Germany did not lose the Battle of Britain

[MaxGunz]

Take a modern Formula One engine that has such tight tolerances it has to be heated to operating temperature -just to start without being ruined- as an example of the best power/weight IC made, and they are good for one race....

hope no one thinks that all the parts in those exchange easily.

That kind of fit was possible in 1936 too. The tightness of machining then for those engines was high though nowhere as CNC fast as now. But they did have to make the things able to cold start, be fixed relatively quickly, and last just a bit longer.

Perhaps you need to have cut metal yourself to understand just how fine the better AC engines of those times really are. Calling the Merlins crude is like saying that people in the past were stupid because they didn't know what is known by some people now. Yet we can't get a real dialog on global warming....

You want crude, get an old Harley made to 1910 technology -- any made up to perhaps the 60's.

[JtD]

If you want to compare today's F1 engines with older technology, you should compare it with older F1 engines, not aircraft engines. Turbocharged these managed up to about 500 hp from 3 litres displacement in 1939, considerably more than contemporary aircraft engines. Naturally aspirated they were at about 50 hp per litre, today were at about 300.

[MaxGunz]

Why? Formula racing is a very different sport just from the 60's let alone the 30's, not just in the cars but the monnnnney poured into it. Is anyone winning with cars built in old barns in the last 20-30 years?

I've seen the Austrian air-rifle that Lewis and Clark took across the American continent and back. It's nothing as good as an M-1 yet I wouldn't be gauche enough to call it crude. The thing was very fine even for today. And look at those really old musical instruments that didn't have MIDI or pickups of any kind.. crude?

Crude AC engines were the radials they used in early WWI.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

All in all I wish my car got the mileage this silly thread got

[MaxGunz]

Us that's worked in tool and die, precision machining for years, after years of design school down to materials and strengths wouldn't know a thing about any of that. We're just tools I guess. But for who I don't have the foggiest.

I'll just drag my knuckles along out of this now that the mud has started to fly.

[Crumpp]

piston engine from the 1940's were crude

The designers from the 1940's knew more about high powered piston engine aircraft design and engines than we do today.

Nobody is building 2000 hp (+) piston engine powered aircraft today.


Computer controls, chemical engineering, and materials science have allowed us to build to better engines in some respects today. As far as engine knowledge and engineering, a mechanical engineer from the 1940's would just have to learn today's design tools but there is not any new knowledge we could teach him. We could learn from his experience however!!

[kimosabi]

Yeah rights and wrongs all over the place. Sorry if I offended you MaxGunz, but I am done here and it is how I roll. Too happy inside to jump back on this. Got some good news today and I'll be dancing with polar bears soon. Yoohooo!

Crumpp, some I agree with and some I don't. I'll leave it at that. Hugz and kizzes.

*edit* Nearmiss, I was expecting a counter-attack. It's just that I was done here. Still am lol. Hugz, No kizz for you.

[MaxGunz]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

The designers from the 1940's knew more about high powered piston engine aircraft design and engines than we do today.

Nobody is building 2000 hp (+) piston engine powered aircraft today.


Computer controls, chemical engineering, and materials science have allowed us to build to better engines in some respects today. As far as engine knowledge and engineering, a mechanical engineer from the 1940's would just have to learn today's design tools but there is not any new knowledge we could teach him. We could learn from his experience however!!

Back around 1970 my father took me to see a co-worker who had built a VW-engine powered airplane in his barn. I was told that they ran lower revs with extra-heavy pistons (he showed a regular VW piston and a special 2x as heavy piston) because as he put it, you don't want the engine to seize up there. The extra weight was for extra inertia -- I was told -- to help keep the piston moving.

Was that just something special to VW engines used in small GA AC?

Perhaps 40 years ago is just ancient history. What differences do more modern regular AC IC engines have from ground car engines?

[kimosabi]

Originally Posted by MaxGunz

Take a modern Formula One engine that has such tight tolerances it has to be heated to operating temperature -just to start without being ruined- as an example of the best power/weight IC made, and they are good for one race....

hope no one thinks that all the parts in those exchange easily.

That kind of fit was possible in 1936 too. The tightness of machining then for those engines was high though nowhere as CNC fast as now. But they did have to make the things able to cold start, be fixed relatively quickly, and last just a bit longer.

Perhaps you need to have cut metal yourself to understand just how fine the better AC engines of those times really are. Calling the Merlins crude is like saying that people in the past were stupid because they didn't know what is known by some people now. Yet we can't get a real dialog on global warming....

You want crude, get an old Harley made to 1910 technology -- any made up to perhaps the 60's.

You can't know much about engines if you don't realize that any piston engine from the 1940's were crude. F1? Get a grip dude, taking an extreme approach like that and comparing those engines to Merlins just makes you look narrow. One race? Read the F1 regulations for 2011, and also compare how many revolutions those engines makes between tear downs to a Merlin from 1940. We're talkin roughly 19000rpm compared to 2500rpm. I wouldn't be surprised if F1 engines surpass Merlins in terms of longevity through crank revolutions. But put simply, they are not comparable.

I'm not calling the Merlins crude because people back then were stupid, you would probably think like that but I'm saying that Merlins(And DB600 series for that matter) are crude because it was on a lower step on the evolutionary scale. Yes, we still use internal combustion engines and yes it is (mostly) the same principles but when a 3L straight six from BMW can fork out over 300hp/400nm reliable power you gotta wake up and smell the coffee man. There's a reason to why piston engines left fighter aircrafts. They were crude, too much prone to failures and something better came around.

Want a fair comparison? Take a 1940's car engine and compare it to a modern one. Any engine.

[waspfarmer]

Did too.