Talk:W engine

message: Could Someone check the cylinder measures in the following text:
"The W-Engine in the Bugatti
In 2006, Bugatti produced the "Bugatti Veyron", with a W-16 engine, combined with 4 turbochargers, it produces 1001 bhp@6000 r.p.m, but it takes 64 valves to operate that 8.0 Liters engine with DOHC (Double overhead cams), and Bore/Stroke ratio 1:1 (82 mm:82 mm)."
As far as I can tell (and calculate) the given 82 mm bore and stroke times 16 makes around 6,9 liters, not 8, so these figures must be incorrect. (r^2 * Pii * h * n; where r = cylinder bore radius, h = length of stroke, n = number of cylinders; 41mm^2 * pii * 82mm * 16 ~ 6928694,6 mm^3 ~ 6928,7 cm^3 ~ 6,9 dm^3/liters )  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.220.135.173 (talk) 15:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Veyron W16

message: How does the Feuling W3 differ from the Napier Lion-style W-engine? Respectfully, SamBlob (talk) 19:11, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Isn't the Feuling W3 a traditional three-bank engine?

message: The text under "motorcycle 2-bank" says it's not like a U, another 2-bank/2-crankshaft design. But, why not? Can't tell from the text. Is it just because the 2 banks are inclined rather than parallel? --71.198.34.87 (talk) 02:20, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Why isn't the "motorcycle 2-bank" like a "U" again?

message: Can we get a section in this Wiki that discusses engine balance? Almost every other Wiki regarding engine configuration has a section devoted to detailing the engines balance.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.250.60 (talk) 23:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Engine Balance. 

message: Are there any sources to support the claim that the W8 was a "testbed" for the W12? Both seem to have entered production around 2001. This article doesn't give the impression the W8 preceded the W12. Letdorf (talk) 21:34, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  VW Group W8 and W12 

message: The statement "Three banks of cylinders sharing a common crankshaft, a configuration also known as broad arrow configuration due to its shape resembling the British government broad arrow property mark" was initially supported by this source:
Upon finding a source that mentions that the W engine is the broad arrow engine, I added it to support that part of the statement.
However, the snippet view at Google Books does not show that the original source supports the part about the shape resembling the government broad arrow property mark.  Searching the source for "property mark" yields no results, while a search for "government mark" gets some hits for "Government", but no apparent mention of "government mark".
Does anyone have access to the actual document, to see if it supports the naming of the engine configuration based on the resemblance of the engine's shape to the property mark?
Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 05:45, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the citation valid? 

message: I have made a theoretical design for a track only car (mid engined) in which the car is as long as a 4-door but the entire back end is an engine compartment, and instead of doors the sides are grille panels. Would a 12012-CC (572-CC per cylinder) W21 be theoretically possible? 2.24.208.79 (talk) 10:46, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Would a W21 engine be possible for a track-only car?