I always wondered why old cars with big engines get less horsepower than the engines of today. For example, a v12 from the 1930's like the Cadillac V12 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_V-12) will only get 135 horsepower, while and engine 3 times less (like the subaru brz or toyota 86, whatever it is sold as) will get around the same ammount, if not more. Is this just because newer cars are tuned better? Fuel injection vs. carbs?
Many, many, many factors. We've learned huge amounts about how to properly carburate an engine even, a modern carb is better than old carbs. We've learned huge amounts about port designs with 4 valves (or even 5) per cylinder being the norm now with very nice optimal designs for efficient airflow versus just 2 valves whacked in wherever they fit in the older engines. Better cam profiles. Elimination of friction. Increasing rev limits. Increasing compression ratios. Perfection of air to fuel ratios. Perfection of timings. All sorts going on really.
Simply put the engines were not as advanced as they are now as a result of that they had massive number of litres and tiny amounts of horse power, the biggest I have yet seen was a 1926 Bugatti Type 41 Royale #41100 which had a staggering 14.7 Litres and Produced 300bhp as the points added the fuel used was less advanced as it is today meaning cylinder compression ratios had to contend with Engine knock and that lead into Leaded Fuel...which tried to counter Engine knock with adding lead to fuel...
That is a fair point, no way could you run a now considered standard 10:1 compression ratio on the gasoline of the day.
The Super Eco cars are running what like 14:1 compression? who knows what F1 runs thats uber secret...
Its not that secret. 13-17 depending on engine. Knock is then a very very real eventuality at that much compression. Not heard of any road car going that high yet though, especially the eco cars which often use a subtle trick that effectively *lowers* compression ratio but allows for greater expansion ratio. The prius is geometrically a 13:1 compression ratio, but the intake port is left open during the compression stroke reducing the amount of air in the cylinder, the final effective ratio is only actually 8:1, but the expansion ratio remains at the full 13:1, can be more efficient.
Ah okay at least I wasnt wrong, I remember my dads old 2002 Saab 9-5 Hot Aero Estate use to run 9.8:1 but it had a garrett turbo on it, now heres a question imagine the compression ratio of the car called "Brutus" and the John Dodds "The Beast" those are 2 Aero Engined cars and both god knows... From what I saw of reading about the BMW VI engine its running an alleged compression ratio of 5.5:1 with 87 Octane fuel As for the Monster Meteor engine who knows! I did some reading on the Mercedes-Benz T80 that had a wacky compression ratio of 7.5:1 on the left bank and 7.3:1 on the right bank.... before you ask the Mercedes Benz T80 was powered by the Daimler-Benz DB603 engine that produced 3000bhp but it never was used....
brutus, 5.5:1. Got to remember its a 1920s engine thats also subject to the above points of older engines not being quite as good as modern counterparts. 650hp from near enough 50 litres. Similar case with the beast. Its the meteor engine, essentially an otherwise unaltered rolls royce merlin supercharged engine minus the supercharger. 6:1.
yeah that engine is almost 100 years old and its still kicking out fire and flames and brimstone from what I heard haha
it is certainly difficult to argue with the sheer shock and awe of that thing. Even if it can be outdone for raw horsepower by a far far smaller engine in this day and age, its cool, and thats what mattered more for those cars, that its fucking cool.
Who argues with a 47 Litre Fire Spitting Satanic V12 engine...no one it just simply starts up and then shouts you to DEATH!
