If a WWII fighter engine were produced with today's technology, what would we get?

[swampyankee]

I am not sure that some of the aromatic compounds were any less dangerous (Benzine?) , not to say there aren't some carcinogenic compounds in diesel exhaust.

The high octane/performance number fuels of the last part of WW II and during the 40s and 50s required a disproportionate amount of crude oil/base stock. You got much fewer gallons of high performance fuel per barrel of crude oil/base stock than for lower grades of fuel. They also required much more elaborate refinery set-ups and often large quantities of materials from the chemical industry.

Somewhat relatedly, there have been significant problems with lack of restrictions on contaminants like sulfur in road fuels, such as US gasoline in the past (much less so now) and US diesel; the former caused problems with auto engines using Nikasil cylinders and the latter largely precluding high-performance diesels.

 

[MACHIA]

Nothing really wrong with the WWII designs per se-they are sound designs even for today. The increased capability would be mostly centered around the use of better/lighter/stronger alloys which would allow higher continuous RPMs from lower rotating mass, computer controlled ignition and direct injection systems and much improved supercharging.

Agree .