You guys have heard me say it many times before, and I am surprised the idea has not come to fruition yet with the RC engine makers. Nitro engines are very quickly becoming surpassed by LiPo batts & brushless motors. Nitro engines are very near their max capabilities, and the only way to keep up with electrics is to go multi-cylinder.

Of course, model airplanes have already been doing it for awhile, I'm surprised that multi-cylinders have not begun to seep into RC cars and trucks.

I'm quite surprised some nice multicylinder engines haven't been marketed in the car industry. They're already all over the boat and plane field. Part of it is that (if you ask me) the car industry has been taken over by cheap low end cars and trucks targeted at entry level users. (Slash, Stampede, Rustler, Minis, etc). There isn't that much emphasis on true hobby grade vehicles anymore .

I've seen and used some amazing V twin or V6 nitros for R/C boats, those types of engines can be converted for on land use easily.

Yeah, it's really to bad that power and coolness couldn't be adopted to a car's needs. Honestly though, I wouldn't drop $600 for an engine that I would require me to maintain a 4speed tranny to get to good top speeds...

$600, true, that is a really steep price. Maybe for a Rossi or Picco or OS, but there aer some mid-grade engine makers that can get into the arena and sell multis for abut $300-400 like a decent in-line 6. Yes, it would be expensive, especially in today's poor economy and jobs going overseas (even I dont spend as much on RCs anymore), but, if they made it, I would definitely save and scrimp until I can afford such an engine.

Of course, the rest of the RC must be reinforced to take the torque of the much more powerful engines: machined hardened and beefier gears and shafts, stronger ball bearings, etc.

Here's some Pics of one for cars from the Toy fair in Germany......(No Clue if it works or not.......But it Looks Cool!)

From a racing standpoint. I don't see much need for multi-cylinder motors. There isn't much more power needed for racing. I do think it would be a better idea to come up with more fuel efficient motors. .28 motors get horrible economy. I get 6 minutes max on my o.s. .28. Being as I am racing truggy. I can't put a larger tank on my car due to roar, and rc pro rules.

From a bashing standpoint. Slowing down a nitro car is a lot different than slowing down an electric car. I don't think having a nitro monster truck *for example* that does 80 mph is a good idea. It will be hard to slow down from full speed. Could potentially cause some major damage. Especially a run away nitro. The failsafe excuse doesn't always work for nitro either. Its not like an electric where the car just stops. If a nitro suddenly loses its power *i.e. batter somehow comes undone, a servo goes, etc* a failsafe won't activate. The throttle will stay in the open position, now you have an 80 mph runaway rc car. Throttle return springs don't always wok either. As much as you say people should take precautions. They don't.

Planes and boats have there own special places to be run. Cars don't. You can't run your boat unless your in water, and if it runs away your not likely to hurt anyone. In order to fly nitro planes you have to belong to an airfield. Mostof which are located in the middle of nowhere.

While it seems like a good idea I don't feel it to be to feasable.

I WANT THAT ENGINE!!! [X(][X(][X(][X(][X(][X(][X(]

Too bad I sold my nitro stuff for an elec conversion... lol

I'm a traitor![8D]

For racing, the real advantage of electric is the low-end torque. As a dgz69er stated, nitro engines are plenty fast for racing. The manufacturers would be better off developing an engine with more snap on the low end. That and lighter vehicles will keep nitro on-par with electric.

Nitro will always be around, and it will keep up, new metals, will make the piston, and the crank light, and it will go fast. It is just like F1, one thing gets better, so they come up with some crazy idea that works, to make something ells better, and so on.....

guys all you need to do is run a modified Picco 28...you will never look for more snap or power then that.... seriously you guys have a whole new world to experience that you have never felt or seen before...

There will always be a place for nitro, some want to tinker and enjoy all the stuff that goes with nitro. Plus with nitro you dont have to spend nearly as much for a charger and lipo batteries so the up front cost is less on nitro. However long haul wise with gas prices going up as well as nitro fuel nitro may be more to keep running.

Yes, it looks awsome. But as for working, I dont think so. It can work if the crank case is divided such that only one cylinder uses a spcific crank volume and the other cylinder uses another part. Also, the once carb and one induction crank port is not wise since the induction timing would not be in proper sinc as you can get on a single cylinder loop scavenging nitro engine.

For this engine, I would have staggared the the cylinders so that one is slightly further back than the other. With the cylinders staggared, I would give each cylinder its own crank case volume. I would have used 2 independent carbs with a linkage to actuate them in sequence. I would put the second carb on the rear of the engine and thus, its own crank induction port on the rear of the engine too. Though it is possible to use a single crankcase volume for two cylinders, it is not that possible on a V configuration. I would have used an opposing boxer style configuration.

Also, I think it would be best to use one tuned pipe for each cylinder. But it is possoible to make a single pipe for both cylinders, it will be trickier to design the expansion chamber to make the return pulses reach each exhaust port at the right time. Of course, you would have to know at what degrees each cylinder reaches TDC.

I would definietly love to see a multi-cylinder with your mods applied to it, now that would be a top speed screeming sound of bees!

So true, and worse yet, engines need to be rebuilt where a brushless motor will lat a long time before you need to replace the bearings or other stuff. Imagine rebuilding an in-line 4 nitro engine: not cheap for about $60-$90 per piston & sleeve.

Maybe in the future, some better metals that do not ewear down as fast will make its way into our nitro 2-stroke model engines.

Instead of multi-cylinders, I'd like to see more stable nitro engines. Stable as in consistent tuning, consistent starting and consistent running. This would make these engines much less trouble-prone and more like the plug and go electrics. Think gasser engine and you'll understand what I'm referring to. Add fuel, start it and drive it. Repeat as necessary. If someone could develop a nitro engine that did just that, they'd be RC legends.

^^^ YES! Not leaky Axials that somehow start a craze and cause people to lose hundreds to a poorly made engine! And ABN OS .30's!!!

Unfortunately, I hate to say that our nitro fuel's volatility is teh root of that instability. Yes, carb and fuel metering techniques have tamed it, but I seriously doubt that teh enginemakes can tame that instability any further without putting in some expensive technology (such as computer controlled direct fuel injection, going 4-stroke, etc.).

4-strokes are possible, but the inertias and frictions of the additional parts dampen acceleration and even reduce top RPM capability. The simplicity of non-valved loop scavenging 2-strokes allows these things to turn 40000+ RPMs

Computer controlled direct fuel injection with propper nozzle spraw pattern can ensure a much higher efficiency in the use of fuel as well as potential power increases if employed propwerly. But, how will the engine be lubricated if it is not taken in through the crankshaft, into the crank case to coat the pistion, conrod and crank? Lubricating oils in the crank block cmight be a solution, but the viscosity of the crank & conrod hitting the puttle of oil at 30000+RPM will do nothing but cause more anti-work. Dry-sump? Yes, but moer moving parts to work an oil pump. More parts = more inertias and friction. Not to emntion cost.

So, as for controlling the instability of our engines, we would have no choice but to go with a fuel that is less volatile. Gasoline for example. I wonder how much we would have to redesign a .21ci engine to burn gasoline? It would have to be made of much stronger materials, gasoline has a way higher BTU count than nitrofuel, so it will make a stronger bang. Reduce the amount of gasoline going into the engine? Then you lose lubrication, classic effect of running too lean. Unless they invent a much better lube additive for gas