Inline Engines

Sure.

>>13915376
Possible but not practical

>>13915376
no. They had enough prblems balancing an inline 8, which is the reason they're no longer around.

From wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straight-eight_engine
>The smooth running characteristics of the straight-8 made it popular in luxury and racing cars of the past. However, the engine's length demanded the use of a long engine compartment, making the basic design unacceptable in modern vehicles. Also, due to the length of the engine, torsional vibration in both crankshaft and camshaft can adversely affect reliability and performance at high speeds. In particular, a phenomenon referred to as "crankshaft whip," caused by the effects of centrifugal force on the crank throws at high engine rpm, could cause physical contact between the connecting rods and crankcase walls, leading to the engine's destruction. As a result, the design has been displaced almost completely by the shorter V8 engine configuration.

File: 77560.jpg (73KB, 580x386px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 580x386px

NP.
89 foot long 44 foot wide 12 cylinder engine

File: 20 20.jpg (65KB, 525x350px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 525x350px

>>13915386
I thought about the engine fitting in the car and I thought you could put it in a one-seater on one side like this one. Also that crankshaft problem is serious and this would never work.

>>13915404
How about a pair of sixes with drive taken from the centre.
I'm pretty sure this was done with a pair of CBX engines and a small hatchback way back in the day.

File: 82sbarro_super_twelve_1.jpg (32KB, 420x273px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 420x273px

Here you go two Z1300 engines end to end in a whatchamacallit.

>>13915386
>I8's are still perfectly balanced like I6 in terms of reciprocating masses
>torsional vibrations in crank isnt much a concern with modern forged steel crankshafts and modern counter balancing, main bearing diameters greater than 1940's engines
>camshaft torsional vibrations also not much a concern with modern camshaft design

The only real inhibition for making an I8 today is packaging.

>>13915583
>as long as it's """"modern"""" it can beat the laws of physics

>>13915386
>>13915583
Don't forget the fact that they are way too heavy. IIRC a Buick 300 I8 had a crankshaft that weighs about 800lbs. There honestly is no point to Inline engines above 6, they are just to big to be practical. And also I remember reading somewhere that I8s are not perfectly balanced eithet

>>13915376
How about an I6 on front and another I6 on rear?

>>13915395
Came here to post this

>>13915685
>Buick 300 I8 had a crankshaft that weighs about 800lbs.
So what its an american pos very poorly designed, poorly engineered, extra useless chunk and weight for days. A modern I8 would be less than half the weight now

File: 1383211192926.jpg (34KB, 394x246px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 394x246px

>>13916239
>He actually believes this

File: 1448309099879.jpg (64KB, 1111x597px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 1111x597px

>>13916248
>he thinks all iron engines from the 1930s are exemplary of modern engine weight and engineering techniques
I think he's serious!!

>>13915583
What is weight?

Have you noticed that a ~3L petrol I6 weighs about as much as a ~6L murrica motor VEE ATE? Imagine how much a ~6L I8 would weigh.

>>13916260
>argues displacement
>thinks a bigger *empty hole* adds weight
this is so /o/

>>13916262
that empty bigger hole adds more surface area to surround it. so more weight. inline 6's are dying you kek

>>13916276
>that empty bigger hole adds more surface area to surround it
The surface to volume ratio increases exponentially with a larger bore, making the weight of the bore liner itself less and less consequential as cubes increase. Also, longer stroke cranks may ass a few grams at the crank arm, but usually require shorter rods and pistons making it a wash.

File: 188nxh7wxdsj4jpg[1].jpg (272KB, 565x377px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 565x377px

>>13915435
packaging an engine like that would be retarded. It'd be longer than the V16 in the cizeta

>>13916262
Are you retarded? I didn't write anything like that. Go back to middle school english comprehension.

Straight-12s did see some use historically, but not in cars. Huge military trucks and ships sometimes used the configuration.

Is it bad if I think everything should be a turbo inline 3 cylinder? Like just scale them up to your power needs.

>>13916436
yes

that said you dont need more than 6 cylinders

It would be too heavy for a car.
The block and crank would have to be stout enough to not bend and that's a lot of weight.

>>13916320
is that just 2 V8's welded together at the ends? the Cizeta had to have a wicked rear weight bias

>>13916320
What the fuck am I looking at?

It looks like a pair of V8s going ass to ass, but with gaps in the cylinders

>>13916492
>wicked rear weight bias
rear weight bias is good for car rotation.

>>13916506
not in early porsches it wasn't

>>13916501

Exactly.

>>13916492

It did, but the engine was mounted transversely to try and counter the weight distribution issues of such a heavy engine.

>>13916519
>the engine was mounted transversely to try and counter the weight distribution issues

the Cizeta must handle like a SW20, snap oversteer has to be an issue.

>>13916519
but why the gaps in the edges of the cylinders? Did they have wicked thick cylinder liners that aren't in there or something?

Is it possible to make an inline 13.5 cylinder engine?

>>13916293
so you can end up with a bigger, lighter engine as long as you reduce rod/stroke ratio and have weaker cylinder walls?
sounds brilliant, well done anon.

>>13915376
Yes, but you'd have to do some serious engineering to get a crank that would resist pretzeling enough to put out any power.

>>13916436
it just means you are car hating cancer.

File: 1437081710667.jpg (272KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 1280x720px

inline 6 is master race

>>13916432

>historically

You mean even still today.

>>13915386

>crankshaft whip

You know they mean flex, and that only happens when you have insufficient main bearings.

Grab a length of 20' 5/8" rebar at both ends and you could swing that thing like a skipping rope. But have a third guy locate it in the middle and it becomes much harder to do so.

>>13917963
>You know they mean flex
Torsional flex.
>and that only happens when you have insufficient main bearings
Do you understand what "torsional flex" means?

>>13915376
Why not a W4?

>>13918253
>Do you understand what "torsional flex" means?
Do you understand how main bearing diameter DIRECTLY affects the torsional rigidity of the crankshaft?

File: 6564390230104656.jpg (150KB, 472x1000px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 472x1000px

>>13915376
>Is it possible to make an inline 12?

Not only is it possible, but the Duesenberg Bros did it over a century ago.

>>13918804
god bless german engineering

File: deusenberg sj.jpg (167KB, 1024x680px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 1024x680px

>>13918812
>implying german
American as a motherfucker

>>13918820
the two truly american inventions are processed cheese and wigwams

File: DSC_0045.jpg (3MB, 2896x1944px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2896x1944px

>>13918842
are you being cheeky cunt?

>watch this duesenberg action

File: DSC_0044.jpg (3MB, 2896x1944px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2896x1944px

>>13918858

>>13918865
bery nice swivel eyes

File: DSC_0050.jpg (3MB, 2896x1944px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2896x1944px

>>13918887
1920's tech at it's finest
>yfw 320hp
>in 1929
>when the ford flathead V8 that would appear later had a quarter of the power
this thing had the performance equivalent of a bugatti veyron, with the interior room of a S-Class.

>>13918804
#SWAG

But I want to hear an Inline-7. 3.5 liters, DOHC. I wonder... would it bark like a vee ayte, or scream like an ayy lmao six?

>>13918804
That looks fucking terribly flimsy.

>>13918912
you forgot:

>based on a racing engine
>at double the displacement of the Flathead V8
>with an optional supercharger
>and priced at over a quarter of a million dollars, in today's money

>>13918912
It was a real Duesy.

File: DSC_0042.jpg (3MB, 2896x1944px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2896x1944px

>>13919017
>and priced at over a quarter of a million dollars, in today's money
not bad. it was a fucking steal

>DOHC 4v/cyl
>comfy as fuck
>literally mows over peasants

>>13916320
Does it have an angle gear to drive the trans input? This seems sketch

>>13919017
>>13919039
That honestly sounds a lot more reasonable than the cars that sell for 250k today.

The craftsmanship and tech there for the time is insane. More like the modern equivalent of a million dollar car.

File: DSC_0047.jpg (2MB, 2896x1944px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2896x1944px

>>13919050
it's basically a maybach with the performance of a veyron.

>>13919039
>>13919050
For comparison, the 1932 Ford with the flathead cost less than $10,000 and they sold ~300,000 of them in 1932 alone.

File: BRM V16 engine.jpg (32KB, 560x380px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 560x380px

>>13916320
BRM built a V16 in the 50's
600 bhp (450 kW) at 12,000 rpm running on 82 psi of boost, gear driven twin cam. alloy with cast liners.

Displacement? 1500cc. yep you read that right One point Five litres / 90 cubic inch.

File: V16 B.R.M.jpg (105KB, 800x546px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 800x546px

>>13919171
BRM's then built an N/A 3 litre 16 cylinder ... im not sure on this designation most places calll it a boxer engine.. but its like a pair of flat 8's welded on top of each other. (two separate crankshafts geared together)

>>13919209
look at all those fucking parts and wires and shit

piston engines are so stupid

File: S761-600x400.jpg (57KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 600x400px

well if excessive cylinders isnt your thing, heres one for the americans. a 28 litre... inline 4

https://vimeo.com/113158655
That video sets it up well, here is more footage of it driving.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsdWgmp4TaQ

hand cranked, open header WW1 engine.1729 cubic inch.

>>13919214
Rotaries are truly the patrician's choice

What about an 8 rotor wankel?

File: 12rotor2.jpg (64KB, 896x600px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 896x600px

>>13919266
What about them?

Those exist and there's larger.

Nothing really stopping you since rotaries are so easy to make. Anyone with a CNC machine can put their own custom one together.

Truly God's engine, unlikely overly complicated piston engines.

>>13919284
what about a twin-row wankel.

File: w12r.jpg (72KB, 500x374px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 500x374px

>>13919300
Seriously, man?

You can do whatever you want.

Doritos know no bounds.

>>13918912
all that power is pointless on pizza cutters. Just saying.

File: ss+(2015-11-24+at+07.02.17).png (325KB, 814x655px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 814x655px

>>13919323
what about wankception?

>>13919335
Needless complication like piston devil machines.

File: DSC_0037.jpg (3MB, 2896x1944px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2896x1944px

>>13919334
they were kings of mid gear acceleration.

File: 1430716626907.jpg (84KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 800x800px

>>13919348
you're triangle a shit

>>13919390
shes really cute :)

>>13918912
>this thing had the performance equivalent of a bugatti veyron
that massive pigfat thing with only 300hp or whatever?

>>13919417
:3

>>13919435
320hp. in 1929. the model T had 10% of the hp.

>>13919456
do you ERP?

>>13919492
u wot m8?
my car has ARP head studs
is that close enough?

>>13918646
Yes, but that has little to do with main bearing count

>>13915376
>Wärtsilä

>>13916436
Why?

>>13919209
Mfw that would be an h configuration but it would get confused for boxer

>>13919226
That thing is a beast. Been following their build for a while now. Shit is insane.

The crank is even crazier, its not even balanced. It's like a tetris blocks welded together. Makes no sense.

File: NWT-Per-Söderström-OP-1561 (1).jpg (2MB, 4008x3120px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4008x3120px

A man and his I16

File: lupov8-55d061059e963.jpg (408KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 1024x683px

>>13915376
Every configuration is possible.
Just follow your dreams.

youtube.com/watch?v=hvpFcSPtDV0

>not having a 3x3 configuration of pistons for a square engine block
>not having a 2x2x2 cube configuration

>>13919171
I was reading up on this thing the other day and thought the '82psi' part was a type.
Nope. Crazy fucks got enough boost in there to blow themselves sky high

>>13918996
That is just the cyl head. Not much going on up there but dumping buckets of oil on 2 miles of camshafts.

>>13923517
>cube 8

why boner

File: 1433024029844.jpg (80KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 500x500px

Can someone build a W32 just to prove the can?

Yes, a 32 cylinder engine in a W configuration (four banks, like Bugatti).