Alfa Romeo Forum banner

2401 - 2420 of 2425 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,498 Posts
Discussion Starter #2,401
Gino is being slightly naughty. Personally, I've always liked the 262C. I used to see one on my way to school.

Your question for today is what car is the The Car actually based on?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,217 Posts
Hmm.

Would it be the Volvo 26... ;) :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,498 Posts
Discussion Starter #2,404
Isn't it a Lincoln of some sort? I know it was put together by the chap who did the original batmobile
It was a Continental mk3 (I think) modified by George Barris of Batmobile and Munster Coach Fame.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,832 Posts
I remember looking it up some time back as I'd watched the film, and that specific car design's referenced in a few things - the scene where it goes over the cliff at the end also appeared in Knight Rider apparently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,498 Posts
Discussion Starter #2,406
Serious question today. Why have car makers moved to 3-cylinder engines? Why not a four with slightly less capacity per pot? A three seems inherently unbalanced and coarse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,817 Posts
Could it be that the 3 cylinder engine is lighter and smaller? Thus less wear and tear on suspension and also the ability to make cars smaller etc...
Stuff the driving experience
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,498 Posts
Discussion Starter #2,408
I don't know how much lighter a 3-pot is. I do know that both my kids' VAG 3-pots were designed for bigger motors because both engines have a massive cast engine mount to bridge the gap to the inner wing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,679 Posts
Serious question today. Why have car makers moved to 3-cylinder engines? Why not a four with slightly less capacity per pot? A three seems inherently unbalanced and coarse.
I don't know any specific science behind it, but would a smaller capacity 4 have more inherent losses through friction etc, therefore be less efficient overall? Also, where does the limit lie for stroke x bore in relation to efficiency? I.e. traditionally smaller capacity 4 cylinders and above tend to be more 'revvy' as the power tends to be up the top end. A longer stroke (oo err) tends to produce a torquier engine, therefore generally not requiring higher revs to power along and therefore comes up as 'better' in emissions tests. I'm guessing that a combination of reducing friction losses and requiring longer stroke and ever smaller capacity turbo motors leads naturally to chopping off a cylinder or two. And if anybody can make any sense out of that ramble then well done!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,685 Posts
I don't know any specific science behind it, but would a smaller capacity 4 have more inherent losses through friction etc, therefore be less efficient overall? Also, where does the limit lie for stroke x bore in relation to efficiency? I.e. traditionally smaller capacity 4 cylinders and above tend to be more 'revvy' as the power tends to be up the top end. A longer stroke (oo err) tends to produce a torquier engine, therefore generally not requiring higher revs to power along and therefore comes up as 'better' in emissions tests. I'm guessing that a combination of reducing friction losses and requiring longer stroke and ever smaller capacity turbo motors leads naturally to chopping off a cylinder or two. And if anybody can make any sense out of that ramble then well done!
The more cylinders generally means more friction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,498 Posts
Discussion Starter #2,413
I get the lighter weight/more friction thing and the long stroke/short stroke thing. I can also see why different parameters might apply to an engine to go in a small city car compared to those for a pick-up or a mid-engined supercar.

The thing is we've always had cars with small engines, and by small I mean around the 1-litre mark. Apart from the Daihatsu Charade and a few odd Kei cars, it's only really in the last 15 years or so that 3-pots have seen widespread use. The laws of physics haven't changed as far as I'm aware so didn't VW use a 1-litre three pot in the Polo in the 80s?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,679 Posts
I'd guess it's to do with ever tighter and faster introduced emissions controls, and trying to increase efficiency to meet such legislation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,959 Posts
Yes and the fact that in the modern era, manufacturers seem to be more willing create smaller engines out of which they can squeeze power.that they didn't seem to be willing to do previously.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
45,155 Posts
New version of the C63 is due to be a hybrid 4-pot. No doubt it'll be fast as hell, but what sort of idiot buys a C63 because it's quick? You buy it for the sound surely. (Actually, evidence on the C63 owners group is that I'm a minority.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,498 Posts
Discussion Starter #2,417
New version of the C63 is due to be a hybrid 4-pot. No doubt it'll be fast as hell, but what sort of idiot buys a C63 because it's quick? You buy it for the sound surely. (Actually, evidence on the C63 owners group is that I'm a minority.)
So it is the small willy thing for most of them?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
500 Posts
I’m sure it wasn’t that long ago I heard Merc were planning on keeping the V8 as along as possible... I imagined that might have been a little while longer than this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
45,155 Posts
2401 - 2420 of 2425 Posts
Top