hey mark You meaning the Orbital Engine Company? Melbourne Uni are doing some cool research in collaboration with Collins Motor Corporation into scotch yoke engine design too that has received considerable attention.
andrew > hi, any one remember the name of the company in australia that was > developing a engine, that had some things that resembled pistons, a sorta > arm lifted the pistons up with a stroke of 5-10 mm, and fuel was injected > with extreme high pressure air to atomise the fuel , and you could gang up > as many of these pistons as u want, it was set up in a rotary fashion i > think, i saw it on a video at TAFE.................. > > > MARK K > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "E Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 12:43 PM > Subject: RE: Boost vs Cubic inches > > > > I look forward to the new engine designs to use hydrogen effectively. > > I bet there is some good technology just waiting for when the cost and > > storage/delivery problems are solved > > > > Cheers, > > Feral Errol > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.datrats.com.au/ > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chalmers, Ryan > > Sent: Thursday, 15 November 2001 12:48 PM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RE: Boost vs Cubic inches > > > > Thats why we should be pushing for Hydrogen powered cars, fill the tank up > > from the tap and away we go ; ) > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: James Marmont [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Thursday, 15 November 2001 12:15 pm > > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > > Subject: RE: Boost vs Cubic inches > > > > > > i wont argue with you cos im not 100 percent on the capacities. my point > > > regarding the multivalve v8s is that even though the technology is > > > available most manufacturers still cling to pushrods. i love a fully > > > worked v8 as much as the next guy, but 5.7l is rediculous in this day > and > > > age! petrol is only getting more expensive and there is less of it to go > > > around. are they going to wait untill there is no petrol left before > they > > > say " derrrr, maybe 5.7l is a bit to big, may be we should make > something > > > smaller". > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Thursday, 15 November 2001 11:10 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: Boost vs Cubic inches > > > > > > > > > You are all wrong wrong wrong! > > > Current Formula 1 cars use 3 litre V10 engines. Some manufacturers were > > > developing V12 engines until cylinders were limited to 10 by FIA. But > yes > > > of > > > course they are multivalve (upto 5 per cylinder). > > > > > > As mentioned by someone else Toyota and even Nissan have production quad > > > cam 32 > > > valve V8s too. You can get them at importers too so they are not that > > > exclusive. > > > > > > > > > > F1's are 3.6 litre and i think the rules have recently changed to make > > > them > > > > all V10's > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "James Marmont" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 10:19 AM > > > > Subject: RE: Boost vs Cubic inches > > > > > > > > > > > > > fornula one cars are limited ti 1.6l.the benneton team used to run > > > bigger > > > > capacity v8s before the rules changed. and yes toyota and ferrari do > > > make > > > > quad cam v8s, but they are only in very expensive luxury cars. they > need > > > to > > > > maked them more wide spead in their use > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: James Cox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2001 3:39 PM > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Subject: RE: Boost vs Cubic inches > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Correct me if I'm wrong but I belive that both Farrari and Toyota > put > > > out > > > > > high tech qaud cam V8s. And I could be wrong but I think a lot of > the > > > F1 > > > > > cars use small V8s, 3.5L etc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >i am well aware of this > > > > > >but another thing to remember is that v8s use 1950s technology. > they > > > > still > > > > > >use push rods for fucks sake! if a manufacturer made a well > balanced > > > 3 > > > > > >liter v8, using quad cams and 4 or 5 valves per cylinder, that > would > > > > change > > > > > >the whole equation and put out the same if not more power. torque > may > > > be > > > > > >down a bit, but nothing forced induction cant fix!!! > > > > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > > > > >From: James Cox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > >Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2001 2:52 PM > > > > > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >Subject: Boost vs Cubic inches > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Gentlemen, > > > > > > > > > > > >I enjoy seeing a L20B beat a V8 off the lights as much as anyone > else > > > but > > > > > >you must remember we are talking a highly modified L20B vs a fairly > > > stock > > > > > >V8. Its all about how much air and fuel you can get into an > engine, > > > and > > > > a > > > > > >larger motor will always have the cability to intake more air and > > > fuel. A > > > > > >twin turbo RB26 can put out 1000hp but a equaly worked blown V8 > will > > > put > > > > > >out > > > > > >10,000hp. There is a reason why the quickest cars in the world run > > > the > > > > 1/4 > > > > > >with blown big block V8s. > > > > > > > > > > > >Although as you know your a lot more likey to be able to afford to > > > drive > > > > a > > > > > >700 - 800hp turbo (both in building cost and in petrol) on the road > > > than > > > > a > > > > > >10,000hp blown V8, blown V8s are BIG $$$ and use a LOT of fuel, > I've > > > > heard > > > > > >of such cars using over a litre of AVGAS per km! > > > > > > > > > > > >Don't want to burst anyone's bubble, but a larger engine, worked > > > equally, > > > > > >will aways produce more power. > > > > > > > > > > > >James Cox > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >OF COURSE THERE IS ITS CALLED BOOST!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > > > >That Harry guy is obviously a peanut. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Duncan Shillito wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "there is no substitute for cubic inches" > > > > !!!!.................(harry > > > > > > >firth 1967). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > > > > > >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > > > > http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > > > http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --membersozdat------------------------------------------------------- OZDAT Mailing List Please Note:- Send (un)subscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send submissions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] No unauthorised redistribution of this email http://www.ozdat.com/ozdatonline/index.htm http://www.ozdat.com/ozdatonline/listindex.html http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------
