Advanced Engineering Tech - W8 vs. V8

W8

http://www.carlist.com/newcars/2003/image/w8_image_cast.gif

V8

http://www.gminsidenews.com/naias/Awards/LS7b.jpg

The W8 block is smaller, lighter, and most importantly has 8 cylinders. Volkswagen failed at their DOHC W8 because of the cost. However, what if GM engineered a OHV W8? Efficiency anybody????

Discuss.

That looks like it would be a pain in the ass to work on.

Unecessarily complex. What do the heads look like?

I think this was designed so that they could fit a V8 in a transverse FWD application.

New ideas and technology only stick if they are better in all areas such as performance, cost, reliability and size.

I read that GM is now working on a direct injected V8. Not sure if it's LS based, or a completely new design.

Quadruple turbo W16 is where its at :D

Quadruple turbo W16 is where its at :D

Not when a twin turbo 408-427 LS1 will make more power. :engarde:

thats actually kind of cool looking, not to mention you could make a W10 look about the same size as a v8. except for the fact the cylinder heads are probably huge. not to mention the possible advantage of turning lateral force into rotational force in 2 more different directions on the crankshaft.

Not when a twin turbo 408-427 LS1 will make more power. :engarde:

making 1000hp on 16 cylinders will always be more reliable then 1000hp on 8 cylinders considering both motor are made properly

let me simplify that. if you need to lift up a very heavy table, who will be more tired at the end of the day, 8 people or 16 people lifting that same table ? yes both of the groups will be able to lift it but the 16 people group will be able to do it more times.

yes, if the 16 cylinder motor is not built properly it will not be able to make 1000hp reliable but in case of the veyron motor it is.

thats actually kind of cool looking, not to mention you could make a W10 look about the same size as a v8. except for the fact the cylinder heads are probably huge. not to mention the possible advantage of turning lateral force into rotational force in 2 more different directions on the crankshaft.

yea but have you seen the crankshaft on a W8 engine ? i personally do not think you will able to spin the motor very fast with a crank like that

I would have a look a Narrow angle V engines if you are intrested in W engines. VW VR6 and R32/36 engines are pretty impresive. heads are BIG though! also keeping them cool is a BIG problem as you have very long exhaust ports.

Also there was a W8 engine used in a W8. hoever i heard the bottom end was very weak as it could only run 3 main bearings!

Regards,

Chris.

I'd rather have an inline 8.

making 1000hp on 16 cylinders will always be more reliable then 1000hp on 8 cylinders considering both motor are made properly

let me simplify that. if you need to lift up a very heavy table, who will be more tired at the end of the day, 8 people or 16 people lifting that same table ? yes both of the groups will be able to lift it but the 16 people group will be able to do it more times.

yes, if the 16 cylinder motor is not built properly it will not be able to make 1000hp reliable but in case of the veyron motor it is.

But then you get into the problem of paying twice as many people, fueling twice as many people, etc. And last time I checked a proberly build twin turbo 427 LS motor is damn reliable. I wonder what the price difference is? I be the LS gets better fuel economy also.

The W motors are a neat idea, but I don't like the fact that you have different length intake and exhaust ports. How the hell do you tune that for power?? And how does the crank take power pulses from so many different angles?? And like stated above; the crank loses room for main caps being so short with so many rods strapped to it.

dam that looks complicated to build and machine. prolly sohc or dohc since i cant see cam tunnel bore.

My friend has a W8 in his VW. It breaks all the time and to work on? ha good luck. Yeah is sounds good but its junk to me. Thinks hes hot shit cause he can kill hondas. Not a chance againts my old TBSS...

how about a flat 16 engine? here is how napier did it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napier_Sabre

Chris.

dam that looks complicated to build and machine. prolly sohc or dohc since i cant see cam tunnel bore.

Yes they are DOHC.

Not when a twin turbo 408-427 LS1 will make more power. :engarde:

If thats how we will play then ill take a 3.0 2jz or 2.0 4g63 which make equal power :engarde:

Thats just as valid a comparison ;)

If thats how we will play then ill take a 3.0 2jz or 2.0 4g63 which make equal power :engarde:

Thats just as valid a comparison ;)

:thumb: 2jz ftw oops did i say that on an LS board?! :bang:

If thats how we will play then ill take a 3.0 2jz or 2.0 4g63 which make equal power :engarde:

Thats just as valid a comparison ;)
Yes, all three are much more valid options than the VW quad turbo W16 when it comes to price, packaging, parts support, etc. Of course we could get into the powerband/torque/useable power argument also.

I just think the W16 is overly complex and unjustifyable from a business standpoint. Now a VR8 like the VR6 might be a more interesting notion.........

Yes, all three are much more valid options than the VW quad turbo W16 when it comes to price, packaging, parts support, etc. Of course we could get into the powerband/torque/useable power argument also.

I just think the W16 is overly complex and unjustifyable from a business standpoint. Now a VR8 like the VR6 might be a more interesting notion.........

VR8 would be intresting. Would be a little longer than a normal V8, probably the length of a inline 6. However you would have 2 extra cylinders. hmmm bet that would look intresting with a pair of T70 turbos hanging off one side! lol

Not when a twin turbo 408-427 LS1 will make more power. :engarde:

it wont last as long nor be as cool and as useable

But then you get into the problem of paying twice as many people, fueling twice as many people, etc. And last time I checked a proberly build twin turbo 427 LS motor is damn reliable. I wonder what the price difference is? I be the LS gets better fuel economy also.

The W motors are a neat idea, but I don't like the fact that you have different length intake and exhaust ports. How the hell do you tune that for power?? And how does the crank take power pulses from so many different angles?? And like stated above; the crank loses room for main caps being so short with so many rods strapped to it.

making reliable 1000hp is not cheap, so you can forget about paying twice the people or the price difference

a 1000hp v8 in not going to be reliable, it will need a rebuild pretty often. reliable engine in a street car is one that can do at least 100000km's without a rebuild. and the veyron motor can do that.

like i have said before, i am not a big fan of the w engines and would never buy one, but it will be very hard to make reliable 1000hp on 8 cylinders

100000km's without a rebuild. and the veyron motor can do that.

Not to pick on anyone but HOW do you know that?

making reliable 1000hp is not cheap, so you can forget about paying twice the people or the price difference

I was refering to your statement of people lifting a table. Meaning you have to buy twice as many parts, maintain fuel for twice as many cylinders, twice as many turbos, etc. I know 1,000hp is not cheap, but I think that a 1,000hp twin turbo LS1 would be light years less expensive than a quad turbo W16. I wonder how much VW would charge to sell that motor........is that even possible??

Not to pick on anyone but HOW do you know that?

bump this, that engine CANNOT do that

Not to pick on anyone but HOW do you know that?

because every production car needs to pass a number of test's before it is sold to the public, cold weather testing, hot weather testing etc. when the engine is engineered they beat the shit out of it on an engine dyno before it goes in to the car

I was refering to your statement of people lifting a table. Meaning you have to buy twice as many parts, maintain fuel for twice as many cylinders, twice as many turbos, etc. I know 1,000hp is not cheap, but I think that a 1,000hp twin turbo LS1 would be light years less expensive than a quad turbo W16. I wonder how much VW would charge to sell that motor........is that even possible??

just as i have told you before, making RELIABLE 1000hp is very expensive. it would be very very hard to do it with a ls1 motor. and probably will be even more expensive, because i have not seen an 8 cylinder engine make that sort of power for a long time.

also the Cadillac has a v16 engine in one of their concept cars, and i believe that made almost 1000hp N/A

just as i have told you before, making RELIABLE 1000hp is very expensive. it would be very very hard to do it with a ls1 motor. and probably will be even more expensive, because i have not seen an 8 cylinder engine make that sort of power for a long time.

also the Cadillac has a v16 engine in one of their concept cars, and i believe that made almost 1000hp N/A

THere ar a couple fo supercars that are aiming ofr over 1000bhp that are using LS based engines. Having said that they are well ver $500K cars! so there is probaby alot of RND goign into the engines.

I think this would be do able with a LS engine, but not a stock unit. although LS9 engines have made close to 1000rwhp with twin turbos running the same boost as the SC produces. maybe it is doable with the LS platform?

Chris.

I agree that reliable 1000hp is going to quite expensive. A 1000hp LS twin turbo motor would likely cost you $20,000 if you don't do any of it yourself. I bet the Veyron W16 is easily twice that much to purchase. This is more or less a moot point because I know I can't afford to build one:D.

I agree that reliable 1000hp is going to quite expensive. A 1000hp LS twin turbo motor would likely cost you $20,000 if you don't do any of it yourself. I bet the Veyron W16 is easily twice that much to purchase. This is more or less a moot point because I know I can't afford to build one:D.

double that, and then maybe you will have a half decent 1000hp motor

last time i checked the SSC Ultimate Aero is the fastest production car in the world, not the veyron. and also last i heard it has a 6.3l twin turbo chevy engine which i heard was LS based. it is twin turbo and if i remember correctly its only on like 15psi and makes several hundred more horsepower than the veyron (it made like 1287 or something excessive like that) will go faster in a straight line than the veyron and ive heard its cheaper which idk about honestly.

and as you said its a production car so its been tested. there is no reason a properly built motor with a power goal in mind couldnt make that power reliabley. we all know the reliability of the LS series so it doesnt shock me at all that they made that kind of power in a production car. hell i saw a 427 lsx with twins make 1480 on pump gas on an engine dyno.

honestly get off the bugatti's nuts, its not that super amazing of a car in perspective and it was only even made as a technological exercise to prove that a 250+mph road car could be made that would be safe and that you could live with everyday. pointless waste of money.

last time i checked the SSC Ultimate Aero is the fastest production car in the world, not the veyron. and also last i heard it has a 6.3l twin turbo chevy engine which i heard was LS based. it is twin turbo and if i remember correctly its only on like 15psi and makes several hundred more horsepower than the veyron (it made like 1287 or something excessive like that) will go faster in a straight line than the veyron and ive heard its cheaper which idk about honestly.

and as you said its a production car so its been tested. there is no reason a properly built motor with a power goal in mind couldnt make that power reliabley. we all know the reliability of the LS series so it doesnt shock me at all that they made that kind of power in a production car. hell i saw a 427 lsx with twins make 1480 on pump gas on an engine dyno.

honestly get off the bugatti's nuts, its not that super amazing of a car in perspective and it was only even made as a technological exercise to prove that a 250+mph road car could be made that would be safe and that you could live with everyday. pointless waste of money.

that engine WILL not last 100000 km

also ultima seems to be a kit car not a production car so people stick whatever engine they like in it.

i am not on bugatti's nut's, if you actually read the whole thread you will see that i do not like W engines, but if you think you can make a 8 cylinder 1000hp motor last 100000km's, you better get you head out of your ass

last time i checked the SSC Ultimate Aero is the fastest production car in the world, not the veyron. and also last i heard it has a 6.3l twin turbo chevy engine which i heard was LS based. it is twin turbo and if i remember correctly its only on like 15psi and makes several hundred more horsepower than the veyron (it made like 1287 or something excessive like that) will go faster in a straight line than the veyron and ive heard its cheaper which idk about honestly.

and as you said its a production car so its been tested. there is no reason a properly built motor with a power goal in mind couldnt make that power reliabley. we all know the reliability of the LS series so it doesnt shock me at all that they made that kind of power in a production car. hell i saw a 427 lsx with twins make 1480 on pump gas on an engine dyno.

honestly get off the bugatti's nuts, its not that super amazing of a car in perspective and it was only even made as a technological exercise to prove that a 250+mph road car could be made that would be safe and that you could live with everyday. pointless waste of money.

Actually Bugatti has done a Veyron Super Sport, and it is officially the fastest production car in the world now. Also, you made me laugh when you said the Aero made "several" hundred more horsepower than a Veyron, when the original was rated at 1,001 and the Aero at 1,287. And then, the new Super Sport only makes 1,200 and still goes faster than the aero, while weighing a considerable amount more.

Now, I'm not hating on the aero, I like the car and the motor is sweet. I guess we just have different views. For one, in my perspective I consider a car that can do 250+, that is safe, and liveable with everyday pretty amazing.

The price of a Bugatti is ridiculous though lol.

Good call on already pointing out that the Bugatti super sport already took back the record, and yes it did haves less power and more weight then the Aero while doing it.

A lot of posts here are pure opinion.

Actually Bugatti has done a Veyron Super Sport, and it is officially the fastest production car in the world now. Also, you made me laugh when you said the Aero made "several" hundred more horsepower than a Veyron, when the original was rated at 1,001 and the Aero at 1,287. And then, the new Super Sport only makes 1,200 and still goes faster than the aero, while weighing a considerable amount more.

Now, I'm not hating on the aero, I like the car and the motor is sweet. I guess we just have different views. For one, in my perspective I consider a car that can do 250+, that is safe, and liveable with everyday pretty amazing.

The price of a Bugatti is ridiculous though lol.

it cost them 5million to make each one and they are selling it at one million :D

not only will the veyron do 250 mph, it will do it so smoothly and quietly you can drive with 1 hand on the wheel and hold a comfortable conversation with your passenger while listening to the radio, sitting on your heated/cooled seats.

Imma cut the chase short because this is looking like it will turn into the time less "more speed for less money" battle.

The veyron really has no competition in this field, as was previously mentioned it will go faster then the aero but it will feel like a luxurious suite at speed while doing it. Andy grandma could just hop in and hit 250 and feel comfortable and secure in one.

Comparing it to the aeros price a car which can go almost as fast if you survive the acceleration with minimal creature comforts is just not a valid thing to do.

Different cars exist for different reasons, if everyone just cared about straigh line speed for little monet everyone would be driving swapped hondas or old swapped mustangs

Seriously give some credit where credit will do, a modded F body will walk a brand new CTS-V or M5 but that doesnt make it the better car, do you really think people who cross shop those will think "oh but for so much less money i can build this F body to be faster, its a tough choice!"

Veyron Impressive. But bugatti is stupid for manufacturing any car at a loss. If I remember correctly the areo broke the first record on a 3 mile run. Said that the car will do in the 260's range. Half the price, but half the options. Bugatti is very sexy and 5k pounds. To much money.

However, what about some kind of ls breed opposed 8. Porche, subaru, and the airplane industry has used them for years. They have proved to be very reliable. To me it just makes sense to have the combustion force driving towards each other to help absorb stress on the block. (but maybe it just makes more stress on the crank). They dont turn a lot of rpms but if you have enough power you can gear it however you want. I would also thing you could have a lower center of gravity for road racing cars. What do you think?

Veyron Impressive. But bugatti is stupid for manufacturing any car at a loss. If I remember correctly the areo broke the first record on a 3 mile run. Said that the car will do in the 260's range. Half the price, but half the options. Bugatti is very sexy and 5k pounds. To much money.

However, what about some kind of ls breed opposed 8. Porche, subaru, and the airplane industry has used them for years. They have proved to be very reliable. To me it just makes sense to have the combustion force driving towards each other to help absorb stress on the block. (but maybe it just makes more stress on the crank). They dont turn a lot of rpms but if you have enough power you can gear it however you want. I would also thing you could have a lower center of gravity for road racing cars. What do you think?

Veyron Impressive. But bugatti is stupid for manufacturing any car at a loss. If I remember correctly the areo broke the first record on a 3 mile run. Said that the car will do in the 260's range. Half the price, but half the options. Bugatti is very sexy and 5k pounds. To much money.

However, what about some kind of ls breed opposed 8. Porche, subaru, and the airplane industry has used them for years. They have proved to be very reliable. To me it just makes sense to have the combustion force driving towards each other to help absorb stress on the block. (but maybe it just makes more stress on the crank). They dont turn a lot of rpms but if you have enough power you can gear it however you want. I would also thing you could have a lower center of gravity for road racing cars. What do you think?

the problem is that the w8 is supposed to save room while the opposed 8 would most likely be a very large engine. i personally am very impressed with the one in my buddies Subaru sti. his modded sti blows the doors off my camaro.

i honestly hope they never make a reliable production 1000hp car that the average person can buy. there is no need for it and all we need is a bunch of idiots buying them. is it possible to make a 1000 hp production ls1 and make it reliable? i have no idea and 6 years ago i never thought i see a 630 hp engine in a corvette but who know they may one day have a 1000hp engine.

but i can tell you this if a manufacture thinks then can make money off producing an engine that make 1000hp then i have doubts if they care if it will last 1000k. back in the day my father bought a sport furry with a 440 race engine in it and it came with no warranty. Chevy build a 1000 hp camaro they could easily sell it with a 3 year 36k warranty instead of the 100k 5 year if they wanted. the point of it lasting a 100k miles is pointless.

the problem is that the w8 is supposed to save room while the opposed 8 would most likely be a very large engine. i personally am very impressed with the one in my buddies Subaru sti. his modded sti blows the doors off my camaro.

i honestly hope they never make a reliable production 1000hp car that the average person can buy. there is no need for it and all we need is a bunch of idiots buying them. is it possible to make a 1000 hp production ls1 and make it reliable? i have no idea and 6 years ago i never thought i see a 630 hp engine in a corvette but who know they may one day have a 1000hp engine.

but i can tell you this if a manufacture thinks then can make money off producing an engine that make 1000hp then i have doubts if they care if it will last 1000k. back in the day my father bought a sport furry with a 440 race engine in it and it came with no warranty. Chevy build a 1000 hp camaro they could easily sell it with a 3 year 36k warranty instead of the 100k 5 year if they wanted. the point of it lasting a 100k miles is pointless.


then buy a 4 banger and squeeze 1000hp out of it, and you will see how expensive the upkeep of that motor will be, not to mention the shitty power curve.

so the motor lasting 100 000km is not pointless to most of us

Veyron Impressive. But bugatti is stupid for manufacturing any car at a loss. If I remember correctly the areo broke the first record on a 3 mile run. Said that the car will do in the 260's range. Half the price, but half the options. Bugatti is very sexy and 5k pounds. To much money.

However, what about some kind of ls breed opposed 8. Porche, subaru, and the airplane industry has used them for years. They have proved to be very reliable. To me it just makes sense to have the combustion force driving towards each other to help absorb stress on the block. (but maybe it just makes more stress on the crank). They dont turn a lot of rpms but if you have enough power you can gear it however you want. I would also thing you could have a lower center of gravity for road racing cars. What do you think?

the gt3rs porsche engine turns to 8300rpm i think

Porche is also a 6 not an 8. RPM is really irrelevant for most street applications. As long as you can make power and gear it right you can go fast. Look at the diesel guys. If your on the race track rpm is a different story. Its hard to say if the opposed engine is really any better than the current lsx engines as far as reliability. I have thought about it hard and the traditional V engine design puts a lot of stress on the mains while the opposed engine puts it more on the crank. I dont know if porches have any crank problem when really sticking the juice to it, but I would guess they would. Just my .02

Bugatti is very sexy and 5k pounds.

Normal Veyron- ~4500lbs (can you say normal Veyron? :lol:)
Veyron SS- ~4400lbs

Heavy, yes, but just a few hundred lbs off of the SRT8s :lol:

Bugatti ss is stupid looking though

Stupid comment. Looks are subjective.

Isnt this the advanced tech section, all I see are opinions about the cars looks and google searches on records with no actual hard data comparing cylinder head flow, longevity or anything else.

Good call on already pointing out that the Bugatti super sport already took back the record, and yes it did haves less power and more weight then the Aero while doing it.

A lot of posts here are pure opinion.

Yea exactly since the maker of the Aero said the car wasnt toped out, just ran out of room on a PUBLIC ROAD!(it was closed to public obviously though) but still a bumpy public road is not the best place to test something like that and he said it could easily hit 270+mph if they were givin a test track like that one the Veyron SS ran on.

Further more, you guys saying the veyron will last 100,000km are clueless, you could have built 10 more 1000+hp LS motors for the price of JUST maintanence to the veyron. VW doesnt know how to make high HP cars, thats why the bugatti is so heavily dependandt on strong high tech expensive materials to make up for the lack of design. years of RnD and countless millions over a long period of time is how GM can do it easily now. You can go buy a 800+ci BBC that makes 2000hp N/A for under $100k and it will last longer than that bugatti. Hell you could buy GM's 572 crate motor and throw a turbo/supercharger on it with very low boost and make over 1000hp and it will last longer.

Isnt this the advanced tech section, all I see are opinions about the cars looks and google searches on records with no actual hard data comparing cylinder head flow, longevity or anything else.
x2, I was hoping to see allot of hard facts and technical comparisons.. :(

my friends got one, they sound pretty crazy

http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p173/xjjf1015x/IMG_0314.jpg

Photo of an actual Veyron engine block. This was at the PRI show (performance racing industry) in orlando last year

Yea exactly since the maker of the Aero said the car wasnt toped out, just ran out of room on a PUBLIC ROAD!(it was closed to public obviously though) but still a bumpy public road is not the best place to test something like that and he said it could easily hit 270+mph if they were givin a test track like that one the Veyron SS ran on.

Further more, you guys saying the veyron will last 100,000km are clueless, you could have built 10 more 1000+hp LS motors for the price of JUST maintanence to the veyron. VW doesnt know how to make high HP cars, thats why the bugatti is so heavily dependandt on strong high tech expensive materials to make up for the lack of design. years of RnD and countless millions over a long period of time is how GM can do it easily now. You can go buy a 800+ci BBC that makes 2000hp N/A for under $100k and it will last longer than that bugatti. Hell you could buy GM's 572 crate motor and throw a turbo/supercharger on it with very low boost and make over 1000hp and it will last longer.


No one is argueing with you that the Bugatti is over priced and that a GM engine couldn't make that power and a lot more. But its clear that you just dont get the Veyron or any type of car like it! Sorry but if the Veyron used a GM engine (and they NEVER would!!!!) it would not be the car it is.

This is nothing against GM orny engine they make. Kornegsega (whatever the name was) made it very clear to the public that they only used a ford V8 race blok in their engine and that it sheard NO other components with the Ford engine!!!! the only hyper car company to use another companies engine is Maclaren with the F1 (and that was a massively worked BMW RACE V12) and Pagani with the Zonda's V12, and again that is had alot of work done to it!

Chris.

making 1000hp on 16 cylinders will always be more reliable then 1000hp on 8 cylinders considering both motor are made properly


Sure if your looking at the power per cylinder, but that's implying that the cylinder sizes between the two engines are the same displacement. Thus, it's highly displacement dependent.

But damn that Veyron block is BEEFY

Isnt this the advanced tech section, all I see are opinions about the cars looks and google searches on records with no actual hard data comparing cylinder head flow, longevity or anything else.

I stayed away from here for a couple of months and came back to see posts about hydrogen generators, 100mpg carbuerators, and people who think you can atomize fuel enough to prevent detonation.:ripped:

buy this

http://nelsonracingengines.com/pricesheets/lsx/racegas/tt/ws_454lsx_tt.pdf

and put it in this

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/12_02/kightriderL_468x582.jpg

From personal experience i can honestly say these engines are an absolute pig and there is still not enough to make them a reliable worthwhile engine. How long has the W8 been around 8 years? the V8...108 years...although many changes.

These volksys have a bit of a hunger for head gaskets, costly and engine removal makes your life much easier.

IMO steer clear, the Veyron is a supercar that costs around 5million USD to build then VW sell it as a loss because they want it to be the greatest automobile experiment ever.
So you cant really compare that to what we use, concept vs mass production. That just doesnt make sense does it

I think the W8 is a complicated answer looking for a question. The W8 was used in the Passat and the Audi A6 which are both B5 platforms.
Audi had already put their 4.2l V8 in a B5.
I worked for VW/Audi during the time they were talking and developing the W8 and the Phaeton both of which were flops.
The W8 was made by lopping 2 cylinders off the15* narrow angle VR6 making it a VR4. Then they mated 2 VR4 blocks together to make a W8, 2 VR6's= W12 etc. The W family of engines isn't really ground breaking it is just a complex design for the sake of being complex. Audi's 5v per cyl is the same way.
Here is the inspiration for the Bugatti super exotic wunder motern
http://www.6066gmcguy.org/TwinSix.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puJaDfB4UFM

I stayed away from here for a couple of months and came back to see posts about hydrogen generators, 100mpg carbuerators, and people who think you can atomize fuel enough to prevent detonation.:ripped:

Me too

I'll take a blown and turboed V-16 71 any day. A pair will push a pilot rescue boat through heavy surf at 70 knots, and last 10k hours.

I know it's anti-creative thinking, but there's probably a reason why there aren't a whole lot of W8's floating around.

making reliable 1000hp is not cheap, so you can forget about paying twice the people or the price difference

a 1000hp v8 in not going to be reliable, it will need a rebuild pretty often. reliable engine in a street car is one that can do at least 100000km's without a rebuild. and the veyron motor can do that.

like i have said before, i am not a big fan of the w engines and would never buy one, but it will be very hard to make reliable 1000hp on 8 cylinders

Hah!

http://jalopnik.com/5449046/veyron-owner-finds-private-jet-travel-cheaper

Apparently, the English Bugatti owner was tired of paying $21,000 for a routine service, $38,500 for a set of four tires and $46,000 every fourth tire change to have his wheels x-rayed to check for stress fractures. In comparison, an annual service on a Ferrari Enzo (http://jalopnik.com/5439687/gemballa-mig+u1-tunes-ferrari-enzo-up-to-11/gallery/) costs just $2,730.



Provide proof that the Veyron's W16 can do that mileage without a rebuild..

And back to advanced engineering tech... The VW R32 is a nice design as it reduces the cost of multiple cylinder heads and valvetrain components. Only downside I can see is that it would be a taller engine: high center of gravity and fitment issues:

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k165/fourthchirpin/Engine%20Pics/28hgR32head.jpg

Unecessarily complex. .



Agreed. Would this be quad cam on each side? Or use different size pushrods? I have no idea how the valve train would work.

Agreed. Would this be quad cam on each side? Or use different size pushrods? I have no idea how the valve train would work.

DOHC each bank (for a W engine). You use rockers to get the valve actuation over to the offset cylinders. as said above the R32 engines are tried and tested. they get a 3.2ltr unit into a space that would normally house a 4 pot engine (2.0-2.4ltr).

It would be intrsesting to see what a W12 engine would look like compeard to a LS engine. two R32 (or even R36) engiens would give you 6.4 (7.2) ltrs with 48 valves! think people are pushing about 800bhp out of these engines so it should be pretty eqsy to get over 1000bhp out of a W12. Obviously as discussed before main bearing support is going to be the problem. the maincap are going to have to be special to take the load. Maybe a built in cradle could be used that linked all the mains together and boted to the block aswell..... Cross bolting would also help......

Chris.

House cleaning.

The W8 can be imagined as flat plane crank V8 engine made with VR4s instead of inline fours.

If you don't know what a flat plane crank is, you don't even belong in this thread.