GMA GMA T.50


GMA is a British maker founded in 2017 by Gordon Murray. It builds analog, V12-powered hypercars like the T.50 and T.33. Official: GMA
I agree totally with @Bridster comments, i think from all angles except the front the car looks fantastic even the rear with the odd fan still looks alot better than some other super cars. The headlights are too convenional and too big for the front. It reminds me of old MR2 or even old Noble headlights and the pinched front looks like an elephant sat on the frunk. If you give me keys of this car or a Koenigsegg then anytime any day i would hop in this beauty and drive it away. Ultimately i may not be as fast the the Swedish hypercar but it stirs the soal more and probably due to its more compact size and lower weight is even better to drive.
 
64 mph in first gear! I need to drive this car to understand how it's all gonna pan out! Like that's ever going to happen. :(
 
Disagree with his opinion on weight at 9:08. Rather surprising coming from some one with an mx5
Yeah, the video is rather weird. I am sure he must be quite aware of all the advantages light weight brings (and I am pretty sure I've heard him mention all of those in the past), but suddenly he comes out saying that light weight only matters to make the car fun? Well yeah, there is that, but also it makes for a better handling car, car with more grip, it makes the aero work better, makes it stop better, makes for better fuel economy, allows you to run softer springs and have more comfortable ride, you can get smaller tires and have more responsive steering and not worry about the car tram-lining all the time. Just endless advantages.

I also don't agree on the fan. Yeah, the benefits of the fan might not stand up to the visual drama of it, but to me it now seems rather less useless than Jason thinks. I also thought the fan was gonna be mostly a gimmick, but the 12.5% drag reduction kinda sold me on the idea. 12.5% drag reduction is the same as 12.5% increase in power when it comes to top speed and some 5%+ more power when it comes to high speed acceleration. And the fan only weighs 12kg. I think you would struggle to achieve the same result with less weight used, making it a rather neat engineering solution - even if it doesn't make or break the car.

Interestingly, Jason also got different gear speeds than me. After looking it over, it seems the F1 (which I used to reverse calculate the size of T.50's wheels) must have a hidden gear somewhere (probably a bevel gear like the T.50 has), so the wheels came out too small, which is also means the acceleration numbers I got will be off. That aside, the gearing seems to be basically identical to the F1, which is a bit disappointing. Yeah, it probably makes sense for acceleration if you are traction limited in 1st and 2nd gear anyway... but that's only if you use full throttle. Otherwise I would rather shift a bit more often.
 
Yeah, the video is rather weird. I am sure he must be quite aware of all the advantages light weight brings (and I am pretty sure I've heard him mention all of those in the past), but suddenly he comes out saying that light weight only matters to make the car fun? Well yeah, there is that, but also it makes for a better handling car, car with more grip, it makes the aero work better, makes it stop better, makes for better fuel economy, allows you to run softer springs and have more comfortable ride, you can get smaller tires and have more responsive steering and not worry about the car tram-lining all the time. Just endless advantages.

I also don't agree on the fan. Yeah, the benefits of the fan might not stand up to the visual drama of it, but to me it now seems rather less useless than Jason thinks. I also thought the fan was gonna be mostly a gimmick, but the 12.5% drag reduction kinda sold me on the idea. 12.5% drag reduction is the same as 12.5% increase in power when it comes to top speed and some 5%+ more power when it comes to high speed acceleration. And the fan only weighs 12kg. I think you would struggle to achieve the same result with less weight used, making it a rather neat engineering solution - even if it doesn't make or break the car.

Interestingly, Jason also got different gear speeds than me. After looking it over, it seems the F1 (which I used to reverse calculate the size of T.50's wheels) must have a hidden gear somewhere (probably a bevel gear like the T.50 has), so the wheels came out too small, which is also means the acceleration numbers I got will be off. That aside, the gearing seems to be basically identical to the F1, which is a bit disappointing. Yeah, it probably makes sense for acceleration if you are traction limited in 1st and 2nd gear anyway... but that's only if you use full throttle. Otherwise I would rather shift a bit more often.
The F1 can't have an additional bevel gear because the engine and the transmission are in-line. The T.50 has the transmission transverse to the engine, which is rather unusual and the bevel is needed to change the direction of the power to 90 degrees before the transmission, while the diff doesn't have a bevel due to the fact that the semiaxles are parallel to the transmission.
 
The F1 can't have an additional bevel gear because the engine and the transmission are in-line. The T.50 has the transmission transverse to the engine, which is rather unusual and the bevel is needed to change the direction of the power to 90 degrees before the transmission, while the diff doesn't have a bevel due to the fact that the semiaxles are parallel to the transmission.
I don't think you can determine that without seeing how the insides look like. No matter what the orientation of the gears is compared to the engine, there might be some additional gears to manipulate the physical size of the main gears so they fit better, etc. And I am not really convinced that in the F1 the gears are in line. From the look of it, it very much seems the gears are transverse in the F1 as well:
btb8UoXL.webp
 
McLaren F1 gearbox
Featured snippet from the web
The standard McLaren F1 has a transverse 6-speed manual gearbox with an AP carbon triple-plate clutch contained in an aluminium housing.
 
R&T article...



In 1992, the press release for the McLaren F1 went into great detail explaining what their new six-speed manual transmission was all about. It's worth reading in full:

Gear ratios offer an ultra close 5-speed cluster for 0-160mph, plus a 6th speed for 200mph-plus capability.

Wheelbase length in most mid-engined sports car designs is increased by conventional clutch and final-drive arrangements forcing the drive-output center rearwards. Until now, all attempts to minimize wheelbase length—such as sitting gearbox and final-drive beneath the engine—have compromised handling, weight or efficiency.

In conjunction with Traction Products Inc., McLaren Cars has imaginatively solved such problems, with the McLaren F1’s final-drive gear offset alongside its clutch, absolutely minimizing engine/drive output centerline separation.

This layout within a transverse-shaft gearbox—already inherently short front-to-rear—provides an exceptionally compact assembly within an extremely rigid cast magnesium casing accepting major rear suspension loadings.

The F1 is also the first production car to adopt current Formula 1 practice by featuring a 200mm diameter aluminum flywheel and carbon clutch assembly. Their extremely low mass and inertia greatly enhance engine response and efficiency, and also save weight.

The 6-speed gearbox has a full synchromesh gear change with helical gears for optimum strength, quiet high-speed running and quick and efficient gear-changing.

Further features include a sophisticated lubrication system, a remote clutch-operating mechanism tailored to provide optimum pedal weight and action, and an integrated purpose-designed starter system.

Gear ratios offer a close 5-speed cluster for 0-160mph (257km/h) plus a 6th-speed presenting a comfortable, peaceful and long-striding 33mph (53km/h) per 1,000rpm cruising gear—plus top speed capability well over 200mph (321km/h).

The final-drive assembly also features a limited-slip differential, while purpose-made constant-velocity jointed high grade alloy-steel drive-shafts are used.

As in all areas of the McLaren F1, exhaustive research and development effort has been applied to no-compromise design and manufacturing quality.



This week, I met Rainer Rump, who currently works as Head of Project on the BMW i8 Roadster. When asked how long he has been at BMW, he replied "over 40 years," adding that he spent the first ten years or so at the brand's Motorsport division. Just in time to get involved in the F1 project, on the gearbox side.

Since I knew Gordon Murray's benchmark for the F1's six-speed manual was the Honda NSX shifter, I asked Rainer whether Gordon's orders in the early 1990s simply went something like "make it feel like this."

Rainer smiled. "Yes, it was exactly like that!"

Apparently, the benchmark was Murray's personal NSX. The team's first challenge was that the S70/2 is a long engine, much lengthier than the V6 found in the Honda. With that in mind, the joint McLaren-BMW effort turned to California's Traction Products Inc., a racing gearbox specialist run by Pete Weismann and his wife. Murray knew that the McLaren F1, which would become the world's most expensive road car when it debuted, couldn't use a racing gearbox with straight-cut gears.

The solution came when they combined Weismann's gearbox design with the synchronizer sets straight out of the V8-powered E34 5-Series transmission, as well as BMW bevel-roller bearings. Three years later, the very same stock BMW synchros won at Le Mans.

But long before the GTR's victory in 1995, the first prototypes had major transmission overheating issues. One problem was that in order to keep the weight down, Gordon Murray wanted to retain the magnesium transmission housing. It had been mentioned specifically in the 1992 press release, after all.

Yet Rainer told me that the final housing had to be made of aluminum instead, specifically to cope with the heat at high speeds.

No surprise then that in 1998, Andy Wallace had this to report after breaking 243mph at Ehra Lessien in the McLaren F1 XP5:

"Gearbox temperature reached 130 degrees, everything else is fine."

But the heat wasn't the only challenge. The gearbox used AP Racing's triple-plate carbon fiber clutch. And because those plates added quite some drag, the racing technology made shifting the F1 anything but smooth. At the time, young Mika Häkkinen had just been lured to McLaren by Ron Dennis; the Finn happened to sum up the F1 prototype's shifting experience as "punchy." Punchy wasn't what Gordon Murray asked for.

However, by the launch in 1993, the clutch drag issue had been resolved, and the McLaren F1 debuted with a transverse Weismann box filled with BMW E34 synchronizers, produced in England by FF Developments near Birmingham. And it works just fine.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Edit - Top Gear article: topgear.com/car-news/first-look/gma-t50s-outrageous-720bhp-racing-version-t50
 
From Autocar

1599153688597.webp



Gordon Murray Automotive (GMA) has confirmed it will produce a racing version of the recently revealed T50 supercar.

Just 25 examples of the track-only car, codenamed T50s, will be built, each with extensive revisions that promise to make it even lighter than the road-going version, at just 890kg.


Each example will cost £3.1 million before taxes - a substantial increase over the road car's £2.36 million plus taxes. Over half of the production run had already been accounted for before the car's existence was revealed to the public.

The Cosworth-developed, naturally aspirated V12 engine powering the T50 has been re-engineered with revised cylinder heads, a higher compression ratio and an all-new free-flow exhaust system to produce beyond 700bhp. According to Murray himself, this was only possible in a track car, which doesn't have to contend with noise or emission regulations. A bespoke new six-speed transmission has new drive ratios and replaces the road car's manual gearstick with paddle shifters.

Significant upgrades to the car's aerodynamics pair the road-going T50's signature rear-mounted fan with a new 1758mm-wide rear wing, new front splitter, underbody aerofoil and adjustable diffusers. Combined, the changes allow the T50s to generate more than 1500kg of downforce. A new roof-mounted aero fin also helps boost cornering stability, allowing the car to generate 2.5-3g under braking.

Unlike the road car, which has multiple aerodynamic modes, the T50s will run in High Downforce mode at all times, with the diffuser ducts fully open and the fan running permanently at 7000rpm.

Ride height has been lowered by 40mm front and rear, oil cooling systems relocated to improve airflow to the rear wing and new brake ducting added to assist with temperature management. Forged magnesium wheels significantly reduce the car’s unsprung mass, but as per Murray's insistence that supercars don't require bespoke tyres, the T50s will ride on Michelin Cup Sport 2s.

Stripping back the interior has helped shave 94kg compared with the road-going car, with air conditioning, infotainment, storage and sound-deadening materials all removed. Road-going displays have also been removed, with performance-focused information moved to an F1-style rectangular steering wheel.

The centrally positioned driver's seat has been exchanged for a carbonfibre racing bucket and six-point racing harness, while one of the two passenger seats has been deleted in the name of lightness.

“With an unwavering focus on performance, and free from road-going legislation and maintenance considerations, the T50s will achieve astonishing performance on track, demonstrating the full extent of the car’s capabilities," Murray said. "We’ve thrown everything at pushing this car beyond the levels of anything that’s been done before. It’s a celebration of British engineering and our team’s extensive motorsport experience.”


GMA is currently discussing the potential for a GT1 sports club and race series with the SRO Motorsports Group, with Murray's team offering a full range of pit, garage, and support equipment for owners. Owners will receive a 'Trackspeed' customisation pack that includes set-up, training, racing and support, with options to fine-tune suspension and chassis balance to suit their driving style.

According to the company, the T50s will carry a "historically significant" name, which is set to be announced later this year alongside the official reveal of the car. This suggests it could carry the GTR name seen on track-only versions of the Murray-penned McLaren F1, to which the T50 is a spiritual successor. There's a chance it will reference the BT46 designation carried by the original Brabham fan car, also designed by Murray.

The road-going T50 sold out within 48 hours of its official unveilling:eek:. Just 100 cars will be built, in the UK, throughout 2022. Production of the 25 racing T50s cars will then follow in early 2023.
 
Road car sold out in 48h? Finally people realized that this is truly a special car, rather than another re-bodied, "bespoke" body-kit of the same car.

Can't wait to see the race car version fully unveiled.
 
Not that I am particularly interested in any of these track only cars, but here is a little comparison of the few of the latest entrants into the "track-only-hypercar" market:


CarDownforce at 250km/hCornering forcePS/t
T50S8251.96G786
BT6211112.06G700
SCV1212001.94G602
Senna GTR10001.91G670
FXX K Evo10001.95G950
T50S MAX10272.08G786

Weight is with fluids but without fuel or driver. That is where the T.50's claimed 890kg is coming from. For the rest of the cars, it's basically dry weight + 30kg. Lamborghini doesn't state the weight of the SCV12, but I calculated 1377kg from the stated power to weight. I am being generous and assuming that's with fluids, although it's most likely dry.

The FXX has an asterisk to basically all its stats. The differences between the claimed dry and kerb weights are massive. I am going with 1105kg, but it could be up to 1335kg. It's stated to develop 640kg of downforce at 200km, but only 830kg at max speed, which makes no sense, unless the top speed is like 230km/h. I am going with an extrapolation of the 640kg figure. Also, the "system power" might be 1050PS, but it's not really because it has a battery the size of a grape, so who knows what the "average" power would be during a track session.

The BT62 claims to develop 700hp at 7400RPM and 667Nm at 6200RPM from its 5.4L engine, but I doubt that very much. For the engine to develop 700hp at 7400RPM, the torque at that RPM would have to be 664Nm. So basically the same torque at peak power as the peak torque 1200RPM lower. Which is very unlikely. Not sure how much it actually makes (probably around 630), but I am again being generous and going with the 700hp figure.

Cornering forces are assuming the cars can corner at 1G without any downforce. Basically, it's not a real figure, just a comparison how much the aero affects each car.

The T50S MAX is what the downforce would be if they didn't have to scale it down to protect tires (the car likely has skinnier tires than all the other cars on the list). The power figure I am using is 700hp, although it can develop up to 730hp at speed.
 
Not that I am particularly interested in any of these track only cars, but here is a little comparison of the few of the latest entrants into the "track-only-hypercar" market:


CarDownforce at 250km/hCornering forcePS/t
T50S8251.96G786
BT6211112.06G700
SCV1212001.94G602
Senna GTR10001.91G670
FXX K Evo10001.95G950
T50S MAX10272.08G786

Weight is with fluids but without fuel or driver. That is where the T.50's claimed 890kg is coming from. For the rest of the cars, it's basically dry weight + 30kg. Lamborghini doesn't state the weight of the SCV12, but I calculated 1377kg from the stated power to weight. I am being generous and assuming that's with fluids, although it's most likely dry.

The FXX has an asterisk to basically all its stats. The differences between the claimed dry and kerb weights are massive. I am going with 1105kg, but it could be up to 1335kg. It's stated to develop 640kg of downforce at 200km, but only 830kg at max speed, which makes no sense, unless the top speed is like 230km/h. I am going with an extrapolation of the 640kg figure. Also, the "system power" might be 1050PS, but it's not really because it has a battery the size of a grape, so who knows what the "average" power would be during a track session.

The BT62 claims to develop 700hp at 7400RPM and 667Nm at 6200RPM from its 5.4L engine, but I doubt that very much. For the engine to develop 700hp at 7400RPM, the torque at that RPM would have to be 664Nm. So basically the same torque at peak power as the peak torque 1200RPM lower. Which is very unlikely. Not sure how much it actually makes (probably around 630), but I am again being generous and going with the 700hp figure.

Cornering forces are assuming the cars can corner at 1G without any downforce. Basically, it's not a real figure, just a comparison how much the aero affects each car.

The T50S MAX is what the downforce would be if they didn't have to scale it down to protect tires (the car likely has skinnier tires than all the other cars on the list). The power figure I am using is 700hp, although it can develop up to 730hp at speed.

This is a fun comparison but there is much more to be told about these cars.

Not considering the standard T50 which is a road legal car, the FXXK EVO is the slowest machine on track among all those that you listed.
Now, more details:

- FXXK Evo: road-derived (LaFerrari) suspensions, chassis, electronics, gearbox. 300+ kg heavier than a GT3 race car (which is around 1230-1280 kg according to BoP) according to real owners of both and also according to Ferrari figures themselves (LaFerrari was weighted kerb at almost 1600 kg by multiple sources, FXXK is 90 kg lighter than that), so the FXXK is much, much heavier than your estimated 1335 kg figure, as all the hybrids are. Less downforce than a GT3 car, which with that much weight means higher inertia and considerably lower corner speeds. Besides tracks like Monza, the FXXK Evo is always slower than a 488 GT3 in terms of lap times, with the regular FXXK falling further behind.

- McLaren Senna GTR: slightly more downforce than a GT3 race car, way more power, similar weight, race-grade suspensions (same as those of the 720 GT3 apparently), but road-derived electronics and gearbox. The Senna GTR for sure is a step further compared to FXXK or P1 GTR in terms of performances and it is much faster than them on a race track. Slightly faster also than a BoP GT3 race car, not sure if capable to keep up with an unrestricted GT3.

- Lamborghini SCV12: FIA race-grade chassis, race suspensions, race brakes, race electronics, race differential, race sequential structural gearbox, DTM-prototype levels of downforce (claimed 35% more downforce than the latest Huracan GT3 Evo race car, which is probably the fastest GT3 right now), higher aero efficiency than the Huracan GT3 Evo, much more power, slightly higher weight (Huracan GT3 Evo should be 1230 kg dry, the SCV12 should be 1370 kg kerb). The SCV12 is basically a real race car (technically speaking, minor probably the weight) developed by Lamborghini Squadra Corse (race division of Lamborghini) for gentlemen drivers. Stated by Lamborghini Squadra Corse to be many seconds per lap faster than their Huracan GT3 Evo race car on any circuit, racing driver Mapelli in an interview compared it to DTM machines in terms of driving experience and performances (DTM machines are real monsters and very up there with LMP2 cars in terms of pace).

- Brabham BT62: lightest of all, highest level of downforce of all (up there with the SCV12), race-grade suspensions, race grade electronics, race grade differential, race grade chassis, race grade gearbox, carbon-carbon brakes (like F1 and LMP1 machines). The BT62 is much faster than any GT3 race car, even unrestricted ones, and it holds the lap record at Phillip Island (time was never revealed but the record was broken casually during testing and it was held by an open-wheel Formula Holden race car..).

So, in terms of actual track performances it should be:

BT62 >(=?) SCV12 > Senna GTR > BoP GT3 race car > FXXK Evo > P1 GTR/FXXK

The gap is huge between the first two cars (BT62, SCV12) and the last ones.

About the T50 track version, considering all the aspects (chassis, suspensions, levels of downforce, weight, power, aero design from Murray, electronics and so on) I expect it to be up there in the list, probably ahead of any other car mentioned in this thread.

Too bad about the current economic/project issues with the Valkyrie, because the AMR Pro would have been considerably faster than a LMP1 machine and would have surely topped this list.

PS: still, there is another car coming that is going to be faster than all of these (hypothetical Valkyrie AMR Pro included)...
 
Is this the vehicle you are hinting at?

1599222917531.webp


1599223044877.webp

Absolutely, spot on.

I've never seen technical specifications of such magnitude before, almost not even from the fastest F1 machines or the 919 Evo.
On paper, this plays another game.

Also, according to direct sources real physical development and testing is proceeding well and at fast pace.
It will be difficult to make it run perfectly and smoothly, given the magnitude of the promised performances, but time and resources are there.
We just have to sit and wait (and hope, since as the Valkyrie project demonstrated: never be 100% sure until it is totally done).
 

Trending content


Back
Top