[tcb] Re: Dan wants to know

  • From: Will Wood <evilscientistboo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: tcb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 11:04:30 -0500 (GMT-05:00)

For some reason, 1914s (94 X 69s) are considered that instead of the math, 1915s.. I always like having that discussion over a beer or two.
 



 
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Martin
Sent: Jul 26, 2006 10:57 AM
To: tcb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [tcb] Re: Dan wants to know

I understand the math.
I can not get your formula to work.
I use this one:


Have you ever seen or heard of a 78.4 stroke crank?
That calc. says it would be a 1907.
There in no listing for 1914 here:



On Jul 26, 2006, at 10:46 AM, Mark Sawyer wrote:

the formula is Bore (mm) x Bore (mm) x Stroke (mm) x 3.1416 = engine cc
This doesn't include how many cc's the heads are.

Denis Dodson <coocoo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
My builder told me that my engine is a 1914. Machined 88s with a 78.4 stroke. Is this wrong? Dan wants to know where did we get a 78.4 crank?


Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. tcb
  3. Archive
  4. 07-2006