The engines and transmissions thread

bobcat

Well-known Member
Location
Northern Calif
Over our lifetime, and even before, there has been numerous versions and combinations of powertrains.
There have been straight 6's and 8's, and even 12's, V6's and V8's, Diesels, and even rotary style engines.
There have also been a large variety of transmissions from manuals, to automatics, hydramatics, and CVT's.
Thought it might be fun to share thoughts and views on these constantly evolving mechanical components of propulsion.
One might be able to come up with a great concept and design, but there is no assurance the public will enjoy it.
What are your thoughts and experiences?
 

I have always been fascinated with the mechanical world. Have helped restore several Hit and Miss engines. Steam is another interest.
How about the Opposing piston diesel engine.
 
I have always been fascinated with the mechanical world. Have helped restore several Hit and Miss engines. Steam is another interest.
How about the Opposing piston diesel engine.
I hadn't even thought of those. In fact, I hadn't even heard of the opposing piston diesel engine. Sounds like another marvel of engineering.
 

Honda's current hybrid drivetrains are built around two electric motor-generators, an around 1 KW-hour of traction battery, and an Atkinson-cycle gasoline engine.

There is no transmission at all, though a clutch can pass power directly from engine to wheels at higher speeds (an overdrive). That bypasses the losses of charging the battery and discharging it to drive the wheels at speed.

At lower speeds it drives like a BEV with an onboard charging system.

Reviewers report an impressively seamless yet enjoyable driving experience. Simulated shifting is a bit goofy to me but it coddles the average slushbox pilot. I believe you can turn that off though, at least in the Civics.

Sadly, many of the reviewers are under the impression that it contains a Prius-style "CVT" (which itself is actually something else). It does not. Honda's "eCVT" is not a transmission at all, that's just marketing for the rubes.
 
This seems like my kind of thread, with me in the past studying engine technology and all. I was 17 years old when I rebuilt my first engine by myself, using a 'short block', and being paid to do it. Previously, I did that type of work with others, as an apprentice.



UPDATE: a 'Short Block' meaning an engine block with the crank, pistons, and rods already assembled directly from the factory. Then having to assemble a preciously stripped down cylinder head, add the water pump and oil pump, and pick up to the block, then flywheel, and all the other ancillaries ect.
 
Last edited:
Honda's current hybrid drivetrains are built around two electric motor-generators, an around 1 KW-hour of traction battery, and an Atkinson-cycle gasoline engine.

There is no transmission at all, though a clutch can pass power directly from engine to wheels at higher speeds (an overdrive). That bypasses the losses of charging the battery and discharging it to drive the wheels at speed.

At lower speeds it drives like a BEV with an onboard charging system.

Reviewers report an impressively seamless yet enjoyable driving experience. Simulated shifting is a bit goofy to me but it coddles the average slushbox pilot. I believe you can turn that off though, at least in the Civics.

Sadly, many of the reviewers are under the impression that it contains a Prius-style "CVT" (which itself is actually something else). It does not. Honda's "eCVT" is not a transmission at all, that's just marketing for the rubes.
I've been reading up on hybrids lately, and although I've never driven one, I think I might prefer it over a straight BEV because there's no need to recharge. Yes, you have to gas up, but it only takes a couple minutes, and the battery system is much smaller, so if it ever needs replacing, it's considerably cheaper than the pack in a BEV.

That being said, I'm still undecided about a CVT or eCVT. I know it improves mileage, but I think I would miss the driving experience of a traditional automatic. There aren't many out there now with that anymore. Maybe it's just something I have to get over.

I guess part of me just misses the good ol' days when you could listen to and feel the rumble of a solid V8. and 4 on the floor. I guess the new generation will never know what that was like.
 
The first supercharged engine I came across was at college in England, at the ripe old age of 16. It was a V6 two-stroke diesel, a Detroit Diesel. What an amazing sound it had! Those American diesel engines seemed to get everywhere.
 
I have always been fascinated with the mechanical world. Have helped restore several Hit and Miss engines. Steam is another interest.
How about the Opposing piston diesel engine.
Way before my time, but the British Commer TS had opposing pistons -- 6 pistons in 3 cylinders. The piston/cylinder arrangement was 'flat', with two sets of unusual rocker arm arrangements positioned at each side of the engine that connected the pistons connecting rods to the crankshaft.

They had a very distinctive sound. The engine starts at around 1:10 in the video. It looks like it has a Roots-style supercharger? That silver structure with the vained casing sticking out at the front.

The silver/grey covers on each side of the engine are to cover the rocker arrangement i mentioned, for connecting the piston connecting rod to the crank beneath the 3 flat horizontal cylinders.


You needed earplugs if the arrangement was where the cab sat on top of the engine:

 
Last edited:
That being said, I'm still undecided about a CVT or eCVT. I know it improves mileage, but I think I would miss the driving experience of a traditional automatic. There aren't many out there now with that anymore. Maybe it's just something I have to get over.
That's why they added back "shifting" simulation. You'll hear sounds very like that of shifting, but without the shift-shock feel.

Here at minute 12 they do a test drive:


A very similar system is being put into 4 of their models now: midsize sedan, small SUV, compact sedan, and hatchback.
 
I have always been fascinated with the mechanical world. Have helped restore several Hit and Miss engines. Steam is another interest.
How about the Opposing piston diesel engine.

The British Napier Deltic engine also had opposed pistons. It had 3 banks of 6 cylinders -- each cylinder having two pistons. (36 pistons). Called Deltic because the three cylinder-bank layout formed a triangle like the Greek letter delta. Its capacity was 88 liters, around 5370 cubic inches.

These engines found their way into the Deltic Locomotive, as they gave a high power-to-weight ratio for the time. Some British Rail Locomotives had two of these engines. They were also found in some Royal Navy Motor Torpedo Boats.

It had 3 crankshafts.


Deltic.JPG

deltic 001.JPG
 
Last edited:
That's why they added back "shifting" simulation. You'll hear sounds very like that of shifting, but without the shift-shock feel.

Here at minute 12 they do a test drive:


A very similar system is being put into 4 of their models now: midsize sedan, small SUV, compact sedan, and hatchback.
Enjoyed the video and was rather surprised at the response. Some critics have said that with CVT's there is a brief lag between manual acceleration and response, but I didn't notice that here, and for whatever it's worth, the little mind trick with the shifting thing just seems more normal probably due to my programmed expectations.

I have also read that CVT's may need a bit more maintenance because of more constant friction. Some even said that transmission replacements were more frequent than with an auto trans, but perhaps that may have been more related to earlier models. Also, I think there may be one or two makers that use a chain for the CVT's instead of a belt. Again, don't know if that is a better way to go.
 
The English Napier Deltic engine also had opposed pistons. Called deltc because it had 3 banks of 6 cylinders -- each cylinder having two pistons. (36 pistons). Called Deltic because the three cylinder-bank layout formed a triangle like the Greek letter delta. Its capacity was 88 liters, around 5370 cubic inches.

These engines found their way into the Deltic Locomotive, as they gave a high power-to-weight ratio for the time. Also found in the Royal Navy Motor Torpedo Boats.

It had 3 crankshafts.


View attachment 417777

View attachment 417778
Wow, that is an amazing piece of engineering. Very cool.
 
I was always a big fan of the GM power plants (283, 327, 396, 409, and 427)
Loved the 396 in the Impala SS.
Those were some awesome engines, and still are.
 
Wnen I was 16, my SIL had a 1950’s Buick Dynaflow.

i was not a fan of that transmission but I now have a Kawasaki 360 ATV with a transmission reminiscent of a Dynaflow and I’m still not a fan🤯🤯
 
I think there may be one or two makers that use a chain for the CVT's instead of a belt.
A lot of them do, perhaps all of them these days.

Those using Toyota's Prius scheme (more than just Toyota) don't use a CVT as such, but instead an odd planetary gear transmission. So no belts.

Honda's current hybrids have no belts, no planetary gears, no nothing really. The closest thing to a "transmission" there is an overdrive clutch that gets automatically engaged or disengaged upon demand.

This clutch, along with two motor-generators, replaces any transmission at all. One MG is mainly a generator taking gasoline engine output and charging the traction battery. The larger MG mainly takes battery power to drive the wheels. Both of these get used as either a motor or a generator depending on what is going on. There is no belt or chain, since there is no CVT under that hood.
 
I recently remarked, in a different forum, about the use of nitrous oxide gas in WW2 British fighter air craft engines, as an emergency boost for added horsepower in a critical situation. It seems that many people nowadays, are unaware of this fact. It was also used in the Lancaster 4 engine heavy bomber aircraft, when a particular Lancaster was going to be carrying the 22,000 pound Grand Slam Bomb. The nitrous gas was used during the takeoff roll to get the aircraft off the ground before it ran out of paved runway space. The bomb bay doors on the Lancaster were 33 feet long, but to accommodate the Grand Slam Bomb. they had to be removed, and a special holding cradle was installed to carry the GSB.

Once the Grand Slam aircraft was in the air, the bomb had to be dropped on the target, because the load was so heavy that the landing gear would have collapsed, if the Lancaster would have attempted to land with it still on board. The Grand Slam was designed by Barnes Wallace, who also designed the Tall Boy, a 11,000 pound bomb, and the "bouncing bomb" use to attack the 3 German dams, by RAF 613 Squadron, The Dam Busters.

The specific targets for Tall Boys and Grand Slams were typically hardened bunkers made of reinforced steel and concrete, like the U boat repair pens on the French coast, or the V1 and V2 rocket launch sites in Holland and France.


During WW2 the RAF's Bomber Command air crews had a FIFTY PERCENT death rate. 55,456 RAF air crew died on operations, which was the highest death rate of any WW 2 British military force. A typical RAF bomber crew "tour " was 30 missions. One memorable crew did an incredible 65 trips, as a Path Finder group leader aircraft. The Path Finders flew ahead of the main bomber stream, and dropped marker flares on the target center, then they continued to fly a circle course dropping more coloured marker flares. That meant the Path Finders were over the target area for up to 45 minutes, while the main bomber stream passed over the target area.

Of the 7,787 Lancasters built during WW2, only TWO are still flying. One is a part of the RAF's Memorial Flight, and the other is the Canadian Lancaster, which is flown by the Canadian War Plane Heritage Museum, located in Hamilton, Ontario. The CWPHM Lancaster is known as VERA, but is officially the Charles Mynarski Victoria Cross Memorial aircraft.

In 2014, VERA was flown to the United Kingdom, via the North Atlantic route, with stops in Newfoundland, Iceland, then Scotland, and finally arriving in England. VERA and the RAF's Lancaster flew together for the whole summer, appearing at more than 30 air shows in the UK, France, Belgium Holland. During that summer VERA lost an engine, and the RAF loaned one of theirs to VERA. Upon her return to Canada, the spare engine was sent back to the UK via an Air Canada cargo flight.

here is a link to the Canadian War Plane Heritage Museum's web site. They FLY more than 25 WW2 aircraft from their collection.

link. Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum - Canadian Aviation History - Wartime Vintage Aircraft
 
A lot of them do, perhaps all of them these days.

Those using Toyota's Prius scheme (more than just Toyota) don't use a CVT as such, but instead an odd planetary gear transmission. So no belts.

Honda's current hybrids have no belts, no planetary gears, no nothing really. The closest thing to a "transmission" there is an overdrive clutch that gets automatically engaged or disengaged upon demand.

This clutch, along with two motor-generators, replaces any transmission at all. One MG is mainly a generator taking gasoline engine output and charging the traction battery. The larger MG mainly takes battery power to drive the wheels. Both of these get used as either a motor or a generator depending on what is going on. There is no belt or chain, since there is no CVT under that hood.
That might be the ticket. I will have to look into that. I appreciate the info.
 
I've been reading up on hybrids lately, and although I've never driven one, I think I might prefer it over a straight BEV because there's no need to recharge. Yes, you have to gas up, but it only takes a couple minutes, and the battery system is much smaller, so if it ever needs replacing, it's considerably cheaper than the pack in a BEV.
It seems a reasonable assessment, as some manufacturers place that battery system under the floor of the truck, or within it, or under the rear seat. It's relatively easy to get to and replace.

That being said, I'm still undecided about a CVT or eCVT. I know it improves mileage, but I think I would miss the driving experience of a traditional automatic. There aren't many out there now with that anymore. Maybe it's just something I have to get over.

I guess part of me just misses the good ol' days when you could listen to and feel the rumble of a solid V8. and 4 on the floor. I guess the new generation will never know what that was like.

I'm only familiar with two types of CVT's. One being two sets of steel cones that move in and out to continuously vary the drive ratio via a steel belt. The other being an Epicyclic Gear Set, otherwise known as a Planetary Gear Set. Named due to it having a Sun Gear in the centre and Planet Gears in mesh around the Sun, then an Anulus (ring gear) around all of it. I'm sure you are aware that this gear set is something you would find in what I would call a traditional automatic transmission.

Instead of having two or more of these, a CVT just has one, and its used in a different way to the traditional Auto box. As with the Epicyclic CVT, it will have 3 power inputs going to it and one power output. The single output ultimately going to the drive wheels via a differential. The three inputs being two electric motor/generators and a petrol engine. By electronically varying the speeds and torque of the three inputs, the speed of the vehicle is adjusted on demand of the gas pedal.

Many of our customers don't like the 'feel' of a CVT, as the lack of a gear change gives the illusion that the car is accelerating slower than it actually is. So the manafacutre I work for added 'padles' to the steering wheel so the driver could manually 'simulate' a gear change, when in reality all it does is sudenly change the rotation speed of the engine and chang (drop?) the speed of the electric motors to give a sence that something is happening. The reality is that nothing of any significance has changed.

I've never owned an automatic of any description, as i don't feel engaged with the car. And besides, I like 'rev matching'. 'Heal and toe' as some might call it -- or as I do it, pressing the brake pedal with my right foot, while simultaneously rolling the right side of my right foot, to raise engine speed and pressing the clutch down with my left foot whilst changing down a gear. Get it right and it makes for a very smooth gear change. Two feet on three pedals at the same time, along with a shifting of gears. It works well for setting up the car under braking before throwing it into a turn. Keeps the car balanced.

Like this -- it's very satisfying!:

 
Last edited:
It seems a reasonable assessment, as some manufacturers place that battery system under the floor of the truck, or within it, or under the rear seat. It's relatively easy to get to and replace.



I'm only familiar with two types of CVT's. One being two sets of steel cones that move in and out to continuously vary the drive ratio via a steel belt. The other being an Epicyclic Gear Set, otherwise known as a Planetary Gear Set. Named due to it having a Sun Gear in the centre and Planet Gears in mesh around the Sun, then an Anulus (ring gear) around all of it. I'm sure you are aware that this gear set is something you would find in what I would call a traditional automatic transmission.

Instead of having two or more of these, a CVT just has one, and its used in a different way to the traditional Auto box. As with the Epicyclic CVT, it will have 3 power inputs going to it and one power output. The single output ultimately going to the drive wheels via a differential. The three inputs being two electric motor/generators and a petrol engine. By electronically varying the speeds and torque of the three inputs, the speed of the vehicle is adjusted on demand of the gas pedal.

Many of our customers don't like the 'feel' of a CVT, as the lack of a gear change gives the illusion that the car is accelerating slower than it actually is. So the manafacutre I work for added 'padles' to the steering wheel so the driver could manually 'simulate' a gear change, when in reality all it does is sudenly change the rotation speed of the engine and chang (drop?) the speed of the electric motors to give a sence that something is happening. The reality is that nothing of any significance has changed.

I've never owned an automatic of any description, as i don't feel engaged with the car. And besides, I like 'rev matching'. 'Heal and toe' as some might call it -- or as I do it, pressing the brake pedal with my right foot, while simultaneously rolling the right side of my right foot, to raise engine speed and pressing the clutch down with my left foot whilst changing down a gear. Get it right and it makes for a very smooth gear change. Two feet on three pedals at the same time, along with a shifting of gears. It works well for setting up the car under braking before throwing it into a turn. Keeps the car balanced.

Like this -- it's very satisfying:

Well, I like the idea of a CVT and I get that it maximizes fuel efficiency, but I guess I wouldn't be able to formulate any meaningful opinion without actually driving one. However, there are a lot of youtube videos of other driver's experiences, so at least that helps.

It seems what concerns me the most is reliability, However they've been around for a considerable time and had improvements along the way, so if there are lots of them still on the road after 100,000 miles, then maybe I'm likely too skeptical.
 
My previous car was bought new in 2002. The chain-based type of CVT, but it ran without trouble until I hit a deer and totaled it in 2018. Only 145K on it, but I retired in early 2011 and wasn't driving it as much.

Experiences vary though, some were better designed and made than others.
 
Well, I like the idea of a CVT and I get that it maximizes fuel efficiency, but I guess I wouldn't be able to formulate any meaningful opinion without actually driving one. However, there are a lot of youtube videos of other driver's experiences, so at least that helps.

It seems what concerns me the most is reliability, However they've been around for a considerable time and had improvements along the way, so if there are lots of them still on the road after 100,000 miles, then maybe I'm likely too skeptical.

They are significantly more reliable than they used to be, and the reliability is getting better all the time and accelerating. The technology is no longer in its experimental phase. Gone are the days when engineers let it all hang out, so to speak.

Hang out under the car, that is. As in Daf and Volvo in the 60s & 70s. In this case, a rubber belt as opposed to a more modern enclosed steel belt and cones, and later the use of Epicyclic Gear Set CVT

 
Last edited:
IMO, the best thing that car makers did was to get rid of carburetors, and went to fuel injection, I used to have to work on a carb at least once a year it seemed. Now, If the engine seems to be running a bit rough, I just add some fuel injector cleaner to the gas, and within a couple of hours of driving, the engine is running smooth again.
 
IMO, the best thing that car makers did was to get rid of carburetors, and went to fuel injection, I used to have to work on a carb at least once a year it seemed. Now, If the engine seems to be running a bit rough, I just add some fuel injector cleaner to the gas, and within a couple of hours of driving, the engine is running smooth again.
Oh, thanks for reminding me. That's something I am probably overdue for.
 
Remember some of the old pickups from years gone by. They were a 4 speed, but first gear was Granny, and it was pretty low geared and would get you plenty of places even without 4WD. Then there were cars that had overdrive, and if I remember correctly, it was a separate unit added to a regular manual transmission. I think some had a control lever mounted under the dash, and I think some may have had it mounted on the pole shifter. Anyway, it was like getting an extra gear without a different transmission.

However, if you wanted to go a different way without changing the tranny, you could change out the rear differential, but in doing that you didn't get an extra gear, just a different ratio, which could give you an edge for the quarter mile.

As I recall, there were lots of ways to mess with the drivetrain to achieve different results. Fortunately, back then it was easier for the garage mechanic to work on their own. Things were a lot simpler. You could even change out a squealing throughout bearing along the highway if you had an extra floor jack to support the tranny. But with a little luck, you could limp home to your garage for a more user friendly environment. Some even had a pit in the garage that gave you a little better access. Ahhh, good times.
 
I recently remarked, in a different forum, about the use of nitrous oxide gas in WW2 British fighter air craft engines, as an emergency boost for added horsepower in a critical situation. It seems that many people nowadays, are unaware of this fact. It was also used in the Lancaster 4 engine heavy bomber aircraft, when a particular Lancaster was going to be carrying the 22,000 pound Grand Slam Bomb. The nitrous gas was used during the takeoff roll to get the aircraft off the ground before it ran out of paved runway space. The bomb bay doors on the Lancaster were 33 feet long, but to accommodate the Grand Slam Bomb. they had to be removed, and a special holding cradle was installed to carry the GSB.

Once the Grand Slam aircraft was in the air, the bomb had to be dropped on the target, because the load was so heavy that the landing gear would have collapsed, if the Lancaster would have attempted to land with it still on board. The Grand Slam was designed by Barnes Wallace, who also designed the Tall Boy, a 11,000 pound bomb, and the "bouncing bomb" use to attack the 3 German dams, by RAF 613 Squadron, The Dam Busters.

The specific targets for Tall Boys and Grand Slams were typically hardened bunkers made of reinforced steel and concrete, like the U boat repair pens on the French coast, or the V1 and V2 rocket launch sites in Holland and France.


During WW2 the RAF's Bomber Command air crews had a FIFTY PERCENT death rate. 55,456 RAF air crew died on operations, which was the highest death rate of any WW 2 British military force. A typical RAF bomber crew "tour " was 30 missions. One memorable crew did an incredible 65 trips, as a Path Finder group leader aircraft. The Path Finders flew ahead of the main bomber stream, and dropped marker flares on the target center, then they continued to fly a circle course dropping more coloured marker flares. That meant the Path Finders were over the target area for up to 45 minutes, while the main bomber stream passed over the target area.

Of the 7,787 Lancasters built during WW2, only TWO are still flying. One is a part of the RAF's Memorial Flight, and the other is the Canadian Lancaster, which is flown by the Canadian War Plane Heritage Museum, located in Hamilton, Ontario. The CWPHM Lancaster is known as VERA, but is officially the Charles Mynarski Victoria Cross Memorial aircraft.

In 2014, VERA was flown to the United Kingdom, via the North Atlantic route, with stops in Newfoundland, Iceland, then Scotland, and finally arriving in England. VERA and the RAF's Lancaster flew together for the whole summer, appearing at more than 30 air shows in the UK, France, Belgium Holland. During that summer VERA lost an engine, and the RAF loaned one of theirs to VERA. Upon her return to Canada, the spare engine was sent back to the UK via an Air Canada cargo flight.

here is a link to the Canadian War Plane Heritage Museum's web site. They FLY more than 25 WW2 aircraft from their collection.

link. Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum - Canadian Aviation History - Wartime Vintage Aircraft

You are a man after my own heart in that respect. This is the type of stuff I read about a lot. I imagine you have read a lot about the Dambuster Raid with their bouncing bombs?

I've only ever seen and heard an Avro Lancaster once, flying over and around my city for some reason, with its four Rolls-Royce Merlin engines.

 

Last edited:

Back
Top