Curiousity: Small engines in each class?

[Iron Woode]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Iron Woode
let me know when you can replace this

see the blower?

Its still an 8000 hp 500 cube Hemi V8.

not some 1.4ltr 4 banger with a turbo on it.

 

[OffTopic1]

Diesel engine 14 cylinder @ 1,556,002 cubic inches (25,480 liters).

[edit]
Total engine weight: 2300 tons (The crankshaft alone weighs 300 tons.)
Length: 89 feet
Height: 44 feet
Maximum power: 108,920 hp at 102 rpm
Maximum torque: 5,608,312 lb/ft at 102rpm

Even at it's most efficient power setting, the big 14 consumes 1,660 gallons of heavy fuel oil per hour.

 

[Siddhartha]

FIAT built a small V-8 during the 1950's. I am looking for the size right now.

EDIT: I remember it having a capacity of two liters.

 

[Apex]

There's the 2.6 liter Radical V8 (nicknamed "Christine"). It only weighs 194 lbs. Currently putting out 383 bhp at 10,000 RPM, and 207 lb/ft of torque at 6800 rpm.

You can hear it (and see it going around Bruntingthorpe in a Radical) here:

17mb mpg file

 

[Stumps]

Originally posted by: Iron Woode

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Iron Woode
let me know when you can replace this

see the blower?

Its still an 8000 hp 500 cube Hemi V8.

not some 1.4ltr 4 banger with a turbo on it.

dang, now thats an engine.

I don't how many times some a$$munch has said "oh my 4 banger will out handle your big heavy V8 any day of the week" only to lose money on it, one of my previous rides was a 1979 Ford XD Fairmont ESP sedan fitted with a 380hp 302cu (5 litre) Cleveland v8, Stage 3 C4 auto with 3000 rpm stall , and 3.5:1 9 nine incher.....and over $3000 of KONI FULLY ADJUSTIBLE suspension, it used to eat Suburu WRX STi's for breakfast and Lancer EVO's for lunch and dinner, although to be fair I never could get around a well tuned GTR Skyline, or Supra RZ, but still plenty of people went down to that car because people assume big heavy V8 powered cars can't handle, anybody with the time and money can make a car handle

 

[loic2003]

jeeez...

The efficiency of an engine is piss-poor, like 20% or less. You're better off building an engine of the same size but with increased efficiency than a larger engine of the same efficiency. It's that simple. Stop infering and assuming crap. And stop wasting my time.

 

[Stumps]

and how do you work that out?, the Volumetric effecieny of a street engine is around 85%, a heavly modifyed engine will get say 92%, a race engine is 95%, your post makes no sense, do you have any knowledge about engines at all?
anything you can do to a small engine you can do to a larger engine..and guess what you get more power, I don't see any 8000hp 1.6litre 4 bangers, lets see you get the 380hp i got out of my 5litre v8, out of your piddle little 4 banger with out a turbo, no can't be done, and my v8 still got 25-27mpg

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: loic2003

Originally posted by: Triumph
When did you mention the layout? You said it right there, "A fat V8 5 liter Chevy block or whatever"!! Your point about efficiency was lost in your nonsensical blanketing of all V8's as low revving, gas hogging, non-turning wastes.

What you on about? I never blanketed all V8's as you claim. Stop putting words in my mouth. My point, like I already has explained to you, is about *capacity*. The emphasis on the above sentence you quoted should be on the 5 liter capacity rather than the engine configuration.

Originally posted by: Triumph
If the added mass of the V8 is offset by the additional power, such that the power to weight ratio of the V8 is better than that of the I4 or 6, then no, the smaller engined car will not necessarily be quicker.

Yes... of course it's possible, it's a bigger engine, so if you fitted it with a massive turbo you obviously could burn more fuel per second = more power than a smaller engine with a proportionally sized turbo, etc. You're missing my point and I can't be fvcked to explain it to you.

Put it this way, a 2.5 Evo managed to go quicker round a twisty course than a murcielago in one test. It's not all about raw capacity.

*whispers*Duuude, the FQ400 is still a 2.0 litre.....*whispers*

 

[Stumps]

who cares...four banger suck!

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: Stumps
who cares...four banger suck!

Shut it, you great Gala!

I love my EJ20.

 

[Stumps]

trust me it sucks,you haven't lived until you have driven a V8 that can smoke it's tyres in all gears and that V8 rumble...just delicous, and it's GALAH!!! (does a head bobbing expression)

 

[loic2003]

Originally posted by: Stumps
and how do you work that out?, the Volumetric effecieny of a street engine is around 85%, a heavly modifyed engine will get say 92%, a race engine is 95%, your post makes no sense, do you have any knowledge about engines at all?
anything you can do to a small engine you can do to a larger engine..and guess what you get more power, I don't see any 8000hp 1.6litre 4 bangers, lets see you get the 380hp i got out of my 5litre v8, out of your piddle little 4 banger with out a turbo, no can't be done, and my v8 still got 25-27mpg

efficiency of 92 -> 95%? Whoops! you've just exposed your ignorance.

The attraction of using the fuel cell to generate electricity, over burning the hydrogen in an internal combustion engine, is that the fuel cell is very efficient indeed, achieving 45% to 60% efficiency (c) 4wd.sofcom.com --> versus a petrol engine's 15% to 35%

Source

HCCI engines could achieve approximately 40 percent peak efficiency versus 30 percent for spark-ignited engines.

Source

Education is your friend.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: Stumps
trust me it sucks,you haven't lived until you have driven a V8 that can smoke it's tyres in all gears and that V8 rumble...just delicous, and it's GALAH!!! (does a head bobbing expression)

*/0 shakes head* terrible suspension wastiong all that power in all gears */0 shakes head*

You DID read the thread title, right?

 

[Theguynextdoor]

For those of you posting big displacements. There's a 4-banger funny car that pushes out....4000HP. Each cylinder are the size of coffe cans. :lol;

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: loic2003
jeeez...

The efficiency of an engine is piss-poor, like 20% or less. You're better off building an engine of the same size but with increased efficiency than a larger engine of the same efficiency. It's that simple. Stop infering and assuming crap. And stop wasting my time.

It's easier to build high-efficiency engines with high displacements than high-efficiency engines with low displacements.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Theguynextdoor

For those of you posting big displacements. There's a 4-banger funny car that pushes out....4000HP. Each cylinder are the size of coffe cans. :lol;

coffee cans are pretty damn big.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Theguynextdoor

For those of you posting big displacements. There's a 4-banger funny car that pushes out....4000HP. Each cylinder are the size of coffe cans. :lol;

coffee cans are pretty damn big.

Yeah, what is this? A 6.0L four pot??

And dude, 50k posts.......insane....

 

[Iron Woode]

Originally posted by: loic2003

Originally posted by: Stumps
and how do you work that out?, the Volumetric effecieny of a street engine is around 85%, a heavly modifyed engine will get say 92%, a race engine is 95%, your post makes no sense, do you have any knowledge about engines at all?
anything you can do to a small engine you can do to a larger engine..and guess what you get more power, I don't see any 8000hp 1.6litre 4 bangers, lets see you get the 380hp i got out of my 5litre v8, out of your piddle little 4 banger with out a turbo, no can't be done, and my v8 still got 25-27mpg

efficiency of 92 -> 95%? Whoops! you've just exposed your ignorance.

The attraction of using the fuel cell to generate electricity, over burning the hydrogen in an internal combustion engine, is that the fuel cell is very efficient indeed, achieving 45% to 60% efficiency (c) 4wd.sofcom.com --> versus a petrol engine's 15% to 35%

Source

HCCI engines could achieve approximately 40 percent peak efficiency versus 30 percent for spark-ignited engines.

http://www.llnl.gov/str/April04/Aceves.html">Source</a>

Education is your friend.

I just wish it was your friend.

You have no clue of what you speak, but you keep speaking.

Next time try figuring out what you are trying to say.

What you are doing is comapring 2 different things. Efficiency is a very broad word that can mean many things. Be specific when you use it. If you are talking about volumetric effeciency then you are wrong. If you mean that the fuel (gasoline) is ineffeciently used by IC engines, then yes, I agree. But you didn't say that did you? Nope, just rambled on about something you know nothing about.

Please stop posting.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Siddhartha
FIAT built a small V-8 during the 1950's. I am looking for the size right now.

EDIT: I remember it having a capacity of two liters.

Jeez, over the years, Fiat has designed and built just about any drivetrain configuration you can think of -- then, two years later, abandoned it for something radically different. Damn, wander through Europe sometime and you'll see what I mean.

I saw some really high line, Ferrari like V8 2+2's with the Fiat badge on them. They'll try anything once!!

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: loic2003

You don't read much do you?:disgust: When did I mention the engine layout? The engine could be a V8/straight 4/flat 6/rotary/whatever.... My point was that you can increase efficiency out of smaller engines and create a better performing car rather than shoving a fat high capacity engine. Get 2 rolling chassis, put a huge 5L V8 in one and a really well tuned lightweight 2.5 or 3L in the other. The smaller engined car will be quicker around the twisty stuff and very likely faster in a line.

stop spooging yourself over your fantasy that large v8s are bigger and heavier than european 6s

That would be one sweet ride; American V8 in a BMW. Way too awesome.

Additionally I think loic2003 confused ATOT with his ricer forums.

 

[Stumps]

Originally posted by: loic2003

Originally posted by: Stumps
and how do you work that out?, the Volumetric effecieny of a street engine is around 85%, a heavly modifyed engine will get say 92%, a race engine is 95%, your post makes no sense, do you have any knowledge about engines at all?
anything you can do to a small engine you can do to a larger engine..and guess what you get more power, I don't see any 8000hp 1.6litre 4 bangers, lets see you get the 380hp i got out of my 5litre v8, out of your piddle little 4 banger with out a turbo, no can't be done, and my v8 still got 25-27mpg

efficiency of 92 -> 95%? Whoops! you've just exposed your ignorance.

The attraction of using the fuel cell to generate electricity, over burning the hydrogen in an internal combustion engine, is that the fuel cell is very efficient indeed, achieving 45% to 60% efficiency (c) 4wd.sofcom.com --> versus a petrol engine's 15% to 35%

Source

HCCI engines could achieve approximately 40 percent peak efficiency versus 30 percent for spark-ignited engines.

http://www.llnl.gov/str/April04/Aceves.html">Source</a>

Education is your friend.

What the hell are you smoking, that article was the biggest heap of crap I have ever read, if petrol engines had such low effeciency figures, they would have been replaced half a century ago, as somebody how studied automotive engineering for 4 yrs and worked in the industry for 4 yrs (total 6yrs)I think I know what I am on about, the efficency of an engine in not measured in fuel efficency, but air flow efficency, you have to remember the an engine is just a big airpump nothing less nothing more, the more air it can push, the more power it will generate, the formula for figuring out an engines air flow is as follows:

Capicity x rpm
-----------------
3456

Capicity is measured in Cubic inches, this formula assumes 85% efficency which IS what a street engine will get, fuel efficency is the figure that automotive companie give to try and make there product look good, in the real world is doesn't mean squat, If you think that you can use some piss poor little 4 banger to try make the same power as a six or V8 and get good economy well you are the uneducated one,

lets use the formula to test this,

302cu 5litre V8 reving at 6500rpm (realistic)

302x6500
----------- = 567 cfm (cubic feet per minute)
3456

250cu 4litre Inline 6 at 6500rpm

250x6500
----------- = 470 cfm
3456

121cu 2litre inline 4 at 6500rpm

121x6500
----------- = 227 cfm
3456

now this assumes that the engine is a 85% efficency (aircleaner installed, mufflers, emisson control)
as you see the 2litre is now where near efficent as the large engine, which is why smaller engines are used in smaller cars and larger engines in larger cars, if I stuck that 2litre into a 1400kg fairmont, it would have work very hard to move all that weight and this would reduces it's efficency and fuel economy!

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: Stumps

Originally posted by: loic2003

Originally posted by: Stumps
and how do you work that out?, the Volumetric effecieny of a street engine is around 85%, a heavly modifyed engine will get say 92%, a race engine is 95%, your post makes no sense, do you have any knowledge about engines at all?
anything you can do to a small engine you can do to a larger engine..and guess what you get more power, I don't see any 8000hp 1.6litre 4 bangers, lets see you get the 380hp i got out of my 5litre v8, out of your piddle little 4 banger with out a turbo, no can't be done, and my v8 still got 25-27mpg

efficiency of 92 -> 95%? Whoops! you've just exposed your ignorance.

The attraction of using the fuel cell to generate electricity, over burning the hydrogen in an internal combustion engine, is that the fuel cell is very efficient indeed, achieving 45% to 60% efficiency (c) 4wd.sofcom.com --> versus a petrol engine's 15% to 35%

Source

HCCI engines could achieve approximately 40 percent peak efficiency versus 30 percent for spark-ignited engines.

http://www.llnl.gov/str/April04/Aceves.html">Source</a>

Education is your friend.

What the hell are you smoking, that article was the biggest heap of crap I have ever read, if petrol engines had such low effeciency figures, they would have been replaced half a century ago, as somebody how studied automotive engineering for 4 yrs and worked in the industry for 4 yrs (total 6yrs)I think I know what I am on about, the efficency of an engine in not measured in fuel efficency, but air flow efficency, you have to remember the an engine is just a big airpump nothing less nothing more, the more air it can push, the more power it will generate, the formula for figuring out an engines air flow is as follows:

Capicity x rpm
-----------------
3456

Capicity is measured in Cubic inches, this formula assumes 85% efficency which IS what a street engine will get, fuel efficency is the figure that automotive companie give to try and make there product look good, in the real world is doesn't mean squat, If you think that you can use some piss poor little 4 banger to try make the same power as a six or V8 and get good economy well you are the uneducated one,

lets use the formula to test this

5litre V8

efficiency: the ratio of the useful energy delivered by a dynamic system to the energy supplied to it

I don't see how you could think he was talking about volumetric efficiency when it was just "efficiency".

 

[Stumps]

hmmm, maybe something was lost in the translation, I believe this thread was about pertol engine's if he started babbling about power efficency, then he was on a completly different wave length to the rest of us, with that said, a 4 cylinder is no more efficent at producing power than any other types of engine not matter what configuration the engine is, it all comes back to volumetric efficency

 

[Stumps]

trying to make a petrol engine more power efficent is pointless, once that power has to travel through the driveline up to 40% can be lost.
the key to making power is volumetric efficency.

 

[Iron Woode]

Ok, loic2003 is trying to say that gasoline engines are ineffecient at utilizing all the potential energy of the fuel. This is true. Most of the energy produced is heat and it is wasted.

Volumetric effeciency is the ratio of power produced to a given amount of fuel.

So, to sum it up: My car may have a VE of 92% but the engine is only getting 40% (more than likely less) power from gasoline's potential.

Any other losses are simply mechanical in origin.