Date:         Tue, 08 Oct 1996 16:23:49 +0100
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         Brian Verbeek <verbeek@the-hague.stbv.slb.com>
Subject:      Re: Gene Berg and wasserboxer performance

Tom Forhan wrote:

>So here is a specific question: I'm thinking what I need first is
>torque, not hp, and that could be just a stroker crank. Is this correct?

True, that will give you more torque, all else being the same, the shorter 
the rod, the more torque, but will increase the side loads on the working 
side of the piston and cylinder, more CCs is also more torque.

and Cetin wrote:

>even if the increased stroke still
>fit the existing cylinder depth, and did not play havoc with the
>cylinder head due to increased compression ratio, would it not make
>the engine work harder at high rpms?

I think what you are referring to is piston speed, the crank makes one
revolution in a certain amount of time, when you install a stroker, the
piston will have to travel a longer distance in the same amount of time, 
thus it will need to travel faster. Loads are increased as the piston has 
to accelerate and decelerate faster, now i think of it, i think this costs 
some Hp imho. 

I think that a stroker in wasserboxer would use a smaller pin height 
and maybe a shorter rod, and/or hemi cut heads to keep deck
height to a minimum and at the same time a proper compression ratio. 
A low deck height means that the piston doesn't have to come out the 
case side of the cylinder as much, providing more stability and keep 
possible trimming of the piston skirts to a minimum.

Brian.