the rules now (fueling by rpm for all rpm) amount to fueling-by-piston speed (because the stroke is fixed by rule)vorticism wrote: ↑25 May 2025, 21:10Reminds me of how, what you might call “free redline” rules led to ever higher engine speeds in F1.
Piston speed is easier to calculate than piston inertia and in some cases easier to explain. Being 50 years before computers and digital calculators, perhaps that’s why the metric became a common frame of reference.
if stroke was free the same fueling-by-piston-speed might allow higher rpm via reduced stroke (and capacity) ....
even a more 'range extender' type of ICE
(assuming the designers can extend their combustion trickery to higher rpm)
btw
YouTuber Dominic Chinea is having trouble converting his Liberty (V12) into a V8 - many think he should L6 or V6 it ..
but as a V8 it will be vibrationwise no worse than a 300 hp Wright-Hispano V8 (& better with a bit of counterweight)
yes the Lib V8 would be torsionally bad with an airscrew - but not so in a car
reforging the original unweighted V12 crankshaft into a 'flat' V8 counterweighted one should be interesting
of course L6 is also historically legit and could enable some novel in-car layout to avoid installation length issues etc
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/44720513.pdf
btw 2