OT why ar hemis powerful?

Page 1 of 2  
OT An interest in hemi engines stirred me, and I found this site
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/hemi1.htm
which gave as the advantage of the hemi that 2 valves could be placed opposite each other, instead of next to each other, and thus could be made bigger, for more power.
I had assumed that the advantage was with fewer corners, etc. in the combustion chamber, there was less chance of power-losing knocking.
OTOH, now it occurs to me that if the combustion chamber is domed, it might be bigger than one with a flat top, leading to a lower compression ratio and less power.
So why are hemi engines powerful?
BTW The last time I posted off-topic, a couple nervous Nellys thought it was spam. It's not.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The hemi design was great in it's time pre-OHC. Other designs are as good or even better. What makes them so popular to day is their reputation and advertising hype. The pentroof allows four valves per cylinder. That have been many other types of head designs that just never had the advertising catch that the hemi achieved.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
mm wrote:

The pistons are domed to match the head
see http://www.streetrodderweb.com/tech/0811sr_chrysler_hemi_crate_engine/photo_09.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I should have thought of that. I guess I'll never make it as an engine designer. That's a shame too, because I'm 62 now and looking for a new career.
Thanks. And to you too Nate.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
mm wrote:

You're assuming that a typical hemi uses a flat top piston - they don't. Most have a domed shape piston and you are correct, the chamber shape allows a higher compression ratio on the same gas.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
todays hemi gets the air in and out of the engine more efficiently. todays gasoline hemi engines in production vehicles dont get horsepower by high compression ratios like in the 1960's , we just dont have the pump gas for it. todays engines get more power thru volumetric efficiency .getting the air in and out in a better way,many with hemi combustion chamber, and of course computer controlls on the engine. most of todays engines use exhuast manifolds that are made like the headers racers use, to increase volumetric efficiency.
---------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.minibite.com/america/malone.htm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 10:32:15 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@webtv.net wrote:

I guess this couldn't be true, becaus high mpg cars don't have especially high compression ratios, but I've always thought:::
Related to your last quoted line above: Unless this means a leaner mixture, and I don't think it does, doesn't this lower mileage, to burn more air and the accompanying gas?
Besides power, I've always thought that a high compression ratio means getting the most out of the gas. That every portion of its expansion applies power to the wheels of the car.
Doesn't that seem reasonable, and how come it must not be true?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
mm wrote: ...

Efficiency and power are competing design features -- the hemi initially was designed for a higher power output per unit volume (remember when NASCAR really was "stock" car and the 60s muscle cars?). The higher efficiencies to produce better mileage are optimizing other parameters.
Not that all was totally bad w/ some consideration -- my '69 Charger w/ the 383 (not hemi) and the 4-bbl split-bowl Holley would average 18+ mpg at interstate+ speed. Around town where it was start 'n stop it only might do 10-12, though, but it surely got off the entrance ramp into traffic in a heartbeat! :) Dang, wish I had kept that puppy. :( Saw an auction on eBay the other day for about 20X what I paid new off the showroom floor...
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not true. Any time you raise the horsepower generated per cubic inch, you increase fuel efficiency. You get more power from a given volume of fuel. Take a 2 lire engine, and add a turbocharger to it. Both available power AND fuel efficiency benefit. You are getting more power out of the same size engine from a given amount of fuel.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote in wrote:

not necessarily.

no,because you have to increase the fuel delivered when using a turbo or supercharger. They effectively increase -displacement-,meaning they compresss a larger charge of fuel/air mixture.(equalling a larger motor) The more air you cram in,the more fuel you have to add to keep the proper combustion ratio.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Really? So the engine will only run at full throttle?
A turbo will ALLOW you to cram more fuel in, but that is not a requirement. At less than full throttle, you will be getting more power per volume of fuel used. A lower throttle setting will get you as much power as a higher throttle setting on a normally aspirated version of the same engine.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote in

and that's when you burn pistons. Too lean,and it wil not ignite at all.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbocharging;
The objective of a turbocharger is the same as a supercharger; to improve upon the size-to-output efficiency of an engine by solving one of its cardinal limitations. A naturally aspirated automobile engine uses only the downward stroke of a piston to create an area of low pressure in order to draw air into the cylinder through the intake valves. Because the pressure in the atmosphere is no more than 1 bar (approximately 14.7 psi), there ultimately will be a limit to the pressure difference across the intake valves and thus the amount of airflow entering the combustion chamber. This ability to fill the cylinder with air is its volumetric efficiency. Because the turbocharger increases the pressure at the point where air is entering the cylinder, a greater mass of air (oxygen) will be forced in as the inlet manifold pressure increases. The additional oxygen makes it possible to add more fuel, increasing the power and torque output of the engine.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote in wrote:

Yes,it is. ever hear of stoichiometric ratio? that's the proper mixture of air and fuel,for best combustion. you must maintain the proper air:fuel ratio. If you cram in more air,you have to inject more fuel,or go lean and burn pistons.

sorry,it doesn't work that way.

Still by using MORE fuel.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jim Yanik wrote:

Not necessarily; the expansion ratio is better on a supercharged engine. It might actually get better economy than the NA engine, even after the losses from driving the supercharger.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A turbocharger achieves more power per unit engine volume by cramming more air (to be used with more fuel) in the same volume.
Superchargers do the same thing but are powered in a different manner.
Both achieve an increase in power and decrease fuel economy slightly.
However, if 2 cars have equal power and one has a turbocharger and the other has a bigger engine, then the car with the turbo could possibly get better city fuel economy by weighing less.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On the contrary, Turbocharging increases fuel efficiency, whereas supercharging always decreases it.
EJ in NJ
Don Klipstein wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Turbocharging is simply a special subset of supercharging.
Supercharging: using a mechanical device to pressurize the air intake of an engine to the end of achieving more than 100% volumetric efficiency.
Turbosupercharging, often shortened to turbocharging: using an exhaust driven turbine to drive a supercharger.
nate
Ernie Willson wrote:

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It is true that turbocharging will increase efficiency and power output. It is absolutely not true that anything that increases output per cubic inch will increase efficiency. Supercharging is an example. It always increases output and decreases efficiency. There are many other things that can cause the same effect. It depends on where the engine is operating on it's "performance map".
EJ in NJ
snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.