Like this Mustang with 8.5 l v8. Isn't such engine lighter at simplier while having comparable power to a 5.7 v12?
>>27986176Why can't mutts into basic physics?
>>27986176Now post the widths and height of the Boss 429 vs the V12 you are talking about.
>>27986176big small cylinders have more nvh small and many distributes the load more effectively
>>27986176Many pre war cars had even bigger inline 4 engines.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As_63QMoCigThe problem is the square/cube law. As an example, if you doubled the size of a piston then it's weight, displacement and torque is multiplied by 8, but the power it's able to produce is only multiplied by 4 as it's limited by the valve area. This means that the engine with these supersized pistons will only be able to achieve half the rpm, and will have half the power to weight ratio of the engine with the small pistons.
>>27987743>big small cylinderswat
>>27986176because of> muh rpm, I need 10000000rpmin reality, 6+ litter V8s are based
>>27986176efficiency. 500cc per cylinder is the sweet spot for efficiency, which is why you see lots of 1.5L l3s, 2.0L l4s, 3.0L l6s/v6s etc.iirc there's also the issue of engine balancing. going too large in displacement will result in imbalances that become very very difficult or outright unfeasible to correct.
>>27986176because ~500cc/cyl is around about optimum for efficiency, burn rate, power etc etc. Big cylinders mean the flame front has a further distance to travel to use up all the fuel in the cyl. Bigger diameter ring packs have higher friction.This is basic shit /o/, maybe it's time to go back to /n/
>>27986176>Why aren't there more cars with relatively small amount of large cylinders?There is a lot of engines designed like this....But they look like this>15.2L i6>586 hp>1958 lb-ft
>>27986176>Isn't such engine lighter at simplier while having comparable power to a 5.7 v12?It's far less smooth
>>27987774That's not actually true btw
>>27988574Except it is but that anon is too stupid to explain it properly and I can't be arsed.
It turned out that the most efficient cylinder size is 500 cc. Some german engineering students demonstrated it in the year of our Lord 2005.https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a15358174/why-0-5-liter-cylinders-will-soon-dominate-automotive-engine-design/
>>27988574>>27988767which bit, the 500cc sweet spot, or going too large in displacement? OP asked why cars don't have low cylinder count, high displacement engines and i gave an answer, that's all he wanted.
>>27986176It is, but not because of the cylinder count or their size, but because the V8 uses pushrods and the V12 uses DOHC.
