Italian V8 vs American V8- the Difference?

I dont' mean to sidetrack the discussion, but does anyone know what type of crankshaft the old Maser V8 had, and what type the current Maser V8 has? I thought I had heard that the current V8 went to a split plane crank, even though the engine is developed from the Ferrari 3.6l. If this is the case, why? What, then, will the F430 have?

-steve

 

In my experience pent roof chambers have required less advance, in fact the least of any of the different chamber designs I have experienced. Hemispherical chambers on the other hand are at the other end of the spectrum having the most and the taller the dome as in early Ferrari or Mopar motors the greater the adveance required. Ignition timing in those was often well into the 40 degree range while a pent roof Cosworth BDA was more like 28 degrees.

 

Masers early and late are 90 degree or split plane, while 430 is reported to be a flat crank.

 

Wow. Talk about splitting the atom.

1.) All engines are just big self powered air pumps. Period.


i disagree, internal combustion engines are MIXTURE pumps, big difference, in that gas and air differ in weight greatly....

 

Yep, Hemispherical Combustion Chambers an AMERICAN engine design that the Italians stole. h

 

one is bred for hp and torque, the other for character, fun to drive, and musical beauty.

 

Having delved into some online research I find arguments that support both theories, but my thinking seems basically correct and upheld by numerous sites that go deeper into the engineering side of things.

While Chrysler certainly put the Hemi on the map to the population at large, it was around since the late 1800's and was certainly not a "new" design even for a car. The Harley Davidson Knuckle head was a Hemi and came to life in the 1930's if not sooner. Aircraft engines had Hemi head combustion chambers long before that, and many still do.

To make some definitions gleaned from various websites, the main concerns going on fall into four catagories. Let me quote some sources:

"Combustion chambers and spark plug location and the number of plugs will have a marked effect on the time required to complete the combustion process."
" A large open chamber like a hemi which has a high surface to volume ratio, will combust more slowly than a wedge or modern pentroof chamber simply because it has more cold, metal molecules in contact with the combustion gasses which tends to slow reaction rates. For this reason, these chambers will require that the spark be initiated sooner to achieve PCP at the correct time."
"Modern 4 valve engines with shallow pentroof chambers and a central plug location are fast, efficient combustors, requiring minimal advance for maximum power."

But, as has been pointed out, there are other factors and many other variables. the ignition/combustion Process, fuel/air ratio, charge density, charge turbulence, fuel characteristics, inert effect of residual fuel left over, combustion chamber shape and spark location, type of ignition system and spark duration, blah blah blah... In other words, we are all correct, you just have to quantify what your looking at. I still stand on my theory that at a lower rpm, a 2 valve Ferrari "can" make more power than a 4 valve Ferrari at the "same" rpm. Again, if someone can show some data to prove otherwise, I will withdraw my claim.

 

So, Karen, did you find your answer through all of this clamor?

 

That's my point when I said the 200 HP TC's are not streetable; at least for normal people. (2 valve DOHC hemi BTW). Nothing much happens below 4000 RPMS. Now, my 125 HP version has really nice low end torque as well as midrange. 0-60 in 7 flat which isn't bad for a 1972 125 HP car! Since my advance maxes out at about 3500 RPM's (at 38 degrees) not much happens over 6000 RPMs. It sure sounds cool up to the 6800 redline though!

Ken

 

When we raced the 900SS Ducati we needed from 36 to 38 degrees of leed. We were running 12.7/1 compression, and would turn the motor 8500 rpm. In 1979, we were the fastest bevel drive at Daytona, going 155 through the traps. The Panta based bike that we ran in the 80s, went 160, it was also a two valve and needed about 36, 37 degrees of lead. Both of those engines were raised d shaped port engines with a modified hemi-head (actually oblong, a design stolen from Mert Lawill, since we had the same mechanic). That bike would turn 8800 rpm, was bored and stroked to 835ccs.

In 1988 we ran an 851, 4 vavle there, and we went a little quicker 165, with a pretty good motor. It only needed about 34 degrees of lead. Compression was 13 to 1, and we used the purple gas, which was oxgenated, and would pass tech.

While you could get almost the same power from a 2 valve as a 4 valve, the 4 valve had a lot more torque down low, required a lot less cam, and wasn't anywhere as critical with the exhaut pipe. On the 2 valve, you had to have the pipe exactly the right length and volume for it to work, much more critical.
Art

 

Ok, Karen just print this out and read it to your friends. It shouldn't take long and I'm sure it'll clear it all up for them.

 

I wanted to ask a question regarding the flat crank versus cross crank as it pertains to the exhaust note. Let's look at the firing order per bank, not per cylinder:

-Cross crank: 1-2-2-1-2-1-1-2
-Flat crank: 1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2

There is "symmetry" with the flat crank in the sense that both banks take turns in the firing order. Not so with the cross crank. Is that the fundamental reason why they sound different?

 

my only comment regarding both types of engines is that you've gotta love both, and if at all possible have one of each sitting in your garage.

my picks would be a hot rodded '54 BelAir with something like a 502 sitting under the hood, and sitting next to it 360 (or another analogous small displacement high revving ferrari)

 

No woman is a mystery.

Finesse I have found distributed in equally small and rare quantities around the globe.

Passion......the flame depends on the spark.


As for automobile engines, I have no clue.



Forza,



Cavallini

 

Thank you for stating it so clearly.

A I think you've got to be about a half bubble off to like going that fast on a scooter.

B Was I correct in thinking that Honda 250 was the one Mike the Bike rode?

 

At this point who cares, we are talkin serious stuff now.

 

Are you saying that speed out of the corners is better than a car with less speed out of the corner but has more hp for straight line acceleration?

Im trying to understand the concept, I don't have much racing experience.

 

O.K. that makes sence, but with that theory wouldn't a car with more torque,
Like the American V8's accelerate faster out of the corner than a low torque small
displacment engine?

P.S. buy the 275GTB So Cool!!!

 

There are aluminum aftermarket American blocks that weigh a lot less than the stock steel units, but still don't really compare to the efficiency or airflow of Ferrari's four-cam V-8s.