Wet belts are something where I get the theory behind it, reduction in friction losses leads to efficiency increases, but it shouldn’t be implemented in practice because oil eats rubber, just use dry belts or chains like everyone else, or even geartrains like heavy truck engines or high-RPM race engines use, the idea behind geartrains for the former being greater long-term reliability than belts or chains, and the idea behind them for the latter being better responsiveness at high RPMs.
And whatever efficiency increases you get from the friction loss reduction that wet belts offer are minuscule to boot, and probably won’t even show up on your fuel bill, I’m pretty sure Ford went this route with the 1.0 EB just to appease bean counters and the EPA.
That said, the idea to use an unbalanced flywheel to functionally replace a balance shaft and reduce engine weight is kinda cool, ngl.
Wet belts are something where I get the theory behind it, reduction in friction losses leads to efficiency increases, but it shouldn’t be implemented in practice because oil eats rubber, just use dry belts or chains like everyone else, or even geartrains like heavy truck engines or high-RPM race engines use, the idea behind geartrains for the former being greater long-term reliability than belts or chains, and the idea behind them for the latter being better responsiveness at high RPMs.
deleted by creator
And whatever efficiency increases you get from the friction loss reduction that wet belts offer are minuscule to boot, and probably won’t even show up on your fuel bill, I’m pretty sure Ford went this route with the 1.0 EB just to appease bean counters and the EPA.
That said, the idea to use an unbalanced flywheel to functionally replace a balance shaft and reduce engine weight is kinda cool, ngl.
deleted by creator