Motors X form engine

Have any of you ever heard of an x formed engine, like two v12 stuck togehtor to form an x. Wouldnt this be a big space advantage if u where to grapht two v12 twelves togethor with one single crank or two. I only found some engines but they are aircraft engines http://www.enginehistory.org/engines.htm

 

They exist for aircraft. From the sounds of it, I'd guess it would be too complex or cumbersome to be usable in automobiles.

Would make more sense to have a W24 configuration since you don't have to make a massive engine block in a senselessly circular shape. You might like the suggestion of engineering a significantly smaller 4-rotor rotary engine instead.

 

Does a car really need two V12s stuck together? I'd imagine it would be useful for massive lorries or something though.

 

I don't think even a lorry would need more than a V12 or V16 diesel tbh, not without wanting to go racing or something at least!

 

wow 2 V12 is alot of power

 

The number of cylinders means nothing alone. Displacement is much more important really, nothing says you can't build a 960cc X24 engine, but a 2 litre 4 pot should be more powerful.

 

Yeah, I thought a lot of lorry engines were straight six or similar?

 

two words Bugatti Veyron

 

So the answer to my question would be no then?

Well, I was thinking along the lines of massive road trains, you need a lot of power so you can escape those mutants. My imagination is far too active.

 

Ever heard of a Napier Deltic? 36 pistons in 18 cylinders on three crankshafts. They were used in trains over there.

 

Routemasters have a straight 6, or was it straight 4....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_configuration

That explains it all (scroll down to the bottom). Some super cars have w12 or w16 configs.

 

I could just get two of the same v12 and link the two cranks trough a gear box and than to an clutch and a automotive gearbox. Its just for fun and the wow factor. Mabe two bmw v12 which would be about 8 liters. If you leave em stock you would already have around a 1000 horses. And with some forced air and tuning u could easyly hit 1400+

 

Somehow I suspect that won't work DMF - if it did, I'm sure VW would've done it without resorting to making their entire W-series engines on a single crankshaft. That, and it'd be absolutely monstrous - most V12's are 90' jobs, so you'd have cylinders on a 180' plane, seperated by a little space to accomodate their twin cranks.

 

no im taking not graphting them toghetor but jut two sperate engines with the oil pans touching.

 

More pistons = more potential to fail

 

so wat v12 run fine and two of them will too. Btw not talkin about building it from sratch just buy two second had v12.

 

two v12s would take a lot of space, use a lot of fuel, and get VERY hot.

 

For super-duty applications, you'd want an very high-displacement inline-6 with very long piston strokes, not a W24 engine. I can only see airplanes really getting an X configuration engine for the benefit of symmetry in order to fit in a cylindrical engine bay. Realistically, W16 or W18 should be the most cylinders usable in automobiles. If adding more cylinders equates to smoother revving engine, then use a Wankel rotary instead; significantly smaller and simpler while producing comparable power figures.

 

A car is normally wider than it's height (really, it is!). so what you want is a wide, but low engine. This makes the boxer config the most ideal. I don't know how it is vibration and efficiency-vise compared to other configs. I would believe that the W configuration gives the best from both worlds, but i'm not sure.

 

i would love to get a w engine but there aint alot around