RW " Jeremy has an aggressive engine...i wouldnt be surprised if...
Cope
Morehits4u <moreh...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000612222807...@ng-md1.aol.com...
> he didnt finish the race !! "" Supposedly he said that b4 the race
!!
> hmmm..
Morehits4u
Andy Smith
harder and create more power, but use more gas and risk blowing it up (if you
really over do it), or you can set it up to run less rpms and save gas. This is
probably a big reason Bobby Labonte didn't beat Tony. Tony wanted to go fast,
Bobby likes to conserve fuel at Michigan. Maybe it's older vs. younger
drivers... ;-)
-
Andy
In article <20000612222807...@ng-md1.aol.com>, moreh...@aol.com
Scotty John Edmond
pipe cleaners & the pistons made from expaneded Miller Lite cans.
(Miller Lite cans borrowed from Rusty!!!!)
just maybe??
Scotty
**********************************
Morehits4u
>if...
>From: "Cope" jbu...@mindspring.com
>Bad fuel additive must have finally caught up with them...
Been laffin' way out loud since i read your
post...great call !!
Wayne Mann
I heard a Sprint car engine builder talking one time and he
said something I found interesting, but do not know if it is fact or
not.
I will use a Cup engine as an example because more people here
will be familiar with it.
He said if you take this engine that produces, let just use
the number 750 Horse Power. He says there is not much more that can
be done to the engine to get more HP out of it. So he suggested, not
that NASCAR would allow it, but if you are restricted by Cubic Inches,
the way to get more power would be to eliminate the 8 cylinders, of 5
inches diameter or whatever they are, and replace them with say 24
cylinders that are 2 inches in diameter.
According to him, with the same Cubic Inches, the more
cylinders, although smaller, as long as you kept the Cubic Inches the
same you would end up with quite a bit more power. I don't recall the
numbers he used, so these numbers are just to illustrate the point,
not that they are correct.
Anyone know anything about this? Would 48 one inch cylinders
be even better?
Thank you.
-v-
"Wayne Mann" <t...@callamerica.net> wrote in message
news:gd5mkskrghfk8q8fd...@4ax.com...
An engine with more cylinders for the same displacement would have smaller
and lighter pistons, rods, valves etc. Smaller and lighter pistons, rods,
valves etc make it easier to turn higher rpm. More rpm leads to more
horsepower. Requires a few adjustments along the way.
--
-v-
Go #3 #20 #8
John McCoy
> According to him, with the same Cubic Inches, the more
>cylinders, although smaller, as long as you kept the Cubic Inches the
>same you would end up with quite a bit more power. I don't recall the
>numbers he used, so these numbers are just to illustrate the point,
>not that they are correct.
To a certain degree, that's true. More smaller cylinders means lighter
individual parts, which allows more rpm. On the other hand, more
moving parts means more friction, which eats power. In addtion,
lots of cylinders means a long crankshaft, which causes some
problems (ever wonder why straight-8 engines went out of fashion),
and, if you have a single point of induction (i.e. a carb) a long
engine results in a less efficient manifold. So there's an optimum
number of cylinders. For a biggish engine, like WC, probably 12
would be optimum or perhaps 16. 24 would almost certainly be
too many. In formula one, they've settled on 10 as the optimum number
(altho Ferrari is apparently experimenting with a 12 cyl engine, 12 being
a long standing tradition at Ferrari; the F1 rulesmakers are threatening
to ban engines of more than 10 cyls as a cost saving measure, a rather
ludicrous concept for that particular series).
John
(I recall seeing a 16 cyl engine made by welding 2 Chevy small blocks
together. It had crankshaft problems...)
-v-
"John McCoy" <igo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:394d659a....@enews.newsguy.com...
>snip all the stuff I agree with too<
In formula one, they've settled on 10 as the optimum number
> (altho Ferrari is apparently experimenting with a 12 cyl engine, 12 being
> a long standing tradition at Ferrari; the F1 rulesmakers are threatening
> to ban engines of more than 10 cyls as a cost saving measure, a rather
> ludicrous concept for that particular series).
>
> John
They have to make it possible for the little guy to compete:)
I am always amazed at people that support a cost saving rule for NASCAR WC
or Busch so that the little guy can compete. If you can't afford a few more
sets of tires you are going to have big problems with something else even in
the Busch Series.
>
> (I recall seeing a 16 cyl engine made by welding 2 Chevy small blocks
> together. It had crankshaft problems...)
Detroit Diesel used to have a 1400hp+ V-16 marine engine that was
essentially two V-8's mated end to end. I saw a 60" Magnum sport boat with a
pair of them driving Arneson Surface drives at the Miami Boat Show back in
the mid 80's when I lived in Ft Lauderdale .
Don't know if they still build them or not . MTU & MAN also build some huge
marine diesels.
John McCoy
> MTU & MAN also build some huge
>marine diesels.
Now you're in a totally different world. MAN makes an inline 8 cyl marine
diesel that displaces something like 500,000 cubic inches. You could
almost drop a car into the cylinder.
John
(of course, flat out it's going something like 42 rpm...)
-v-
You are right there. I think the low end of their lines are good for the
really big Hatteras and Broward motor yachts, etc.
http://www.mtu-friedrichshafen.com/en/pr/prdiep.htm