Lyndon Tiu wrote: > On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 09:05:10 -0700 mike@garfias.org wrote: > >> Hmm. >> >> Did you know that overhead cams are an OLDER technology than pushrods? >> >> > > Really? > > I wonder why most cars today use overhead cams? > > -- > Lyndon Tiu > --------------------------------------------------- > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings: > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > > Reciprocating weight. Push-rods and rocker arms weigh more than the thimble + shims that most ohc engines use. The heavier the reciprocating weight, the heavier the valve springs have to be to prevent valve float (which can lead to interference with the pistons, making very expensive noises.) Many modern engines use twin cam, four valve per cylinder, design (pioneered by Isotta-Fraschini in 1911, I believe. I used to have some pictures of a marvelous old chain drive IF with a gigantic four cylinder engine with just such a layout.) At any rate, two valves of half the valve surface area weigh about half of what one valve would weigh and would need lighter valve springs. Less reciprocating weight equals higher rpm without valve float, and that equals more power from a given displacement engine. The upper end of the rpm scale is usually governed by a phenomenon called valve spring surge. This occurs when the valve reciprocation equals the natural vibration frequency of the spring, causing catastrophic failure of the spring, resulting sometimes in an engine devouring itself. Various schemes were tried to get around this limitation: hairpin valve springs, torsion bar valve springs (both difficult to contain, requiring huge valve covers.) Mercedes-Benz in the fifties 300SLRs used desmodromic valve actuation, in which the valve is forced open by a cam and forced closed by an "anti-cam." This won some races for them, but was extremely expensive to manufacture and maintain. Probably the most elegant answer to this problem was the one devised by Ferrari a couple of years ago, when they set for themselves the task of wringing 900 horsepower from a V-10 twin cam multi-valved unblown three liter engine. They figured that if they could get 300 hp out of a three liter engine at 6000 rpm then they would have to spool up the engine to 18 grand to get 900 hp. No known valve spring would survive that, so they used 150 lbs of air pressure to close the valves. Air has no natural frequency, so the valves could operate at this rate. The only thing limiting the rpm was the reciprocating weight of the pistons and connecting rods. These they had to fabricate from titanium, at a cost that probably made even Ferrari blink. I never found out whether they ever raced that engine, but what a marvelous tour de force! Bob Eaton --------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss