Displacement anomalies

[Ferrer]

I tried the DB9 (89x79,5mm) and I got 5935cc, which is what they announce.

[Kultag]

Originally Posted by Ferrer

I tried the DB9 (89x79,5mm) and I got 5935cc, which is what they announce.

Yes, this shows the confusion around: I have 6 sources writing about the DB9, 1 of them writes 6000 ccm, another one 5953 ccm (a typo maybe, here's the source of error), the other 4 writes 5935. Thanks. I thought with such a basic car, it would be enough to read out one site's data about displacement, the others would write the same. Nnnno!

[SIMPLETON]

Originally Posted by Kultag

Also the sidewall of the cylinder must be cylindrical (sealing).

not true. The Honda NR bikes used V4s with 8 valves per cylinder. They had oval pistons.

[Matra et Alpine]

K, the example you've given kind of proves the point made earlier.
CLEARLY the 6000 is some journo taking a marketing line of "6 litre engine" and then converting that to cc. Typical journo
You have one of one figure and a number of the other and as you say it woudl strongly suggest typo. So in this case it's pretty much obvious which one is the real number. Have you fgollowed this with all the other "errors" you have ?
IBM: "Garbage In, Garbage Out"
Fix the input and accept the math

[Kultag]

Yes, the solution should be simple, though I've tried a few things with them, like swapping the bore and the stroke, or swapping some digits. I've already corrected some cars this way (and sent a warning to the websites, they were mostly thankful). In some cases I was happy to even find any data about them. I guess in some cases we will never find out the truth.