Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 08:04:57 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [65.66.11.38] (HELO qbert.gami.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0b8) with ESMTP id 1791222 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 22:54:46 -0400 Received: by QBERT with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 21:56:25 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <52548863F8A5D411B530005004759A931C2EC7@QBERT> From: George Braly X-Original-To: "'lml@lancaironline.net'" Subject: RE: [LML] Re: V8 engines X-Original-Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 21:56:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C26508.4D4EA09C" This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C26508.4D4EA09C Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Sky2high@aol.com [mailto:Sky2high@aol.com] Subject: [LML] Re: V8 engines In a message dated 9/25/2002 4:37:06 PM Central Daylight Time, marv@lancaironline.net writes: Water cooling an aircraft engine makes about as much sense as air cooling a submarine. >> Cute, but misses any point. << Well, it may be cute, but, I submit it is also true, and, therefore, does not miss the point. >> Controlling the temperature RANGE of engine components, such as cylinders, allows for much tighter tolerances and, thus, more efficiency. << The problem with the "... sloppy tolerance = inefficient engine" argument is that the "sloppy", "air-cooled" piston aircraft engines built for the last 45 years just happen to be routinely and substantially more efficient (BSFC ~ 0.385 aircraft compared to > 0.4xy something, water cooled automotive) than the engines that Detroit or Japan, Inc. have been building for the last 20 years, using tight tolerance water cooled components. Regards, George ------_=_NextPart_001_01C26508.4D4EA09C Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Sky2high@aol.com [mailto:Sky2high@aol.com]
Subject: [LML] Re: V8 engines

In a message dated 9/25/2002 4:37:06 PM Central Daylight Time, marv@lancaironline.net writes:
Water cooling an aircraft engine makes about as much sense as air cooling a
submarine.
 
 
 >> Cute, but misses any point.   <<
 
Well, it may be cute, but, I submit it is also true, and, therefore,  does not miss the point.
 
 >> Controlling the temperature RANGE of engine components, such as cylinders, allows for much tighter tolerances and, thus, more efficiency. <<
 
The problem with the "... sloppy tolerance  =  inefficient engine"  argument is that the "sloppy",  "air-cooled" piston aircraft engines built for the last 45 years just happen to be routinely and substantially more efficient (BSFC ~ 0.385  aircraft  compared to   > 0.4xy  something,  water cooled automotive) than the engines that  Detroit or Japan, Inc. have been building for the last 20 years,  using tight tolerance water cooled components. 
 
Regards,  George
 
------_=_NextPart_001_01C26508.4D4EA09C--