R-1830 vs. Allison V-1710

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Ir was figured that the P-40 had 22% less drag than the P-36. That Explains the the higher speed with equivalent engines and the push for liquid cooled engines, but since technology doesn't stand still later air-cooled engine installations cut into that margin quite a bit. The people in charge of ordering planes could only go with what was known at the time, not what would become known in 2-3 years.
 
Ir was figured that the P-40 had 22% less drag than the P-36. That Explains the the higher speed with equivalent engines and the push for liquid cooled engines, but since technology doesn't stand still later air-cooled engine installations cut into that margin quite a bit. The people in charge of ordering planes could only go with what was known at the time, not what would become known in 2-3 years.
Sorry I m so late on this, but PW DID built a Hawk 81 powered by a two stage two speed Twin Wasp and got 389mph out of her at 22K ft, albeit without armament.
 
That Explains the the higher speed with equivalent engines and the push for liquid cooled engines, but since technology doesn't stand still later air-cooled engine installations cut into that margin quite a bit. The people in charge of ordering planes could only go with what was known at the time, not what would become known in 2-3 years.

Sorry I m so late on this, but PW DID built a Hawk 81 powered by a two stage two speed Twin Wasp and got 389mph out of her at 22K ft, albeit without armament.
You are correct, they did, in 1943. Which is a little late for being the engine of choice for the P-40 in 1939 or 1941.
We have pictures of it a number of threads on this site. A better cowl than the P-36, the two stage supercharger allowing max speed at 22,000ft instead of 10-12,000ft and much better use of exhaust thrust compared to the P-36/Hawk 75.
 
Note that after WW2 Canadair built a conversion of the DC-4 called the North Star which replaced the R-2000 engines, a version of the R-1830, with the significantly more powerful Merlin 620 engines. This was not a very popular modification and despite the availability of large numbers of surplus V-1710's no one else tried replacing the R-2000 with in line engines. The R-1830 and V-1710 were two different engines good for two different kinds of aircraft.

As for the R-2800 it benefited enormously from the long period of earlier service of the R-1830 Wasp, and with refinements to the valves and cylinders really was a Double Wasp. In the 1980's a company addressed the shortage of parts for rebuild of the R-1340 by modifying R-2800 cylinders to fit on an R-1830 case.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back