Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Draco Malfoy" data-source="post: 29891561" data-attributes="member: 570250">afaik, engine type (in this case W) has nothing to do with better fuel efficiency. imagine a V16 with same cylinder capacity & everything else, it would probably have same fuel consumption. [SPOILER="spoiler"](upcoming bugatti chiron's replacement will have a V16 with hybrid assist)[MEDIA=youtube]aO4Q4xt8g9o[/MEDIA][/SPOILER]lightweightness: I doubt this either. afaik, they went with W type because of the compactness and lightweightness(relatively)imagine a V16 with same specs, it would be twice the length of the W16. It would also make the crank shaft twice the length.<hr />engine design ton ganak thiyenawa bn.most common eka thama Inline type (I type)second most common V type.eita amatharawa,W typeFlat typeBoxer Type (similar to Flat type but different piston movement)rotary engines------ Post added on [DATETIME="UT"]1718533921[/DATETIME]</blockquote>

Top Bottom