MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > MILITARY VEHICLES > The Armour Forum

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 23-08-18, 12:05
Chris Camfield Chris Camfield is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Toronto
Posts: 13
Default

David, thanks for your reply also! I'm half asleep here.

Do you know what effects there were by changing the engine to produce more horsepower? Did it consume (proportionately?) more fuel?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 23-08-18, 13:57
David Herbert David Herbert is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland - previously Suffolk
Posts: 563
Default

Hi Chris,

Short answer is yes ! The different power outputs of these engines was done by effectively just opening the throttle more. More fuel in made more power and of course used more fuel.
This will have reduced the range but the extra mobility was well worth it. Remember that the Valentine was originally designed as an infantry tank and so did not need great range or speed (or firepower). Quite quickly it became necessary to improve the firepower and it then began to be used as a more general purpose tank but it was never going to be one to do long distances or high speeds so range was not too critical.

David
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 23-08-18, 16:58
Chris Camfield Chris Camfield is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Toronto
Posts: 13
Default

Brilliant, thank you!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 23-08-18, 18:55
Chris Camfield Chris Camfield is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Toronto
Posts: 13
Default

Hmm, so I thought to check what information I have on the Archer vs Valentine engines.

According to the specs in the handbooks:

Valentine IX: "S" type, 130 BHP at 1850 RPM
"A" type, 165 at 1850
Fuel consumption(road): 2.5 MPG

Valentine X: 6-71A, 165 BHP, 2.5 MPG

Archer: 6-71M, 192 BHP at 1900 RPM, 2.9 MPG

More horsepower, and better fuel consumption. They must have done something to improve the engine, but I do not know what.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 23-08-18, 19:48
David Herbert David Herbert is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Ayrshire, Scotland - previously Suffolk
Posts: 563
Default

Remember that fuel consumption testing in those days was not the science that it is now. The tank was simply driven around a course and the fuel used measured. Speeds and rates of acceleration were left up to the driver. No attempt was made to allow for temperature or the condition of the course, though both would be recorded. An Archer is roughly the same weight as a Valentine but with the extra power is vastly nicer to drive and so the driver can be in the optimum gear much more easily and will need to change down less for heavy going. That in itself will make a significant improvement in consumption.

As I said the difference between the different versions of the WW2 6-71s is basicly that the more powerfull ones get more fuel and are allowed to rev harder.

David
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 23-08-18, 20:20
Chris Camfield Chris Camfield is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Toronto
Posts: 13
Default

Ah, interesting point, thanks David.

Chris
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 23-08-18, 21:37
Andrew Rowe Andrew Rowe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manawatu , New Zealand
Posts: 567
Default AEC versus 671

When I have rebuilt Valentines, with the 671, you can indeed upgrade the injectors to the later "N" - series to increase the horsepower to 190 to 200.
This still uses the original 6004 engine block and 2-valve head and original governor, but you also do a change of the piston liners to the latter "slotted" version with a 17:1 compression ratio.
I would also state that it is entirely possible without too much problem to change out an AEC engine for a 671. The front engine and gearbox mount holes are identical, the only real difference in the engine compartment is the 2-lugs welded on the side for the oil cooler in front of the radiators and the main water pipe to the engine water pump is on a different side. Steering clutches and everything else will just line up.
There would be a couple of extra throttle linkage brackets to change and the gearbox gate shifter housing would have to be changed over as well, but all controls front to back remain the same, Cheers Andrew.
__________________
Valentine MkV
Covenanter MkIV
Lynx MKI and MKII
Loyd Carrier / English / Candian / LP.
M3 Stuart
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 21:10.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016