Re: What would be the qualities of a very small V-12?
You are accessing this site in a read-only mode. For full access to all member benefits, including message posting, please login or register. Registration is completely free, simple, and takes only a few seconds.
Login |
Free CarKB.com registration |
Whole discussion thread
The message you are replying to and its parents are listed in the reverse order with the most recent posts first. This might not be the whole discussion thread. To read all the messages in this thread please click here.
Re: What would be the qualities of a very small V-12?
| Jeff DeWitt | 16 Jul 2007 03:58 |
> As the number of cylinders increases, the internal friction increases.
> Also complexity cost etc. goes through the roof as well.
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>> pistons/cylinders. What would be the qualities? Finally, as a proof
>> in concept, do you know if any research has been doine on this?
All of which is true, and this is getting silly.
A V24 in a modern car is getting ridiculous, that car would have a LONG
hood, and an X24 is even goofier, although at least it would have a more
reasonable length.
According to Wikipedia both V24s and X24s have been built for aircraft
use, but they are VERY rare and not successful. The one V24 listed was
rather large, 50 liters! (that is FIFTY, not five.)
Jeff DeWitt
|
| benteaches@gmail.com | 16 Jul 2007 03:44 |
As the number of cylinders increases, the internal friction increases.
Also complexity cost etc. goes through the roof as well.
There is no power increase with more cylinders.
HTH,
Ben
On Jul 14, 1:13 pm, Kaleidoscopic Perspectives <zutalors...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> I wonder, in that case, the properties (qualitatively and
> quantitatively) of a V-24 3.0L engine!!!
>
> Or an X-24 engine...another words, an engine with many many very small
> pistons/cylinders. What would be the qualities? Finally, as a proof
> in concept, do you know if any research has been doine on this? |
| Kaleidoscopic Perspectives | 14 Jul 2007 20:13 |
I wonder, in that case, the properties (qualitatively and
quantitatively) of a V-24 3.0L engine!!!
Or an X-24 engine...another words, an engine with many many very small
pistons/cylinders. What would be the qualities? Finally, as a proof
in concept, do you know if any research has been doine on this?
Mazda had a 1.8L V-6 a few years. It wasn't so popular.
> Cost of course. A V12 is much more complex than a V6, complexity =
> money. The are also a lot longer, which makes them hard to fit under
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text - |
| Jeff DeWitt | 14 Jul 2007 04:16 |
Cost of course. A V12 is much more complex than a V6, complexity =
money. The are also a lot longer, which makes them hard to fit under
the hood of most modern cars.
The extra cost of a V12 can be justified in an expensive luxury or
sports car, where the smoothness and cool factor of the V12 may make it
worth while, but in normal bread a butter type cars they don't make sense.
Jeff DeWitt
> Then, besides costs of implemetning a v12, why aren't small v-12s
> (i.e. 3.0L) more common?
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>>
>> Jeff DeWitt |
| Kaleidoscopic Perspectives | 14 Jul 2007 03:56 |
Then, besides costs of implemetning a v12, why aren't small v-12s
(i.e. 3.0L) more common?
What are the disadvantages?
> > What would be the differences between a 3.0L V-12 and a 3.0L V-6?
> > Suppose that all else being equal, except the bore/stroke are
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> Jeff DeWitt |
| Jeff DeWitt | 12 Jul 2007 23:10 |
> What would be the differences between a 3.0L V-12 and a 3.0L V-6?
> Suppose that all else being equal, except the bore/stroke are
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Would the V-12 have more torque, efficiency, power, etc.?
All other things being equal V12 would be smoother, I think it would
have more torque, and it would last longer.
The reason it would last longer is because it's naturally balanced,
unlike the V6, that's a big reason why straight 6's tend to last so long.
Jeff DeWitt
|
| Kaleidoscopic Perspectives | 12 Jul 2007 05:19 |
What would be the differences between a 3.0L V-12 and a 3.0L V-6?
Suppose that all else being equal, except the bore/stroke are
proportionately smaller (the V-12 has pistons one half the size of the
pistons of the V-6).
I heard that the V-12 is going to be more smooth. OTOH, the V-6 would
be more durable for some reason.
Would the V-12 have more torque, efficiency, power, etc.?
|
Quick links:
|
|
|
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage