Jump to content


Photo

Quirkiest F1 engine concepts?


  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#1 Rudernst

Rudernst
  • Member

  • 90 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 06 December 2013 - 18:01

Which engine concept can be considered the quirkiest, most absurd ones ? 

 

My personal favorite would be 2,5 litre in line twin cylinder Ferrari engine designed by Lampredi in 1955.

How could they expect that one to work ?

A 90 deg V twin at least would have been far less vibratory and.

 

Any other other follies of similar magnitude ?

 

Rudolf



Advertisement

#2 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 06 December 2013 - 18:16

life W12 springs to mind

 

life_l190_2009-2-1024x682.jpg

 

http://en.wikipedia....e_W12_adventure


Edited by eronrules, 06 December 2013 - 18:21.


#3 Tim Murray

Tim Murray
  • Member

  • 14,563 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 06 December 2013 - 19:24

Doug Nye was looking for information about this rumoured interesting engine, but nothing was ever confirmed:

 

1.5 litre, turbocharged, 2 stroke F1 engine - 1974-75



#4 Sisyphus

Sisyphus
  • Member

  • 132 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 06 December 2013 - 20:00

Aern't you overlooking the obvious one--the BRM H16?  What were they thinking?  The 1.5 liter flat 16 Coventry Climax must get a mention as well.

 

While the W12 was certainly odd, it was a one-off but the BRM was actually the factory production engine.  And the Climax engine was a more or less serious effort by the then dominant F1 engine supplier.



#5 bradbury west

bradbury west
  • Member

  • 4,609 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 06 December 2013 - 20:11

Rudolph, do a search on TNF for Guidobaldi....
Roger Lund

#6 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 8,087 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 06 December 2013 - 21:58

The supercharged flat twin Panhard engine used by DB in 1955 was a somewhat unconventional approach



#7 plannerpower

plannerpower
  • Member

  • 261 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 06 December 2013 - 22:10

The Trossi springs to mind;

 

121triw.jpg

 

From;

 

http://oldmachinepre...naco-trossi.jpg


Edited by plannerpower, 08 December 2013 - 01:07.


#8 layabout

layabout
  • Member

  • 105 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 06 December 2013 - 23:40

The Trossi springs to mind;

 

http://oldmachinepre...naco-trossi.jpg

The Ferrari 2-cylinder, the Motori Moderni/Subaru flat 12, or even the Indy Ford engine reduced to 3-litres might be a candidate.

call .



#9 Catalina Park

Catalina Park
  • Member

  • 5,730 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 06 December 2013 - 23:58

The Repco 620. What the heck were they thinking? An Oldsmobile block, single cam per head, two valves in line, a dirty great long single row timing chain. What a disaster!



#10 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 6,062 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 07 December 2013 - 01:32

The Repco 620. What the heck were they thinking? An Oldsmobile block, single cam per head, two valves in line, a dirty great long single row timing chain. What a disaster!

Sounds very wrong,,, but it was quite succesfull. Unlike most of the above.

#11 PJGD

PJGD
  • Member

  • 76 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 07 December 2013 - 02:24

Well, this Ferrari concept from 1994 would have been pretty wild, if it had seen the light of day (perhaps it did?).

 

Ferrari_OPE.png

 

Then of course the 1.5 litre 1925 Fiat Tipo 451 opposed piston 2-stroke was not exactly run-of-the-mill either.

 

PJGD



#12 GMACKIE

GMACKIE
  • Member

  • 1,782 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 07 December 2013 - 06:45

The Porsche air cooled flat 8 [early '60s] was different.



#13 Sharman

Sharman
  • Member

  • 2,703 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 07 December 2013 - 07:32

Of all of the above might be said "How different, how very different from the home life of our own present regimented era when every thing must be to an exacting formula"



#14 Allan Lupton

Allan Lupton
  • Member

  • 3,064 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 07 December 2013 - 08:50

Of all of the above might be said "How different, how very different from the home life of our own present regimented era when every thing must be to an exacting formula"

Yes and it is that over-legislated blandness that we older folk can't be doing with.

Grand Prix racing always benefitted from its designers having a free hand within simple constraints, as reading many of the TNF threads would remind us.



#15 Rudernst

Rudernst
  • Member

  • 90 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 07 December 2013 - 09:16

Aern't you overlooking the obvious one--the BRM H16?  What were they thinking?  The 1.5 liter flat 16 Coventry Climax must get a mention as well.

 

While the W12 was certainly odd, it was a one-off but the BRM was actually the factory production engine.  And the Climax engine was a more or less serious effort by the then dominant F1 engine supplier.

 

what were they thinking ?
easy to answer: Tony Rudd himself wrote that he thought - at the time - in his own book, that in his 1,5 V8 they had arrived at the optimum possible combustiion chamber or close to it. The H16 was his attempt to use this in the 3 litre formula. This was beeing wrong from the outset about "optimum" because the V8 had a good but dated 2 valve layout that got ultimately ditched even from the H16.

I cant make my mind up as whether the H16 was a folly or a heroic failure or an orphan from Tony Rudd getting ousted form BRM, probably all of the above. 

 

the better compromise for BRM would have been their V12 based on the 2 litre V8. But that engine was hobbled from the ooutset by chain driven cams as cost cutting measure, as it was meant to be sold for profit. 

At least in the short term until the arrival of the Cossie a good V12 would have been competive, but BRMs fell victim to intercompany strife.

Sad case of too little too late.

 

now for Doug to point out my mistakes

 

Rudolf



#16 Rudernst

Rudernst
  • Member

  • 90 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 07 December 2013 - 09:18

The Trossi springs to mind;

 

http://oldmachinepre...naco-trossi.jpg

 

 

great try, this is why I started this thread, to dig up stuff like this.


Edited by Rudernst, 07 December 2013 - 09:18.


#17 Rudernst

Rudernst
  • Member

  • 90 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 07 December 2013 - 09:19

The Porsche air cooled flat 8 [early '60s] was different.

 

different, yes but not a complete folly, it won a GP, and it did well in sports cars a 2 litre for a while



#18 Rudernst

Rudernst
  • Member

  • 90 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 07 December 2013 - 09:21

The supercharged flat twin Panhard engine used by DB in 1955 was a somewhat unconventional Approach

 

that one presumably based on their production engine ? any more detail info about this one ?

 

Rudolf



#19 Rudernst

Rudernst
  • Member

  • 90 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 07 December 2013 - 09:26

ok

 

I think it makes sense to establish some ground rules here:

 

can we please differentiate between:

 

 - engines that actually raced or attempted to qualifiy, or tested, basically made it into a car

 - engines that were built and at least made it onto the dyno

 - paper concepts

 

I meant to discuss the ones that actually made it into metal and made some noise, but I have to admit that the paper engine folliies can be quite interesting as well, some of them... 



Advertisement

#20 Rudernst

Rudernst
  • Member

  • 90 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 07 December 2013 - 09:43

German folly

 

German  Racer Egon Evertz floated the idea of 2 stroke F1 engine in German Magazine Rallye Racing in the late 1970ies, called the Evex.

It was a disc valve two stroke, I think he came as far as building a 1,5 litre 6 cylinder version with a view to either doubling this up or possibly turbocharging it. 

Project probably died from alc of funding.

He now seems to be a successful indutrialist, judging by his website.

I think the disc valves were an unnecessary complication in something potentially as powerfull, but current German thinking then in 2 stroke racing.

 

 

 

The folly that I would have persued with my money would have been:

(had not been just 16 years of age then)

 

a 16 cylinder 2 stroke piston ported engine based on Yamaha TZ 750 mechanicals.  

bulky, but potentially low weight, certainly low CofG, stunning torque, very good power, 20 % up on the DFV, but fragile, You would just gotten one Grand Prix race out of a set of pistons as the large exhaust port scrapes them to pieces, and the packaging of the expansion chamber exhausts would have been challenging, probably impossible in a ground effect car,

this is why I aborted the project before leaving school.

 

:)

 

Rudolf


Edited by Rudernst, 07 December 2013 - 09:46.


#21 GMACKIE

GMACKIE
  • Member

  • 1,782 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 07 December 2013 - 09:48

different, yes but not a complete folly, it won a GP, and it did well in sports cars a 2 litre for a while

Being air cooled makes it quite different. A folly it certainly was not.



#22 Sharman

Sharman
  • Member

  • 2,703 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 07 December 2013 - 10:51

Yes and it is that over-legislated blandness that we older folk can't be doing with.

Grand Prix racing always benefitted from its designers having a free hand within simple constraints, as reading many of the TNF threads would remind us.

 "Hear bloody Hear"



#23 f1steveuk

f1steveuk
  • Member

  • 3,201 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 07 December 2013 - 12:21

Doug Nye was looking for information about this rumoured interesting engine, but nothing was ever confirmed:

 

1.5 litre, turbocharged, 2 stroke F1 engine - 1974-75

 

 

Ah, but we did!!! Doug asked the question, and I partly answered. The reason was it was part of research for a book, that has since been published, the writer, Paul Kenny frequents this forum, and will probably appear shortly, and he is far better versed in the history than me. All I knew was it was a horizontally opposed 12 cylinder, along the lines of a Commer TS3 engine, in which the pistons come in toward each other, with two cranks.

 

I would dispute that the Life was a bad idea, it was brilliant, it was the execution that was bad! The W12, or better termed "Broad Arrow", as been a very succesful layout. Giving the the power and torque of a 12 cylinder within the dimensions of a straight four. The shorter, and therefore stronger (and less prone to whip) crankshaft was the whole reason the idea came up, with Napier in the Lion series engine, and engine used in aircraft (including racing aircraft) cars (Napier Railton circuit car and Napier Railton land spped car), and on the water as both the Lion and the Sea Lion engine.

 

As a nomination for a bizarre racing engine, that was made and ran, I put forward the Bradshaw Omega!!



#24 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 1,832 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 07 December 2013 - 13:52

How about the Lotus 56 turbine car?

 

I can understand how the concept was great for Indy, but for F1?? I know hindsight is 20:20, but even so.....



#25 Mistron

Mistron
  • Member

  • 854 posts
  • Joined: June 05

Posted 07 December 2013 - 21:33

Didn't the Walklet Brothers of Ginetta build a flat 12 1.5 litre engine for a proposed F! project in the mid '60s, casting their own block, heads etc? Not sure if it ever ran though, let alone made it into a car.

 

Al



#26 arttidesco

arttidesco
  • Member

  • 5,712 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 December 2013 - 23:33

While the block pattern of the supercharged BRM V16 was certainly unusual, I'd humbly suggest the H16 block pattern was BRM's quirky one apart from a handful of aircraft applications only two motorcycle companies built prototype motors with H block patterns that I know of, while the V16 block pattern had been used in three different pre war production motors, appeared at Indy in the early 30's and more successfully in top flight European racing in the mid thirties.



#27 Peter Morley

Peter Morley
  • Member

  • 1,910 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 08 December 2013 - 09:24

Bugatti U16 engine from the Type 45 & 47 is similar to a BRM H16 in that it used two 8 cylinder engines with a common crankcase, the difference being the Bugatti's were straight 8s and the BRM's V8s?



#28 Allan Lupton

Allan Lupton
  • Member

  • 3,064 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 08 December 2013 - 09:35

Bugatti U16 engine from the Type 45 & 47 is similar to a BRM H16 in that it used two 8 cylinder engines with a common crankcase, the difference being the Bugatti's were straight 8s and the BRM's V8s?

Er, no the BRM was a double flat-8, not V-8.

As Art wrote, the H-configuration was used in aeroplane engines, mainly by Napier (Rapier, Dagger & Sabre with 16, 24 & 24 cylinders) but experimentally by Rolls-Royce (Eagle 22)



#29 Macca

Macca
  • Member

  • 3,345 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 08 December 2013 - 11:08

Without opening that can of worms that says anything pre-1950 cannot be mentioned in a thread with F1 in the title.....;-)

 

The air-and-oil-cooled V8 Honda of 1968 which never cooled sufficiently.

 

And away from F1, the Apfelbeck-headed radial-valved BMW F2 4-cylinder - theoretically better for gas-flow but a nightmare for packaging/installation (also tried by Ferrari on their 166 Dino F2 car but never raced).

 

And reverting to paper concepts (as there has never been any evidence it was built), an air-cooled straight-8 1.5-L collaboration between Ferrari and MV Agusta in 1962 for which an artist's impression appeared in R&T.

 

 

Paul M



#30 Jackmancer

Jackmancer
  • Member

  • 2,861 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 08 December 2013 - 11:25

Has F1 ever used a rotary engine?



#31 Tim Murray

Tim Murray
  • Member

  • 14,563 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 08 December 2013 - 13:04

Didn't the Walklet Brothers of Ginetta build a flat 12 1.5 litre engine for a proposed F! project in the mid '60s, casting their own block, heads etc? Not sure if it ever ran though, let alone made it into a car.

 

Al

 

Here's the story as told by Bob Walklett in Ginetta: The Inside Story:

 

Ginetta Formula 1 Engine

 

I thought I was immune to surprises but I was always wary when Trevers would come into my office with a little grin on his face. 'What do you say we build a Formula 1 engine, Bob?' he said. 'I don't really think I am in the mood for jokes, Trev,'I replied. 'It isn't a joke,' he said: 'Ivor and I have worked out a design which is perfectly feasible. It is a 1½-litre 2-stroke engine. Current F1 rules allow for 3-litre naturally aspirated or 1½-litre blown. We could make it in-house: we have the mills, the lathes, the borers. We can turn up our own steel cranks and make the engine patterns.'

 

I suppose incredulity was written all over my face.

 

'Would you like to see the drawings?' he said. ‘I would love to see the drawings,' I replied. 'Right - I will go and get them.' I cleared a space on my desk in anticipation and Trevers laid them before me. I could see straight away that it was twelve cylinder, horizontally opposed, two crankshafts with a central drive. 'Perhaps you will explain it further,' I said, 'where are the inlet and exhaust valves? Where is the induction manifold? Where is the valve gear?' 'It doesn't have any! It is based on piston-controlled inlet and exhaust ports. Let me show you how it works.' I was intrigued. 'But there only seems to be about 50 mil throw on the cranks,' I said. 'That's right, the pistons will move about 100 mil and we shall have six firing strokes for one turn of the crank.' 'More like a turbine,' I said. 'Well, similar: we shall turbocharge it. Do you like it?' 'I think it's fantastic, but we can't possibly make it!' I answered. 'You may well be right, Bob, but do you agree we have a go, in between times, for a little light relief.' 'Light relief! You call that light relief!' I exclaimed, to which Trevers responded: 'Well, I can have a play in the evenings can't I?'

 

I was totally fascinated to watch it develop. Trevers made the patterns for the crankcase and had them cast in aluminium alloy. The steel cylinders were next. These had to be made with a special steel. When the supplier quoted, I said: 'That's reasonable for a foot.' 'The price I've given you is for one inch,' he said.

 

Obviously, it was a part-time, general-interest project and it was overtaken by other events. I don't suppose any of us expected it to be finally finished, but as an exercise in original thought and the sheer gutsiness to have a go in-house, it reflected perhaps what Ginetta was about: we were always prepared to go as far as we could - and then perhaps even a little further.



#32 jcbc3

jcbc3
  • Member

  • 5,120 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 08 December 2013 - 14:23

Er, no the BRM was a double flat-8, not V-8....

 

Really 'flat' or just a 180 degree V8?



#33 Allan Lupton

Allan Lupton
  • Member

  • 3,064 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 08 December 2013 - 18:58

Really 'flat' or just a 180 degree V8?

you've lost me here.



#34 jcbc3

jcbc3
  • Member

  • 5,120 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 08 December 2013 - 19:29

To me a flat engine = boxer

a 180 degree v engine = not boxer.

 

I may though be highly mistaken.



#35 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 7,241 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 08 December 2013 - 19:55

Really 'flat' or just a 180 degree V8?

 

Planet Earth must be a 180 degree vee then, I think that ties in with the rest of your thinking...



#36 wolseley680

wolseley680
  • Member

  • 80 posts
  • Joined: August 12

Posted 08 December 2013 - 23:40

What about the Rotorvic V12 - one and a half litres of motorbike engines? Air cooled and two stroke.

Edited by wolseley680, 08 December 2013 - 23:44.


#37 P.Dron

P.Dron
  • Member

  • 191 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 09 December 2013 - 09:45

Another W12 Formula 1 engine was made in about 1990 by Guy Negre. It was fitted into an AGS and I believe was all ready to go testing when AGS went bust. I saw the engine on a display stand in Monsieur Negre's premises near Nice, where he and his son Cyril were working on a car powered by compressed air, which was going to be next year's big thing. They still are and it still is, I expect.



#38 Glengavel

Glengavel
  • Member

  • 534 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 09 December 2013 - 09:59

To me a flat engine = boxer

a 180 degree v engine = not boxer.

 

I may though be highly mistaken.

 

Unhelpfully, Ferrari's 'boxer' engine (as used e.g in the 512BB) is apparently a flat-12 (or 180-degree V12) and not a boxer at all.



#39 Peter Morley

Peter Morley
  • Member

  • 1,910 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 09 December 2013 - 10:08

BRM H-16 used cylinder heads and cam gear trains from the V8...



Advertisement

#40 jcbc3

jcbc3
  • Member

  • 5,120 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 09 December 2013 - 10:24

Unhelpfully, Ferrari's 'boxer' engine (as used e.g in the 512BB) is apparently a flat-12 (or 180-degree V12) and not a boxer at all.

 

Which is exactly the thing that was rummaging around in my brain, hence the question. Which I guess has been answered by now.



#41 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 4,840 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 09 December 2013 - 12:04

 

Unhelpfully, Ferrari's 'boxer' engine (as used e.g in the 512BB) is apparently a flat-12 (or 180-degree V12) and not a boxer at all.



Curiously enough: Though the name of Porsche often brings back memories to boxers, the Flat 12 they used in the fearsome 917, despite being flat and a Porsche, that was no boxer engine either but a flat-12.


Henri

#42 Duc-Man

Duc-Man
  • Member

  • 1,082 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 09 December 2013 - 16:20

Flat or 180° V engine? In the german article about the boxer on wikipedia is this picture: http://upload.wikime...-Boxermotor.png

The boxer is on the right, the 180° V on the left. Hope that helps to clear things up.

 

I remember reading something about Guy Negre's W12. Didn't that thing have some kind of rollers instead of normal valves? Something like this motorcycle single on page 259 of the cutaway tread.

 

Turbine cars...on any kind of superspeedway no problem. On a normal road course it could work if you run the turbine on constant rpm in combination with a CVT to accelerate/slow down...


Edited by Duc-Man, 09 December 2013 - 16:22.


#43 Sisyphus

Sisyphus
  • Member

  • 132 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 09 December 2013 - 20:06

Planet Earth must be a 180 degree vee then, I think that ties in with the rest of your thinking...

...Planet Earth would be a 360 degree vee since Columbus!



#44 Rudernst

Rudernst
  • Member

  • 90 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 09 December 2013 - 20:13

 


Curiously enough: Though the name of Porsche often brings back memories to boxers, the Flat 12 they used in the fearsome 917, despite being flat and a Porsche, that was no boxer engine either but a flat-12.


Henri

 

quite simple

flat V 12...

In a 180 degree V-engine You can think of each bank as one inline 6,

 - these are inherently fully balanced, no vibrations, even firing order

 - and You can make a simple but effective extractor exhaust system separate for each bank,

 - and You have little pumping losses in the crankcase as the air is not compressed, just pushed from side to side,

 - and You get a relatively short and stiff crank because You get away with fewer bearings

 - and you get less power losses in the bearings. 

 

the boxer layout FOR A 12 CYLINDER

offers NO advantage but plenty of drawbacks compared to the above list.

 

a no brainer for every qualified engineer

to go for a true boxer in a flat 12 cyl engine can only be a marketing driven decision

 

In 4 and 6 cyl engines this is not quite as clear cut

 

The flat 8 cyl Porsche engines worked, but did have issues and to my knowledge different firing orders and crankshaft layouts were tried as discussed elsewhere here in the technical Forum in a very good thread. 

aircooling made things worse as cylinder spacing was larger compared to water jackets due to the width of the cooling fins, giving a longish crank

 

Rudolf


Edited by Rudernst, 09 December 2013 - 20:48.


#45 Rudernst

Rudernst
  • Member

  • 90 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 09 December 2013 - 20:15

...Planet Earth would be a 360 degree vee since Columbus!

 

Planet Earth is a flat disc and You can sail off the edge if You are a careless navigator, this well known fact since the days the Vikings roamed the seas...


Edited by Rudernst, 09 December 2013 - 21:41.


#46 GMACKIE

GMACKIE
  • Member

  • 1,782 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 09 December 2013 - 20:32

Thank you, Rudolf, for those explanations.....very helpful. :up:

 

And thanks, also,  for the warning about sailing off the edge of the Earth.  I shall be careful.



#47 Rudernst

Rudernst
  • Member

  • 90 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 09 December 2013 - 21:11

How about the Lotus 56 turbine car?

 

I can understand how the concept was great for Indy, but for F1?? I know hindsight is 20:20, but even so.....

 

 

Turbines...

now thats a subject

key to their sucess or lack of it in the end is the equivalent formula

I mean the size restriction regulation in comparison to displacement in piston engines. 

 

Indy came up with the idea to restrict the flow areas to a given number if square inches

that in a nutshell is it

If You want to give turbines a leg up, then allow them large diameters and as a consequence a power advantage 

in this case only available fuel and thermal efficency limits the power.

 

Racing in general chose to do precisely the opposite

intake area of turbines was quickly, arbitrarily  and severely limited to make sure that the revolution did not happen 

turbines never got a fair chance

technical issues notwithstanding

 

same thing in a way happend to Wankel engines

as the rotors a 3 sided they, do 3 power strokes per revolution of the rotor

for a given displacement they will allways make more power than a 4 stroke reciprocal piston engine

for instance the NSU Ro 80 had about a litre of displacement but gave as much power as 2 litre conventional engine

 

note: efficiency per swept volume is about twice but not thrice as much as conventional engines. 

reason for that are scavenging and filling issues

 

Wankel engines were - more or less deliberately - hobbled by applying a factor of 3 to the swept volume which was unfair 

pls note that a Wankels greated win was Mazda at Le Mans under fuel efficiency regulations with swept engine volume unlimited

irony in that of course is, that Wankel engines are not very fuel efficient

 

Rudolf



#48 Rudernst

Rudernst
  • Member

  • 90 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 09 December 2013 - 21:58

Another W12 Formula 1 engine was made in about 1990 by Guy Negre. It was fitted into an AGS and I believe was all ready to go testing when AGS went bust. I saw the engine on a display stand in Monsieur Negre's premises near Nice, where he and his son Cyril were working on a car powered by compressed air, which was going to be next year's big thing. They still are and it still is, I expect.

 

Ahhh, yes the MGN

I think Brabham also looked at it for a very short while (I seem to remember reading something in German Motorsport aktuell at the time)

but then turned it down

yes, it had rotary valves instead of conventional poppet valves

These are great in theory as they offer unrestricted flow area through the opening compared to the much smaller ring that a conventional valve opens

in practice, however, it is very very very difficult to seal a rotating valve against a stationary counterpart bearing in mind that combustion pressure, tops out at 15000 psi or more

 

Negre claimed to have solved this

Generations of engineers had failed at this and a lot of money has been burned chasing this dream 

 

personally I am convinced that the MGN engine never was a proper runner that could have finshed a Grand Prix

 

he ran his own tests with a used AGS chassis that he had bought

later he fitted that engine into a Le Mans that failed to qualify due to - you guessed it - engine issues 

 

Rudolf


Edited by Rudernst, 09 December 2013 - 21:58.


#49 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 6,062 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 09 December 2013 - 22:27

Has F1 ever used a rotary engine?


noooooooh

#50 elansprint72

elansprint72
  • Member

  • 3,387 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 09 December 2013 - 22:28

Planet Earth must be a 180 degree vee then, I think that ties in with the rest of your thinking...

Michael Bentine had it right: it's a square world.  :stoned:

 

Slightly off the F1 topic but... until a matter of weeks ago our friends at Bentley were considering using a W12 in GT3; it really was that close. Their V8 debuts next week-end.