MEGANE TROPHY 3.5 litres 320hp

5869 Views 34 Replies 16 Participants Last post by driver#8, Oct 5, 2004

Doug

Discussion Starter · Sep 18, 2004

Continuing the sporting tradition of the Renault 5 Turbo, Alpine, Spider and Clio V6, all of which made their marks on European race tracks over the last 25 years, the Mégane Trophy - unveilled at next week's Paris Motor Show - is set to take to the grid in 2005.

Renault designers have taken the Mégane Renaultsport 225 and refined its sleek lines to come up with a silhouette racer resembling the awesome German touring cars. It's bodywork - lowered by a full 10 centimetres - widened wheel arches and rear diffuser combine to give the 155mph plus Mégane Trophy incredible looks and a powerful stance.

Renaultsport's latest offering pulls out all the stops to deliver a powerful product with single-seater values. Its tubular chassis, mid-engined V6 powerplant and semi-automatic gearbox make this a top level racing machine.

The 3.5-litre V6 engine fitted to Espace and Vel Satis powers the engine of the Mégane Trophy but in this case, the unit develops more than 320hp and features semi dry sump lubrication.

The Megane's electronic control system is by Magneti-Marelli and covers all engine, gearbox and automatic clutch management functions plus the data acquisition that is essential for drivers and engineers to unleash every fraction of the car's performance.

Driveability is also enhanced by the specially-designed Michelin tyres, while stopping power comes courtesy of ventilated discs with six-pot callipers at the front and four-pot at the rear.

In dynamics terms, strong power-to-weight ratio and wind-tunnel developed aerodynamics, make Mégane Trophy comparable with some GT racers.

Next spring, around 30 Mégane Trophy racers will feature in a championship covering eight European race meetings with two races at most venues.

After its grand unveiling on the Renault Compétition stand of the Paris Motor Show (Hall 7.2), the Mégane Trophy will be given an initial shakedown at the end of October before the first development tests get underway in November.

See less See more

Save

1 - 6 of 35 Posts

TSRF

· #7 · Sep 19, 2004

QUOTE Once you've driven a turbo'd car you dont ever want to have a normally aspirated one again!

Baz,
You need to get into some more serious machinery after which you may change your mind. May be a lap around Brands in a C5 or a C6 Vette would show you that a fuel-efficient, normally aspirated engine of large displacement will be much more user-friendly at any revs than any turbo engine ever conceived.
Of course in Yurrup, it involves higher taxes since the fiscality is based on displacement instead of fuel consumption. So it happens that the smaller 3.2-liter Ferrari V8 from the 360 eats nearly twice the amount of fuel used by the 6-liter Corvette to produce less horsepower... Makes a lot of sense.
Your statement may have been be valid at one time for engines under 2 liters, but again, what USED to be an advantage in fuel efficiency is no longer the case today. Displacement no longer means huge fuel needs, but displacement IS torque, and torque IS all. The best turbo engines never had much low-end grunt. Supercharged engines do better, but are noisier and have less consumer acceptance.

Check out the GT-class results sometimes, and compare the lap times of the 3.6-liter turbo Porsche GT to the C5's.
Regards,

Philippe

See less See more

Save

TSRF

· #10 · Sep 20, 2004

Au contraire...

QUOTE I would prefer an RS200 to be honest. They stroll upto 60 in about 2.8 seconds. So I think that would shame your C5/C6 corvette, Sorry.

Baz, with all due respect, what is CLAIMED and what is TRUE are often 2 different matters. I was very privileged to have had the opportunity to drive no less than 5 of the 7 "Group-B" production cars in the late 1980's, including the very potent RS200 in its "stage III" 380HP form, and I have as yet to see a car that really will go 0-60 in under 3.5 seconds. Some RS200s have had their power all the way up to 570HP but the reliablity becomes very marginal, and only their top-end power is improved.
In 1987, I used a rather mundane but well-prepped 1973 Porsche RS Carrera with only 280 atmospheric HPs to humiliate, along a whole range of supposedly much more powerful cars, a brand new Stage III 380HP RS200 at this race:

I actually PASSED the car with another 10MPH flat-out on a 6-mile straight... I was as astounded as he was.
There were also a half-dozen Porsche turbo cars, a pretty mean twin-engined turbo Suzuki that later did some very impressive climbing up Pikes Peak etc... and my little car put 4 minutes on the second-place finisher. And I drove it home, they trailered the RS200 after it blew a turbo on the way back. In the mountains, no one could stay with the RS (the Porsche, not the Ford...)

A week later, the same Carrera RS (still atmospheric) HUMBLED the same RS200 (driven by a former British rally champ who unfortunately was killed last year in California driving a factory Subaru rally car) at Riverside, setting fastest time of the day and a "road-legal" record that died with the track.
No doubt that many turbo cars are impressive, but the atmos are ALWAYS more usable. Ask Michelle Mouton about the lack of torque of the Audi. She will tell you how difficult it was to keep that turbo spooled in tight spots.
If you have not seen the Corvettes at le Mans, you haven't seen one yet.
Also the all-alloy Corvette V8 engine is lighter than many 4-turbos, and the road car offers you unequaled torque with great handling and comfort for a financial bargain...
Kind regards,

Philippe

See less See more

Save

TSRF

· #14 · Sep 22, 2004

QUOTE Been, done, seen. Trax - Sept 7th silverstone England, 33degrees C.
Baz, you forgot the year and the turbo boost.

Save

TSRF

· #18 · Sep 23, 2004 (Edited by Moderator)

Baz, you got a point there. On my Eagle-Offy 2.6-liter turbo, I have a dial. It goes from zero to 125 inches of boost. At zero, it pulls 435HP. At 125, it pulls 1800.

So yes, of course anything is possible. But for how long? I recall when such an Offy engine was dynoed at AAR in 1973, it DID show 1800HP on the dyno before exploding in the most spectacular and noisy fashion. There were bits of it EVERYWHERE, solidly implanted in the walls. It was quite a mess.
All in all I must repeat: turbo engines lack bottom-end torque compared to atmos, but of course can produce LOTS more up-there HP and torque. Problem is, sometimes top-end power is not as good as usable torque. Especially on the road...
Also I read (especially in specialty British mags, akin to the National Enquirer, designed for sensationalism rather than truth) pretty extraordianry acceleration figures for many cars. From my own experience, most of these figures are pure BS.
Regards,

Philippe

Save

TSRF

· #21 · Sep 23, 2004

QUOTE Would you believe 1.8 secs. in a RS 200!

No I don't.

Check out American top-fuel dragsters, with 8000HP and of comparable weight: it takes them over 1 of their 4.5 seconds in the quarter to reach 60. After that of course it gets pretty exciting... So 1.8" with 700HP, when a Champ Car takes nearly 3 seconds to get there?
Right.