I wonder if you can get this engine to fit in a Civic?

[cjolley]

The strange thing to me is how conventional it all looks.
You would think that the laws of scaling would make the relative sizes of it's parts to be quite different from a car or motorcycle engine.
But it all looks so normal. *
chuck

* Except, of course, for the ladder going down into each rod journal sump

[Jon P. Inghram]

It's a little different, the connecting rod attaches to a piston rod which rides in a guide, presumably to reduce side forces and thus friction and wear on the piston and cylinder. I like the "little" bolts that hold the bearing caps on, they look tiny until you compare them to the person inspecting them.

[MultimediaMan]

Jon, Crossheads have been used in Steam Engines for decades. Take a look at the drive cylinders of a live steam train and see what they use: A Crosshead that rides on a track rather than in the cylinder itself:

[Fat Tone]

That's the biggest penis-extension I ever saw!

T.



Maybe it would fit under the bonnet of a Capri Ghia

[Jon P. Inghram]

I was just saying it's slightly different than a conventional automotive gasoline or diesel engine, I don't think anyone was thinking about steam engines until you brought it up. It's two cycle also, making it even more powerful for it's size compared to more typical engines you'd find under the hood of a car or pickup.

I'd think it would be much cheaper to maintain than a turbine, far fewer parts that need routine inspections. But then again, I only have detailed knowledge about aircraft turbine engines, perhaps marine and fixed engines (like in powerplants or whatever) are made heavier and are less delicate than their flying versions.

[MultimediaMan]

You would be correct, Jon. Most Marine and Stationary Gas Turbines are VERY sturdy. They have much more robust lubrication and often times cooling systems that a flying GT wouldn't ordinarily have.

[cjolley]

The Crosshead would not be appropriate for a car or motorcycle. It would make the engine too tall and heavy.
I was talking more about the general scale of things.
As you know, the mass (read both weight and/or) mass of an object scales as the cube of its size, the strength only by the square.
I just thought it interesting that they left the relative scale of every thing so normal.
If you saw a picture of that crankshaft and it’s shell bearings sitting on a gigantic bench so that you had no hints about it’s size, except for the cylinder count you would hardly notice it.
chuck