• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Curiousity: Small engines in each class?

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
sounds fairly accurate to me, but how he came to drop that in the discussion still eludes me, but the sad fact is that the internal combustion engine is still the most efficent design going and will be for many years to come.
With that said 4 bangers still suck, they don't even sound nice
http://www.frenzy.com/~jester/racecar.html
 
just to add to my earlier statements, It takes 2cfm for every HP produced, obviously a large v8 will move more air through it and therefor make more power!
 
Originally posted by: 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.
Click to expand...
Volumetric efficiency is the ratio of actual airflow over theoretical airflow (i.e. at 1RPM, so to speak), isn't it?
Originally posted by: Stumps
just to add to my earlier statements, It takes 2cfm for every HP produced, obviously a large v8 will move more air through it and therefor make more power!
Click to expand...
Great blanket statement. :disgust:
 
Speaking of small V8's, I transplanted a 287cid V8 into the 1966 Rambler I'm restoring. Fairly small as far as V8's go. Speced at about 200hp by AMC. Doubtful the one I put in comes close to that since I haven't rebuilt it yet. Still has about 90,000 miles on it. Still more power than the original 232cid 3.8L straight six that was in there.
 
Originally posted by: Stumps
some british V12's got bigger than 38litres and produced over 3000hp, but they were in the Supermarine Spitfire, I think the yank Mustang had a smaller but similar roll royce based V12 that made similar power, I think they were only 28litres
Click to expand...

The Merlin was the engine of the Mustang and the spits until the later marks. the late mark spits have a griffon, had to add a blade to the prop to actually use the power of that monster. Spit mk. XIV is the most well known Griffon-powered beast, mk. IX is probably most common Merlin powered spit, but they kept building them with griffons well into the twenties.
Couple other late late ar British fights, tempest and typhoon, were amazing. I think the Typhoon was the fastest fighter at sea level in the war . ..might have them backwards though.

but those engines never produced anywhere near 3000 horse.

The Double-wasp in the P-47 and the corsair I think peaked around 2800 horse, on some of the late war models like the P-47 M series and N series. I think the N was made to hunt down those german jet-bombs they started lobbing at britain towards the end.
 
Originally posted by: Horus
Mazda 1.8L=130HP. Not to mention that the MX3 and early MX5 engines were pulled from the 323GT, that was turbocharged. I remember a Miata owner on these forums telling me that the 1.8L I4s could take 10+ of boost no problem.
Click to expand...

my 99 vw passat with stock turbo takes 15 psi of boost no problem
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top