View Single Post
Old 08-30-2016, 12:21 PM   #15 (permalink)
NeilBlanchard
Master EcoModder
 
NeilBlanchard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Posts: 7,907

Mica Blue - '05 Scion xA RS 2.0
Team Toyota
90 day: 42.48 mpg (US)

Forest - '15 Nissan Leaf S
Team Nissan
90 day: 156.46 mpg (US)

Number 7 - '15 VW e-Golf SEL
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 155.81 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3,475
Thanked 2,950 Times in 1,844 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by niky View Post
Interesting thought. I see what you mean... this is basically the reverse of a stroker modification... instead, you're getting the engine to act like a short-stroke one with the same effective movement range. I don't know if it's noticeable, but the piston on the VC-T actually accelerates slower at the start of the downstroke than the standard piston, where all the power is supposed to be made... and contrawise, due to the eccentric movement of the upper link, if you reversed the motion, the VC-T piston would indeed move faster on the downstroke, which *should* give more torque. (...uhh... right?)

But I'm assuming Nissan makes it rotate that way due to side loading and efficiency. Plus, it will probably rev higher (if these other considerations outweigh the extra friction caused by the extra link assemblies) Besides... with a turbo, they can probably cover up any torque deficiency inherent in the design... they're claiming V6-like power... meaning 250-300+ hp... though that's not too terribly far out for a two-liter turbo nowadays.
I was thinking along the lines of what Honda (and I am sure others as well) did, which is to offset the centerline of the cylinder to the down (power) stroke side. This puts the connecting rod in a better position at TDC to push the crank more effectively at the beginning of the power stroke.
__________________
Sincerely, Neil

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote