|
"Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1@comcast.net> wrote
> And if you add up all the Sukhois, Murphy Mooses (not rebels), Thrushes,
> etc. it is not a drop in the bucket. There is not nearly enough volume there
> to make a radial diesel worthwhile for someone who wants to make money.
I'd think that the reason isn't economics, but the suitability of a
radial for diesel.
You always see diesels using a very stout block, and very stout cranks and
rods. Could a radial diesel be beefed up enough? I do not know, but I think
the answer is no.
GM tried to use a gas engine block converted to diesel, and it was a dismal
failure. That even had a solid cast iron block, and stout crank, and that
wasn't even up to the task.
Individual jugs are weak, since they blow off even with gasoline pressures,
sometimes. How much stronger would they have to be, for diesel? Could it
be done using separate cylinders?
A master rod may be strong enough, but I'd think that the slave rods and
pins would not be. They would have to be extremely beefed up to stand the
pressures. I do not know if there would be enough room in the case to do it.
Good questions raised here. Answers?
--
Jim in NC
|
|
Re: Why no new diesel radials?
