http://www.bath.ac.uk/~ccsshb/12cyl/ (http://www.bath.ac.uk/~ccsshb/12cyl/) massive !!!!!! :crazy: :crazy:
Heh.. something to be said for inline engines. :p
wow all at 102 rpm...lol maybe they are going to move the plant to usa and want to do it under there own power?
I bet that header is a PITA to replace.
You think that's bad, imagine doing a head gasket. :yuck:
Or changing the glow plugs!
it's ok, i'm waiting for the stroker version. :hick:
man too bad it looks like you just barely cant fit it under a stock fox hood without special motor mouts. those bastages!
I wonder if they can still get the $19.95 oil change. xD
:rollin:
I think the decimel is in the wrong place $199.50
And uh whats the city/highway rating on that thing?
prolly about .00025/.00027. About the same as a 5.0.
and the rebuild kit is how much?
I wonder if Auto Zone has it in stock.......
mmm, doing a burnout with that motor going east will slow down the rotation of the earth.....
(http://teaca.iespana.es/almacen/Cougar.jpg)
I've read about this engine before - that 102 RPM is actually 2 RPM over redline.
Just imagine - over 1500 gallons per hour fuel consumption, at it's most efficient setting!
So let's say you're cruising at 60 MPH. You'd burn 1500 gallons to go those 60 miles in one hour. That's a whopping 25 gallons of fuel to travel one mile. That's 0.04 miles per gallon. Sounds like about what my snowmobile gets (actually, the snowmobile is a relative fuel miser at 3 MPG).
I've actually been around some very large engines - not so big as that one, but some biggun's nonetheless. The biggest was a V-18 Caterpillar that had 13" bores and a 28" stroke. It was a stationary engine powering a generator (the engine itself would fill a semi trailer) and it was designed that it would run on anything that was wet and flammable, including powdered coal mixed with water, bunker C, veggie oil, and even straight crude oil. The one I looked at (it was on a class trip in trade school) was headed to some African village to be a power plant.
It was pretty cool - the rocker arms were exposed and were larger than my arms. The valve springs looked like the springs in our suspensions (actually even larger), and the fuel lines were about 6" in diameter. It had roller lifters, but they looked more like connecting rods - the cam ran INSIDE them, almost like a crankshaft, instead of having a lifter roll on the cam as in our engines (and the pushrods were part of them - a one-piece lifter/pushrod). The cam actually pulled the lifters down in addition to pushing them up. The injectors were driven off the cam - each cylinder had three rocker arms: Exhaust, intake and injector. Each cylinder was designed so that it could be disconnected from the engine and then serviced while the engine was running. Imagine changing a piston or head gasket in a running engine! It produced somewhere around 100,000 horsepower and way more torque at its 360 RPM redline. We never got to see it run, though...
I like the way you think. :hick: Let's get an International Joint Government Grant and prove it.
Well, we can give a try, even if The Inquisition will charge me Heresy...."And yet it does slow down"....
(http://teaca.iespana.es/almacen/Cougar.jpg)