Hey guys, you love these videos and to ensure that you will still have the opportunity to watch new videos, considering your support also through Patreon: www.patreon.com/visioracer
This should be the second part of the Fiat TwinCam engine, i am still waiting for that video VisioRacer. 'Til that moment take a like and added to favorites.
This should be brought back, and used in a diesel. The extra swirl would do amazing things to keep smog low, while still getting great power. Many 4V diesels have port restrictors to generate swirl, this system could get as much or more swirl, while having more port flow. That would get more power with less weight and less turbo lag.
You’re totally correct. Would work great in a diesel application. It’s too bad manufacturers are obsessed with EVs now. They’re not going to waste time with the development of new diesel technology. Since the VW diesel-gate scandal, diesel cars are being seen as dirty and bad for the environment (even though that is not the case). I wish we could go back to the days when most cars weighed 3,000 pounds or less and got 40mpg without any complex smog and emissions crap. Make the driving tests harder so idiots can’t drive. It will lower the number of car accidents which means cars won’t need as much crash protection. Less crash protection reduces weight and improves economy and performance.
@@portermcsorley Yeah, VW screwed us by faking NOx readings on their non-DEF engines. If VW didn't do that, they wouldn't have screwed up so many diesel sales in the USA. I considered buying a diesel Jetta. I am so glad I didn't, I would be burning with road rage, knowing I would have had a car that was a fraud. VW eventually put DEF in the Jetta and Golf, but then they were exposed for their 2009-2013 variants committing fraud. The Passat always had DEF and didn't have that problem, I think.
@@portermcsorley can't and won't ever agree on less crash protection. No matter how well you drive, people around you won't necessarily be the same, even with proper driving tests. Accidents will always happen and I don't really wanna die or kill my family because my car is just unsafe and some freak accident happened to get me involved. Plain oil on the road in a rainy day could kill a family if cars had less passive crash protection, and that's entirely out of one's control. It is true of course that making them lighter will improve fuel economy, it just might be quite costly keeping the same standards.
I was always fascinated by this engine. It seems to tick all the boxes of being thermally efficient. Yet no one seems to have made it to production. Still wonder why is it so.
Because sometimes what seems good in theory either doesn’t really work any better, or isn’t worth all the trouble. With this I imagine other technologies, like turbos, got better so all the extra complexity wasn’t worth the performance gains.
Cost, mostly. A single turbo on a 4 cylinder engine is good enough for most use cases, especially since turbo tech has evolved greatly since the mid 80s. Additionally, it is very space inefficient, making packaging it into a car difficult.
Others have already mentioned cost: you need two turbos, two waste gates, two exhaust manifolds, two intercoolers, two blow-off valves, and so on. Add to that the utter nightmare of trying to package this in a normal road-going consumer car. The special intake plenum just towers straight up from the engine block and the block also needs lots of space on both sides. No problem for a race car, but commercial production cars play by quite different rules.
With the improvement in turbocharger design, engine management etc it's not needed, for a production car there are serious issues with packaging and cost.
I'm not a mechanical engineer and I don't have any academic background in the field. But I'm enthusiastic about the subject and some time ago I even drafted a system very similar to this one from Lancia, but it was for a flatplane V8. It's very interesting to know that someone in the past thought of something similar, and the best part is that it's functional and not just a crazy idea from a random person.
I was thinking “what about the M10?!?!” as you described the Lancia cross flow head and then … you brought it up to give credit to a design that proceeded Lombardi’s concept by 20 years. Superb work, thank you.
1 - Never seen that before! So happy to see it + explained so well! 2 - WHOA! four-valves-per-cylinder BUT Middle-out, rather than one-side-to-the-other! 3 - DOUBLE-WHOA! Apparently-twin turbos WORKING AS IF THEY ARE SEQUENTIAL! 4 - 6:13 - wATCHING THE REST OF THE vID... How many more 'Whoas' can there be??? (BRB) 6:52 - I've given up being surprised... Bravo Lancia..!
It's easy to produce more power , it's harder to do it and meet government fuel economy regulations . A rotary engine is tiny compared to anything that produces the same amount of power as it . But it sucks back fuel like a big block V8 .
@@VisioRacer You pronounced that exactly right: Lanča. It really bothers me when someone says they are a fan of that brand and then can’t even pronounce it right. BTW: love your channel.
Packaging is probably the biggest issue with this. The intake design makes for a much taller engine. Not such an issue for a mid-engined car but for a front-engined car the hood would have to be quite tall, even with the engine leaned over at an angle.
Tri-Flux head is a patent of FIAT. This head with a twin Turbo or Turbo plus a supercharger configuration is amazing. Can't understand why it didn't evolve beside costs, piping, etc.. 16 valve DOHC , 1.6, 1.8 Liters can reach tremendous amount of power, and stay cool. Impressive configurations from my youth.
Exept the Fulvia,s and Stratos..........All 4 cylinder engines used by Lancia in rallying .....were FIAT ....engines.....the Intergrale ...and ....Delta S4 ...engines are FIAT ...engines ..!!!!!!! FIAT automotive engineering technology is second to NOBODY....!!!!!!!,,,GOAT..!!!
i don't want to imagine, 4strokes are pretty efficient with a turbine each three cyls. so two turbines for I6 is really good. 4 cyls is not divisible by 3 as can tell. so they have to invent stuff to accomodate, like double ports. but never is as good as a simple turbine with 3 cyls.
@@Xayuap But you would have 3 cyls feeding two turbines. Smaller turbines, less lag, more boost with better flow/efficiency. Adding to that the 6-cyl duty cycle and balace by design.. It could make a solid 1000+ hp from 3200 to 17500 RPM
@@Xayuap I personally don't need any of that, but it would still work better than just having two valves per side opening simultaneously. You can feed one big single with an I-6 up to four digits, but having four, or six as compound 3 per side, with the added swirl and better overall runner design, it would make heaps more power. I-6's choking points are the runner openings in the head. Even though the valves would flow, the opening and the valley between the opening and the valves disrupts the flow, on both sides. Tri-flux design overcomes that turbulence completely, filling and flushing the combustion chamber significantly more efficiently than conventional 4-valve cross-flow head design. And the mentioned heat distribution would benefit I-6 even more than I-4, and the power stroke overlap on I-6 would require less stroke, rising the redline easily to 5 digit range. (Honda CBX)
The question is whether, today, this double supercharging of the engine is cost-effective for manufacturers. Volkswagen has already demonstrated with its 2006 Golf V 1.4 TSI 170cv GT Sport DSG 170CV that it was not. It only lasted 2 years on the market. There have been today, for quite a few years now, more efficient solutions to find engine torque and power at low revolutions in turbo engines such as the "twin scroll" or variable geometry for diesel engines (205 T 16 E2 had a similar system) or the "bang bang" anti-lag in rallies. Although Lancia's idea was good, at that time there was not enough advanced electronics to manage the combination of the Turbo and the Volumex and the power delivery was too abrupt and driving the car was quite complicated (said by Alén and Biasion, I'm not making this up).
Great Content, as always. I loved the Stratos, but always thought the S4 / Delta / Integrale were always butt ugly, and never appreciated the engineering behind these not-so-pretty, but damn fast cars.
you are not the only one.......people that knew nothing about cars .......always had a lot to shoot their mouths off ......but all these World rally Championship Lancia,s......the ,,...S4 Delta included.....all 4 cylinder motors were FIAT MOTORS ....Hard to believe hey ...???.......all this "' ugliness "' you saw ...was design orientated....and it worked ....that is why LANCIA is the most successful rally marque.....ever....( Although with help from their brother...FIAT ...!!!)
Dude I love your content. I have watched you for many many years and you tought me so much about engine technology and what people do with different engine to get different effects. I have watched you for probably 10 years or so and became an engineer because I love to learn about mechanical systems. You're awesome man.
The turbos weren't shut down, they were different sizes, a smaller one that would spin up and give good boost at lower RPM and gas flows, and at higher RPM/power level the second would provide the additional air as it had spun up by then.
@@tsb3093 It's not the whole video wrong. I just forgot about a single car. And since it is not the core of the video topic, I suppose it is not a big deal. Sorry for the mistake.
Thank you so much for this content! This engine was supposed to run in the Monte Carlo Group 5 Silhouette but never did. Apparently Volta has 5 or 6 engines sitting on shelves collecting dust although that might just be a rumor.
I think that Beppe Volta bought a whole bunch of engine parts and leftovers from factory, when they shot down the racing department in Lancia! So it all sits somewhere..
Lancia made the Delta S4 silhouette body of ultra thin carbon fibre, chassis of bike frame tubing and an aluminium roll cage ! I'm really glad Group B was banned before more drivers died !!
Lancia did not enter rallying with the Stratos .........LANCIA was rallying long before the Stratos with 1300 and 1600 cc Lancia Fulvia ,s ....in the the European and World rally championships ...!!!!!...i only lisened... a few minutes to your post ....and i stopped ....Where did Lancia re invent the twin turbo ...?????......The Delta S4 has got a .....super and turbocharged Triflux 1756 cc Engine....!!!!!....FACTS my friend FACTS ....!!!!!
If l recall correctly the Russians had an inline V-12 aeroengine with intake valves and exhaust valves with one of each inboard and outboard in each cylinder. Unfortunately i cannot find the website right now.
Kimlov M-105 and VK-107. They actually had an even stranger layout, the valves are rotated 45 degrees from normal. For each cylinder, on the inside of the V there is just one exhaust port. On the outside, an exhaust, a normal inlet port coming from a blow through carb (total of 6 carbs on the engine, they are shared between cylinder pairs) and a port that takes uncarburretted air direct from the blower. The exhaust from the inner ports was collected by a pair of manifolds that ran forward and exited in front of the outer ports, leading to seven exhaust stubs on each side of the engine.
Just a couple mistakes : the S4 engine is not a Fiat block : the 90 mm bore spacing of the Lampredi iron block (that was used in the 037) would be insufficient for the 88.5 mm bore and the extreme pressures. And , only the road version had an open front differential : the racing one had an LSD that could lock up to 40% (in the rear , it was 60%). And , the Group S never had a 300 hp limit : that was the Group A!
The S4 engine was a completly redesigned block by FIAT ......Lancia belongs to FIAT ..and they use all FIAT engines ...parts ...components etc ..etc...Where did you think Lancia got that engine ????......China ...???lol.
@@giuseppec8158 Nobody said that the S4 Engine was a Lampredi ...!!!.....The S4 engine was still a Fiat designed engine ..!....The triflux head was FIAT ...designed..........The only non Fiat engined....... Lancia,s.......was the Fulvia,s ...and Stratos ....ALL other Lancia,s used FIAT engines .!!.....Some .people just hate it when FIAT achieves success ...dont they ...?........they cannot accept the fact that the so called ..."'.unreliable ''...FIATs are world beaters .!!!
That trifle head is awesome, imagine a modern LS or LT engine with heads like This, with about 6.3--6.6L a 6.3L two versions, one for light truck, and one for cars, the car version having 3.375" stroke, and 4.25" bore, the truck version having 3.80" stroke and 4" bore, both being near equal displacement, with the truck possibly making much more low end TQ, the performance "car" version designed for more high rpm HP, revving about 1500-2k RPM higher, 8500 rpm redline, direct injection, quad turbo, and naturally inspired power, the center exhaust crossing the valley and exiting behind the head and down, or in front ina similar exit , using a oval pipe about 1.25" x 1.5" with a cast steel header with 1.5" internal ports, with wall thick enough to open it up to 1.7" or 1.8" non turbo, without modification, (welding the exterior,). With a rocker system allowing pushrod cam in the valley, with roller lifters, and direct injection , dual pumps, dual injectors, a in valley set, as well as a outer set, the intake vales divided one on one side one on the other, should increase swirl a ton, especially if the port has any features to induce swirl, possibly add a feature to introduce tumble as well, a pair of 1.5" exhaust valves. And 1.7" - 1.8" intake should be fitting, with long 6mm stems, conical springs, the truck version should be capable of near 600 HP, at 6250-6500, and the other should be capable of near 750 at 8200, natural HP, and 1000hp, and 1600 HP with 15-16 psi boost, definitely use a cast steel block, with wet liners, 6 bolt. Mains, 4340 crank and rods, 6.250'' rods coated forged Pistons with 10:1-11:1with boost, , and 12.5-13.5:1 without boost, and use additional fuel injectors at mid runner, to chill the air, e85-E100 recommended, 3 injector per cylinder should supply enough fuel!! A C8 Vette would be a fitting engine for that, as well as a Camaro or a modern version of the GTO from the 2000's maybe a modern 70 z28/ss Camaro, it would be awesome, the split bumper can look how designers intended it!! That grill with no bumper disturbing the looks, and modern LED lighting, with tail lights made up of LED rings , inside of rings, with a single 3-5 watt led in the center, with a 5-10 watt white led in the center of the outer, or inner pair of round tail lights, with the headlights similar, with a 50 watt projector led and 20 watt DRL plus a 5-10 watt halo, white and amber, with turn signals with halo in side halo, with the outer , the moving inward to the center for each flash with just like the tail lights, with the outer ring for running lights and the center as well as all rings lit for brake lights, with a high mount center brake light made of 3rows of LEDs, that grow from the center out when the brakes are hit then flash, alot like a bulls eye. 🎯 Only flat, it would be a cool car, also offer a 4cylinder turbo version, with a 25kw electric motor connected to the rear diff, with a 100 mile range, a basically k24 turbo, with 6speed manual, or 8 speed automatic, only a larger engine, 2.6L maybe a 5 cylinder 3.0L , and using the electric motor with the engine , it should be qual to a 650 HP engine, the maybe use the triflow making an additional 250 with boost!! Sorry to ramble!!
I thought of this in highschool. Thought it was revolutionary. Glad to know 15 years later it was already done 30 years ago ..learn something new everyday.
An effect of the diagonally opposed valve pairs is that each camshaft runs both intake and exhaust valves, so the cam phase control techniques used now would not work.
Those monster car most by 80's group b rally era is truly monster rally car 2.0L line 4 twin cam 16~20value engine + huge big turbo charge making 450~650hp huge terrible horsepower and toques in light weight 750kg~1.1tons rally car making terrible speed But in the past those monster rally car is killer a lot in 80's young famous rally driver, famous rally champion die in that monster rally car ! Only can say is.......... "Too faster and Too furious" ! But nothing or anything can stop rally racer, stop rally champion to chasing speed, power and win to be a rally champion ! About old days in 80's group b rally racing is most all of die-hard rally fans to talking about rally history and memory ! Even those memories some good, some bad, even feel sad ! But nothing can change is most of rally race golden age ! But rally car racing until now feel rally race like kids play video game ! No more old days toughest and roughest challenge ! No more real damn good driving skulls and stunning driver style ! Most by now those new generation rally car look like matchbox mini car ! 1:18 model toys car ! Everything but computer, micro cheap, electric system support rally driver....... I can't imagine by now new generation rally racer, rally driver how to challenge those old day East Africa Safari rally ? Huge rain after rain fall flooding water flooded all race track, after rain how can be passing though sticky and slippery wet mud, afternoon super hot and wet weather making engine overheating and sharply rocks and stones crashing the car chassis and suspension, tyres, wheels even break down gear box and transmission system ! How to survive ? How to passing though all of race and rally stages ? How can be keep car safe and running well and win the race ?
it's too bad that they discontinued Group B and then not to even bother releasing Group S?? There were so many phenomenal innovations that were created because of this. Now we have the crappy EV vehicles. There is nothing like the combustion engine, turbocharging supercharging, high revving engines, etc...
Wow what a car brand thats absolutely nowhere today. You couldn't even say its a shadow of its former self, but more accurately its on life support making handbag/purse cars for urbanites. What a fall from the bleeding edge of rally technology, to being a car maker thats laughed at today. Whats the Lancia they make today called: The Lancia Bagina.
Nowadays you just slap a twin-scroll turbo on a 4-cylinder with an appropriate set of headers and you're good to go. Spools up quickly and even a small-ish twin-scroll turbo can pump out significant boost at relatively low RPM.
Really cool to see how the engine worked with those shots you found of the cylinder head. And also very cool to hear some of the other engines you talked about! Am I wrong in thinking Lancia got back into Rallying with the Fulvia before the Stratos though?
buonasera ma la famosa lancia stratots che montava il 2.4 V6 era di origine Ferrari oppure abarth-martini e volevo sapere se montava anche il twin-turbo!? oppure no!!!!????
I'm so glad this guy is still making content. I remember like 5-6 years ago when he first started out. Still making insanely entertaining content to this day.
Very straight intake port with just enough bend to mitigate valve shrouding, vortex in the cylinder due to the valve configuration, excellent thermal characteristics... What a design. The plumbing is extremely complex though.
Lancia è stata la Regina dei Rally! Ma purtroppo caduta in disgrazia per colpa della cosidetta "classe dirigente" italiana, che non ha mai avuto ne classe, ne tantomeno dirigenza! Ciao e complimenti da Genova Italia!
I know this head as "Apfelbeck" head. Ludwig Apfelbeck from Austria invented that head in 1937. Here is the link to the German Wiki entry: de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Apfelbeck Apfelbeck worked with BMW, Maico, KTM and Horex. He also invented the ConCam. A camshaft with conical lobes. He wrote two books. These books are a must-read for any 4-stroke tuner. In my eyes, he was a genious. Maybe, you dedicate a video to him. ;-)
lancia was the face of the fuat group in rally because of the sucess they had with the strattos and fulvia before fiat acquistion that already owned abarth
It is a pity you do not elaborate on how they shut of one turbo, this is only possible by an extra butterfly or enabling half of the exhaust valves. Suppose the used a butterfly, but I do not see it in the drawings.
As another viewer (Lee Watson) commented, it probably used differently sized turbochargers, optimized for different engine speeds, rather than actually controlling one of them.
Imagine if you could do this with an inline 4 with a 20 valve head. Have one valve running a smaller turbo and cam lobes with a VTEC system or with the Free Valve technology on you could really get the small turbo spooled up quickly. Then, have the larger single turbo activated by the dual exhaust valves. Then, on the intake side, a twin screw supercharger or roots style supercharger and a massive intercooler between the head and blower unit. I don't think a centrifugal supercharger would add anything at all to a setup like this the twin turbochargers wouldn't already be accomplishing. Plus with a twin acrew or roots style supercharger it could bet the immediate boost amd then you could have a bypass valve that would open up and progressively bleed off the supercharger boost and have the turbos come in. I would build it with as large of a bore as possible to take advantage of the added area for the biggest valves possible and a short stroke to get the revs to build quickly. I don't know if I would do a 1.8 but a 2.2-2.6L since it wouldn't need to fit in any set of rules I think would be perfect. Run it on Methanol, or E85, with a very high compression, and it would be an absolute riot. But the fact that he was able to do this back in the late 70s or early 80s is what's so mind-bending. There are much easier ways to now make this kind of power but absolutely amazing build and leap forward in technology for the time. Incredible upload as always Visio.
@kingalfred3902 modern turbo, engine control, metallurgy technology, airflow and fuel injection technology would create a completely different beast. Not to mention how much better our fuels are now.
