I would like to first say that I do love this game so far, like many people on the forums. I’ve been following it for quite a long time on youtube and finally got the demo a month ago, followed shortly with me getting the ‘full’ game.
After playing about with the V8 today I noticed something that I find odd. The OHV (push-rod) engines are not that much lighter or more compact then then OHC designs. While It’s not that big of an issue I believe that is the main advantage of an OHV engine.
While I could link a few articles about the same thing. I’ll just leave a picture. Keep in mind both are ford motors, of different times to be fair. one a 4.6 liter OHC model the other a 302 (about 5.0 liters.) OHV model.
It’s somewhat limited by the range of parts it needs to be compatible with, because the size is actually measured off the physical size of the model itself, so we’ve made the OHV heads about as compact as they’re able to be whilst still fitting.
I do see issues with the more compact size of the the parts. They would more then likely require new manifolds and the like which would require more modeling of parts. Not the best use of time. I would really like to maybe see the lighter weights. It is hard to find good examples of that online. If I do run into some I might post them. Either way, I am more then glad to have a response.
On the subject of comparing ohc to ohv… It’s just that I think the ohv setup looks too ugly for my late 60s V8s… so could it be possible to put over-head cam valve covers on a pushrod setup in the future?? There is nothing against it
I did a little bit of digging of my own and just got annoyed by conflicting pages saying one thing and then another. With some sites stating differences as low as 20 lbs and other stating things like about 50 lbs heaver then a dressed RX7 TT rotary. I’ll try to find something a bit more reliable, internet research into things like this can be quite annoying.
you can’t really make a V engine with air cooling, the back side of it would simply melt under load, same goes for big inlines which are mounted longitudinally
[quote]you can’t really make a V engine with air cooling, the back side of it would simply melt under load, same goes for big inlines which are mounted longitudinally
[/quote]
Yeah, you certinally CAN do aircooled V engines, but as far as I know only ze russians have done so. Every american V8 is water cooled, and the only aircooled american engine I know of is the Corvair Flat 6.
A couple of other aircooled V engines: 1932-1934 Franklin V-12 AMC’s M422 ‘Mighty Mite’
DEUTZ V6, V8, V10, V12 Aircooled truck engines
ZAZ Zaporozhets and LuAZ
Many difference construction motors
A couple of tank engines
many older aircraft engines
and lots of motorbike engines obviously
see the thing with aircraft engine is, they suck in so much air and while flying it’s cold enough up there, so they don’t really need liquid cooling, although Maybach and BMW did watercooled aircraft engines in WW2
speaking of air cooled Vs … i still don’t see the effectiveness and reliability of the engine being very good and would love to see how it would do under stress in long term
I don’t think a V is much different from an Aircooling perspective, you just need to jacket it so you can fan force air around the cylinders and I think it’d cool pretty similarly to a flat engine.
