User Tag List

Page 46 of 49 FirstFirst ... 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 LastLast
Results 676 to 690 of 726

Thread: Merc V6 History

  1. #676
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,006
    Thanks (Given)
    2
    Thanks (Received)
    232
    Likes (Given)
    9
    Likes (Received)
    364
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by mbd29 View Post
    Gee Rotary John an X8Must have been an awesome engine. Are they still in production?
    Unlike the Merc that used 2 production V-6's with a common c'case. The Zigler was designed new from scratch. If I recall it was 100ci. Like the Merc X-12, it never saw production.

  2. #677
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    37,827
    Thanks (Given)
    64
    Thanks (Received)
    1667
    Likes (Given)
    337
    Likes (Received)
    19199
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rotary John View Post
    Unlike the Merc that used 2 production V-6's with a common c'case. The Zigler was designed new from scratch. If I recall it was 100ci. Like the Merc X-12, it never saw production.
    ...and recall you saying in a long previous post, that the single cranks journals & the rod bearings failed under load, as they were underengineered for the task. of course, a second engine was put together, but...well...you know...what was that einstein quote about the definition of insanity?...
    Last edited by FUJIMO; 03-05-2021 at 03:56 PM.

  3. #678
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    179
    Thanks (Given)
    113
    Thanks (Received)
    21
    Likes (Given)
    204
    Likes (Received)
    159
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hey Jerry,
    What an awesome thread you have gotten a couple thousand people drooling over. Bravo!

    I do have a question, On the X12 motor that You had made, What was the flywheel driving? Fuel pump? Distributor? If it was a fuel pump why the redundancy?

    Thanks again man!

    Jesse

  4. #679
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Pickett, WI
    Posts
    210
    Thanks (Given)
    19
    Thanks (Received)
    86
    Likes (Given)
    362
    Likes (Received)
    210
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    [QUOTE=SkywayGT;3322652]Hey Jerry,
    What an awesome thread you have gotten a couple thousand people drooling over. Bravo!

    I do have a question, On the X12 motor that You had made, What was the flywheel driving? Fuel pump? Distributor? If it was a fuel pump why the redundancy?

    Thanks again man!

    Jesse[/QUOT


    Thanx Skyway --- Actually the flywheel (which is on the rear crankshaft) doesn't drive anything. It has the normal magnet structure for triggering the ignition for that engine, but that's it. --- Refer to the picture on entry #478

    i know it looks like I'm using all kinds of fuel pumps here and I am but they're all necessary. -- The fuel injection system requires somewhat more fuel pressure than the usual diaphragm pumps can put out. I couldn't use an electric pump because the alternator doesn't put out enough current to support it. So I had to utilize a belt driven gear pump instead. What you see is the belt from the front crankshaft driving the brass high pressure pump underneath the fuel bowl. The fuel bowl has a float valve inside and receives low pressure fuel from the two diaphragm pumps which are connected in series. When we first tried to start the engine it wouldn't fire because the belt driven pump just wasn't spinning fast enough at cranking speed. So I had to add a small electric pump in parallel and wired it into the start circuit. Started fine with that and got the engine spun up enough the big pump could take over. -- Good Question!
    Last edited by rckid74; 12-21-2021 at 04:10 PM.
    Never up --- never down!!

  5. Thanks SkywayGT thanked for this post
    Likes Bob V, SkywayGT, Mark75H liked this post
  6. #680
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Mosquitoville, East Coast Florida
    Posts
    2,654
    Thanks (Given)
    15
    Thanks (Received)
    93
    Likes (Given)
    104
    Likes (Received)
    681
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How were the two cranks joined ? Gears at the bottom ?

  7. #681
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Pickett, WI
    Posts
    210
    Thanks (Given)
    19
    Thanks (Received)
    86
    Likes (Given)
    362
    Likes (Received)
    210
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yes! Just the gears in the gearcase. i had planned to put a set of gears up just under the engines in the adaptor plates tying the two driveshafts together if needed but never got that chance when the project was canceled. i would have preloaded those gears high enough to prevent any free play.
    Last edited by rckid74; 12-21-2021 at 06:03 PM.
    Never up --- never down!!

  8. Likes SkywayGT liked this post
  9. #682
    Join Date
    Jun 2022
    Location
    Edgerton WI
    Posts
    23
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    9
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have a question: How many Mercury V6s were produced between 1976 and the end of the opti run?

  10. #683
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Pickett, WI
    Posts
    210
    Thanks (Given)
    19
    Thanks (Received)
    86
    Likes (Given)
    362
    Likes (Received)
    210
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by NoLimits View Post
    I have a question: How many Mercury V6s were produced between 1976 and the end of the opti run?
    I haven't the slightest idea! Had no connection with the V6 after the summer of '76.
    Never up --- never down!!

  11. #684
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    edmonton Alberta
    Posts
    48
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    2
    Likes (Received)
    11
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Very interesting Thread. Thanks for the inside story of the history of the V6

  12. Likes rckid74 liked this post
  13. #685
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    3,514
    Thanks (Given)
    177
    Thanks (Received)
    449
    Likes (Given)
    3381
    Likes (Received)
    2278
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Merc V6 production run from 1976 to 2018.

    In this video at the beginning you will see two boats flipping. That is Cees vander Velden and Bob Hering, and both were using Merc inline 6 power. Renato Molinari leading the race, in the photo, is also using inline 6 engine.

    However, Boat #6 is Bob Spalding powered by the First V6 Merc in racing competition. The race is in Europe near Koblenz Germany. Ron Anderson and two other Mercury engineers brought the engine from Wisconsin to Europe in 1973.



  14. Likes rckid74 liked this post
  15. #686
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    3,514
    Thanks (Given)
    177
    Thanks (Received)
    449
    Likes (Given)
    3381
    Likes (Received)
    2278
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    With Loop Charged Induction does the engine achieve a better fuel burn ratio (less non-burnt fuel) in the chamber, than the Cross Flow Induction system?

    Therefore, creating a cleaner exhaust, and generate more horsepower - relative to the same cubic engine size.

  16. #687
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    3,514
    Thanks (Given)
    177
    Thanks (Received)
    449
    Likes (Given)
    3381
    Likes (Received)
    2278
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Post# 132.

    Quote Originally Posted by rckid74 View Post
    After setting the (bore -3 1/8 in. and stroke -2.65 in.) to give the 2 liter displacement, the next thing to do was to determine the best crank arrangement. With six crankpins there are many different combinations to consider, however, if we apply a couple of restrictions it boils down to only four arrangements for each type (V and opposed). Those restrictions are that the firing intervals must be even ( for smooth torque delivery), and that the three cylinders of each bank must fire 120° apart (for exh. pulse tuning). These types were analyzed for balance and results tabulated. The technique used was to obtain complete balance data for a three cylinder inline engine firing from top to bottom and bottom to top and then vectorially adding the out-of-balance forces (couples in this case) for the two banks making sure to phase the couple vectors properly. Then it is easy to determine; first, if a counterbalance couple added to the crank can reduce or eliminate the inherent couple, and also exactly how much and where to place it. I did all this graphically as opposed to analytically.

    Today you would punch a few numbers into a computer and have the answers immediately. My computer back then was a slide rule, which I still have by-the-way.

    Using this information I picked out what I considered to be the best arrangement for each engine type. (more later)
     

    And the calculator was the instrument tool between the slide rule era and the CAD computer.


  17. #688
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Pickett, WI
    Posts
    210
    Thanks (Given)
    19
    Thanks (Received)
    86
    Likes (Given)
    362
    Likes (Received)
    210
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Lake X Kid View Post
    With Loop Charged Induction does the engine achieve a better fuel burn ratio (less non-burnt fuel) in the chamber, than the Cross Flow Induction system?

    Therefore, creating a cleaner exhaust, and generate more horsepower - relative to the same cubic engine size.
    Yes!! The trapping efficiency is better. That is - more of the fresh mixture is trapped in the cylinder before combustion.
    Never up --- never down!!

  18. Thanks Kitch thanked for this post
  19. #689
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    37,827
    Thanks (Given)
    64
    Thanks (Received)
    1667
    Likes (Given)
    337
    Likes (Received)
    19199
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ...42 year build run of this superior engine. just wow......

  20. Thanks rckid74 thanked for this post
    Likes Dd24skater liked this post
  21. #690
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    3,514
    Thanks (Given)
    177
    Thanks (Received)
    449
    Likes (Given)
    3381
    Likes (Received)
    2278
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by rckid74 View Post
    Yes!! The trapping efficiency is better. That is - more of the fresh mixture is trapped in the cylinder before combustion.
    If Loop Charged Induction is more efficient than the Cross Flow Induction, then why was CFI introduced as a viable system in outboards?

    Both LCI and CFI seem to be mechanically (moving parts) on a equal physics platform. With trapped fuel-burn-performance going to the LCI system.

Page 46 of 49 FirstFirst ... 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Chris Carson's Marine