This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============1509158424580885372==
boundary="------------92D30B1A8B1F07D956DB780D"
Content-Language: en-US
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------92D30B1A8B1F07D956DB780D
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
On 9/2/2019 8:25 PM, Paul Dorsey wrote:
> Why don't more cars have wet sleeve engines? What was the weekness of
> this idea?
Remember that the wet-sleeve engine in your car was first introduced
with the Standard Vanguard in something like 1937-38. It was expensive
to remove an engine for machining the bores, and with wet sleeves, the
bores could be removed and replaced with the block in the car, or, in a
pinch, machined on a lathe. And, there was good heat transfer from the
bores to the coolant, so it made sense at the time. The other
consideration was that the material that made really long-lasting
cylinder bore material wasn't that easy to cast in big lumps, like
engine blocks, without defects. And, an engine block with all that open
space without cast-in-place bores was simpler to design and cast, and
was more tolerant of commonplace errors in casting such as core shifts.
Over time, casting science improved, cylinder blocks were improved,
materials science produced iron alloys that flowed well /and/ had good
bore-wear characteristics, so wet-sleeve engines became pretty rare
(except for really huge stationary engines which can't just be yanked
and sent to the machine shop).
Cheers.
--
Michael Porter
Roswell, NM
Never let anyone drive you crazy when you know it's within walking distance....
--------------92D30B1A8B1F07D956DB780D
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/2/2019 8:25 PM, Paul Dorsey wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAFU8DPs79VTKzTLNXJHOs7d_mkgb+9ZkPfwp+KnF71WUxmo9gg@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">Why don't more cars have wet sleeve engines? What
was the weekness of this idea?</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Remember that the wet-sleeve engine in your car was first
introduced with the Standard Vanguard in something like 1937-38.Â
It was expensive to remove an engine for machining the bores, and
with wet sleeves, the bores could be removed and replaced with the
block in the car, or, in a pinch, machined on a lathe. And, there
was good heat transfer from the bores to the coolant, so it made
sense at the time. The other consideration was that the material
that made really long-lasting cylinder bore material wasn't that
easy to cast in big lumps, like engine blocks, without defects.Â
And, an engine block with all that open space without
cast-in-place bores was simpler to design and cast, and was more
tolerant of commonplace errors in casting such as core shifts.<br>
</p>
<p>Over time, casting science improved, cylinder blocks were
improved, materials science produced iron alloys that flowed well
<i>and</i> had good bore-wear characteristics, so wet-sleeve
engines became pretty rare (except for really huge stationary
engines which can't just be yanked and sent to the machine shop).</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Cheers.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Michael Porter
Roswell, NM
Never let anyone drive you crazy when you know it's within walking
distance....</pre>
</body>
</html>
--------------92D30B1A8B1F07D956DB780D--
--===============1509158424580885372==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
** triumphs@autox.team.net **
Archive: http://www.team.net/pipermail/triumphs http://www.team.net/archive
--===============1509158424580885372==--
|