Deskjetser wrote:XYReis wrote:I know the engines are fairly weak for their displacement, but a long stroke is required for high efficiency;
Why do people keep saying this? All my eco engines have smaller stroke than bore...
Take a look at this engine, its efficient, decently powerful for its displacement, runs on 91 fuel and it's a short stroke with a long lifespan without having a low redline.
Even though it's a good idea -- Sorry to tell you this, but your engine wouldn't be good for mass production as it requires over 240 man hours (mine probably wouldn't be too good as well with its 80+ MH) - VVL on engines with more than 6 cylinders is generally not a good idea.
I've got some constructive criticism for you:
- Seriously, reduce the bore and increase the stroke - your engine is just too large for a 5-liter. The alternative isn't always better. (low-friction pistons+low stroke instead of forged pistons+high stroke)
- Expensive conrods are useless when limited by pistons.
- Nobody uses 91 RON any more, especially in such powerful engines - you may have gotten this confused with the American 91 AKI fuel.
- Your MTBF is fairly low in contrast to your quality settings, probably because of the low-friction pistons.
- I don't recommend using high quality settings in the exhaust section unless you're making 1500+HP, it takes a lot of man hours which you could spend elsewhere.
- It's too loud.
I edit your engine a bit, now it's smaller, a bit more powerful, has a higher MTBF, lower man hours and just slightly lower efficiency (266 vs 270g/kWh), however, it runs on 95 RON which is standard in Europe. (I think it's equal to 89 AKI)