory come from?
would make a good story to try and at least make people aware of whom actually invented the products.
if there's stuff you don't want to share in public my contact details are,
email: millerchassis@gmail.com
PH: 0404 960 160.
You lost me at 'candle light'.
Me too... do they really expect anyone to believe it?
@@celtisafricana4984 I put it to you sir that they not only had light bulbs and electricity but also a premium coffee machine! Perhaps they are confusing #firstworldproblems with actual acts of achievement in adversity.
@@philclarke7712 ah yeah dude those damn civilized people who create unbelievable machines and seemingly defy the laws of physics, their achievements mean nothing, fucking trash, yeah you get em dude.
I believe he was using a dramatic turn of phrase rather than being literal.
@@FunkingPrink Sorry but you don't get to do a dramatic phrase, pose it as fact, then never correct the mistake, and expect noone to call you out for BS.
Gotcha to watch the whole thing!
Viewfabulous!
Nice and quick, to the point video. All videos should follow this format
WOW a video about an engine that hardly ever shows the engine. You just talk about it.
“Hey man, you mind if i have the window seat.”
Engine block: Hell no, i paid for this first class ticket.
On a Concorde no less.
Thanks for the in-depth review of the engine, learned heaps.
I’m sorry to all the critics below, but this video was informative enough for me. I just like knowing some of the history behind Penske racing, and the Indy cars in general. I like short and to the point; myself. But that’s just me.
Engine? What engine? I didn't see one. Better change the title of the video. ya wombat! ;D
I was employed by Mercedes Benz at the time. Thought it was a secret I was in the technical Traing Department at the time. And some how we knew there was a special engine being built that did take advantage as all racers do when they can. I have a poster signed by Al Junior with that engine and car. And yes the engine used very short push rods so it was no longer an over head cam engine. Thus could be bigger and have more boost by rule.
Saw this race on TV, this beast dominated that Day in May. Top qualifier too, and the press commented on this quite a bit...🏎
Penske exploited to great advantage, smart guy, won Indy this year 2019 50yr anniversary of Penske's career, Bravo 🏎
Thats an amazing story! What commitment!
I was at Indy in 1994 and saw these in action, and Little Al was my favorite driver at the time. That Mercedes killed it that year, and I have heard the "Push Rods" were 2" in length.
So, is there gonna be a part two where you explain the actual engine and why it was banned?
It was banned cause it made more power...because it was an OHV engine...which would be considered a disadvantage...the rules allowed them to run more timing advance then the OHC engines which gave them higher boost pressure...but it was not reliable at the high rpm the engines were run at...but would have lasted long enough to win a race...had the driver not crashed...
They don't say if the team mate that won was running the same engine...I am assuming not...
harry guy thanks for the clarification. Your comment had ten times the actual information than the video.
I had a suspicion it was overhead cam/overhead valve configuration but wasn’t sure. These were fast moving times for innovation and new rules. 👍
@@dozer1642 NP...after some reading it seems because the engine was an OHV design...very similar to a Buick V6 it allowed them to run 4.9 PSI more boost then the other engines giving them almost a 200hp advantage...
Nice to see an F1 channel look at another race or two. Great job.
I really like these types of vids. That shows car manufacturers brainstorming that idea that will give them the edge & victory. Nice!!😁😁
"If you were a stock block engine manufacturer, and you had pushrod timing you could run more." -- More what? More pushrods? More timing?
[Yes, I know he means more boost, but it's bad video production.]
I had to play that sequence twice to get it.
Same thing regarding the Offy. Nobody won against it, so they made it impossible to use by lowering the max boost, and killed Offenhauser as an engine supplier.
I couldn’t imagine doing such precision work by candlelight!
Great channel, I like the tech background of things.
This should be published by Autopolitics; practically nothing about the engine. Lame.
its the top down story of the engine not the technical details. Did you expect the latter from a video lasting less than FIVE minutes?
@@mfThump just a simple explanation would have done. "shorter pushrods and less friction" is intriguing, but a simple diagram would have explained a lot. this video is criminally lacking in detail.
@@mfThump I expected something about the hardware, since the title suggest that.
@@actontreadway1168 If you cant understand that you probably shouldnt complain about this video beeing not detailed enough because you couldnt understand anything anyways.
@@jakecole7447 using the info in this video, explain how they won. and, nowhere did I say I didn't understand what they said, you just decided that because the spanking you received this morning still hurts.
I imagine Autosport sent a load of staff out to the US to cover Alonso at Indy. Whoops!
Just JBL by the looks of it.
Autosport should become an advertising agency, the quality of "bait and switch" here is truly amazing, considerably more slight of hand than anything to do with the engine.
Henry 'Smoky' Yunick ran a 209cu. in. stock block Chevrolet (pushrod) at Indy.
No secrets here.
This video did a great job of not explaining a single thing. Bravo!!! Well done.
The "loophole" in the regulations...
The regulations allow pushrod engines to have more boost... oh really?
I remember this very well. Al Unser Jr absolutely took off on the straights. The power and torque was brilliant!
I love Al Jr. He is such a fun soul. I remember when he took his formula car and ran it around Albuquerque all drunk. Some people were like "omg thats so dangerous." Most people were like "hell yeah, I always wanted to do something like that."
thanks for making this a short video
thanks for at least giving a try at IndyCar history!
Hunter Smith they need to cover the IRL CART split years 1996-2007. That period of Indycar history got nascar a huge boost in popularity and is still effecting the sport of Indycar.
Supposedly this is a video about a fantastic engine, yet it doesn't even say how much power it had...
Andy Harman ... it had a lot 😂🤣
Here after listening the Mario Illien episode on the f1 podcast. Goes right into depth on this engine. Absolute beast
Enjoyed that story. I remember those days well.
Seriously??? The engine they HAD to outlaw (and did) was the turbine engine.
The sucker car was banned too....it drew up air with a 5 or 6 hp 2 stroke engine to lower the air pressire under the car, drawing it closer to the ground and giving it a edge in the cornering department.
Cummins diesel in 1960s. The car was faster and because of the fuel economy it did not have to pit as often. Yep it got banned.
Nobody ever talks about the stock blocks. That certain sound it made going around the track. It bonced off the front straight stands as the car went by. Really miss those days. When different engines and cars. Came to the track. To take their chances on winning the Indy 500. Shawn
I would like to know more about this engine. Perhaps an interview with Penske. Garlits gave us details & specs, along with great stories. I expect Penske would do the same...
I watched that race, that explains alot!
rip fernando
Je suis fernando 😂
It looks like a 1980s mclaren Honda
Ikr
Why do you think an Andretti was teamates with Senna? Cause Indy.
McLaren wasn’t the only one sponsored by Marlboro
Just the livery
I've always been curious but have never seen any explanation about the similar Penske/ McLaren sponsor portfolios (Marlboro, Mobil 1, hugo boss)
The Turbine engine got to the front as well and it left ever one in the dust and it was banned as well
As some have said it would have been nice to know more on the engine but over all a good story
Thanks
I remember this race, it was legendary and had all the muscle car fans of the day cheering for push rod domination
SIngle turbo, not twin turbo!
this story is half right.Illmore which MB had a interest in built the engine.
Thats what he said....
Mercedes only came aboard in the final weeks before May. Only later did they align officially with Ilmor.
I think Penske , Mercedes and John Deere had just made a deal to buy Detroit Diesel from GM and that's how it got on the car . the penske teams pretty had unlimited funding at Indy. And A.J. Foyt would field 3 cars on a shoe string budget and give Roger a run for his money.
That truck bay at Penske plaza next to the shop was an empty unused space where the beast engine was built I'm from Reading,Pa that was an incredible accomplishment completely done in secret a few of my friends worked on the team were sworn to secrecy 🏁
This video may be about the engine in the car, but every time I see one, I think to myself that there are very few paint schemes in the world of motorsports more iconic or pleasing to the eye than the Marlboro white and red used by McLaren F1 and Penske in Indy cars. Simply iconic!
Are people getting dumber? This guy says "It's not about the car,it's about the engine".
The engine IS ABOUT THE CAR. Phrasing it that way not logical.
What do you mean?? Perfectly logical to me, perhaps it is your interpretation?
How about that Benz in the background at the end?
Remember that.... was 11 and just starting to enjoy motorsport..
I was there for the practice weekends before the actual race. No engine on the track sounded like it and the car was able to run down anyone they were chasing. Tony got mad and took his racetrack and went home. Haven't watched a race since. I have the 209 on tape and watch it once in awhile.
'He did say by candlelight...?
Single turbo not twin
True!!! But why let the facts get in the way of a great tale 🤠🤠🤠
Awesome Video and the dirty little secret is magnifique.
I rented a diesel Penske truck that was governed for 70 mph and had my right leg shaking from pushing the pedal so hard to floor on RT 80. When I returned the truck I told them did Roger Penske know that he was renting the slowest trucks on the road? HE was a race car driver -- did you know that? SADLY most of them didn't!
Exactly how did they reduce Friction by shortening the Pushrods? Generally a pushrod engine needs a specific pushrod length to keep the geometry of the rocker arm correct, thus minimising side loading on the Valve. This is no secret, this is how it has always been done.
the rocker arm geometry can be fixed...but massive piston friction to the cylinder wall due to agressive rod angle is not fixeable, the same for a very poor rod to stroke ration wich give a very sudden accelleration to the piston as the engibe rev
First and foremost. Surprised me. Second figures it would be Penske. Third thanks for a little history of what goes on behind closed doors for the 500.👍🏎👍
And the guy who got it all started was ware house worker named Rick Moranis, who on the night shift had nothing better to do than read the fine print of the Indy Racing Series.
I still remember watching that race and rooting for that engine back in my college days. That stunt was certainly worth it, I wi lol always remember the names.
I love when human ingenuity finds the loopholes in the rule book and and out-smarts those who wrote it. Rules placed on NASCAR to make all the cars basicly cookie cutter cars for all the drivers has ruined NASCAR. Personally, I would like it to go back to Stock car racing like in the 60's and 70's where the best driver in the fastest car took home the trophy or made love to the retaining wall trying to win.
That's why I cannot watch Nascar anymore they've got 700 800 horsepower or more engines out there and restricting them with restrictor plates which I personally think they use to help people win that they want to win could be wrong the weather is Big Money there's cheating
They banned the first generation Chrysler hemi as well.... & they did it before it even raced.
I remember watching this race. It was the PENSKE show
Cheers Lil Al....🍻
lung cancer is bad but Marlboro had the best liveries
Cool......
So what about the engine?
yes what was so special about the engine come on spill the beans
@@joefoley1480 they never said. But ti shorten the pushrods and gain any benefit you would raise the cam in the block.
Smokey Yunick with his high school education, could and would have taught all those Engineers how to read a rule book between the lines a thousand times over. R.I.P. my friend.
A dyno comparison with the 'other' engine types would have been nice.
This verges on clickbait quality. Too many factual errors. No loophole, for one.
And of course Mercedes was in on it
At the time Mercedes had only an observing role in Indycar and F1. Mercedes was the biggest sponsor and labeled Ilmor engines as Mercedes.
Tell that to hakkinen.
because they are the kings off Motorsport and building engines.
The only involvement that MB had was the choice of the font for the “i500” engine badge. Mercedes did not have any other involvement. Penske and ILMOR offered MB the branding rights late in the project as a gift. that “gift” had huge benefits for Penske and MB post-race. Like the billion dollar deal where MB purchased Detroit Diesel from Penske. And Penske started using mostly Freightliner trucks (a Daimler brand) in his rental/lease fleet. The book “The Beast” details MB”s involvement
@@Makavelli2127 the ferarri F1 engine is more powerful than the Mercedes... Mercedes are just a better constructed team with better management, sponsors and resources, which shows in their F1 cars.
PSA: This video isn't a technical overview of the engine, its a retelling of a historical event emphasizing the secrecy of this engine, not how much power it was able to produce
Not a loophole, simply a different choice from everyone who all had the same choice to make. The rules makers got it wrong and created a choice that mb exploited which is just good old racing engineering.
Nothing "stock" about this stock block. Not even derived from a stock production engine.
your information is incorrect,Tony...camshaft was located in the block as per regulations and a further change was made to allow pure race engines with cam-in-block as well for 1994. Read the Jade Gurss book "The Beast", its quite incredible!!
@@rod928s4 If you follow the letter of the rule yes, but that was never the rules intent. This engine failed the smell test when it comes to the spirit of the rule. Plus unlike the Buick engine, the Mercedes was never sold in a production car in any form. Hence the name "stock block".
@@tonyradca1235 Exactly right Tony! Of all the comments on this blog you are the only one to get it right! The Ilmor engine was a pure racing engine with a special bespoke block. In complete violation of the the intent of the rules. Menard's Buick V6 was based on a block in Buick family car as USAC intended. The Ilmor should have never been allowed to tun. It was only Penske's bribing and leaning on the rules committee that permitted the engine to be run in the race. Thank you.
Gentlemen, I must respectfully disagree. Please remember that the rules allowed more displacement and boost for stock-block-based, 2-valve engines and this was still not helping Buick engines even though this rule was to help them specifically.The reg was changed specifically to encourage more variety and participation from other engine manufacturers but USAC did not expect llmor to build another type of engine.
They did 228 mph in 1990s and alosno in a mclaren did 227 mph . How would you expect to qualify for race?
Those cars were faster back in 1994. Far less regulations. Those engines had 1000hp, or more for the Mercedes. The average speed per lap now is 230mph for P1 position at the Indy 500. They have around 700hp these days.
Today the best cars do 230 mph average, with 240 mph top speed at the end of the straights.
That Penske in '94 did 228 mph average, but with 255 mph top speed.
That tells us some things about the difference in handling and corner speed...
@@hannesgroesslinger I agree, which is why the average speeds are so close. Don't forget the tire technology these days has gone up several notches.
I saw the 1994 race on the tube & remember that when the Brazilian wrecked the grandstands erupted into cheers when Al Under Jr took the lead.
Aidan Millward did a great video on this topic too and got into more details
More what??
Mercedes ruining races even then! :)
Haha Gang Gang!🔥🙏🏾
Sinking 🤣 go have a cry mate. #teamLH #stillherises
@alexg 1379 truth
Same as Porsche in Can-Am in 1972? Same as Audi at LeMans? Same as TAG in F1? Same as Menard-Buick at Indy?
It was so outrageously dominant that only Jacques Villeneuve finished on the same lap as Al Unser Jr. And at some point Emerson Fittipaldi had put even Al Unser Jr. a lap down, before crashing alone.
The rules were available to everyone. Just because Penske could read the rules better than everyone else is what makes Roger Penske Roger Penske.
Was kinda looking for what they actually did to the engine, and it's hard to read a micrometer or torque wrench in the candle light
This is happening again in formula one.
Please explain
Mercedes domination.
almost boring
@@jamesstewart1794
There is nothing "Mercedes" about this engine, it was developed by Ilmor for Penske. A similar deal was done with GM years before when the Ilmor engine was labelled "Chevrolet" until 1993. Pesnke offered Mercedes the naming rights to the Ilmor engine in exchange for investments in his companies, including the purchase of Detroit Diesel.
Over the years, Mercedes bought increasing shares of Ilmor which produce the "Mercedes" F1 engines since 1995. Since then, the company has been renamed but still bears no technological connection to Mercedes itself.
A part of the company split off and operates under the Ilmor name, having built Honda Indy engines until 2011 and building Chevrolet (!) Indy engines since 2012.
@The Truth
Nothing to do with hate, I am merely stating facts. If you watched the official 1994 Indianapolis 500 broadcast you could hear the commentators say exactly the same (in the latter third of the race).
Working by candle light? I suppose they will be sharing a bowl of spaghetti on their lunch breaks.... Great video though.
@judas crim I'll have to look for that one :)
Those Mercedes Illmor engines had a distinct lower pitch sound when ripping down the straightaway. It was quite nice actually.
Robert Keefer Because of the sound from their relatively low rpm and the high torque output (the rims where spinning in the tires combing out of the pits!!!), Rick Mears called them “tractor” engines
This told me about as much as the sky is blue.
Mercedes Power!
Illmor power more like. Great british engineering
Mercedes dominated everywhere it went.
Except BTCC, DTM (until they were the only ones racing), 24 Hours of LeMans, etc.
Good job working within the rules
Wiggins fittings, nice.