Jumo inverted vee's vs. Daimler-Benz inverted vee's - Pros and Cons

[spicmart]

I would be extremely careful with these figures, and what they might actually mean.

For example, the "J`s" produced as far as we can see had "F" superchargers on (I think), as the final "J" version superchargers
with variable speed drives were probably not ready. Its not easy to say what these numbers refer to.

The "F" had no chargecooler, so would have been a lot lighter.... so is tricky to say whats-what. In other words,
a "J" with the final supercharger, would probably be more comparable with an "E", weight wise.

Here is another set of numbers... dry weight. Note this states that the "weight tolerance" itself is about 30kg !

So dont get too fastidious about this stuff. (92kg of fluids of all forms)

View attachment 673419
View attachment 673418

I assume that the 1007 kg of the Jumo 213E here are dry weight? "Motor mit Zubehör" means "engine with equipment" though.

 

[spicmart]

Davebender said: But Junkers did produce the 2,031 hp Jumo211F in small numbers.

What was the maxiumum power they could get out of a Jumo 211 for frontline service?
Where is that from? I've never seen such a figure before, not even close.

 

[Denniss]

213E-1 is noted with 1040 kg dry weight in a 12/44 document collection from Jumo Dessau.
Installation dry weight of the complete engine system for a fighter is given as 1414.5 kg, +12 kg for a pressurized cabin fighter as Ta 152H
+94kg for wet weight
+263kg for VS-9 prop system or +301kg for VS-19 prop system
+78kg for MK 108 and mounting system