Alex, I think you have posed an interesting question. Where are the "no
replacement for displacement" folks at? I wonder where we would be today if
the energy crunch of the 70's hadn't hit? Can you imagine 1,000 cubic
inches of cast iron under the hood?
I would have to agree with you that at some point it becomes more effective
to change direction from simply larger displacement. Size and weight of the
vehicle may have something to do with it. Anyone for a 2 cycle, every
stroke is a power stroke - or maybe a jet engine, yeah, that's the ticket...
Cal
----- Original Message -----
From: Alex Harris <jetcity@swbell.net>
To: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 4:49 PM
Subject: Re: DML: Re:2003 Viper R/T Roadster
> Well, I may be wrong, but I would think mass would have a lot to do with
> selecting a displacement in regard to the performance of an engine, given
> that the larger you make the displacement of a cylinder the more mass
you'll
> have to move (and/or the farther you'll have to move it). This seems like
it
> would have a significant effect on how an engine performs for a specified
> task, in our case an engine with a reasonable degree of what we'll loosely
> call 'performance' (that stuff that shows up on your timeslip).
>
> Even assuming you use the lightest possible material to build your engine,
> you can't just keep making cylinder dimensions bigger and bigger and still
> get increased results in the area you want (say 1/4 mile times), can you?
> Obviously you can build huge engines with enormous amounts of power (like
a
> train engine), but my question is basically when we're talking about fast
> cars, where do you get to the point where you just aren't going to gain
more
> 'performance' by increasing individual cylinder displacement?
>
> I realize this is way oversimplified and there are a whole lot of
variables
> involved, but it all started because I thought >1L per cylinder was a lot,
> and made me think that there had to be some point where it would just not
be
> efficient to make the cylinders larger, that it would in effect begin make
a
> car slower off the line... just an interesting subject (at least to me,
all
> the rest of you just go about your regularly scheduled business) :-)
>
> Thanks for the response!
>
> - Alex
>
> > From: Viper450hpGTS@aol.com
> >
> >
> > "Mass" as you put it has very little to do with the displacement of an
> > engine. You could build an all aluminum V-12 that could be lighter than
a
> > V-10. Only the length of the rod and the size of the bore makes up the
> > displacement. Depending on the materials used and the bore spacing, you
could
> > design an engine that would be lightweight yet have big displacement....
> >
> > James
> > '99 Flame Red RC Dakota R/T (ATI Procharged)
> > '01 Black 4.7L RC Dakota Sport (5-speed & 3.92 gear)
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:58:33 EDT