Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 91 to 98 of 98

Thread: What is your favorite engine?

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    10,227
    I've heard turbines are very light for the amount of power they produce - at least the ones that were used as engines for cars (I would imagine others are too).

    I imagine it'd be a real pain in the ass to drive a turbine car though.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Way Down South
    Posts
    2,734
    Turbines are light which is why they're perfect for aircraft... where torque isn't that important. There are too many things that make them impractical for automotive use.
    Never own more cars than you can keep charged batteries in...

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    10,227
    I mean - from strictly a driving point of view - putting your foot down and having no power for several seconds would be quite irritating.

    Jets don't sound nice either.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    29
    Actually, 0.003 cc is correct, because I happen to know quite a lot about this bike, having personally spoken to the creator of it. The reason why it is classed as 0.003 cc is for the same reason that a Mazda rotary is classed as ''654x2'' cc. Because it is a different type of engine.

    For a car, the capacity is measured by the cubic capacity of the cylinder (as I am sure you already know). For the Allison Gas turbine, the cc cannot be measured in cylinders, can it? Because it has none. The cc of the Y2K is the size of the fuel injection hose that supplies the turbine with fuel, the nozzle of which is 0.003 cc in capacity, thank you very much.

    And as for the aspect of running on diesel and kerosene, once again, the creator of this bike, Mr. Ted Mcintyre, stated that this bike can run on Tequila. However, diesel burns most efficiently - a fact which I never argued against.
    I am the most humble person in the world and no one is going to tell me otherwise.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Modena
    Posts
    9,826
    That is a misinterpretation of the term "displacement".
    You don't measure the displacement of a car with the size of the holes on each fuel injector.

    The Wankel engine you mentioned is quoted as "654x2 cc" because it has two rotors, each of them having a size of 654 cc to subdivide by the number of combustion chambers in each rotor (3, usually).

    The displacement is the volume of the fluid elaborated by a machine/engine at each cycle, something you can't detect in a turbine as the intake is always "connected" with the outlet.

    Hate it when I don't have my books with me (or when Matra and culver aren't around).
    KFL Racing Enterprises - Kicking your ass since 2008

    *cough* http://theitalianjunkyard.blogspot.com/ *cough*

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    10,227
    So ultimately, the cubic capacity is dependent on how you define it for a turbine.

    UCP seems to think that the Howmet TX (which is a turbine car) displaces about 3 Litres. Maybe if you included the volume of the turbine itself (the volume of the area where the gas is ignited and the fan blades spin), you'd get a more sensible measure of displacement.

    The applicable sentence:

    The sport's governing body determined that the Continental turbine had a swept volume that was equivalent to 2958 cc in a piston engine. This placed the Howmet TX in the the three-litre 'Group 6' prototype category of the FIA World Championship and made it eligible for all the great sports car races; the Daytona 24 Hours, Sebring 12 Hours and the 24 Hours of Le Mans.
    It doesn't seem as though they are talking about the size of the fuel injection hose to me, although I could be wrong.

    Then again, I don't know exactly how turbines work, and I am not sure that either method would be a proper analogue to the method used by engines using pistons.

    I mean, wouldn't measuring the cc of the Allison turbine as the size of the fuel injection hose be somewhat similar to measuring the displacement of a gas engine as the area of the cylinder that the valve displaces when fuel is injected?

    I would also say that the makers of this car would like to make it seem as though their bike displaces only 0.003cc as to make their power seem utterly ridiculous - this is maybe not entirely honest of them.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    10,227
    Quote Originally Posted by LeonOfTheDead View Post
    That is a misinterpretation of the term "displacement".
    You don't measure the displacement of a car with the size of the holes on each fuel injector.

    The Wankel engine you mentioned is quoted as "654x2 cc" because it has two rotors, each of them having a size of 654 cc to subdivide by the number of combustion chambers in each rotor (3, usually).

    The displacement is the volume of the fluid elaborated by a machine/engine at each cycle, something you can't detect in a turbine as the intake is always "connected" with the outlet.

    Hate it when I don't have my books with me (or when Matra and culver aren't around).
    Thank you Leon.

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    On the edge of the great Chihuahuan desert in West Texas
    Posts
    2

    favorite engine

    I bought a then new 1968 Chevy SS, 396ci., 375HP, twin dome hood, about 9 months prior to leaving for Vietnam. I figured if I stood a good chance of dying I might as well out in blaze of tire smoke. My wife and drove the car all over the south to motorcycle races on the weekends. I feel sure I counter rotated the earth a few times with that motor. Lots of torque.
    Pretty much any V12 I have ever been able to hear. The sounds are just amazing.

    Favorite bike motors, going two stroke here: Husky 400 WR, about 1975.
    Honda CR125 Elsinore, add some methanol, a bit more compression and wheelie the straightaways!
    For just raw nastiness and feeling like your butt is connected to the highway, my old ironhead Harley Sportster. Complete with a better cam, SU carb, pipes, hotter ignition. You could feel every pulse of the engine. Most visceral I ever owned. I put 65,000 on that motor and never rebuilt a thing.
    Bruce

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Honda CR-V (RE) 2006-2011
    By dracu777 in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 01-28-2010, 08:13 AM
  2. Ford Focus RS8 with Cammer Engine
    By Gt1Street in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 06-30-2008, 06:33 PM
  3. UCP Supercar II: Engine Department.
    By hightower99 in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 225
    Last Post: 02-16-2007, 04:09 PM
  4. BMW Unveils New V10
    By lithuanianmafia in forum General Automotive
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-28-2005, 06:51 AM
  5. Your all-time favorite American muscle engine!
    By nist7 in forum General Automotive
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 09-26-2005, 05:26 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •