How well would a modern DOHC inline-8 perform?

How many cars could you even fit that in?

>>16033757
your mum

>>16033757
All of them? I mean who needs seating.

>>16033757
Maybe something witha long hood like a morgan or weisman

File: tayfash.jpg (27KB, 480x368px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 480x368px

>>16033757
any centre placed engine would fit this. see: Volvo C303 with a massive I-6. Most commercial buses and tractor trailers

put them in a monster trucc and have them between the axles and the body. that way, they waste less gas.

>>16033744
probably pretty shit, desu. fuel displacement would suffer due to maximisation of surface area of the displacement. more travel means more loss of kinetic energy due to heat
this might be the case that SOHCs could be better than DOHCs (rangerfags btfo)

it'd make a really, really weird sound, though.

>>16033744
Long ass camshafts, long ass crankshaft

No thanks.

>>16033974
One instead of two, though. Titanium and tungsten carbide coat would resolve any issue. Maybe carbon nanotubes.

I'd buy one just to hear how it sounds.

>>16033982
It'd sound really smooth I bet. 45 degree firing angle.

File: ya43.jpg (313KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 1024x1024px

>>16033990
Ooooh, yeah. Based on what Inline-6s sound like, that'd be neat.

Know what would be even cooler? An inline-7. Used to have a cheby colorado with Inline-5 and due to cheby's post 2000 engines with their auto shutoffs, you have to keep the revs at below 4000 if it's cold so that they could all fire correctly. In that time, it would make a weird, higher noise like it was a diesel but smoother.
However, if you rev it above 4000 in that state (highly discouraged), then they would make this clanging, high pitched sound as it tries to fill all the cylinders before they're ready. This was a major fault in Ramjet and still remains an issue but they did sound slicker.

Probably shouldn't rev too high. Torsional whip would be insane with a crank that long.

>>16034021
not with modern building materials
see above:
>titanium/ tungsten carbide
>stainless titanium
>high intensity doped steel
>carbon nanotubes
List goes on and on

>>16033757
Probably a 70s era Monte carlo
Buick fireball 8 sounds like heaven

>>16034052
>carbon nanotubes
Don't forget to add unicorn semen to your oil.

File: IMG_0514.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>16033757
It actually wouldn't be bad provided the car is RWD and you don't mind a fuckhueg transmission tunnel. The DOHC would be a bit larger than OP's pic though.

File: cum boiled laureta.png (336KB, 534x446px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 534x446px

>>16034201
>>16034201
why? it'd just gel up and smell really bad after running 5+ miles

>>16034019
Inline 7 would be extremely weird to build, mathematically. You'd be working with numbers that have never ending decimals. Doubt it'd be very balanced either.

File: 2jz.jpg (160KB, 960x480px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 960x480px

>>16033757
Any fucking car. Just gotta remove the bumper support, and instead of one radiator, you have two small ones on each side.

Anything is possible

>>16034294

where can I find info on mathemathical theory for piston engines?

>>16034303
That engine could go so much further back if dude wasn't trying to frame the thing like a picture. Much better shifting the engine and trans to the rear than hanging 70% in front of the front wheels and running two radiators.

>>16034352
Its how it is because AWD. The engine has to sit in front of the K member cause that's where the transmission sits.

That swap is fucking retarded. Putting in an 400lb+ iron block completely in front the axle.

That aside, as you can see, there is room for it. It can be moved back if he converts to RWD, and a I8 could probably fit in there as well.

But who makes a modern I8 anyway that's not a 2 stroke Diesel?

>>16034324
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Bdc9CuBOzc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aonbwOxooGA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdHQ8aTfiQQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBUyR7xQvhY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5NZsc1oQpU

>>16034303
Where are all the wires and shit in these pictures? I always see engine bays that look ridiculously clean, and I don't mean "dirt-free." When I look under my own hood there's goddamn wiring harnesses crisscrossing over and under everything.

>>16033757

Basically any car with a long hood and short deck.

>>16034407
A lot of people tuck wires for that clean look.

>>16034407
Lots of zip ties.

They eliminate a lot of stuff you don't need for a show car that never gets driven to work on a rainy day and the rest just gets tightened up and pulled under the sheet metal.

File: 3066804294_87e5326776_o.jpg (124KB, 1024x681px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 1024x681px

>>16034407
Wire tuck, very popular with VW. Its either all hidden under the fender, or inside. They run custom looms, and hide the shit out of them.

Pic related, fully functioning car. Booster on these are inside stock so that makes life easy

>>16034389
>swapped in a 2jz
>retained the audi quattro drivetrain

wew

>>16034427
They eliminate shit like heater, and AC. Just the bare minimum to run the engine.

Lots of these cars already have manual steering, or no power assist brakes. So its a good start.

File: 20160930_184410.jpg (2MB, 3264x1840px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1840px

>>16034455

Just thought of a badass build
AWD midengined I8 w/transaxle on the rear. Sorta like Subarus but backwards.

>>16034516
>like Subarus
8cyl Boxer?

How hard could it be? There are a gazillion I4 engines around, just get two and join them around one crank somehow. Oil pans are overrated anyway.

>>16033744

>inline-8
Penis car

File: nbkfz0kiTT1stce7po1_500.png (228KB, 403x403px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 403x403px

>>16033744
Guise, what if we aligned those 8 cylinders in a v pattern to save weight and space?

>>16034567
You can't just take two inline blocks and weld them together. You'd need to cast whole new blocks

>>16034659
assmad gm fangirl detected

>>16034659
>weight

1 less bank of cylinders, 2 less camshafts.

>>16034717
Straight 8s are notoriously heavy

>>16033744
i don't fucking know, but how fucking COOL would a flat 8 be in a production car.

if someone put one of those in an frs/brz/86 i would cream my pants.

>>16034567
>oil pans
Dry sump system ofc

>>16034676
Why not Ford? They are also known for their Vee-aytes

File: IMG_1336_1et8_0.jpg (128KB, 672x448px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 672x448px

>>16033757
Can't be too bad if a 240 can fit one

I prefer torsion beams in my suspension, not my crankcase thankyou.

File: 070802-P2-0012.jpg (265KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 1200x800px

>tfw no i8 barra
oh boy would that be awesome

>>16034659
space is just in a different config, plus i8 puts out more power than a v8, even if there are very few i8 engines.

>>16034879
>long stroke, slow revving, even heavier pig iron power plant
Still trying to figure out why that'd be awesome.

>>16035013
put it in a fairlane
fake yacht with appropiate anchor

>>16034911
>plus i8 puts out more power than a v8
Gonna need a citation on that one.
>>16035058
Or just, you know, use a superior boosted six or V8 that you'd already have access to anyway.

>>16035092
or an exsisting v12
but where's the fun in that

>>16035092
I should have said torque, an I6 makes more torque and a v8 due to its configuration, having 2 extra cylinders would only give it more torque.
Also, v8s aren't very efficient, "2 i4's with none of the balance"

>>16034457
Why wouldn't he use a factory 2jz AWD drivetrain like one from an altezza gita? The engine doesn't hang all the way out over the front in those

>>16035124
>I should have said torque, an I6 makes more torque and a v8 due to its configuration
Ah, so you're going on presumption without anything compelling to back it up.
>having 2 extra cylinders would only give it more torque.
You don't say, but no more than a V8.
>Also, v8s aren't very efficient, "2 i4's with none of the balance"
A less true statement has never been made. Do you understand what a cross plane V8 crankshaft looks like? Cross plane V8s are exceptionally balanced for a lot of reasons. Hell, even the few flat plane V8s which have crankshafts that resemble inline fours, still address a lot of balancing issues experienced by conventional i4s by way of countering the polar moment of inertia with each piston reaching the end of it's stroke, there's another sharing the journal it maximum velocity.
Are you just putting a bunch of words together hoping they make sense? Or are you just trying to sound more intelligent than you are?

this idea would be shit as an engine swap. the car would have to be designed around this, as a mid engine.

here's an example why.

the supra is a fantastic car, with a great engine. but that engine has one downside. it's long (have you seen a supra bonnet) and thus it drapes over the front axles and sits high in the engine bay.

this is why people v8 swap supras when they have retard budgets.

the reasoning behind it is they can push the engine further back behind the front axle and lower down, shortening the driveline and the entire center of gravity in the car gets lowered.

from a handling perspective, it's an insane benefit.

now mind you, this is a swap done only with a lot of money since it's not easy and more pricey than making a big power 2jz.

but for those looking to improve their handling, with no regards for cost, this is commonplace.
now imagine 2 extra cylinders. that's more weight infront of the front axle, which is the opposite of what you want to do

>>16035293
http://www.dieselhub.com/tech/i6-vs-v8.html
>talks diesel but still good for the discussion
>Cross plane V8s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossplane
Crossplane crankshaft could be used in many cylinder configurations to have an evenly spaced firing as long as the number of cylinders is multiples of four in two-stroke engines, or multiples of eight in 4 stroke engines. Unless the crank pins have big-end phase-offset, the V-angle requirement must be met for an evenly spaced firing on V configurations as listed below.
yea the V8's that have been around forever and yet still aren't anywhere near comparable to inline 4's balance, why must you talk out your ass

>>16035446
You're completely out of your depth here...
>Unless the crank pins have big-end phase-offset, the V-angle requirement must be met for an evenly spaced firing on V configurations as listed below.
Do you even understand that quote you just linked? "the V-angle requirement must be met for an evenly spaced firing on V configurations" with 8 cylinders is 90 degrees. Have a guess what angle the majority of V8s that share common journals are set at?
>yea the V8's that have been around forever and yet still aren't anywhere near comparable to inline 4's balance
You keep saying that without any base for that claim. Flat plane i4s are troublesome with moment of inertia, which is why larger examples require artificial balancing shafts, and V8s do not.
If you're going to quote other articles, make sure you understand them...

>>16035446
>It is often thought that the architecture of an inline 6 engine favors torque production over a V engine design, when in fact the arrangement of cylinders has little, if anything to do with performance characteristics.
From the very article you linked.
>>16035124
>I should have said torque, an I6 makes more torque and a v8 due to its configuration
Hmm...

File: img_1127jengineonstandcrop01c.jpg (729KB, 1668x1805px) Image search: [Google]

729KB, 1668x1805px

>Tfw Duesenberg is kill
Dohc supercharged i8 where a thing in the 30s op.
Pic related makes my cock wet every day.

>>16035574
>It is often thought that the architecture of an inline 6 engine favors torque production over a V engine design, when in fact the arrangement of cylinders has little, if anything to do with performance characteristics.
bretty much my understanding of these. just crankshaft configuration and maybe some cams and valves just need to be changed around. otherwise, why the fuck would it change performance if they're still measured on displacement and power? do you know the whopping heat of combustion that gasoline has and how much raw, kinetic energy it has (even if 75% of it is lost as heat)?!?!

File: 1475399807361.jpg (55KB, 640x635px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 640x635px

>>16035347

>>16035013
They make asschunks of torque

>>16035607
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/the-physics-of-engine-cylinder-bank-angles-feature?bcsi-ac-54EBA38933525503=257FC01F00000002WAm8ar6eYhefgxrV0MnxwMxEnL6WQQAAAgAAACpCGAGEAwAAAAAAAGu2AAA=

Read a website nigger,

>>16035602
Somehow they made 320hp like almost a hundred years ago. That is fucking crazy when you consider that at the time the ford flathead v8 was at most like 85hp. And this was in a luxury sedan

>>16033744
Any old American land barges

File: 1458402948400.png (53KB, 412x357px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 412x357px

>>16033761
Haaahahaha hahaha hahaha.
Hahahahaahahahhahahaha

I can't believe no1 loled at this. Best. Joke. Ever

>>16033744
Probably like half of a modern V16

itt; we learn inline or V configurations are completely arbitrary without taking cylinder count into account

>>16036522
Explain yourself

>>16034659
>weight
???????????????????????????????

>>16036662
It's pretty self explanatory. The exact thing I said.

File: freedom racing.jpg (2MB, 2431x1823px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2431x1823px

>>16035347
>Handling

?

What is this europe

>>16034021
take the power from the middle

>>16036522
Inline engines sound better and allow for more room in the engine bay, at the expense of weight distribution

But let's be honest, that doesn't even matter unless it's a boxer or a rotary.

>>16037171
This. Also;
>transverse mounted I8
>few gearwheels
>inline mounted tranny
boom, all problems solved

>>16037185
>Inline engines sound better
At the risk of falling into your subjective tripe, for certain cylinder counts, sure. V configurations sound better with other counts. That doesn't even take header collector design into it, which changes everything again.
>unless we're talking boxer or rotary
Are you implying these are the only configurations relevant to weight distribution?

>>16034723
Because they were used ages ago, where every engine was heavy

>>16037244
They're the only configurations that have significant and tangible effects on the handling characteristics of a car.

Transversely mounted V6 versus a longitudinally mounted inline 6: they both weigh too much/the weight is still high up no matter the configuration. Even moving the engine further back than the front axle doesn't do much when you have a tall boat anchor sitting there.

>>16037264
>Even moving the engine further back than the front axle doesn't do much when you have a tall boat anchor sitting there
Bullshit. Tell that to the sports sedan guys who are pushing engines back through the firewall in an effort to attain a superior polar moment of inertia.

>>16033744
>tfw no qt3.14 flat top L8 to twist my frame with

>>16033982
why is this post so cringey

File: mack engine.jpg (171KB, 1200x871px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 1200x871px

>>16033990
>45 degree firing angle
Not unless it's a two stroke, no.
It'd have exactly the same firing angle as every single other 90° V8 in existence.

>>16037325
dat technical shit talk

>>16033744
the crank shaft and cam shaft would be a bit prone to flex

>>16037483
Like I said, torsion bars belong within suspension componentry. Not crankcases.

>>16037494
imagine an inline 8 with only 6 main bearings

>>16034021
Go camless bruv

>>16037515
how would that help the crank?

>>16035109
>v12 barra destroked to 4L
that would make it a little more rev happy, and sound nicer than a i8

>>16040241
Then you're still stuck with tall deck architecture that's unsuited for a small displacement (relative to cylinder count).
What's the point of basing this idea on a "Barra"?

File: vr6 block.jpg (59KB, 614x461px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 614x461px

>>16033744

If someone could make a VR8 based on the VR6 design they would basically have an inline 8 (because the VR6 is essentially an inline 6) without the extreme length of the inline 8 or long crankshaft issues. VR6s already have 7 main bearings so a VR8 would have about 9.

>>16040389
are these any good?
does anyone else make them?

File: Dusenbergstraight8.jpg (2MB, 3648x2048px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3648x2048px

When will some bored billionaire revive dusenberg and the straight 8

File: 1477080583914.jpg (38KB, 500x434px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 500x434px

>>16040970
According to wikipedia theyre as balanced as an inline 6. And i know lancia made a super narrow angle v4 that had the pistons share the head and cams, this was wayyyyyy before vw thought up the vr6 tho

>>16040241
nah proper 8L V12
that'd be sick
>>16040315
because barra

>>16033744
>tfw no I8 with billet titanium crank and 9 ceramic needle main bearings

>>16041448
nah see there's no point trying to increase redline in a straight 8. They're good engines for long strokes.
Unfortunately anything newer than a flathead will be tall as shit. The vertical height is the real problem with these engines.

>>16041417
>because barra
Pretty much what I've come to expect from the Barra fanboy brigade.
>>16041453
>They're good engines for long strokes.
Eh, so is a crossplane V8.

>>16041453
The goal isn't to increase the redline, that's just a bonus. The goal is to maximize the support of the crank to reduce whip. Mount them at a 45 degree angle to maximize vertical space.

>>16041655
>The goal is to maximize the support of the crank to reduce whip.
Whip isn't a problem with tame RPM and heat management.
A good idea would be to add cam drives on both the front and rear of the engine as well.

>>16041669
Whip is a problem when you put powerful forces into a long, poorly supported rod. Take a stick, support it in two places 3 feet apart, and press in the middle. Then support it every 3 inches and press wherever you want. Notice which bends more.

>>16040970
No, they're trash. See how wide the gaps between the cylinders are? It's actually longer than an I5. They have two cams so they call it a DOHC engine, but each cam controls both intake and exhaust for a single bank, so it's actually SOHC.

>>16041687
It's going to happen no matter what you build the crank out of, less heat and slower speeds will help mitigate whip without spending $20k on materials.

File: IMG_7288.jpg (89KB, 1024x680px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1024x680px

>>16041652
>not wanting a barra i12

>>16041996
Nope, I'd much prefer a good engine.