Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*225hp\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*225hp\s*$/: 41 ]

Total 41 documents matching your query.

21. Re: 225hp (score: 1): Author: "jrhill" <jrhill@chorus.net>; Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 12:49:28 -0500; You guys are making me dizzy . . . the only stroke I'm likely to have will require medical attention. Jim Hill; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00225.html (8,031 bytes)
22. RE: 225hp (score: 1): Author: Bill Babcock <BillB@bnj.com>; Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 10:10:46 -0700; Oh, and one more thing--I mis-spoke about a infinite length rod--the rod angle doesn't change quickly, in fact it never changes. If you're going to actually play with the math, start by looking at an; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00226.html (8,177 bytes)
23. RE: 225hp (score: 1): Author: "Randall Young" <ryoung@navcomtech.com>; Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 13:04:07 -0700; Absolute minimum rod length would be 1/2 the stroke, giving a rod angle of 90 degrees at a crank angle of 90 degrees. Somehow I don't think it would run very well, something about there being no for; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00229.html (8,421 bytes)
24. RE: 225hp (score: 1): Author: Bill Babcock <BillB@bnj.com>; Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 15:35:06 -0700; I was picturing a pin that slid inside the piston attached directly to the crank. I'm sure it would make no sense but I figured someone, somewhere would challenge the notion that there needs to be a; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00233.html (8,967 bytes)
25. RE: 225hp (score: 1): Author: "Richard Taylor" <tarch@bellsouth.net>; Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 06:34:52 -0400; Bill, I hate to say it (especially in a public forum) but for once your right! The connecting rod, long or short, is the hypotenuse and the vertical distance from the crank shaft centerline and the w; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00236.html (8,494 bytes)
26. RE: 225hp (score: 1): Author: "Randall Young" <ryoung@navcomtech.com>; Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 16:36:03 -0700; Problem is, then the piston would have to move sideways to follow the crank throw. Or were you thinking of a slot in the piston to accept the sideways component, like the mechanism on a jig saw ? Ra; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00238.html (8,167 bytes)
27. Re: 225hp (score: 1): Author: Larry Young <cartravel@pobox.com>; Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 19:45:57 -0500; I have a hard time believing these arguments about dwell time at TDC .... means better blah, blah..... The arguments are always stated like the effect is really dramatic. I've done a spreadsheet that; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00239.html (8,417 bytes)
28. Re: 225hp (score: 1): Author: "michael cook" <mlcooknj@msn.com>; Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 21:55:43 -0400; I have no idea what the heck you guys are talking about but I can show you a two-stroke model airplane engine with the cylinder parallel to the crank and it has a slot in the piston for the rod. The; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00242.html (9,529 bytes)
29. RE: 225hp (score: 1): Author: Bill Babcock <BillB@bnj.com>; Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:05:31 -0700; Hey, that's really cool. You're as nuts as I am. Of course right there is the problem I was talking about. For our engines it doesn't really matter--you can't get even close to the numbers you need f; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00246.html (9,224 bytes)
30. RE: 225hp (score: 1): Author: "barry rosenberg" <britcars@bellsouth.net>; Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:21:32 -0400; It seems that a lot of brain effort is being expended on this subject with all the math and such. I say we just take the reduced weight and friction and be happy with it. Or, to get the same benefit; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00248.html (8,258 bytes)
31. Re: 225hp (score: 1): Author: Larry Young <cartravel@pobox.com>; Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:07:58 -0500; I've played with the numbers in the spreadsheet, and I can't get much difference even when the stock length is less. For example, a stock SBC is 5.7, long rods are about 6.2. The arguments about weig; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00251.html (8,753 bytes)
32. RE: 225hp (score: 1): Author: Bill Babcock <BillB@bnj.com>; Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 10:08:22 -0700; You need the rod to stroke ration to be about 2:1 to start seeing big differences. If you hover around 1.8:1 you won't see much. Makes great sense for cams to be expressed that way except that the ca; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00252.html (9,211 bytes)
33. Re: 225hp (score: 1): Author: Henry Frye <henry@henryfrye.com>; Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 11:26:38 +0047; Interesting thread, albeit a bunch of the theory is WAY over my head. The 225 hp number applies to the 2.5 litre 6 cylinder engine. So what kind of horsepower number should us 2.2 litre 4 cylinder gu; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00254.html (7,878 bytes)
34. Re: 225hp (score: 1): Author: "Robert M. Lang" <lang@isis.mit.edu>; Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 12:53:32 -0400 (EDT); Ditto. Well, you have two fewer cylinders, so 225*.66=148.5. Seems like a good number to me. I can't use that excuse. My answers are just stupid. rml -- Bob Lang Room N42-140Q | This space for rent C; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00255.html (8,436 bytes)
35. Re: 225hp (score: 1): Author: N197TR4@cs.com; Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 14:45:51 EDT; After a couple of hours of calculations, I came up with 198.1 HP for the venerable Tractor Engine. :-); /html/fot/2005-06/msg00259.html (7,809 bytes)
36. Re: 225hp (score: 1): Author: <triumph_marx@freenet.de>; Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:53:13 +0200; Very close! The TR4 that is showing up at the track end of june will have about 195HP.; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00260.html (8,028 bytes)
37. RE: 225hp (score: 1): Author: Bill Babcock <BillB@bnj.com>; Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 12:20:42 -0700; Sounds good to me. Could I have one of those please? Last time I dynoed Peyote it was about .020" thicker on the head (my pushrod-side flange looks like a stocker), had a different cam (an Erson) and; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00261.html (8,488 bytes)
38. RE: 225hp (score: 1): Author: "Joe Boruch" <jaboruch@netzero.net>; Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:25:21 GMT; I have built and dynoed (engine) an 89mm engine for my TR3 with 189 HP at the fywheel. Pop-up pistons, profile 23 cam, big valves and Weber 45DCOE's. With more work we probably could have gotten more; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00262.html (9,051 bytes)
39. Re: 225hp (score: 1): Author: Henry Frye <henry@henryfrye.com>; Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 19:08:36 -0400; I guess I need to go back to the drawing board and find another couple of ponies to catch up... ;-); /html/fot/2005-06/msg00264.html (7,511 bytes)
40. Re: 225hp (score: 1): Author: JCJCarrera@aol.com; Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 13:37:16 EDT; I asked Kas the same ? last week on the four cylinder motor--not specifically the 2138cc. He indicated they were making 158 to 160 in the 60's!! JJ; /html/fot/2005-06/msg00291.html (7,185 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 40
Page: [1] [2] [3]