gtfoxy

Who's to say that couldn't be done with a V-16. Only difference would be 4,000HP.

Staged turbos running like 40-50psi of manifold pressure would be awesome. That's the kind of stuff I see at tractor pulls. But on diesels.

DER E30

Some kind of crazy sand rail/4wd buggy...

How would you link engines the engines mechanically?

DER E30

Double post sorry.

gtfoxy

Here's a vid similar to what I was thinking, but a tad small. I would not adapt it at the small bolt diameter but use the outer bolts on the flywheel.


I would also have an adapter that would bolt to the bell housing flange & connect to the heads/ block of the rear engine. Torque joiner & shield for the flywheel.

Blown06

iTrader: (32)

Might be better to bolt it closer to the centerline of the crankshaft. There could be some big forces happening a foot away from the centerline.

This is just a guess. I've never done this, but do find it very interesting.

Not sure I agree with a rubber coupler in the center of it all though. Harmonics be damned.

gtfoxy

If you are talking about me using the pressure plate mount bolts, yeah I hear you. I was thinking along the lines of a plate that would be machined to engage the rear crank hub that would center the adapter. The shaft to the next engine would be pretty short, spacing it so you would have just enough room for the water pump & drive belt. Ideally the adapter & damper would be one piece. It would slide over the crank snout & bolt down like normal, being keyed, & then just line up the flywheel bolts so the engines are sequenced, & bolt it down.

I have gone back & forth on the dampening. If the longitudinal crank center lines can be gotten about perfect, it shouldn't be needed. This was the reason why I wanted to do a 1-piece crank adapter (more fasteners holding multiple pieces together invites too much tolerance variances) & have a system to connect the upper portions of the engines together. That way they are concentricly linked on the crank centerline & Peripherally linked on a radius of the centerline.

Blown06

iTrader: (32)

I assume that 99% of people on this forum don't know who "flathead jack" is, but his knowledge on this subject would be invaluable. He has a hot rod shop, mostly just selling parts these days, in a little town outside of Sacramento California called Wallnut Creek. He runs a front engine dragster with two Ford V8 flatheads in line. Last time I was at his shop he was telling me about the engineering he has in his current setup. I can't really speak to everything he said, but mention of balancing the crankshafts together as one piece and crazy **** like that came up. He is a super nice guy and likes to talk.

My little story of inline v8 set ups.

sbcgenII

iTrader: (1)

What about 4 80mm turbos?

chuntington101

A similar think was done in the Uk with a kit car. That ran two motorbike engines. However rather than linking the engines together end on end they ran them to a transfer box that took two power inputs and converted to a single power output. This was AFTER the bike gearboxes so shaft speed would be slower.

Might be another option but doing it pre gearbox. You could then mount one engine in the front and the second in the rear. Then maybe a truck could be used.

gtfoxy

I saw that the other day. Proves my point from my statement at the top of this page.

I've heard of him. He's right. Ideally you would link the motors together & balance the cranks together. It is more imperative as you get up in RPM's.



That's done in tractor pulls also.

Forcefed86

iTrader: (4)

I can’t see any front mount in a vehicle being practical. Mid mounting it behind a built shorty glide/th400 with a tiny driveshaft shaft in a van/truck would be the only vehicle option IMO. Did you see the rear mount BBC turbo truck that’s been in the last few drag weeks? Something like that could work…

gtfoxy

That's bad-***!

I agree. Rear mounted all the way.

coltboostin

Well I just found my next build....

Thanks!!!