No one did, at least in any production car. Packard built V-12s. The crank in an inline 12 would have to weigh 500 lbs to keep the whip down to a minimum
Research the drive system in the old multi-engine streamliners at Bonneville and El Mirage. The Goldenrod, I think, would be a good research bed. I don't think anything is stupid, if it's mechanically possible, build the SOB and screw the nay-sayers. I was told that building an underslung '39 Chev Pickup with a slant six is stupid , but, the mock-up is killer and there have been alot of crow eaters. Use what you got and go for it. Art Arfons was told HE was stupid and the first CAR he built was stupid. Take a look at the rail posted by b-a-r....looks bitchin' to me!
Instead of flipping the head, why not use a Ford 6 and a Chevy 6... say, a 292 and a 300? That way the intake/exhaust manifolds are on opposite sides of the engines. It would be a trick to get the power output balanced, but it would solve the clearance issues. I had this thought years ago. Not for building a drag car, but more of a crazy 60s show rod. I don't have teh skills to pull it off though.
Well that is simply not true. Before making V12s Packard did build and sell a inline 12 cylinder car and this is a picture of one of them. I believe there were only a very small number of them ever built. Less than ten. But at the time it was a showroom avalable car.
I don't see a picture. Again, NOBODY ever built a production inline 12 cylinder automobile. NOBODY. Packard was building six cylinder cars. In 1915, Cad came out with their first V-8. The next year, Packard one upped them with the first production V-12. There was no inline 12 Post a better picture of this phantom car, please. BTW, if less than ten were produced, which is an absurd claim, that hardly qualifies it as a production car. The cost of developing an inline 12 and then only building half a dozen or so examples would have likely crippled Packard and gone down in history as a bigger folly than the Edsel
That is looking at old production numbers with modern criteria. Everybody knows what a Bugatti Royale is, for example, but they only made 6 of them. ( and if you look that up, they call those the production numbers...)
But we're not talking about Bugatti. Packard built more cars in a week that Bugatti built in it's lifetime. The word "produced" and the "term" production can be one in the same, but they are not necessarily the same across the board. Buick "produced" one "Y Job". Is it a production car? I am not here to argue semantics. You know what I mean about "production". Now, back to the subject at hand. I'm still waiting for the picture of Packards, production, showroom available inline 12. This is where you cue the theme from "Jeopardy"
I would direct your attention to the Packard forum on the AACA web site. I'm not going to do your research for you.
dentprone, I liked the sketch and what I meant was - I couldnt understand why the sketch didnt show up when I tried to repost along with your quote and my comment. ???? BTW back in WWII Chrysler put 5 or 6 Inline flathead 6's in a circular arrangement in a Tank. I looked on YouTube, Im sure Ive seen it there. Whatever gearing arrangement they used it ran for long times without breaking. Reading on thru from the 4th page (to catch up) I found llonnings post of that chrysler tank engine 5/5 at 03:06 PM. Still think theres a video on utube but havent found it.
You do not need to direct my attention anywhere, nor do you need to do my homework. I go to the AACA site daily and post there, often, under another name. You are only partially correct. Packard build a grand total of ONE inline twelve. It was an experimental engine. It was installed in a car and driven by, I believe, a Packard executive., It never went into production, it was never offered for sale to anyone at any price, never was on any showroom and as far as anyone knows, it was destroyed. So, again. where is this production inline twelve cylinder car? Maybe the dog ate your homework.
Maybe. In the interest of full disclosure I did go to the Packard forum and La Fong is correct. I stand corrected. To bad it was a really strange idea that would have been neat.
i dont understand the big deal , red green would just duct tape two six cylinder cars together , hell ol red probablly already done it!
Fascinating thread about something I've wanted to try for many years. Someone mentioned using two different type engines - check this link out for a DeLorean powered by a Honda 4 banger and Olds Toronado V8. Not a hotrod by any means, but you have to admire the guy's ingenuity. www.gendreaumicro.com/tenpointtwo/11472index.htm I still think making it 4WD with linked trannys would be the easiest solution, but I also like the Ford 300/Chevy 292 idea.
OK...here is something out side the box. two MOPAR slant sixes side by side. the right side engine would be raised just a little higher than the left so the intake runners could get over the valve cover , that way they could share an intake with a row of two barrel carbs. the cranks could be tired together with a chain like the ones used on the old 425 turbos. And slant sixes are not a highly sought after engine so if it doesn't work just throw it away.
It just keeps getting more bitchen every day!!! Or have a reverse cam ground, flip one end for end and have a twin crank V-12
HELL YEAH ! Now we are on to something. That way you could build an intake and bolt a huffer to it. A huffed V12 and six Zoomies on each side. Oh man , I've got to get to E-bay...
I can't see any gain in all the work and money you will spend on twin 6 . Now 2 in line 6 in a row would be nice but you would have to drive the car from the trunk !
The chassis will be wide and it will be heavy however you do it. Those 300 Fords are not exactly light weight engines either. So although it will have 600 CID, it will probably not end up as fast as you might think. A blown big block V8 would be far better for performance. How about a pair of modern DOHC all aluminium V6's stacked one behind the other if you really want 12 cylinders?
Warpspeed , I see what your saying . This really isn't about having an ass load of horse power, it's more about the "what the hell is that" factor. The best part of going to a cruise or car show to me is looking at how this guy used a part or how another guy was able to make the steering shaft get around a giant Hemi head. Building a car that was bought off a page of the Speedway catalog just isn't fun to me.
twin engned anything is cool!i've just finnished reading up on a couple of real cool alfas from the 1930's one was 2 side buy side supercharged 1750cc 6's reversed ports/head on 1,1 engine rotated backwards,each engine had it's own gearbox the clutchs were opperated by 1 pedal the gear levers were linked and each driveshaft drove 1 wheel!It was the forrunner to the front/ rear straight 8 bi motor they went over 210mph!A lot of thinking and machining went into these cars but i'm sure if anybody can do it they're here!
Frenchtown Flyer races a 300ci Ford I6 that has a cross-flow head on it. He made it from two 351 heads (the bore centers are the same) that he cut and welded together. That might help with the logistics of the intake/exhaust systems.
build it, and send me pics, I would love to see it!! nothing matters more than cool..... at any price
exactly, what's so cool about having something a lot of other people have done? i don't want to have something the next guy has. i'd rather make people take a double take and think WTF? than be like, "oh, seen that done before." it's fun messin with people.
I don't know. Everytime I see something different or really cool, there is some douche telling his buddies how he, or some ol' boy down the road, built one just like it only better.
The more I think about this, the more I would go twin modern electronic auto transmissions, and two diffs with spools, each driving one rear wheel. I would also link the engines at the front with a fairly wide toothed belt. This belt would not have to transmit any significant power, just keep the engines running together, at the same identical speed. If you think about it, any slight engine speed difference is going to SOUND absolutely horrible with a slight and varying exhaust beat. It will also eliminate any twitchy handling from slight differences in engine power or response. The two torque converters will handle any difference in rear wheel speeds when going around corners.
The Jalopy Journal
