Hi,
Just a slight digression from the record holders of the past - does anyone know why the British steam powered vehicle, which broke the record last year, used a steam turbine rather than a steam piston engine?
I would have thought that a steam piston engine would have given the vehicle much better acceleration and could have been well designed and balanced for the higher revs involved and used less steam.
Ian.
Good question, they do get more RPM as Giovanni says, but to use the stupid RPM of a turbine you need a gearbox, and to manage the HP it produces it has to be a big heavy gearbox, completely taking any advantage of weight loss on the higher steam consumption of an engine.
My personal preference would be for a single acting V8, double beat poppet valves on twin camshafts giving very little cut-off, alloy crankcase, alloy cylinders with CI liners using 400-500psi superheated steam, and as it's not roadworthy; direct drive.
I imagine they thought that if they could produce a relative power to a jet engine (the propulsion of choice for all record attempts) then a steam turbine would do the job best- but unlike jet power which has had billions put into research and where you can buy off the peg machinery to suit, with steam they have had to go back to basics, ten make it all automatically controlled.
I couldn't believe when I saw it for the first time that it had the safetys blowing off madly- surely the auto boiler feed and fuel inlet management system should have kept it simmeriung, not completely overdoing it?!
At the end of the day it came down to Colin Chapman's favourite, the Power : Weight ratio, and on that score it just didn't cut it.
So come on Ian- I want to see come with a fully auto' controlled model record breaker with a piston engine that'll do a scale speed of 200mph+....

Greg