damn that engine will be stressed OUT..haha

pS
cant wait to see this car..

Just noticed on all the phototypes, they have different front wheels, to the rear ones, wonder what the reason is for this.

Also, 500bhp from a 4.3 V8 NA is incredible, Ferrari definately know what they are doing in the engine department!

Ooo, impossible to say outright Tyc.

What about the fantastic 6.2 litre AMG V8? It's so versatile and does the perfect job in such diverse applications. From an ML to a C-class and on to an S-Class, it's an engine that really does rise to the occassion.

I think that the long-stroke 4.2 litre FSI V8 in the RS4 is another contender considering its amazing appetite for revs taking into account the engine's under-square characteristics.

Of course, time will tell that the new M3 V8 - despite being short on statistics on paper - will set new standards for everyday useability and refinement coupled with fantastic throttle response and lust for revs!

As for that Ferrari mill... if it really does make 500 horses at 9000 rpm then it'd be a superlative piece of engineering.

Let me just say that for MB, it's easy to pull out even 600hp from a 6.3L V8 engine, but from a 4.3L V8 to pull out 500hp...? Sure i admire the mighty NA V8 from AMG, but this one from Ferrari... I don't know, it just seems superior...

Kinda shows it's time for Ferrari to increase its displacement (or put more cylinders) for their next car.

... or make them internals even stronger to handle 10 000 rpm. High revving NA engines in sports cars are a proven method to extracting great gobs of performance without having to go the forced-induction route.

A 10 000 rpm mainstream production sportscar? It may be closer than we think!

seriously do you guys like engines like this?
its totally stressed OUT.. 9000rpm.. 500hp 4.3l
i like engines with more grunt and a power reserver.. this is crazy edgy..
and probably needs a service every month to be healthy

A Ferrari? In a service every month because of the engine?

Man, i'm sure that whole factory would be blown up long time ago by angry buyers who spent $h!tloads of money on their Ferraris to go to service every month!

You put forward a good point Artist. However it also depends as much on what one's definition for a stressed engine is...

Engine rpm isn't the only measure of how stressed an engine is - i.e. the components in the engine that are exposed to the forces of combustion - and there are many factors that one must evaluate to determine how stressed (as in close to the limit of failure) an engine is.

Engine rpm isn't the only measure of how stressed an engine is. It's a LOT more scientific. Too scientific for my pea brain at least.

One could argue that the modern, high performance turbodiesel is more stressed than a high performance petrol engine due to the greater combustion forces (where do you think all that torque comes from) that act on the internals of the engine such as pistons, gudgeon pins, con-rods and bearings.

Modern motorcycle engines consistently rev higher than 10 000 rpm without failing as the reciprocating masses and internal piston speeds are lower than in engines of a bigger capacity.

The M5 and M3 engines with their shorter 75.2 mm strokes actually have lower internal piston speeds at 19.42 m/sec @ 7750 rpm compared with the 6.2 litre AMG's piston speeds of 21.42 m/sec @ 6800 rpm.

So in fact, in the C63 AMG at max power the pistons move up and down faster (therefore deceleration to TDC and BDC is greater) in their cylinders than those in a M5 or M3 do at 1000 rpm more. So, which is the more stressed engine? Also, in the bigger capacity engine, the pistons and conrods are bigger and thus heavier too, so the reciprocating masses are greater still as M = mv (Momentum = mass * velocity). Again, which is the more stressed engine?

Interestingly, the M3 CSL's engine with its 91 mm stroke has a much higher internal piston speed at 23.95 m/sec @ 7900 rpm. Now we get a clearer picture as to why the M engineers felt that the S54 was as the maximum of its operating envelope. It's also another indication as to how much power and torque BMW have in reserve for both the M5 and M3. A simple increase in stroke length alone will give greater displacement and torque thus resulting in more top end power too...

The F430 CS engine - if displacement remains unchanged at 4.3 litres with an unmodified stroke - has a stroke of 81 mm. So even at 9000 rpm its internals will "only" be going back and forth at 24.31 m/sec. Couple this with expensive forged pistons and lightweight high strength titanium con-rods for lower reciprocating mass and this small capacity V8 doesn't look nearly as stressed as originally suggested.

By way of example, an RS4's internal piston speeds at max rpm (8250) are an almighty 25.50 m/sec - approaching Formula 1 speeds - due to VW/Audi's pursuit of the long stroke / small bore design where the stroke is 92.8 mm.

In conclusion one has to evaluate an engine's max rpm, measurements and weights, layout and materials holistically to determine how stressed and engine really is.

Martin, do you by any chance work as an engineer in the automotive industry?