Joel, that doesn't sound unbelievable to me. The full scale motorcycle manufactures in Japan, Ie: Honda, Yamaha etc. have been getting far better horsepower to displacement ratios than that for some time now with their 2 stroke motocross bikes. Some 125cc racers produce over 30hp and can be purchased at your local dealer. Sooo, the technology is out there for this kind of power per cc, especially with today's microprocessor controlled ignition to manage the spark timing, the weight seems a bit light, however with the right engineering it is possible.
Tom Wales AMA 435536
Pure HP doesn't always tell the whole story. While I believe that MVVS can produce such an engine, what are the running characteristics?
500cc GP motorcycle engines put out nearly 180hp so 9hp from this engine isn't that remarkable.
At what RPM does it do it tho? At a guess at RPM way too high to be useable in a practical model.
Rear induction, reed valve... does this mean that it'll start and run backwards? Will it be like a Cox... every other time, it'll start backwards when you flick it...
-- Philip Rawson
Since it runs on gasoline - and requires an ignition system - no it won't run backwards !
David
My 3W-70 ran backwards just long enough to run off my helper. It runs on gasoline and has an ignition system.
Because the ignition is highly retarded at idle (cranking) speeds, it fires far past TDC. That's what keeps it from kicking back when hand propped, and also prevents it from running backwards. It just can't happen unless the auto-advance ignition system is whacked, or you somehow got it started at full throttle backwards.
Jack
If the spark is retarded past TDC when at idle, it will still run backwards if flipped backwards. It should continue to run backwards wut will be very low on power. There is no reason that the system couldn't be reversed to operate in the reverse direction.
Paul, that you?
The Ford Model A had all the features you describe. I'm GLAD that the auto makers kept trying to improve!
My $ 0.02
MVVS contracted a racing cart engine designer for the job. When all dust has settled, it still should be an awsome engine. The target was and is: "best in class"
What i said. 100bhp per liter is a benchmark for a decent IC engine.
I can't answer for the lump of crap in the font of your truck, but my jaguar engine does 350bhp on 4 liters. Not too bad.
An F1 engine does 850 bhp on 3.5 liters - well over 200bhp per liter.
Most 10cc (61) glo engines will crack a horsepower or so.
Ok its easier on 2 cycles, but it can be done on four.
Car engines are engineered down to a price not up to a performance level. Who would buy a 150bhp 1500cc engine? Yet its perfectly possible with decent materials and maybe a tad of supercharging. The bigger problem is variable valve timing to get decent efficiency through the power band.
And remember, in te USA Big Is Better, and Gas is Cheap and We Can Invade Iraq to make it so, so who gives a shit about a hi tech engine that will do 150bhp on 1.5 liters, when you can make a big marketing splash about a 5.76 liter engine that does 180bhp.
Not Ford, not Chrysler, not GM.
100bhp per liter is a decent benchmark for a decent IC engine.
Agreed. Power is almost directly related to peak cylinder pressure times RPM (squared?) time swept volume.
If nt using nitro, or charging, and stock fuel, the peak cylinder pressure is fairly constant over a wide range of engines, though upping the comp ratio a tad squeezes a bit more out as does advancing the iginition. The bigger gains come from running at higfher RPM, where the limits are breathing and the ability of te valves to operate at the RPM.
I talked to a couple of ex-designers of F1 and Indycar engine - Brian Hart and John Judd - and they reckoned that the primary problems in getting beyond 100bhp related to head design - they had to make the engines vastly over square to fit 4 thwacking great valves in them, and the ability to get those valves to operate without bouncing or breaking, hence the use of compressed air rather than springs and so on.
It wasn't such a problem to get the RPM as far as the bottom end was concerned - titanium conrods etc help a lot :-)
F1 engines peak out about 18k rpm as far as I remember.
Racing motorcycle 2-strokes are even better - reed and rotary inductin really works well. Paul here probably knows what a modern 50cc F1 bike
2-stroke spits out. My guess is its over 10 bhp. Hmm. Or are they 100cc Paul? Long time sonce I went to a bike race...If youi wnat to see what REALLY can be dne with a blown, tuned up full nitro'ed 5.7 chevy block, the top fuel dragsters develop over 300 bhp I believe :-)
For 5 seconds anyway.
Quite believable. This works out to be 160HP/litre which is only slightly more than an OS 40LA. OK, that's a sort of apples and oranges because you'll get more HP from methanol (about 30% more) but it's very close to what you'd get from an FX running zero nitro. And an FX is a very average sports engine. The very best model engines put out over
1000HP/litre without using nitro but this is done with extreme revs which just isn't possible with larger engines. I suspect that if they're finally starting to develop large gassers then this is only the beginning of the HP race.Brian Hampt>
Modern Superbikes are around 185-200hp on 1 litre. The new GP four strokes are approaching 250 hp on 990ccs. The little 250cc GP bikes are over 60hp.
The comment about American engines is a load of crap. They develope the amount of power that they do because they are tuned for low RPM usage. They will haul much larger loads easily compared to higher revving engines. That is why lorries don't use Jaguar engines even though the Jag lump puts out twice the HP of many of the lorry motors.
300 hp? How about 6,000-7,000 hp! BTW, the top fuel dragsters don't use 5.7 L Chevy blocks. They use custom built 500 c.i. aluminum block hemi engines.
You can get over 300 horsepower out of a 5.7 L (350 c.i.) naturally aspirated engine...no nitrous, nitromethane, or blowers are needed. :)
tim
^^^^^^^^^^^
Where can I buy one of these? :-)
No. they use lorry engines because they are cheap to make, simple to produce and last for 500k miles plus. The performance given adequate gearing would be as good or better with a hi tech jaguar engine.
When weight, size and fuel economy are not issues, economics favours lazy design and monster engines.
Everywhere else in the world apart from the USA they are an issue, which is why the USA exports (almost) no native design vehicles anywhere.
The rest of the world has to cope with high oil prices, small roads, and the need for ever increasing economy. It lacks the weaponry and the stupidity to march into every oil producing country on a pretext and annex the oil to prolong an idiotic governemnet at teh expense of another iduiotic governemnet for a trult expensive short term solution. .
>
Sorry, should have reas 3000 bhp
Missed a zero. I THINK the one and only time I attended a drag race meeting, the 5.7block was producing abouut 3500 bhp.
It was some years ago.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.