Performance Boats Forum banner

1 - 20 of 80 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
16,874 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
This might take off or it might suck so bad I move it to Gray Water storage lol.

If you were not limited to what you can buy or make easily. What would you do to change an internal combustion reciprocating engine? I'm looking for big power from this new engine. Don't even consider how much it costs, fuel economy etc.

When you think about it, All anyone does to get more power or performance from an engine is to use what is already there and tweak it continually making tiny ittle improvements. I would imagine why all boils down to $$ The $$ to actuallly do something new and amazing while at the same time keeping someone with many more $$ than you from killing it. So we design this new mega power engine (for our own amusement) and let the process of chipping away at the little tweaks bring it back down to doable. Right now we have a crude design and have refined into something acceptable. I propose the opposite. Design something amazing and refine the details down to plausable.

Useing an existing technology created by Mr Otto how many years ago? Throwing away limits of what we have on hand. And probably using at least some fossil fuel lol but don't have to.

What would you do?
 

·
Resident Ford Nut
Joined
·
10,075 Posts
:D
I like.

We need to address the friction caused by the rings :|err

If I re-call correctly on my old Super Flow 900 dyno sheets there's a column that reads; FHP I was told that's the Hp lost to friction in the engine ( I never looked into it so I'm assuming that was correct info) but the "old" 565 made 855 HP and the FHP # was 277 at 6,600 and 299 at 6,800. Wow. If the friction in the engine could be cut by 35% I can pick up approx 100 hp.

Edit: i would guess the computer calc's the number based on bore size,stroke and maybe a few other parameters ... does anyone know ?

I'll get back to this later with a couple of idea's ....

Sleeper CP :D
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
16,874 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
How about a rotary engine on a WWAAAYYY bigger scale? Allows you to virtually run unlimited RPM's.
RPM's can be good, but are really a crutch for not enough time in minutes and seconds to adequately fill a cylinder. More power strokes per minute is replacing cylinder filling.

Dynacam engines have always amazed me as well as a star rotor? engine.
 

·
Resident Ford Nut
Joined
·
10,075 Posts
RPM's can be good, but are really a crutch for not enough time in minutes and seconds to adequately fill a cylinder. More power strokes per minute is replacing cylinder filling.

Dynacam engines have always amazed me as well as a star rotor? engine.

I'm not sure that is an accurate statment :)bulb Hummmmmm:

100%+ VE ...... hummmmmm. There are quite a few that post here that have engines that have ve's above 100%.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKyP19ky_W0

Sleeper CP :D
 

·
steelcomp was here
Joined
·
26,512 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
16,874 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
OK then RPM's a crutch for no blower :D

I'm going to throw out my design ideas and let you guys debate current design theory

I've typed this 4 times now cuz this new broadband card is killing me. Just moved the antennae to the top of the cabinet. Will see if that helps.

i would like to have NO combustion during the compression stroke and longer combustion from just after TDc to 90* ATC. Be it feeding air and fuel the entire time, short bursts whatever. Getting the push on the piston there at the best mechanical advantage. Not working around current technology limitations.
 

Attachments

·
Just another Wannabe
Joined
·
1,196 Posts
Warren Johnson's schetches for the DRCE 5 sound like a pretty cool deal. Then just bump up the idea with a larger than 4.900 bore spacing. Maybe 5.200 or so. Make a short stroke 600-650 cubic inch.
Basically a shallow valve angle head with the camshaft in the very deck of the block to make the pushrods about an inch and a half long. Then make sure it is injected on alcohol. Maybe even a turbocharged application.
 

·
Resident Ford Nut
Joined
·
10,075 Posts
600" SOHC 3 valve

Just make a 4.602 x 4.50 three valve engine, 2 intakes and 1 exhaust valve with a clover leaf combustion chamber and a dry sump and low-tension rings, EFI with a variable length intake track. :)devil :)devil or at 74.85 cu.in per cylinder make it a V-10 and have a 748" engine making 1.75 hp cu.in.

That's my dream engine, of course with a Valve cover that reads FORD

Sleeper CP
Big Inch Ford Lover :D
 

·
Resident Ford Nut
Joined
·
10,075 Posts
If I have a clean sheet of paper and was designing an engine for a high performance boat or airplane the choice would be easy; just modernize one of these with the best electronics:



http://www.iet.aau.dk/sec2/junkers.htm

and a single power take-off shaft. Bruce Crower has the pistons,cylinder and heads in his shop to build a 1,200 hp 183 cu. in 8 piston super-charged engine that will be about the size of a small end-table about 24" x 18" it would rev about 10,000 rpm :)devil It would weigh less than 300 lbs. :)grn :)grn

Sleeper CP :D
 

·
steelcomp was here
Joined
·
26,512 Posts
If I have a clean sheet of paper and was designing an engine for a high performance boat or airplane the choice would be easy; just modernize one of these with the best electronics:



http://www.iet.aau.dk/sec2/junkers.htm

and a single power take-off shaft. Bruce Crower has the pistons,cylinder and heads in his shop to build a 1,200 hp 183 cu. in 8 piston super-charged engine that will be about the size of a small end-table about 24" x 18" it would rev about 10,000 rpm :)devil It would weigh less than 300 lbs. :)grn :)grn
Sleeper CP :D
That's a 3L engine, and would be a little behind the times in power output...F1 had that platform years ago. If you want to stay conventional internal combustion, DOHC 4v pentroof design with a proprietary piston dome is going to be the most effecient.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
OK then RPM's a crutch for no blower :D

I'm going to throw out my design ideas and let you guys debate current design theory

I've typed this 4 times now cuz this new broadband card is killing me. Just moved the antennae to the top of the cabinet. Will see if that helps.

i would like to have NO combustion during the compression stroke and longer combustion from just after TDc to 90* ATC. Be it feeding air and fuel the entire time, short bursts whatever. Getting the push on the piston there at the best mechanical advantage. Not working around current technology limitations.
Isn't the air fuel mix introduced ahead of TDC to allow sufficient time for the mixture to burn/expand, particularly at higher rpm's?

Maybe the way to approach your idea is to break it down into smaller parts.

For example:

1. Type of engine- I vote 2 cycle
2. Induction- I vote turbo direct injection
3. Cylinder confiruration- Let's say opposed for smoothness, but 2 strokes are inherently smooth anyway, so would be determined by application.
4. Fuel type- Maximum power...I guess nitromethane but out of question for longevity. So I'll say gasoline.
5. No. of cylinders? 12
6. Target operating rpm? 700-10,000
7. Displacement? 500cc per cyl. to keep mass down equals 6.0 liter
8. Block/ head material?
9.etc.
10. etc.:)bulb
 

·
BTC cardcarrying member
Joined
·
1,075 Posts
What If ?

We all ride in computer conrolled cars with computer controlled fuel injection and ignition timing.The fuel injector pulsewidth is adjusted for power requirements as is the ignition timing and so on and so on...What if we were to lose the camshaft,lifters pushrods,rockers and springs?Make an electric solenoid that opens and closes our 4 valves per cylinder?These solenoids would also run by our onboard computer.We could
then adjust our cam timing as we wanted,and so on,and so on.The amount of freed-up power would then come as a bonus!:)bulb:)bulb:)bulbO.K. after re-reading the original post,this is just another tweek...not bad though?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
We all ride in computer conrolled cars with computer controlled fuel injection and ignition timing.The fuel injector pulsewidth is adjusted for power requirements as is the ignition timing and so on and so on...What if we were to lose the camshaft,lifters pushrods,rockers and springs?Make an electric solenoid that opens and closes our 4 valves per cylinder?These solenoids would also run by our onboard computer.We could
then adjust our cam timing as we wanted,and so on,and so on.The amount of freed-up power would then come as a bonus!:)bulb:)bulb:)bulbO.K. after re-reading the original post,this is just another tweek...not bad though?
Variable cam timing and valve lift are already in use, albeit controlled by ECU and operated by hydraulics. I don't think there is a need to go beyond the max. advance/retard they are currently capable of.
 

·
Resident Ford Nut
Joined
·
10,075 Posts
We all ride in computer conrolled cars with computer controlled fuel injection and ignition timing.The fuel injector pulsewidth is adjusted for power requirements as is the ignition timing and so on and so on...What if we were to lose the camshaft,lifters pushrods,rockers and springs?Make an electric solenoid that opens and closes our 4 valves per cylinder?These solenoids would also run by our onboard computer.We could
then adjust our cam timing as we wanted,and so on,and so on.The amount of freed-up power would then come as a bonus!:)bulb:)bulb:)bulbO.K. after re-reading the original post,this is just another tweek...not bad though?
Some of that if not a lot of that is in the BMW V-12. When you step on the peddle the engine doesn't rev because you opened the throttle but because the servo's on the cam opened the valves more. The system is awesome,complicated but awesome.

Sleeper CP :D
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
16,874 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
I completely agree with a direct injected 2 stroke engine.

We have a good candidate for that in the shop right now.

As far as breaking down what I'm asking for.. . . .. . just wanting to have a little fun and not facilitate a discussion :D
 

·
Resident Ford Nut
Joined
·
10,075 Posts
That's a 3L engine, and would be a little behind the times in power output...F1 had that platform years ago. If you want to stay conventional internal combustion, DOHC 4v pentroof design with a proprietary piston dome is going to be the most effecient.
I don't think so, F-1 has always run engines with valves, at least post-war cars. ( after WWII) I'd like to know if I'm wrong though. But I didn't know they ran 2 cycle engines ? I would think the power potential of a valveless 2 cycle engine would be damn hard to beat.

If we stay conventional internal combustion and if packaging wasn't an issue and you could build a 500-600" 12 cylinder engine would you build a V or a "flat" boxer engine ? I think a 5v head would outperform the 4v. :)bulb

Sleeper CP :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
I completely agree with a direct injected 2 stroke engine.

We have a good candidate for that in the shop right now.

As far as breaking down what I'm asking for.. . . .. . just wanting to have a little fun and not facilitate a discussion :D
I think a radial would be the way to go. It would allow adequate room around each cylinder to avoid port shape compromises, and water jacketing...:D
 

·
Resident Ford Nut
Joined
·
10,075 Posts
I think a radial would be the way to go. It would allow adequate room around each cylinder to avoid port shape compromises, and water jacketing...:D
Packaging is a bitch for anything other than an airplaine. :)bulb :)bulb

Sleeper CP
 
1 - 20 of 80 Posts
Top