kitplane01
Airman 1st Class
- 135
- Apr 23, 2020
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I'm not so sure. We're still using 1940's metalurgy and manufacturing. Turbos and superchargers would benefit from 75 years of experience in what works.I think engine reliability would go up tremendously, along with power, and improvements in valves, valve train, blowers, turbos, waste
The only change is we have 2020's design process and extra funding. Funding was not in short supply, at least for US firms.Suppose I gave you year 2020 design technology
I'm not so sure. We're still using 1940's metalurgy and manufacturing. Turbos and superchargers would benefit from 75 years of experience in what works.
The only change is we have 2020's design process and extra funding. Funding was not in short supply, at least for US firms.
I suppose we need to define what is 2020 design process as applied to the 1940s? If we don't have computers to aid in the calculations and modeling, are we back to drafting tables and slide rules? What design tech from 2020 can we use and not use? Did we learn more about valve train in the past 75 years that we can apply in 1944 using the manufacturing tech of the time? I like this discussion, I just need more info.
One place to start might be a look at how existing engines, like the P&W R-2800 Double Wasp and Bristol Centaurus are overhauled in the 2000s by both museums and more importantly, racing teams. Unless this entails "unobtainable" alloys or manufacturing processes, whatever is done in 2020 to make these 1940s radials reach their max performance should be applicable in the 1940s.
If you look at the outputs of the Amsoil Engine Masters Challenge I think you would be surprised. In 2019 they got 800hp out of a 440CI LS-4 engine.
I think engine reliability would go up tremendously, along with power, and improvements in valves, valve train, blowers, turbos, waste gates, internal friction that fuel efficiency would also improve.
Cheers,
Biff
If they can make your proposed fuel using 1944 tech at a reasonable cost, go ahead. But they octane they had in 1944 (and their lack of fear of lead) ...Well, I get 2020 tech but not the engine electronics. I would think, especially on the V engines, that a good deal more power could be squeezed out with a gain in reliability. Does that include todays tech for fuels?
Cheers,
Biff
Well, I get 2020 tech but not the engine electronics. I would think, especially on the V engines, that a good deal more power could be squeezed out with a gain in reliability. Does that include todays tech for fuels?
Cheers,
Biff
Are we any smarter or more knowledgeable about such things today than we were in the 1940s? Look at any aerospace engineering school today and everyone's using calculators and computers to do calculations that people did in their head and on paper. I just don't know if an aerospace expert of today would have much to offer their 1940s counterpart.In this scenario, we could redesign cylinder heads such that every bit of metal is under the right amount of stress, every cooling fin is the exact right size and placement, and inlet/exhaust passageways are designed using computer aerodynamic simulations. Repeat for every single part.
Any reason why this helps the V engines (like V-8, V-12) more than the radials. Or did you mean V like Allison? And if so, why is Allison more able to be improved?
The first of the cars to be designed and produced post war were about 1948. Electronic controls were introduced by GM in 1981.
So comparing a Cadillac designed in 1948 and 1980 ...
The 1948 engine had a 331 cubic inch, 160 horsepower.
The 1970 engine had 500 cubic inches, 400 horsepower.
The 1976 engine had 500 cubic inches, 210 horsepower (and it got worse after)
So if you figure engine weight is proportional to cubic inches, and you stop sometime before the OPEC crisis, you conclude Cadillac engines got 14% worse.
Arg!