Re: photos and engines

[Vic Thomas]

Dear Stewart

Many thanks for the offer of the photos.

 

Regarding US dynos that give a reading higher than English

ones , I have done some research and think I have found the answer.

"As you know US gallons are 4/5ths of English ones [thats why our car do  better MPG !].

This all comes from 20 fluid onces in a Eng. pint against your 16 fl. ozs.

Now in 1956 the R&T Eleven that was road tested to 132mph gained

a fifth of its weight whilst crossing the pond from England.

ie your US pounds are 4/5ths of the English pound [but we have less to the Ton].

Now a Dyno is basically calibrated in Foot. Pounds of torque which when

multiplied by RPM gives BHP [with a constant that is].

So if your Pounds are smaller , then your Horse Power are smaller ,

which is why you get more from a Climax.

By the way, the Itallians use a different metric calibration and they get even more

HP [ps] whilst the Germans use a DIN rating which gives less than the English

because they are more honest and dont tell lies.

When a German DIN inspector came to the Lotus factory in 1971 to observe

the Elan Sprint ["big valve"] on test, after the Torque figures were recorded,

 he was sent for a cup of coffee whilst they changed the cams to 145bhp racing ones to

make the advertised 127 bhp.----------- TRUE STORY !!

Also Coventry Climax abandoned their new 2.5 V8 Godiva when it couldnt get near to 

the Ferrari and Masa  "banded about "bhp figures.    Subsequently they got hold of an

Itie engine and discovered the true output, but the commercial damage was already done

and the engine stayed in mothballs.

 

Best regards

VFT

ps sorry about the delay in replying ,but I was still returning from Lotus Donington

on the first of the month when I drafted this off line.         

Hello Victor,

 

I purchased 5 , 3"X5" photos of Lotus history that I finally took out of the frame (Susan framed them for me about four years ago) and photo copied them. I'll send them off to you if you can let Peter Ross take a look. I don't know who the guys in the photos are except Colin Chapman and Fangio looking at an VIII in 56'?, 55?.

 

Climax technology is climbing rapidly. There is a builder back east building 1500's and limiting them to 8300 rpm. Don Burrows emailed pictures of the interior of his engine (ran it's bearings) and it is space age.  Mike's attitude is if he can build for 130 hp per liter on Porsches he can accomplish the same on Triumph TR's, Climax's, etc. I am working with Mike on an engine for myself and utilizing his expertise and we'll see what I can achieve. A friend, Mike Tangney purchased a TR engine a few years ago form Racetorations advertised and with a dyno that proved 205HP that only made it to 173 HP on Cal Dyno. I think it's a good dyno.

 

But then doctors differ, patients die....

 

Cheers,

Stewart Smith

[Charles Helps]

Vic and I have spoken on this. He admits that part of it was a late
April 1st spoof and that US lbs are the same size as those in the UK.

This is what I wrote to him:
You are still having me on with the 4/5ths size US lbs on I suspect:
I see no reason to quarrel with this article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_customary_units#Units_of_mass

'For the pound and smaller units, the U.S. customary system and the
British Imperial system are identical.'

Both the Americans and we are happy with a conversion of roughly 1hp =
746 Watts.

There are many reasons why the Road and Track test weights may differ
from the tests in the UK. Accuracy of scales and person doing the
measuring both in the UK and USA, amount of fuel, oil and water
carried and so on.

I have photocopies of the November 23, 1956 Autosport roadtest on the
Lotus Eleven Sports with a weight of 7 3/4 cwt and a February 1957
Motor Sport test on a similar (the same?) car with a quoted weight of
9 cwt 0 qtr 0 lb (without occupants, but ready for the road, with
approximately two gallons of petrol). The Autocar quotes a dry weight
for the FWA Climax engined Lotus Mk IX of 9 cwt in its five page test
published on 1 April 1955. [1 cwt = 112 lbs for those unfamiliar with
the hundredweight]

I look forward to hearing from the US how the engine builders there
get on with improving the FWB engine. You say ' It is difficult to
get the FWB to breath well over 8000rpm which it needs to achieve a
theoretical 150bhp' and yet I think Stewart said that the engine he
was speaking of will go to 8300 rpm so not impossible with this 3.75%
increase in revs. In any case to get to 100 bhp/litre gross one only
needs 146 bhp for an engine with the standard capacity.

I'm not really quarrelling with your claim about the engine power but
I do think you should be more careful before making some statements
about units of measurement.

[Gary Anderson]

Charles

    The only measure that I am aware of is

 

"The pint is a pound the whole world round"

 

I think its measured in beer, not water. I have never measured one as it never stayed in my hand long enough to get an accurate measurement.

 

                             Gary

Charles Helps <charle...@btopenworld.com> wrote:

---

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.