06-17-2007, 05:05 PM
|
|
Novice
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 31
Location: Los Angeles
|
|
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine
Never said it didn't.
Please read what I'd said.
The likelihood of an engine of the like of REvetec's is highly unlikely 
Also the new wave of companies trying to ensure success int he quickly growing Chinese market is way differen to what BMC and Datsus et al did in India |
You specifically said in the previous comment: Engines are "handed" down to 3rd tier because they are cheap have little commercial value and therefore not carrying royalties. So you don't see leading edge engines go that route. So you did say that.
Quote:
|
Check out all the V8 power plants coming out of the UK at the moment
|
Compare apples to apples.
Quote:
Why ?
The gearbox packaing becomes an issue, the X4 could fit in any transverse engine bay with a crown/pinion drive
And from the sizes discussed able to fit in "normal" space for many vehicles too. True if trying to fit a V10 into a 4-potter it involves more effort, but we're not looking at major voume differences here !!! Not saying that it cant' fit in to all cars, but don't see a problem for most.
|
Manufacturers are a tad more prcise then this. They dont just throw in a relatively samll engine in a large engine bay. Consumers dont particualrly like that.
[quote]WHat other tooling ? As said above, no real reason why this requries major surgery. Possibly even adaptable usign engine mount cradles. Kit car makers and builders use this technique all the time
Quote:
Not on what I have seen.Are you serious? It is not a simple stick and paste job, stop simplyfing relatively complicated engineering.
Quote:
Name me an R&D project you have known that added more and delivered sooner.
I can provide the shame list of hundreds over the years in a major highly professional and experienced multi-national
|
My point all along is that management are taking too long. There are ways to fast track processes, I can gather from your general comments that you have worked on relatively minor projects. If OEM's like Toyota & Porsche adopted your mentality we would still be driving 16 valve twin cam engines.
Quote:
Thermal modelling is well advanced.
Force modelling on bearings and castings is equally well in place.
So the risks are not what they were 10 years ago even with the never-heard-of ideas
To optimise any software for what Revetec are doing will require significatn capture of the real world results to validate any model. That's why I pointed it out.
|
Exactly, and how do you get these results? Let me guess you would say "abra kadabra" right?
Quote:
We are in agreement.
So software isn't an answer.
Building and testing is.
Now if you build 20 equal engines to test 20 things quess what .... when you encounter a need to redesign you've just thrown out 19 test results as irrelevant as this is a closed loop system, not linear.
|
What the? I am not going to even bother responding to this nonsense.
Quote:
Agreed. "carefully review" -- not leap into action and trip up.
Brad has shareholders to answer to and I consider the progress being made is reasonable and well managed risk level. I was providing inputs to suggest why I think whilst it would be great for an engine to be ready 2 years ago, these things take time and money. Both I consider being reasonably managed at this time.
|
|
It is a big bad world out there and there are countless numbers of technologies being developed. I am saying that he needs to quicken the pace by maximising and optimising his ability to complete the engine. He reqquires assistance and support to finnish the development of the engine in a timely fashion.
|