Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > Vehicle Specific > Domestic Cars
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-23-2005, 05:09 AM   #16
vwhobo
CF's Anal Orifice
 
vwhobo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Redneck Hell
Posts: 8,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSMer
Not quite sure of the specific name of the tool but I've used it in Chemistry class on couple of occasions. Its a large graduated cylinder with a spout on the bottom and it pours a measured ammount of fluid. What I've seen some engine builders do is use one of these to meassure the ammount of fluid(usually just water) that the cylinder would hold and they put some kind of clear plastic block over the cylinder head and sealed the surrounding edges with jelly or wax. Something to keep the water from overflowing.. Don't know what the proper name is, but I've seen a few guys do it with engine blocks and valve heads. Not sure as to how accurate that is but thats one I know of.

The other I heard from reading one of Wally's post that had something to do with pressures. Absolute manifold pressure to be exact, but he may not have been talking about an accurate measure I'll have to find the post to clarify...
Sorry, you lose. While the procedure you're describing will in fact tell you what the displacement is, it is a mechanical measurement. Great for CCing heads but not for what we're talking about, or what you're bitching about here.

What you are doing is a way of physically measuring. You can only mathamatically determine the displacement of and engine by using the appropriate equation ans mentioned above. Time for you to appologise.
__________________
Thanks for the pic, jedimario.

"Everybody believes in something and everybody, by virtue of the fact that they believe in something, use that something to support their own existence."
Frank Vincent Zappa, 1940-1993

vwhobo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2005, 05:16 AM   #17
88GrandPrixSE
CF Freak
 
88GrandPrixSE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Regina, Sask., Canada
Posts: 581
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSMer
Damn I thought you were on a role there. Incorrect, while stroke does indeed refer to the crank, stoke is distance that the crank moves the piston fromt BDC to TDC. The actual lenght of a cylinder is never used in calculation because there are parts of the cylinder that will never see the combustion. Therefore the correct term to use would be "stroke" not lenght. Bore and Stroke, not Bore and Lenght. You passed the first test, surely you could have gotten this, just open a fecking automotive dictionary. Come on my little lab rat you can do this...

You do realize that's what I just said, no?

Mistake #1

Quote:
Self explanitory dipshit. A different crank can produce a lesser or greater stroke(that thing you're not familiar with) wich would give you the extra 300cc's. Surley YOU should have known that... Jeez, you're doing horribly on this test.

Once again, I'd already said that a different crank/rods/pistons would change the displacement. That was my reasoning for bringing it up.

How many times do I have to tell you I know what a stroke is, it's you that doesn't seem to, as you seem to think the whole cylinder is part of the stroke.

Mistake #2

Quote:
Ok cmon Mr.Chrysler man, for extra credit. You can still redeem yourself by naming at least one other way to figure out engine displacement.

All I was saying is you can't just take a block and figure out the displacement, you have to have the block, crank, rods, pistons and heads to determine displacement.

Mistake #3

Wow, you're good. 3 mistakes in one post.
__________________
88GrandPrixSE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2005, 05:17 AM   #18
DSMer
CF Extraordinaire
 
DSMer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwhobo
Sorry, you lose. While the procedure you're describing will in fact tell you what the displacement is, it is a mechanical measurement. Great for CCing heads but not for what we're talking about, or what you're bitching about here.

What you are doing is a way of physically measuring. You can only mathamatically determine the displacement of and engine by using the appropriate equation ans mentioned above. Time for you to appologise.

Well if it does in fact tell you displacement and it will work, the whats the problem? If you can use a mechanical measurment to get the volume of the cylinder then whats wrong with it? I'm not sure of the accuracy but I've seen it work. Engine was overbored, they did that test it came out to 2.4L when they did it mathematicly it also came out to 2.4L....

It may be inneficient in that it would just be easier to use math, but if it can indeed tell you displacement, whats wrong with it?

**EDIT**
Quote:
All I was saying is you can't just take a block and figure out the displacement, you have to have the block, crank, rods, pistons and heads to determine displacement.

Well I said you could use Stroke and Bore, assuming you have a block you'd have the bore. How else do you think you could get stroke? By guestimating where the piston and crank would travel? According to the calculations the head would'nt be necessary... Just the Block itself.., with its parts still in it of course..
__________________

...Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid...

Last edited by DSMer : 03-23-2005 at 05:22 AM.
DSMer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2005, 05:21 AM   #19
Wally
I Know More Than You
 
Wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oz
Posts: 2,564
You have been a bad boy DSMer and you must be punished. Now go to the nice man and tell him you are sorry. I will deal with you when we get home.
__________________
"She gave me a look only a mother could give a child."
Wally is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2005, 05:46 AM   #20
windsonian
Dodger65's weirdo
 
windsonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down Below
Posts: 2,081
Is this serious?!?!?

Quote:
Not quite sure of the specific name of the tool but I've used it in Chemistry class on couple of occasions. Its a large graduated cylinder with a spout on the bottom and it pours a measured ammount of fluid. What I've seen some engine builders do is use one of these to meassure the ammount of fluid(usually just water) that the cylinder would hold and they put some kind of clear plastic block over the cylinder head and sealed the surrounding edges with jelly or wax. Something to keep the water from overflowing.. Don't know what the proper name is, but I've seen a few guys do it with engine blocks and valve heads. Not sure as to how accurate that is but thats one I know of.


I thought it was cleared up back there when someone said multiply piston area (or cylinder x-section area) by stroke of piston by number of cylinders to get displacement.

Why would you start going on about using burettes and other assorted chemistry apparatus (apparatii?).
Just admit you were wrong and that you were trying to figure out a complex way to solve a simple problem.

As for filling a 2L engine with 2L of water.... wouldn't the pistons all be at different parts of the cycle at any one time? Tell me how then you would just start filling up cylinders?

Sometimes it takes a bit of courage to admit you may not know everything. I know I don't know everything, but I thought that it would be difficult to get all 4 cylinders in a 2L engine to be at the bottom of the stroke.
windsonian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2005, 05:54 AM   #21
88GrandPrixSE
CF Freak
 
88GrandPrixSE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Regina, Sask., Canada
Posts: 581
Quote:
Originally Posted by windsonian
Is this serious?!?!?



I thought it was cleared up back there when someone said multiply piston area (or cylinder x-section area) by stroke of piston by number of cylinders to get displacement.

Why would you start going on about using burettes and other assorted chemistry apparatus (apparatii?).
Just admit you were wrong and that you were trying to figure out a complex way to solve a simple problem.

As for filling a 2L engine with 2L of water.... wouldn't the pistons all be at different parts of the cycle at any one time? Tell me how then you would just start filling up cylinders?

Sometimes it takes a bit of courage to admit you may not know everything. I know I don't know everything, but I thought that it would be difficult to get all 4 cylinders in a 2L engine to be at the bottom of the stroke.

Well you could fill one at BDC with water then multiply by the number of cyls. But filling it with something.... that'd be somewhat... inneffective to say the least
__________________
88GrandPrixSE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2005, 06:11 AM   #22
car_crazy89
Part Time CFer
 
car_crazy89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,849
I'm sorry for asking a question that started these problems, i thought it would be a relatively simple answer. But thanx again for your replies and i'll leave it for you all to work out these other problems.
car_crazy89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2005, 06:15 AM   #23
windsonian
Dodger65's weirdo
 
windsonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down Below
Posts: 2,081
It's bound to happen ...
Did you find out what you needed to know amongst it all?
windsonian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2005, 07:20 AM   #24
DSMer
CF Extraordinaire
 
DSMer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by windsonian
Is this serious?!?!?



I thought it was cleared up back there when someone said multiply piston area (or cylinder x-section area) by stroke of piston by number of cylinders to get displacement.

Why would you start going on about using burettes and other assorted chemistry apparatus (apparatii?).
Just admit you were wrong and that you were trying to figure out a complex way to solve a simple problem.

As for filling a 2L engine with 2L of water.... wouldn't the pistons all be at different parts of the cycle at any one time? Tell me how then you would just start filling up cylinders?

Sometimes it takes a bit of courage to admit you may not know everything. I know I don't know everything, but I thought that it would be difficult to get all 4 cylinders in a 2L engine to be at the bottom of the stroke.

Thats the name of the tool. I think its a burette.. and this is usually done to an engine that has just come back from machining. You turn the crankshaft until each piston is at BDC, just as you would if you were checking the compression of each cylinder. Multiplying would be inaccurate because one cylinder may be off.

Its not difficult. Most 4 cylinder engines fire in a 1/4 and 2/3 position. Wich would mean you would only have to turn the crank one full time. Again as I said simple math would always be easier, but this is indeed a way you can determine cylinder volume.
__________________

...Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid...
DSMer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2005, 04:36 PM   #25
DodgeRida67
Banned
 
DodgeRida67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Jackson, Georgia
Posts: 2,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by 88GrandPrixSE
Well you could fill one at BDC with water then multiply by the number of cyls. But filling it with something.... that'd be somewhat... inneffective to say the least
Not to mention how inaccurate it would be with all the different piston types used. For instance I bought a set that would soak up 5CC's each. That would be 40CC's off.
DodgeRida67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2005, 10:28 PM   #26
car_crazy89
Part Time CFer
 
car_crazy89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,849
Yes, i think i found out what i needed to know. Thanx for your help. And ya I know problems occur sometimes cause i've read some in other threads. Thanx again.
car_crazy89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2005, 11:01 PM   #27
jman
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2
To convert engine displacement (litre) to cubic inch just multiply by 61. For example 2.0L is 122 cubic inch
jman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2005, 01:56 AM   #28
CarEXPERT
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 1,117
why is everyone arguing about a very simple thing?

DSMer has been a bad boy?
CarEXPERT is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:51 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.