MolaKule
Staff member
A rather long but interesting reading for those who want to dig deeper:
Physics and Mechanics of the ICS
Physics and Mechanics of the ICS
Physics and Mechanics of the ICE (2003)
- Thread starter MolaKule
- Start date
- Status
I like those huge letters on that web page that says "First placed on the internet in 2003", like we couldn't tell from the old-style crude HTML construction.
And dig the "font change" buttons on the right side! Who does/did that ever?
Oh, good info.
And dig the "font change" buttons on the right side! Who does/did that ever?
Oh, good info.
LOL!
My work's web filter blocks that site.
It says it's about religion.
My work's web filter blocks that site.
It says it's about religion.
Too many notes. Just cut a few (million) and it will be perfect. I'll label this a 60's spin on material that was 50 years old at the time with the technical and scientific explanations removed. On the same day Rat 540's nonsense shows up. My head hurts.
Reminds me of the day my nephew brought home from school a book on how ICE's work, it was focused on the Oldsmobile Rocket V8.
I gave him a copy of Hillier and Pittock's Fudamentals of Motor Verhicle Technology to take back to his teacher.
I gave him a copy of Hillier and Pittock's Fudamentals of Motor Verhicle Technology to take back to his teacher.
Quote:
Engine durability is less than it used to be, but people rarely seem to keep vehicles as long as they used to, so it is apparently not considered a problem.
Wow!
Quote:
Modern (2012) advertising tends to brag about Mileage Estimates of 30 mpg or even 40 mpg. But in extremely fine print, they note that the engine they are describing is 1.2 liters (72 cubic inches) or 1.6 liters (96 cubic inches) or 2.0 liters (120 cubic inches). The giant 350 cid or 427 cid engines sucked down the gasoline, while engines which are 1/6 as big in piston displacement CAN get much higher gas mileage. But there are unspoken details. The impressive numbers of 30 mpg or 40 mpg ARE possible, but only if you drive in a very restrained manner! Those new (tiny) engines ARE able to wind out to impressively high REVS, where they can sound like a Dentist's Drill, where they might create the horsepower claimed, but under those conditions, the gas mileage is far lower. No free lunch!
Wow,Wow!
Quote:
So the LANGUAGE is now rather different than it used to be. A giant V-8 engine running at 1600 rpm made a throaty growl and had impressive available torque for acceleration, even for a 4,000 pound car. A modern 2.0 liter (120 cubic inches) four cylinder engine running at 2,500 rpm makes a lawn-mower sound but also has extra torque for accelerating a 2,200 pound car. Are they the same? Not to me! But the point here is that evaluating big old V-8s and tiny new four-cylinder engines involves two rather different languages, even though the Physics is still the same. With the tiny modern engines, IF you run it at some specific rpm, you CAN get impressive mileage, but no advertising ever mentions that fact.
No new fangled 4 bangers for this guy
Engine durability is less than it used to be, but people rarely seem to keep vehicles as long as they used to, so it is apparently not considered a problem.
Wow!
Quote:
Modern (2012) advertising tends to brag about Mileage Estimates of 30 mpg or even 40 mpg. But in extremely fine print, they note that the engine they are describing is 1.2 liters (72 cubic inches) or 1.6 liters (96 cubic inches) or 2.0 liters (120 cubic inches). The giant 350 cid or 427 cid engines sucked down the gasoline, while engines which are 1/6 as big in piston displacement CAN get much higher gas mileage. But there are unspoken details. The impressive numbers of 30 mpg or 40 mpg ARE possible, but only if you drive in a very restrained manner! Those new (tiny) engines ARE able to wind out to impressively high REVS, where they can sound like a Dentist's Drill, where they might create the horsepower claimed, but under those conditions, the gas mileage is far lower. No free lunch!
Wow,Wow!
Quote:
So the LANGUAGE is now rather different than it used to be. A giant V-8 engine running at 1600 rpm made a throaty growl and had impressive available torque for acceleration, even for a 4,000 pound car. A modern 2.0 liter (120 cubic inches) four cylinder engine running at 2,500 rpm makes a lawn-mower sound but also has extra torque for accelerating a 2,200 pound car. Are they the same? Not to me! But the point here is that evaluating big old V-8s and tiny new four-cylinder engines involves two rather different languages, even though the Physics is still the same. With the tiny modern engines, IF you run it at some specific rpm, you CAN get impressive mileage, but no advertising ever mentions that fact.
No new fangled 4 bangers for this guy
Last edited:
one can only squeeze so much energy out of a gallon of gas, no matter how much combustion technology is employed, in the end to get more power you have to burn more gas, there's no free lunch. Smaller engines weigh less and can employ the latest friction reducing tricks and combustion management which can produce small MPG gains, but of you want to cruise the Autobanh at 100 mph any power plant is going to burn more fuel than at 60. At a fixed speed in the 60 to 70 mph region, 4 and 6 cylinder engines return about the same mpg when installed in the same body.
- Status
Similar threads
