Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-02-2012, 10:23 AM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 28

Escort LX - '95 Ford Escort LX
90 day: 25.37 mpg (US)

Camry - '03 Toyota Camry
90 day: 26.18 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Another way to reduce pumping losses

Thought I would share this here since this could benefit this forum as well.

Found this while browsing the internet one day. Its a superbike engine, but I have no idea what kind anymore. Those notches between the companion cylinders are designed to reduce pumping losses by allowing the air to move back and forth between cylinders as they move up and down. There was a Porsche engine that also had this but I cant remember where I found it anymore.


  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 03-02-2012, 10:31 AM   #2 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: london, on
Posts: 355

Buggie - '01 Vw Beetle TDI Gls
Thanks: 4
Thanked 37 Times in 27 Posts
By increasing the vacuum in the crank case you can do the same. I would no want full vacuum but a 5psi difference to atmospheric pressure would do the same. A lot of single cylinder engines have reed valves that allow air from the crank case to escape and when the piston comes down but not return when the piston goes up. The cummins onan 140h has one, unfortunately it is a wear item like most feed valves. But a manifold ported vacuum would do the same

I was sure pumping losses were meant sucking the air through an intake and pushing through an exhaust. If you are concerned with the inside of an engine you should also knife edge the crank and smooth out anything else like the rods that move a lot
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 11:53 AM   #3 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Boise Idaho
Posts: 842
Thanks: 39
Thanked 89 Times in 69 Posts
just to be clear, this is showing the bottom of the pistons from the crankshaft side.

and with an inline 4 cylinder, typically 1/2 and 3/4 pistons are exactly opposite each other, so as 1 goes up, 2 is going down.

kind of makes sense.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 01:52 AM   #4 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mwebb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 513

no nickname , it's just a car - '04 volkswagen golf tdi
Thanks: 2
Thanked 101 Times in 74 Posts
you must be seeing a different photo than i see

just to be clear, this is showing the bottom of the pistons from the crankshaft side.

you must be seeing a different photo than i see
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 02:23 AM   #5 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 28

Escort LX - '95 Ford Escort LX
90 day: 25.37 mpg (US)

Camry - '03 Toyota Camry
90 day: 26.18 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Yes its cut into the bottom of the cylinder, if it was cut in the top the compression/ AF mixture would get pushed right into the other cylinder and then break the rings when they got caught in it.

Look at the shiny parts of the bores where the rings have been touching, and the dark spots on the bottom where the rings never go.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 01:14 PM   #6 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Boise Idaho
Posts: 842
Thanks: 39
Thanked 89 Times in 69 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwebb View Post
just to be clear, this is showing the bottom of the pistons from the crankshaft side.

you must be seeing a different photo than i see
Kind of why I posted the comment - the pic really is showing the BOTTOM of the cylinders.

On the motorcycles, it is pretty common the cylinders unbolt from the crankcase
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 02:57 PM   #7 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Ed-in-Maine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Maine
Posts: 69

Iceberg - '02 Ford F250 XLT
Pickups
90 day: 18.3 mpg (US)

Tool - '08 Toyota Matrix XR
Team Toyota
90 day: 43.15 mpg (US)
Thanks: 24
Thanked 18 Times in 7 Posts
I would have to see an ABA test to believe this design would have any benefit. There may be slightly less cylinder mass and slightly less pressure. But I doubt there would be a measurable difference in HP or MPG within the tolerance of identical motors. In fact if this is superbike stuff I suspect it's more about reducing mass where ever oz counts.
Ed
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 03:02 PM   #8 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,024 Times in 1,304 Posts
That's to reduce windage in the crankcase. Think that's the right term.

regards
Mech
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 03:47 PM   #9 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 75

Versa - '12 Nissan Versa Hatchback S
90 day: 39.65 mpg (US)
Thanks: 8
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
You are correct Mech, it is to help reduce windage. By lowering the pressure inside the crankcase below atmospheric you allow the pistons to travel down toward the crankshaft easier. It is a minimal gain on a street car, especially in an instance where you are running lower RPMs, such as driving conservatively. It is highly effective on high horsepower race engines though. Those engines spin at high rpm with tons of pressure inside the top end of the engine. Reducing pressure in the crankcases allows them to work more efficiently and use more of the power the engine is capable of making.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 04:00 PM   #10 (permalink)
Corporate imperialist
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 11,266

Sub - '84 Chevy Diesel Suburban C10
SUV
90 day: 19.5 mpg (US)

camaro - '85 Chevy Camaro Z28

Riot - '03 Kia Rio POS
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.21 mpg (US)

Bug - '01 VW Beetle GLSturbo
90 day: 26.43 mpg (US)

Sub2500 - '86 GMC Suburban C2500
90 day: 11.95 mpg (US)

Snow flake - '11 Nissan Leaf SL
SUV
90 day: 141.63 mpg (US)
Thanks: 273
Thanked 3,569 Times in 2,833 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bandit86 View Post
By increasing the vacuum in the crank case you can do the same. I would no want full vacuum but a 5psi difference to atmospheric pressure would do the same.
A high vacuum would be bad. Having about -5psi or 10''Hg is ideal.
Word on the street is a high vacuum pulls oil away from wrist pins. It would also cavitate the oil pump, before pressurized hydraulic oil tanks came along aircraft above 30,000ft could have their hydraulic pumps cavitate do to lack of absolute pressure on the return side.
You might be able to go as high as 15''Hg to 20''Hg on a non racing application. Monkeying with your oiling system is playing with fire, I took a risk by running low tention oil rings on my diesel and it seems my reasoning for needing standard or high tension oil rings was sound. (diesels dont need them because they don't draw much vacuum)

__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread






Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com