Best motor ever produced?

[floody]

Id go the trusty ct110 postie yeeah

Actually the Honda laydown single is a pretty awesome thing, in terms of performance, cost, and resilience.
It now exists from 50-140+cc, and is manufactured by literally hundreds of companies; it would be easily the most prolific and indestructible motorcycle engine in the world.

 

[MasterOfReality]

True,

You can't deny that Italian cars are designed with a real passion for the things. Too bad they dont extend their enthusiasm into the reliability side hehehe.

German design is improving. People complain that German cars are too sterile, clinical and surgically precise. I think thats a reflection on the people that built them hehehe.

 

[Oddjob]

Emissions laws have also changed a fair bit in that 10 year period and hence the comparison isn't as easy as it first appears.

For the specific example of the BMW Turbo F1 engines, they were outclassed by the Ferrari and Honda equivalents.

While the Germans and the Italians both have a rich motorsports history and make superb engines I don't think they quite match the Italians except when it comes to reliability

German engines and their cars in general also lack a certain soul which also has me leaning towards the Italian alternatives.

The BMW was euro II compliant and the Ferrari Euro III. There's not much in it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_emission_standards#Emission_standards_for_passenger_cars

The Honda equivalent creamed everyone, Ferrari included. In fact the Scuderia got creamed by English teams using a combination of Japanese, French and German engines for over 15 years from 1983 onwards.

You're joking right? The 911 is the most successful race car ever, game over, nothing to see here, go home.

Is soul some kind of euphemism for unreliable?

 

[brisneyland]

BMW M12/13/1

http://www.gurneyflap.com/bmwturbof1engine.html

This 1.5l turbo bad boy made 1300hp in qualification. And they would apparently go for a whole season as long as you replaced the valve springs etc after each race.

Comparing cc to cc with a rotary is totally misleading. A wankel engine has 3 combustion chambers per rotor so a 1.3 2 rotor such as the 13B series is equivalent, at least in thermodynamic terms, to a 3.9 litre 6, although in auto racing purposes they count for double the capacity. This of course highlights the great advantage of wankel motors, their small size and very light weight. The disadvantage of course is the infamous high oil and fuel consumption. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wankel_engine

Aha, that's what I meant in my earlier post about comparisons of swept capacity between rotaries and piston engines. Glad someone knows and can articulate it better than I

Edit:
My favourite (not really technically the best or anything) is the Lotus Twin Cam. They've got a very strong competition record and were, to some degree at least, responsible for inspiring the modern four cylinder, high performance twin cam engine.

And they sound fucking gorgeous.

 

[moorey]

I love the simplicity of the suggestions......just what I was hoping for when I posted it

 

[S.]

270+ks on it WITHOUT a rebuild.. ie. WITHOUT replacing the seals (or "caps").

EDIT: i have also seen piston engines with more that 500k on them.. i have also seen engines with less than 100k pop. it depends on construction, how strong the block/head is, how it's driven etc etc etc. in the scheme of things 500k is fairly remarkable

yes i know people have crapped on 200kw, but how many 1.3l piston engines are there with 700+kw? my 200kw example is only my own car, and it's pretty much standard.

as with any motor the equation is more power & more mods = less reliability and worse fuel consumption.

i'll say it again, cc for cc, NOTHING.. NO motor will match the rotary.

EDIT: read up, stupid on the fuel efficiency thing. 400kays from a tank is no bad thing

400/55 = 7.27km/L. That's not impressive at all, Landcruisers will get nearly that if they're not thrashed or sat in traffic all day, and virtually every modern 3-4L v6 will do as well or better. If you're really impressed by a "mere 1.3L" engine drinking more fuel than a 4L v6 then your idea of fuel efficiency is not the same as mine. And as Oddjob says, 3 combustion chambers per revolution = effectively a 3.9L engine. Even if it's only counted as double for competition purposes, that's still a 2.6L engine and I don't mean to bag your car, but 200kw out of a 2.6L turbo just isn't that impressive. Especially not when it's been exceeded by 50% by GENUINE 1.3L turbo'd engines. How many do it? Not many, because most 1.3L engines are in motorbikes and thus not turbocharged. And even then, they're edging 150kW (ZX-14 is about 147 or 148) with no forced induction, right off the showroom floor.

And like you say, going by single examples is pretty useless - 270k on ONE car without a rebuild means nothing unless you count the ones that need it every 50k as well. Sure some piston engines blow up under 100k, but realistically a pretty large percentage of them crack 300 without too many serious dramas. Very rare with rotaries.

So, in conclusion:
- cc for cc, yes, piston engines can match The Rotor.
- counting cc for cc is misleading by a factor of at least two and realistically 3
- rotaries are quite heavy on fuel due to their apparent thermodynamic inefficiency (obviously if they have 3x the swept volume per revolution but are only counted as twice the capacity for race purposes, then they're not doing a good job of converting the extra fuel consumption into power at the wheels)

Thus I agree: rotaries are clearly better than piston engines. You could have at least tried to argue power to weight or something...

 

[lebronmtb]

apart from maintinence and economy issues the mazda 20b rotary

 

[FR Drew]

I love the simplicity of the suggestions......just what I was hoping for when I posted it

Well, without requesting a desired end use and with no criteria stated such as:

• Max size allowable
• Power
• Power to weight
• Non forced or forced induction
• Regular fuel
• Economy
• Looks
• Sound
• Cult of ricer fans
• Must be a car engine

you were kind of bound to get a pretty wide spectrum of responses.

If nothing else it's given you a look at some pretty cool motors.

 

[Oddjob]

There have been a few diesels mentioned but I thought I would have a stab at a few pretty interesting ones.

The VW Touareg V10 TDI motor is so crazy its freaking brilliant. http://autospeed.drive.com.au/cms/A_2100/article.html I hope and pray they put that motor in a diesel Audi S6 or S8.

Still in the VW/Audi group we have the Audi R10 motor. This is a truly stunning motor. 5.5L alloy (which is unusual for a diesel) V12 pumping out 485 KW and 1100 NM (!!!!!). The Puegeot 908 was the other diesel racing at Le Mans and came second to the Audi.

The other interesting motors are diesel hybrids, these have the incredible potential but are simply too expensive for mainstream production at the moment. http://www.hybridcars.com/related-technologies/diesel-hybrid-dreams.html

 

[Xmetal]

People complain that German cars are too sterile, clinical and surgically precise. I think thats a reflection on the people that built them hehehe.

I agree, The M5's and M6's are an example where the magic 'M' button unleashes hell on a stick - any other car would just be a matter of putting your foot down and going but with the M cars it's program the iDrive computer, set the transmission up, press the M button and your opponent is already racing off into the Sunset.

Top Gear said the M6 was 'positively nerdy'.

 

[wombat]

I agree, The M5's and M6's are an example where the magic 'M' button unleashes hell on a stick - any other car would just be a matter of putting your foot down and going but with the M cars it's program the iDrive computer, set the transmission up, press the M button and your opponent is already racing off into the Sunset.

Top Gear said the M6 was 'positively nerdy'.

I thought the point of the M button was that it meant you didn't have to fiddle around with all the other junk; just press the M button for all the preset "fun" settings and hold on?

 

[tld_06]

Actually the Honda laydown single is a pretty awesome thing, in terms of performance, cost, and resilience.
It now exists from 50-140+cc, and is manufactured by literally hundreds of companies; it would be easily the most prolific and indestructible motorcycle engine in the world.

Yeah true, this is a version of Honda's SOHC 125cc Fourstroke single that I race with:

can't decide which one gets a better view of the engine

 

[Oddjob]

Always good to see a Farkiner in the lead ^^^^^^^

 

[scblack]

I thought the point of the M button was that it meant you didn't have to fiddle around with all the other junk; just press the M button for all the preset "fun" settings and hold on?

Not that simple at all. Top Gear gave the M6 a go and it took them five minutes to get going.

 

[Xmetal]

I thought the point of the M button was that it meant you didn't have to fiddle around with all the other junk; just press the M button for all the preset "fun" settings and hold on?

Yes and no

The M button unleashes the 'other' 200hp but from what I can gather you have to set the 'hardness' of the gear shift on a scale of 1 to 7, plus there's all these other little settings that make it rather complex.

I'll go back and watch the Epp of Top Gear where they pointed all this out.

 

[floody]

Cool, go the junior sliders! I used to have a really old one of those, XL125 motor on methanol, was Danny Kennedy's once.

Sorry for the OT

 

[Jack_STP1]

Yeh, RB30, RB26DETT, most skyline motors are nice.

 

[tld_06]

Juniors are awesome! We're not allowed to run methanol anymore

Oh well, it revvs up to 10,000RPM so it's definately good enough!

 

[arpit]

Ok, a bit too much top gear here. Who here has driven an M6? Is it excessively complex?

 

[Stereochild]

This beast of mine.
J15 '78 Datsun 1500.

weirdest pita to work on, but sounds right now.