Why aren't radial engines used in cars?

>>16519802
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8InG6T9pxs

>happy starfish engine

>>16519832
I don't see a problem here

>>16519802
Large size

Massive oil consumption (ie, the only time they don't consume/leak is when there's no oil left)

Depending on how it's arranged, you have to fuck with it before you should even think of starting it to prevent pooled oil locking the cylinders.

>>16519845
I guarantee nobody rear ends you.

or at least nobody will live to tell the tale

>>16519832
psssssh
he probably doesn't even change his own oil

>>16519841
Five-way assplugging.

>>16519802
It's a massive pancake with the crank set very high on the block. In its intended orientation it's a very inefficient configration for a low riding land vehicle.
>>16519890 is probably the only good way to pull it off. Even then an H configuration would sit lower and require less mechanical wizardry.

>>16519890
damn thats pretty. have a picture of the rest of the car?

File: autowp.ru_prochie_julian_coupe_by_fleetwood_1.jpg (734KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

734KB, 1024x768px

>>16520080
Here.

File: Adams-Farwell-6A-Connolly-Runabout-26176.jpg (199KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1024x683px

Radial rotary in a car

File: 06-Adams-Farwell-6A_Connolly-DV-11-PBC_e01.jpg (157KB, 1024x681px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1024x681px

>>16520217

>>16519802
they're too big

Where to start?

*If it's not high enough across the ground, your valve covers would scrape the ground, but regardless, it has an extremely high center of gravity (planes move through the air, not across the ground that's below them). Other than balance, boxer engines exist for this exact reason.
*There's also more complexity and cost, as you'd need an overhead camshaft for every cylinder's valves. You'd need air/fuel/cooling/exhaust/ignition/etc wires/hoses/manifolds traveling radially outward to EACH cylinder instead of all in a cutesy little line. You're also using a ton of material to make your engine block/cylinders/heads. That's a lot of parts to make, material need, failure points, tedious assembly process, cost, weight, potential wasted space, and did I mention cost?
*Say you if you use the design that has the engine block rotating around stationary pistons air-cooling the engine without a fan as it moves past the air and eliminate the need for a flywheel. That's a lot of rotational inertia and the handling would be shit vertical and horizontal. Even if you had two blocks counter-rotating to cancel each other out and eliminate this problem, all that rotational inertia would lead to a terribly unresponsive throttle (not a problem for planes though, which spin the propeller at a constant speed or gradually speed up or slow down if needed).
*The oil pump would be doing a ton of work.

They're great for airplanes, but terrible for cars.

>>16520330
>engine block rotating around

OP asked about Radials, not Rotary.

>>16519802
Because worrying about 2 cylinder heads is bad enough.

>>16520330
>you'd need an overhead camshaft
You could make it OHV.

>>16520599
>Engine block
>Rotating

Wonder where is your comprehension anon. He refers to the block, which is not a single piece holding 4 pistons together, but a masive multi piece block holding each piston separately

>>16522092
or go camless

File: 220px-Chistian_von_Koenigsegg.png (142KB, 220x416px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 220x416px

>>16522343
>camless
im so glad you brought that up, did you want to hear about koenigsegg camless engine technology?

>>16522353
oh boy