![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Kyler Laird" wrote in message
... Don't forget that you're safest with a single-cylinder engine. If you have a six-cylinder, you're *six* times as likely to have a failure. If the only thing that could go wrong with an engine was some sort of failure of the cylinder, then that would actually be a pretty close approximation of the truth. And in fact, if you have a six-cylinder engine, you ARE (about) six times as likely to have a failure *of a cylinder* as you would with a single-cylinder engine. In the single vs. twin analysis, you have nearly double the chance of an engine failure as with a single, all else being equal. If X (a number between 0 and 1) is the chance of an engine failure for a single engine, it's not that you have 2 * X chance of an engine failure for two engines. You actually have 1 - ((1-X) * (1-X)) chance of an engine failure. But when X is small (as it is in this case), the square of 1-X is pretty close to 1 - (2 * X). If all that could fail on an engine was a cylinder, or component related to a cylinder, then a six-cylinder engine would be 1 - ((1-X) ^ 6) likely to fail, where X is the chance of failure for a single-cylinder engine. But just as 1 - ((1-X) ^ 2) is very close to 2 * X for small X, so too 1 - ((1-X) ^ 6) *is* actually very close to 6 * X for small X. Now, with that essay out of the way, the real reason that six cylinder engines aren't six times as likely to fail is that a number of failure modes have nothing to do with the cylinder. They involve one or more other parts, parts which exist in the same number regardless of the number of cylinders. Note also that just as having two engines provides a benefit to offset the very real increased opportunity for failure, having four, six, or more cylinders provides a benefit to offset the very real increased opportunity for *cylinder failure*. That is, with a six cylinder engine, if something that IS specific to a cylinder fails, often the result is simply reduced power, not a complete power failure. ...or at least that's what I've learned from some of the geniuses who talk about twins vs. singles. Sounds like you've got some good geniuses advising you. Stick with them. Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
V-8 powered Seabee | Corky Scott | Home Built | 212 | October 2nd 04 11:45 PM |
Dennis Fetters Mini 500 | EmailMe | Home Built | 70 | June 21st 04 09:36 PM |
My Engine Fire!! | [email protected] | Owning | 1 | March 31st 04 01:41 PM |
Engine... Overhaul? / Replace? advice please | text news | Owning | 11 | February 17th 04 04:44 PM |
Gasflow of VW engine | Veeduber | Home Built | 4 | July 14th 03 08:06 AM |