S85B50


So beautiful... *dreaming*

Quote from tristancliffe :

How do the pistons move independantly? 5 separate cranks? Any why is five ignition pulses (i.e. not wasted spark) clever? The only reason wasted spark exists is because of cost, but it's the work of an evening to convert it to a coil per cylinder, or to use a distributor.

Why? Throw enough turbochargers at an engine and you make whatever power you want. Aspects of the Veyron are impressive engineering feats, but I don't think any of it is particularly cool - have you seen how much that thing weighs?

No idea how, all I know is that instead of like on a 4 cylinder where the two outer pistons would move in sync and the two inner ones would too, each of the 5 cylinders in the audi would move uniquely. So instead of "BANG BANG" each revolution you'd get "bang bang bang bang bang".

you didn't say it had to be car engines
http://i39.tinypic.com/2dm9z9.jpg

T'was only a matter of time before the DFV showed up, a grand sounding engine too, probrably the mightiest racing engine ever built.

why cool?

120hp from a NA 600cc engine.

that's 200hp/l

the type R engine was heralded as a very efficient engine. 200hp out of 2l. hah.

what's that, m3 engine? 400hp out of 4l?
what's that, m5 engine? 500hp out of 5l?

what's that, quad turbocharged 16 cylinder bugatti veyron engine? 1000hp out of 8l? got your bloated ugly ass handed to you by a tiny fourbanger? (well ok, it doesn't output 1000hp. that is what goes to the drivetrain. the engine itself outputs 4000hp most of which goes to the radiators for cooling the engine. still, it just matches the specific output of the r6 engine)

Quote from tristancliffe :

Just like 99.9% of production conrods, the i-section is in the wrong plane. Look at a proper conrod (e.g. F1, because it's easy to find pictures of F1 conrods) and see how different they look when made properly.

judging by the pics you can find of bent conrods via google the double t profile is placed just fine
by the looks of it f1 conrods use a completely different design approach to handling the bending forces and dont actually employ a double t profile as such

Quote from lococost :

BRM V16!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZMPDCNyQxE

That right there is a beautiful sound. That and the Audi Quatro won right there just won.

Quote from mcintyrej :

Exhibit A:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEK7POxpVeE&fmt=18



5 Cylinders, all moving independantly - perfect balance. 5 seperate ignitions per revolution, as opposed to the 2 seperate ignitions of a 4 cylinder. A work of genious.

more like a +2 for this!

but then, there is this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... Gi7Jw&feature=related

http://i385.photobucket.com/al ... edia1/PRI_Sonny_motor.jpg

/GameOver
Insert coin to continue

Quote from Sueycide_FD :

http://i385.photobucket.com/al ... edia1/PRI_Sonny_motor.jpg

/GameOver
Insert coin to continue

no, now it's game over
http://img247.imageshack.us/im ... /51020080224161340jb8.jpg

Quote from mutt107 :

you didn't say it had to be car engines
http://i39.tinypic.com/2dm9z9.jpg

cryengine 2 is so much better

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... ion_476114&feature=iv

Quote from Shotglass :

judging by the pics you can find of bent conrods via google the double t profile is placed just fine
by the looks of it f1 conrods use a completely different design approach to handling the bending forces and dont actually employ a double t profile as such

it's a H profile. the good ones have the || perpendicular to the axis of the crank

the usual ones have the || parallel to the axis of the crank

as a physicist i'd expect the good ones to have more rigidity

but i am not an engineer and specificaly not a metallurgy expert

i'd have to ask my father about this.

Parilla 125 Sudam. Max HP 55 approz 10-15kg



Italian and simple = beatiful

Quote from george_tsiros :

it's a H profile.

1) its a double t profile
2) thats the german din name for the profile
3) we all know no one should challenge a german in engineering so the din is right

Quote :

the good ones have the || perpendicular to the axis of the crank

judging by their looks the "good" ones dont actually use the profile as such and the only reason why they have that profile seems to be to save some weight

Quote :

as a physicist i'd expect the good ones to have more rigidity

1) they sure do
2) as an engineer id expect a physicist to be able to see that the "usual" design achieves much the same with a lot less metal (for engines that arent subjected to the same stresses as an f1 engine)

Quote from mcintyrej :

5 Cylinders, all moving independantly - perfect balance. 5 seperate ignitions per revolution, as opposed to the 2 seperate ignitions of a 4 cylinder. A work of genious.

My uncle visits Switzerland as he has a contact who owns stock-piles of IMSA and Trans Am engine blocks, aswell as S1 turbos and almost anything motorsport-related to Audi. Very exciting feeling to know your uncle has been holding an AudiSport crankshaft from an Audi S1.

Quote from BAMBO :

Game, set and match!

Sorry but not, the 6R4 is no match for the S1.

i'd say they weight the same. do you have some figures?

and the first engineer was greek so neener neener

meh i don't care... screw it :/

For a turbo engine, it made quite a fine sound.

EDIT: How do I attach full sized images?

A conrod is doesn't need to be laterally stiff as it is constrained by the piston and crank along it's two axis. But when the piston is transmitting work it has to do so through an angle, and hence needs to be stiff in that direction.

Conrod failures due to hydraulic lock or an escaping piston aren't indicative of the normal loads, so shouldn't be used to determine the orientation of the I section.

Any powertrain engineer would agree.

Quote from mcintyrej :

No idea how, all I know is that instead of like on a 4 cylinder where the two outer pistons would move in sync and the two inner ones would too, each of the 5 cylinders in the audi would move uniquely. So instead of "BANG BANG" each revolution you'd get "bang bang bang bang bang".

you know that although the pistons move in pairs, they are 360 apart, so you still get bang bang bang bang. On a 6 you get bang bang bang bang bang bang. But they aren't moving independantly, as they are driven by a common crankshaft. Maybe a good time to learn the basics of engines before making stuff up.

Apologies for typos, but iPhones don't induce accuracy!!!!

Quote from george_tsiros :

i'd say they weight the same. do you have some figures?

i dont and im pretty sure the f1 rods are lighter since theyll be made from stem cells or some other exotic ridiculously expensive material
the standard rods however do have a bit less volume so as far as manufacturing costs go theyll probably be cheaper

Quote from george_tsiros :

and the first engineer was greek so neener neener

but did he get something as fat and heavy as 3 american backsides up into space and all the way to the moon and back?

Quote from tristancliffe :

But when the piston is transmitting work it has to do so through an angle, and hence needs to be stiff in that direction.

which im pretty sure it is with the profile oriented that way
unless im misunderstanding you

Quote from Shotglass :

i dont and im pretty sure the f1 rods are lighter since theyll be made from stem cells or some other exotic ridiculously expensive material

how sure? keep in mind the rest of the engine is strictly regulated as to what materials it can use... (crank, crankshaft, valves, pistons, etc)

Quote from Shotglass :

but did he get something as fat and heavy as 3 american backsides up into space and all the way to the moon and back?

he would, if you gave him a place to stand...

Quote from tristancliffe :

A conrod is doesn't need to be laterally stiff as it is constrained by the piston and crank along it's two axis. But when the piston is transmitting work it has to do so through an angle, and hence needs to be stiff in that direction.

Conrod failures due to hydraulic lock or an escaping piston aren't indicative of the normal loads, so shouldn't be used to determine the orientation of the I section.

Any powertrain engineer would agree.

you know that although the pistons move in pairs, they are 360 apart, so you still get bang bang bang bang. On a 6 you get bang bang bang bang bang bang. But they aren't moving independantly, as they are driven by a common crankshaft. Maybe a good time to learn the basics of engines before making stuff up.

Apologies for typos, but iPhones don't induce accuracy!!!!

Either I'm explaining it wrong or I've completely missunderstood how the Audi works.

Let me draw a diagram using lines:
_____
.............................................|555|
.................................|444|
.....................|333|
.........|222|
|111|
__________________________________


That's what I'm talking about, probably not in that order but how each piston is at a different stage. Instead of it being like this:




|111|........................................|111|


.............|222|..........|222|.....

Rolls-Royce Merlin:



And the noise, oh, the noise: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49Xu-7riTBI

Are boat engine allowed?

Mercury Racing 1200SCi, 9.1L V8 dual supercharger.



And the noise, well something like this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeRlVpcirIQ&fmt=22

2 of these in a catamaran will take you up to ~160-170MPH

http://jonthecomposer.com/WEB/WEB%20pics/duesenberg8.jpg


thats somting to look at

Quote from G!NhO :

Are boat engine allowed?

Mercury Racing 1200SCi, 9.1L V8 dual supercharger (i believe).

[mahoosive engine]

And the noise, well something like this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeRlVpcirIQ&fmt=22

The the fact that it completely drowns out the noise of the helicopter that the camera is in is impressive.