What's your favourite engine?

[fritz katzenjammer]

I once had a Datsun with a 1171cc pushrod four in it. Lovely smooth rev happy little thing that burned very little gas but almost as much oil.

tiny two barrel Hitachi carb, points ignition, no pollution crap… a sweet simple engine that just worked really well.

if only they hadn’t mounted the oil filter threaded side straight down so there was no way to change it without dumping oil everywhere.

 

[fritz katzenjammer]

This thread had me thinking on my first car versus my current ride and how far we’ve come…

my current car weighs twice as much as that first one, puts out over four times the horsepower from over double the displacement and somehow gets better gas mileage. So next time we are looking through the rose tinted glasses at the good old days let’s all remember what junk it really was. Sure you could work on it because it was simpler, but the modern stuff goes a lot further between tinkerings.

I mean really, has anyone ever seen the inside of a Honda Civic engine?

 

[Yellow Fang]

This thread had me thinking on my first car versus my current ride and how far we’ve come…

my current car weighs twice as much as that first one, puts out over four times the horsepower from over double the displacement and somehow gets better gas mileage. So next time we are looking through the rose tinted glasses at the good old days let’s all remember what junk it really was. Sure you could work on it because it was simpler, but the modern stuff goes a lot further between tinkerings.

I mean really, has anyone ever seen the inside of a Honda Civic engine?

That is curious. Your combustion engine is a heat engine, so there is a physical limit to how efficient it can be. Your first car must have been very inefficient.

 

[raleighnut]

That is curious. Your combustion engine is a heat engine, so there is a physical limit to how efficient it can be. Your first car must have been very inefficient.

Combustion chamber technology has moved on a great deal in recent times plus Carbs have been mainly supplanted by fuel injection leading to better atomization of the fuel, older engines tended to send a lot of unburnt fuel down the exhaust pipe. Knock sensors mean the ECU can be set to run as lean as possible with no pre-ignition (pinking)
At one time 100BHP per litre was considered to be highly tuned but now engines like the BMW 1,000cc bike engine are putting out over 250 BHP and that's without turbocharging/supercharging.

 

[Drago]

Indeed, and our understanding of the combustion process itself has advanced significantly since the 1980s.

 

[figbat]

And supercharging is now used widely. Brake mean effective pressures have increased dramatically in a couple of decades or so. Not to mention increased numbers of ratios in the gearboxes and much increased use of automation. The biggest factor in fuel efficiency is the nut connecting the seat to the steering wheel.

 

[raleighnut]

And supercharging is now used widely. Brake mean effective pressures have increased dramatically in a couple of decades or so. Not to mention increased numbers of ratios in the gearboxes and much increased use of automation. The biggest factor in fuel efficiency is the nut connecting the seat to the steering wheel.

Anyone else remember the TV advert with the guy with 'big boots' back in the late 70's

 

[Dadam]

Computerised ECUs with map tables for many different conditions. Previously you set your carb for rich/lean and ignition timing and that was about it.

 

[Reynard]

Previously you set your carb for rich/lean and ignition timing and that was about it.

And you could also put a different cam in to alter the performance characteristics.

 

[fritz katzenjammer]

That is curious. Your combustion engine is a heat engine, so there is a physical limit to how efficient it can be. Your first car must have been very inefficient.

It was an air cooled VW type 3. You can only push an air cooled engine so hard before you start wearing stuff out unacceptably quickly or melting things outright. It was a 1600cc four with fuel injection, the addition of the fancy solid state, and unrealizable as hell, fuel system enabled them to squeeze a claimed 72 bhp out of the silly thing.

my current ride pumps 314 bhp out of 3.6 litres. Direct injection and variable valve timing might be helping a bit.

oh… and water cooling.

 

[Profpointy]

For production car engines the old Jag XK is rather appealing and lovely, particularly the 50s and 60s triple carb'd and polished alloy versions. I have driven an XK150

For motorcycles, has to be the Vincent. I may or may not go for one of these in retirement if we end up with somewhere to actually secure to keep it

Though for absurd bike V twins, Alan Millyard's steam punk inspired "Flying Millyard" is quite something. Each cylinder, off an aero engine is 2.5litres

And purely on complexity appeal, Napier's Deltic diesel and their w12 Lion aero engines

 

[Reynard]

my current ride pumps 314 bhp out of 3.6 litres. Direct injection and variable valve timing might be helping a bit.

Ah, but how much weight does that have to shove around?

That same engine in something like a Caterham will leave you as a smear on the horizon, while in a big SUV, you'll just have a comfortable and sort of fast motorway muncher.

 

[fritz katzenjammer]

Ah, but how much weight does that have to shove around?

That same engine in something like a Caterham will leave you as a smear on the horizon, while in a big SUV, you'll just have a comfortable and sort of fast motorway muncher.

About 4000 pounds, not SUV territory, but more than even my Dutch bike! It does properly go like stink if provoked though.

 

[Reynard]

About 4000 pounds, not SUV territory, but more than even my Dutch bike! It does properly go like stink if provoked though.

View attachment 786491

Ah. A motorway muncher with a bit of a sting in the tail. But not *that* much more BHP per tonne compared to my Skoda Rapid, which weighs half that and puts out 110 BHP from a 4-cyl 1.2 litre turbo. Cars on this side of the pond do tend to be somewhat smaller, and our fuel decidedly more spendy.

However, this little Madam weighs only 600kgs. And could fit inside yours to boot. Only 60hp (ish), but she uses them very wisely. Powered by the aforementioned A-series engine mentioned upthread - in this case a twin-carb 998cc version.

 

[fritz katzenjammer]

Ah. A motorway muncher with a bit of a sting in the tail. But not *that* much more BHP per tonne compared to my Skoda Rapid, which weighs half that and puts out 110 BHP from a 4-cyl 1.2 litre turbo. Cars on this side of the pond do tend to be somewhat smaller, and our fuel decidedly more spendy.

However, this little Madam weighs only 600kgs. And could fit inside yours to boot. Only 60hp (ish), but she uses them very wisely. Powered by the aforementioned A-series engine mentioned upthread - in this case a twin-carb 998cc version.

View attachment 786492

I came very close to buying a Skoda Rapid 130 a lot of years ago. ( early eighties! ) Test drove it a few times and was properly in love with the wee rear engined beastie. Then I found out about the 20,000km clutch life And decided to run my dead reliable Lada for a few more years. I even rallied that poor Lada once, it was great fun and managed fifth overall against some proper cars. The stereo in that car, while not great, was worth more than the car. Oh the life of the college punk.