« Reply #3 on: June 26, 2010, 10:37:19 AM »
Inertia from an engine spinning was always a reason for not using a radial in a car. There have been attempts and of course the Wankel is a radial but infact though the rotor is heavy it is a minimal amount of spinning angular acceleration.
The BSA trike with the aircooled 'Hotchkiss' engine is as near a successfull radial in a car really as I can think of. The Hotchkiss bit being the top end, barrell and head from a radial unit. Two of these being mounted onto a crank casing for the car. This offered pretty good power for its time. Not really a radial but using the parts from one.
This angular acceleration is a problem on multiple cylinder bikes being more sensitive to such with two wheels. Another instance is the Ford V4 which were engineered to have counter spun balance shafts. It is a problem with my trials car as it is made for some 30 bhp and could be fitted with a twin cam of 130 bhp. It remains to be judged if the spaceframe can take the torsion this aditional power, torque and revs offers. If not I will have to think again as a cross bracing will spoil the car which I fit at the moment.
A topic microcars tend not to have to worry to much about.
Logged
Messerschmitt set, Goggo Darts, Heinkel 175, Fiat Jolly, Autobianchi, Fairthorpe Electron Minor, Borgward, Isuzu Trooper
Citroen BX 17TZD & GTI 16v
Held - MG Magnette ZB & 4/44
For sale - Vellam Isetta, Bamby, AC Type 70, Velorex, Church Pod, Reliant Mk5, KR200, Saab 96, Bellemy Trials, Citroen BXs