[SEL] two questions about hit n miss engines

[Chuck Balyeat]

> Someone's idea of the best way to go.  If you did not require a constant
> speed or have a constant load, it was much more fuel efficient.
> >>>>>>>
Cadillac won some awards for that idea huh ?



>> Why  do these same early engines have such a poor power to weight
>> ratio?
>>     Jim kangas
> They were made to last.  The thought of making it just barely strong
> enough to do the job for a year or two was not a goal.  Also metallurgy
> was not high tech.
  Those are the short answers.

If you want to improve the ratio  , you have to spin it a lot faster , and 
it is much cheaper
tolerance and materials wise to build a slow speed engine .  A good smith 
could cast the
 iron , do  his own machining ,  build a reliable product and  turn a profit 
.  A bunch
of them did , everybody wanted a piece  . As power to weight increases so 
does the level of complication  .
And there were people who did it a long time ago .This one went into 
production in 1917
and made 450hp @ 2000 rpm @ 800lbs wt 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dU0X461IPCw&feature=related
Certainly there is an older and  faster one  . Ferro had a V8 a year before 
that ,  and producing it put
Scripps Booth into recievership .

And that is STILL the short answer .


Chuck Balyeat
http://royalcrossfarm.com/essentials.htm