To: ovrtaxt
...a displacement of 850 cubic inches ...Tell me that's a typo.
A TINY engine with a displacement of 850 CUBIC INCHES?!!!
34 posted on
05/21/2006 4:07:26 PM PDT by
uglybiker
(Don't blame me. I didn't make you stupid.)
To: uglybiker
The 850 c.i. likely comes from the fact that the combustion chamber is a big donut-shaped tube. There are two sets of four pistons and they move back and forth relative to each other (while they all rotate around the donut). The total effective displacement is probably something like 150-200% of the area of the "donut".
Its weird, but it looks like he may have something.
To: uglybiker
I was thinking about that -- my '68 V8 Wildcat had a 430 CI engine and it was a MONSTER.
42 posted on
05/21/2006 4:13:01 PM PDT by
freedumb2003
(Governor of California, another job Americans won't do.)
To: uglybiker
Yup- 850 ci, dude.
It's calculated by displacement per revolution of the driveshaft. I think the cylinder fires like 16 times per rev.
49 posted on
05/21/2006 4:20:35 PM PDT by
ovrtaxt
(My donation to the GOP went here instead: http://www.minutemanhq.com/hq/index.php)
To: uglybiker
Sure, a tiny engine that is 13 liters. Nothing wrong there. /sarc
To: uglybiker
A TINY engine with a displacement of 850 CUBIC INCHES?!!!
I noticed that too, as well as the fact that its supposed to weigh only 25 lbs. These two things don't correlate.
77 posted on
05/21/2006 4:49:22 PM PDT by
Husker24
To: uglybiker
It took 34 posts for someone to point that out. 850 cubic inches is not equal to 2.4 liters. It's more like 14.
103 posted on
05/21/2006 5:40:58 PM PDT by
Disambiguator
(Unfettered gun ownership is the highest expression of civil rights.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson