Quote:
Originally Posted by robertwb70
I remember reading somewhere that smaller bore longer stroke engines are inherently more efficient. It was somehow related to vintage race car motors (old Ferrari and Jag engines were WAY oversqaure). Smaller engines are also generally more efficient so I'm not sure a 300 is a good starting point for any vehicle smaller than a dump truck. I used to drive a Ford dump truck that had a small (for the job) car-type (didn't have replaceable bore sleeves) engine in it and IIRC it was around 300 CID and while it wasn't ideal it did move the 70,000 lb truck down the road at 70 mph everyday.
Best parts source would probably be dodge/ cummins stuff since it's also inline 6 cylinder configuration and there is a pretty good after market developed around them. Might could even use internal parts, I'm not sure but it's definetly worth a look.
On gas engines static CRs range from around 6 to 1 up to around 15 to 1 but if you look at dynamic CRs there is a MUCH smaller range, ie it's the dynamic CR that sets the limit and this is largely dependent on the cam timing I would assume diesel is the same way but to what extent I'm not sure.
I think it would be more fun to find a way to bolt 2 of them together and make a flat 12 boxster out of it  |
Normally, I'd agree with the size thing... problem is, I don't have anything else readily available (read: free) with an Iron block, heavy duty crank, and decent specs... not to mention multiple copies of something fitting that description.
I guess the 300, for me, is just kind of a "proof of concept" tinker-build.
Also, the 240 is the same engine with a shorter stroke and longer rod combination, IIRC. That would put the next size down to being the 170 and 140 L6, also from Ford.
Remember - Cheaper is part of efficiency. If I have to pay a bunch of money over the course of a tinker build, I'd have to recoup that in the final product. If I spend less money, I can have lower (read: realistic) expectations without being disappointed in the end.