Interesting engine?

"dje" wrote ...
http://www.bourkeengine.com/

From the web site:
"Fuel Consumption: Russell Bourke, the inventor, claimed a brake-specific
fuel consumption (BSFC) of .25 pounds of fuel per horsepower hour."

Nothing interesting about it. He's a liar.

Rich

From the web site:
"Fuel Consumption: Russell Bourke, the inventor, claimed a brake-specific
fuel consumption (BSFC) of .25 pounds of fuel per horsepower hour."
Nothing interesting about it. He's a liar.

For gasolines, that's just over 4 gallons per hour for a 100hp engine.
What's wrong w/ that? Sounds ambitious, but not crazy.

Ben Hallert
PP-ASEL

"Fuel Consumption: Russell Bourke, the inventor, claimed a
brake-specific
fuel consumption (BSFC) of .25 pounds of fuel per horsepower hour."
Nothing interesting about it. He's a liar.

For gasolines, that's just over 4 gallons per hour for a 100hp engine.
What's wrong w/ that? Sounds ambitious, but not crazy.

It violates the laws of physics. There is not that much energy in gasoline,
even if there were zero waste heat. Have you ever seen an internal
combustion engine with zero waste heat?

The best SSFC engines today are in the range of the 40's. If he could
really prove that engine was that good, he would be a billionaire right now,
not searching for investors.

People that design engines see claims like that, and chuckle while turning
the page.
--
Jim in NC

In article ,
"Morgans" wrote:

"Fuel Consumption: Russell Bourke, the inventor, claimed a
brake-specific
fuel consumption (BSFC) of .25 pounds of fuel per horsepower hour."
Nothing interesting about it. He's a liar.

For gasolines, that's just over 4 gallons per hour for a 100hp engine.
What's wrong w/ that? Sounds ambitious, but not crazy.

It violates the laws of physics. There is not that much energy in gasoline,
even if there were zero waste heat. Have you ever seen an internal
combustion engine with zero waste heat?

The best SSFC engines today are in the range of the 40's. If he could
really prove that engine was that good, he would be a billionaire right now,
not searching for investors.

People that design engines see claims like that, and chuckle while turning
the page.

The Bourque engine has been around for at least 50 years. About 30 or
more years ago, Sport Aviation published a series of articles on this
engine -- it did not live up to its claims, and, it had some mechanical
difficulties, IIRC.

There are a lot of balonium engines out there; more appear regularly,
too. Takr most claims with a healthy dose of salt (and, perhaps, a shot
of booze, too)!

--
Remve "_" from email to reply to me personally.