![Photo](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/99de7e92756dc17a2e3d2e6cb6d9223f?s=100&d=https%3A%2F%2Fbb2.autosport.com%2Fpublic%2Fstyle_images%2FTheo%2Fprofile%2Fdefault_large.png)
Cylinder angles
#1
Posted 06 February 2000 - 10:23
So, why only Ferrari with 80 degrees, and what's so special about 72 degrees such that everyone else uses it?
Advertisement
#2
Posted 07 February 2000 - 03:35
Without resorting to "split" crankshaft journals the ideal balance for a V8 engine is 90 degrees and for a V12 is 60 degrees, therefore one would assume that 75 decrees might be ideal for a V10 (right ?).
My guess is that the angle of the v shape is not based so much on an ideal balance so much as for (1) packaging efficiancy and (2) what provides the lowest centre of gravity with out (3) compromising aerodynamics.
Perhaps Ferrari is mostly inderested keeping the height of their engine as low as possible so as not to interfere with the airflow under the rear wing ?
#3
Posted 08 February 2000 - 07:40
Width will not be terribly different, either.
But there will undoubtedly be a reason - probably relating to some design parameter the team set when they had a white sheet of paper.
Did you know that the C of G of a horizontally opposed F1 engine is generally through to be higher than that of a V?
#4
Posted 10 February 2000 - 11:15
Any 180 degree engine (boxer) needs an oil pan (or dry sump pan) BELOW the cylinders--this helps prevent the pistons from slapping the oil ("windage"). The result is that the oil system raises the whole motor (and the resultant CG).
#5
Posted 19 February 2000 - 07:54
Do you know why inline 6 has perfect balance?
I happen to have a M3 (which got a i6) and one of my friends asked me why they use I6 instead of V6 which will be more comapct and my answer was better balance but could come up with a reason.
#6
Posted 19 February 2000 - 12:11
And doesn't an inline 6 have a nice howl?
#7
Posted 23 February 2000 - 06:01
I suppose perfect natural balance isn't as important these days as overengineering other parts to deal with excessive vibes without wasting too much in terms of weight is probably acceptable, the only reason however for running slightly different V angles I can think of is possibly to optimise the intake path, and the power increase from that outweighs the power drain/slight weight increase from out of balance configurations.
Might be tosh of course!
![:)](https://bb2.autosport.com/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
#8
Posted 23 February 2000 - 08:28
How about giving me some Tec. talk on how and why a V has a lower C ov G Than a flat opposed engine. If the center line of the crank is the same distance from the road surface on both engines.
Art NX3L
#9
Posted 23 February 2000 - 16:38
You'll find that be the time the exhausts (or the inlets!) have room to fit under the heads that you have lifted the crank centreline higher. Just can't be done without it. Maybe a very wide-angle Vee - say 150 degrees, would be the optimum for c of g, but then you have width destroying your airflow and getting in the way of the suspension.
#10
Posted 24 February 2000 - 01:27
Both engines have to have a flywheel so we can eliminate that. Now for the intake & exhaust? We re design the heads intakes between the cams W196 style and switch sides of the heads with the exhaust. We gain body width but eliminate the large air box and can run a much lower body profile behind the driver. The exhaust headers will protrude through the body which looks nice anyway eliminate engine room heat and can be aimed at the rear wing better. So the C ov G is the same and we have a different looking car. But it may be equal to the V engined car and the aero package may be the same or better.
Art NX3L
#11
Posted 24 February 2000 - 03:20
[This message has been edited by desmo (edited 02-23-2000).]
#12
Posted 24 February 2000 - 05:34
What angle are the valves? Are they running a near flat combustion chamber?
Art NX3L
#13
Posted 24 February 2000 - 05:41
Art NX3L
#14
Posted 24 February 2000 - 07:13
Exhaust pipes also need neat and gradual bends - it's all a minefield down there.
#15
Posted 24 February 2000 - 07:42
I was surprised the first time I saw an F1 clutch it is very small. And with my idea you could use almost straight exhaust pipes like the old Auto Unions. It is nice that we all can get in and discuss each others ideas.
Art NX3L
#16
Posted 24 February 2000 - 08:21
[This message has been edited by desmo (edited 02-24-2000).]
#17
Posted 24 February 2000 - 12:20
#18
Posted 25 February 2000 - 10:50
I'm afraid I can't explain why an inline six is perfectly balanced without using diagrams. Head to your local library and look up the "Automotive Handbook" published by Bosch. In the section called "Function and Dynamics of Power Transmission Components", there is a 7 page description of engine balance, starting with a single cylinder example, and then expanding it to most common motor layouts.
You are right about the better balance answer though! Sorry I'm not more help!
#19
Posted 26 February 2000 - 02:18
And a clutch is 97mm in diameter today for a F1-engine.
Advertisement
#20
Posted 14 March 2000 - 05:49
#21
Posted 14 March 2000 - 07:49