Does Veeky Forums think dual overhead camshaft is superior to single overhead camshaft...

btfo

Well the best engines in the world are DOHC so

>implying
The single greatest engine family in the world is OHV.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhh

Pushrods push gods.
Fact: DOHC is inferior exotic technology
Fact: valve lashing is a fun activity
Fact: more than two valves/cylinder is kikery.

Not that user.

Sure there are better engines in better cars. But there is no better standalone engine that is consistently as good in every car it's put in (and it finds it's way into loads of them), and is as easy to put into cars that were not meant to have it.

No cams a best cams

>tfw lash the valves down
>feely feeler gauges
>no more clackityclack
>no more misfire CELs
>butt dyno says at least +40HP

>faster than million dollar, state-of-the-art, DOHC hypercars
>uses the tried and true formula of massive displacement, pushrods, fuckoff massive tires and borderline retarded aero
And DOHC is superior how again?

>gimmick bs

People who LS swap are literally worse than hitler

of course its superior you stupid moron

>CEL
>flat tappet cams
fuck off illuminatjewy

Has everything to do with aggressive aero brakes and tires on a barely street legal car
And yet still slower than other track specials with much less power

Its a 7 LITRE fucking engine

First of all, Cubic Inches as God intended.
2. So what?

SOHC 4-valve masterrace

>tfw one tappet actuates two valves on the exhaust side
>have to adjust it 50-60 times until lash is acceptable for both
>i bet the jews did this
>still feelsgoodman when you get everything smooth and nice
>finally get it right

>SOHC

Lower friction bitch.

Guess what else. That's still twice as many cam shafts as you have.

>tractor engine
>good

I guess you you'd know more than Mr Koenigsegg seen as you're so quick to dismiss his huge technological advancement as a mere "gimmick". So please, tell me where he went wrong and how this technology won't contribute significantly to the cars of the future.

>That's still twice as many cam shafts as you have.
wat
Pushrods have cams noob

I have one cam per head and two heads.

>huge technological advancement
This won't sell.
Innovation is not profitable.

Oh my bad.
Yeah you do have two heads, reptilian.

H4/V6 SOHC 4 valve? holy shit man.

bingo old subaru with an EJ22

if you clean the spider webs out of one of the intake runners you get +14 torks easily.

youtube.com/watch?v=S3cFfM3r510
the tl;dw
>eliminates camshafts
>massively reduces the size of the cylinder head
>eliminates the timing chain or belt
>eliminates timing chain guides and sprockets
>reduces the bulk of the engine as a timing cover doesn't need to be present
>massively reduces weight and increases packaging due to the elimination of these parts
there's more, too
>each individual valve can be independently controlled, including lift and duration
>every valve can get its own port
>each port can be tailor made for optimum airflow/exhaust flow
>if turbo, the exhaust ports can split off so half can go directly out like an N/A and half can go to the turbo
>NA ports can heat catalytic converters by shooting flames, eliminating the need for a precat

Sounds like some faggote shit 2 me.

>his huge technological advancement
camless valves have been around for a while bro

It's ok to not understand, just don't hating something because it's smarter that you.

*hate

>good option
Sorry, you're right good call. I meant to imply it's the best option.

>valves that are operated independently by linear actuators with timing controlled by a computer
whoop de fucking doo I had the same idea in 2005, asked why it didn't exist yet, and was told "too expensive." what a goddamn surprise that the guy who sells cars for OVER A MILLION DOLLARS EACH has the funds to design and produce it.

That's not innovation, he's just the first person who bothered.

no

No Cam is the way to go.

FUCKING WEEEW D00D
More electronics that will fail way before any physical valve operation
Pushrod>everything else

>Does Veeky Forums think dual overhead camshaft is superior to single overhead camshaft?
lol

f1 has been doing it for years. i think they banned it at some point maybe.

>HUR DUR MUH DUAL CAMS
>HUR DUR MUH ROTARY
>HUR DUR PUSHRODS
>HUR DUR SOHC
christ you faggots argue about anything lol

Some chink company has Freevalve prototype engines for a car that's like 25-30k so it's likely possible to implement at not too much cost.

fuck, what an achievement.
worse than hitler (implying he was bad tho)
now i feel like i want to ls swap.

There's a reason engine development through history has followed the path of OHV > SOHC > DOHC

>having to make your OHV engine twice the size it would need to be if it was DOHC

>lower redline
>poorer throttle response
>less power
>less airflow
>worse emissions

Why would anyone use OHV over DOHC aside from trying to cheap out production costs?

As good as those engines are, they would perform even better if they were DOHC

Valveless 2-stroke.

Missing Leafs on that list at the very bottom.

>>lower redline
Who cares. 6-7,000rpm is plenty. Redline doesn't mean shit when you have torque and gearing that is matched to it.
>>poorer throttle response
What the fuck? Wrong
>>less power
Wrong unless you cherrypick truck engines and malaise era shit
>>less airflow
Wrong (go google flow numbers for modern LS heads)
>>worse emissions
Wrong where are you even getting that one?

>Why would anyone use OHV over DOHC aside from trying to cheap out production costs?
Because it's good enough for many applications
Because it's a more compact configuration
Because it's simple and proven
Because it's

My DOHC 24V BMW has cylinder head flow numbers comparable with a 2V LS engine, and even though MUH HP/L is higher with my I6, I'd swap it would swap an LS engine if something were to happen to it. LS engines are light and small, they make good power and loads of torque. That's the advantage of OHV.

>The only alternative is a pushrod OHV setup - but only on engines with two banks of cilinders.

Are you fucking stupid?

Pneumatic valves are better

Fact of the matter is we have made no significant technological advances since the 1950's.
We've just developed existing technologies.
Most "New tech" today are just fucking gimics that could have been done, or were done 60+ years ago.

I'm sure everyone has had the idea, but actually implementing it is another story.
It's never going to get cheaper if no one does it.

Fucking sick of ideas guys

>cams

hows that dual underhead cam engine running bro

No reason to have cams at all. All you need is a few actuators with a nice control. It's simply the best.

>Engine gets smaller
>Better performance optimization
>You may even get rid of throttle body in some cases
>Literally better in every performance aspect

>Maybe harder to implement but then again the frequencies the engines are operating are basically constant compared to electonics controlling these. So it's entirely possible to better optimize.
>Maybe not as reliable but then again you are expected to change timing belt every 5 years. Just changing the actuators may even be as simple as removing the cylinder cover and plugging in new ones.

>reeevalve
with a bit of imagination that could be a very rare pepe that you have there

...

I'm super impressed with American improvement on pushrods. They looked hopeless in the 90s, but now American engines are the best in the world and they don't need high-octane gasoline too.

>but now American engines are the best in the world a
I wouldn't go that far, but it is really impressive the amount of flow they get out of 2 valve heads in their LS and LT engines. They're also compact and lightweight, DOHC V8s are much wider and usually heavier.

Welcome to cars in general. Now gtfo.
Pushrod > everything else
>search your feelings. You know it to be true.

not that guy, but dont you inherently get more surface area therefore more flow from 4 valves per cylinder vs 2?

that's literally what freevalve is

f1 has pneumatic valve springs, they still use camshafts for opening the valves

True, but port design means that pushrod 2v engines tend to outflow 4v OHC engines despite the added surface area.

Also, pushrod engines don't have to be 2v. Multivalve is still possible (see: Honda CX500).

And the car built around them would perform worse, since the added weight and chassis size would make it slower.

OHV only makes sense on V engines. Ever seen a OHV inline engine? It's literally retarded SOHC with more stuff added to make it more complicated - and DOHC > SOHC.

DOHC is best for inlines.
DOHC and OHV are best for V's.

>camshafts
>valves
youtube.com/watch?v=Qo6RpLer_bw

dohc>sohc>ohv

>twice the size
The only naturally aspirated engines with more power than the Viper are:
>F140 (6.3L)
>Lamborghini V12 (6.5L)
>Aston Martin One-77 (7.3L)
If you exclude the statistical (and ludicrously expensive) anomaly that is the Enzo, a DOHC engine can displace 75% of it's OHV counterpart to make identical power - if you add heaps of money, because every engine on this list costs more than an entire base Viper. Also, displacement does not mean engine size - the Viper V10 is extremely compact for both it's displacement and it's output.

Half of a Viper would be 4.2 liters. None of those cars mentioned above are that displacement.

Yes, but the valve stems take up some area so the surface area advantage isn't as large as that image makes it out to be. In any case, port design and quality matters more to flow than valve size. Doesn't matter how big your valves are or how many you have if your ports are not optimized for flow throughout the valve lift range. Scope these numbers: hotrod.com/articles/hrdp-1012-ultimate-chevrolet-ls-cylinder-head-test/
The stock LS head's intake port is flowing 228cfm @0.5" valve lift, and 28" differential pressure. That's well over 200cfm from a factory 2V head designed in the early 90s. Most people on this board would love to have that kind of head flow. It's impressive. Now look at the aftermarket, these guys managing to make over 300cfm @0.5" valve lift. Most modern 4V DOHC heads don't flow that well, aside from expensive high performance engines.

The way anons talk about DOHC 4V they'd have you you'd believe that their 4 cylinder econobox has a superior cylinder head to an aftermarket LS head. Considering that this AMG M156 just outflows aftermarket LS engine heads, pushrods aren't as bad as they're made out to be.

427 cubes man. NASCAR's 7 litre limit is what gave us the big three motors: 427 Ford, 427 Chevy and 426 Hemi. Trans Am gave us the small three: 302 Ford, 302 Chevy and 304 Mopar, because it was limited to 5 liters.

And it doesn't matter, because the LS7 is tiny for it's displacement, and it's output.

>No. Most of them aren't even crossflow.

Who needs crossflow when they are easy as fuck to work on?

Because Multi-air does 99% percent of what Freevalve can - and Multiair certainly did not change the automative world. It's not a huge advancement, and neither is Freevalve.

>update old engine
>be amazed it gets gains
Wew. See above - Multiair can do 99% of this.

T-heads are a thing though. Basically DUHC flatheads.

>>lower redline
Honda made a 4V, 9500RPM pushrod engine - in 1978.
>>poorer throttle response
Throttle response is a function of plenum volume, throttle activation, injection and ignition. Not valvetrain.
>>less power
Less power per displacement, similar power per volume.
>>less airflow
No. Go find me a set of 4v DOHC heads that match an LS7, or a well-ported 6.4 Hemi.
>>worse emissions
True.

If you're under displacement limit, get DOHC. If you're under emissions limits, get DOHC. If you desperately want a redline over 10K, get DOHC.

If not, consider OHV.

I normally very much prefer simple mechanical systems but every time this guy does something I almost end up hopping on the technology bandwagon.

honestly i couldnt care less about such a minor thing, the cars i consider buying are already heavily vetted to meet my uncompromising standards

Pushrods or full-retard electric solenoid. There is no need for anything in between.

In the future, all engines will be either a 350 small block or a high tech 1.2L turbo wih solenoid valves.

Pushrods.

I came from sohc andndohc and I have to say pushrods are stupid simple and really no downsides these days

Pushrods aren't only used in muscle cars. Twingo's D-type is a pushrod inline 4. By making such a compact engine, they were able to use "real" 4 cylinder in a Twingo rather than 3-lylinder that vibrates at high RPM (like Matiz and new Twingo). That's one of the big advantages Twingo has over other extra-small, extra-cheap cars. The newer version also has 4 valves per cylinder.

That is not a pushrod engine.

???

Sorry.

What is in-cylinder motion friend.

Also have a read, interesting stuff.
auto-scape.com/?p=305

>What is in-cylinder motion friend.
Something you can compensate for using a twin plug setup.

You're confusing the D-type with the Cléon-Fonte engine used in the early Twingos as well as the Renault 5, among others.

Right, because timing chains/belts, camshafts, sprockets, guides, tensioners, etc never fail.
Thing is though, timing isn't mechanically simple. A mechanism like this makes things simpler, not more complicated. The only thing that gets complicated would be the tuning.
So what does MultiAir do that Freevalve can?

The engine shown in that video is probably for that company, Mr Koenigsegg explains that it was for a Chinese customer.

>So what does MultiAir do that Freevalve can?
All of these:
>>each individual valve can be independently controlled, including lift and duration
>>every valve can get its own port
>>each port can be tailor made for optimum airflow/exhaust flow
>>if turbo, the exhaust ports can split off so half can go directly out like an N/A and half can go to the turbo
>>NA ports can heat catalytic converters by shooting flames, eliminating the need for a precat

>mfw HEUI uses similar technology
>mfw the Jacobs engine brake uses similar concepts
>mfw these systems have been used for decades
>mfw these systems have been used for millions if not billions of miles
frig off.

whoops, meant that for

Yep that's the 'ault