OT: Driving electric cars in winter

[Vir Campestris]

My experience goes right back to ... oh... I think it was August?

Andy

[Vir Campestris]

They're quite common in marine applications.

Andy

[tony sayer]

As witness the magnificent Deltic engine that powered the Class 55 loco:)

[bert]

Performance in what sense?

[Davey]

That sounds like Stephen Potter's Gamesmanship: "But not in the South ...".

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Eh?

[Dave Plowman (News)]

If you'd be happy with a car engine which had its maximum BHP at 1500 rpm

- and weighed more than most cars - carry on.

Yes dear. But engines which produce their maximum power at low revs are large and heavy.

Then that wonderful engine would be powering every FI car with suitable gearing and be winning everything.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Do tell which make and models. Which make and spec autos they were fitted with.

[polygonum]

Some bad quoting there - I'm not seeing the post you are quoting.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Hah. Look at those really big 'diesels' that power supertankers. 100 RPM if that.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Any sense and every sense

[Tim+]

Nothing wrong with the quoting. Your reading skills though... ;-)

Tim

[NY]

I've always wondered what it is about huge marine diesel engines which allows them to run at speeds as low as 100 rpm (and that's delivering serious torque, not just idling) whereas smaller car and lorry diesels typically idle at around 800 rpm. Is it that they have so many cylinders at a variety of different phases around 360 degrees that there is still an explosion happening in one of the cylinders sufficiently often even at that low crankshaft speed that the engine doesn't stall?

[Davey]

Have a look on Youtube for some 'large diesel engine starts' or similar references. It might not answer your question, but shows some impressive action.

[bert]

That's non sense

[The Natural Philosopher]

It isn't. If you take a black box power unit that might be a slow revving torque monster or a geared high revver, and stuff it in a vehicle, you wont be able to tell from its output which is which. If they weigh the same.

In practice the geared high revver will probably weigh less and wear out faster though.

Guess why commercial trucks have big slow revving diesels. When you are hauling 30 tonnes, and extra half tonne is nothing if it lasts another

200,000 miles.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Try reading carefully what I wrote. It is quoted at the top of this post. Not what you *think* I wrote.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Perfect example of what Andy doesn't seem to realise.

There is a Rover SD1 fitted with what is claimed to be a Spitfire engine. You'll find it on U-Tube if interested. Except that, of course it's not a Merlin, it's a Meteor tank engine. Same basic engine, but with about 600 bhp from 27 litres, rather than the 2000+ some versions of the Merlin made. But still massive torque at low revs. So all you need to do is gear it up and you'll have a very fast car.

U Tube shows it struggling up to 160 mph. And trying to stop it was to say the least, interesting. Because it weighed so much. And increased the frontal area of the car too. The Meteor engine alone weighs near enough the same as a complete production SD1 - and that's before all the other stronger bits like the drivetrain needed are added.

The standard Vitesse with 190 bhp does 136 mph (average of a proper two way run - not like the U-Tube video. The racing models with the same size but tuned engine had a top speed of something like 175 mph. On roughly 300 bhp.

[Davey]

Up to this point, I thought you meant Triumph. I once had a Herald 13/60 with a Spitfire engine, and it fitted very well, but it wouldn't reach 130 mph.

[Tim Streater]

Anyone any idea what a Hawker Tempest would cost today - production run model, not a one-off, I mean. It worries me that our front line planes cost so much per unit (£50M upwards or so). There must be many situations where a cheap plane could do the job.