Notices
928 Forum 1978-1995
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: 928 Specialists

GTS vs S4 crankshaft

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-01-2010, 12:39 AM
  #16  
Dennis K
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
Dennis K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ptuomov
I've read that article a couple of times. Frustrated about the figures 9 and 10 missing...
If you can't see the pics on the webpage, you can download the article in pdf format here:

http://www.ret-monitor.com/articles/...rankshafts.pdf

By the way, those pics are awesome. That S4 crank pic w/ the nice depth of field was taken w/ Jim's 18-200 VR lens. Also as an FYI, that crank isn't stock. It was drilled by Jay @ Taylor Engine. For the purposes of this discussion though, the counterweights are stock.

Last edited by Dennis K; 06-01-2010 at 01:05 AM.
Old 06-01-2010, 01:13 AM
  #17  
ptuomov
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
 
ptuomov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MA
Posts: 5,610
Received 81 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Dennis K
If you can't see the pics on the webpage, you can download the article in pdf format here:

http://www.ret-monitor.com/articles/...rankshafts.pdf

By the way, those pics are awesome. That S4 crank pic w/ the nice depth of field was taken w/ Jim's 18-200 VR lens. Also that crank isn't stock. It was drilled by Jay @ Taylor Engine.
Yes, I've been using a lot of your photos, they look really good.

The center main journal hole gives a hint that something not entirely stock is going on with the crank.

The pdf article and the html page are quite different. The pdf, for example, doesn't have any mention of 6 vs. 8 cw crankshafts.

In any case, just killing time wondering if there's a decent crank hiding inside either one of these...
Old 06-01-2010, 05:50 AM
  #18  
IcemanG17
Race Director
 
IcemanG17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Stockton, CA
Posts: 16,270
Received 75 Likes on 58 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ptuomov
Holding other aspects of the cw design constant, mainly the radius, putting counterweights closer to the center main necessarily means that the counterweights in aggregate have to be heavier.
Tuomo
I am not an engineer, I was merely relaying info I got from other people who are engineers and build engines...

If the 8 wt design is worse, why did Porsche do it & why do SO many modern race engines use it...the 8400rpm M3 uses 8 weights & makes 103.5 HP/L
http://www.rcollins.org/m3/RS46/DSC02293.jpg

It is interesting that the LS7 uses a 6 weight design....but turns "only" 7000rpm, even thought the far longer stroke moves the pistons over 10% faster than the M3
Old 06-02-2010, 01:02 AM
  #19  
ptuomov
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
 
ptuomov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MA
Posts: 5,610
Received 81 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by IcemanG17
If the 8 wt design is worse, why did Porsche do it & why do SO many modern race engines use it...the 8400rpm M3 uses 8 weights & makes 103.5 HP/L

It is interesting that the LS7 uses a 6 weight design....but turns "only" 7000rpm, even thought the far longer stroke moves the pistons over 10% faster than the M3
What's the point of having the same size counterweights in the center as elsewhere? In those M3 V8 cranks, the center counterweights are much smaller. What's weird to me with the GTS crank is not so much why it has the center counterweights but why they are so big.



Quick Reply: GTS vs S4 crankshaft



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 10:43 AM.