Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: R-2800-34 vs. 34w

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like

    R-2800-34 vs. 34w

    There are conflicting reports of 34w's HP; some state it to be 2100 HP military, some 2400 HP.

    Does anyone have the official spec sheets for these engines?



    How much MIL. HP does a plain 34 produce?

    What's the main difference between 34W and 34?
    Last edited by Zegera; 06-09-2014 at 11:38 AM.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    According to P & W it was 2100hp military rating.

    But P & W didn't publish/put out WER ratings or ratings using water injection/ADI for this engine.

    According to at least one Navy chart/spec sheet the combat rating was 2400hp at 1000ft and the Military rating was 2100hp at 3200-3400ft.

    The engine could make 2100hp using 100/130 fuel but needed either 115/145 or water injection to make the combat rating.

  3. #3
    Creator of Interesting Threads tomo pauk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,160
    Post Thanks / Like
    The latest sentence is in good agreement with chart posted here (http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/eng...a-36560-3.html (Terminology and engine data)Military power on 115/145 grade fuel was 2300 HP, vs. 2100 on 100/130 grade.

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by tomo pauk View Post
    The latest sentence is in good agreement with chart posted here (http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/eng...a-36560-3.html (Terminology and engine data)Military power on 115/145 grade fuel was 2300 HP, vs. 2100 on 100/130 grade.
    Very interesting. Military power; even though 30W starts at about 2210 HP and 34W at 2300 HP, 30W seems to hold power much better than the 34W; if I'm interpreting the charts correctly, that is.

    Also, if the only difference between 34 and 34W is the ADI, then I suppose their non-WER charts would be identical, correct?
    Last edited by Zegera; 06-09-2014 at 02:00 PM.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    The -30 is a whole new engine and supercharger, it did keep the same bore and stroke as the -34 though

    The -30 was an "E" series engine and it used a hydraulic coupling (DB 600 series style) to drive the supercharger and the supercharger was a different model than the one used on the -34.

    It is confusing but the dash numbers do NOT go in chronological order. the -34 is a development of the -22 engine.

    There were only two "E" series engines, the -32 used in the F4U-5 Corsairs and the -34 used in a variety of aircraft including the F8F-2 Bearcats. Some planes used water injection and some didn't.

    High and low blower refer to the supercharger gears not stages. The variable speed drive on the -30 engine is responsible for the curved/wavy lines on the chart. Engines with fixed gear ratios have straight lines on the charts.

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Shortround6 View Post
    There were only two "E" series engines, the -32 used in the F4U-5 Corsairs and the -34 used in a variety of aircraft including the F8F-2 Bearcats.
    R-2800-34 used on F8F-1, R-2800-30 (Series E) used on F8F-2?

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    7,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    You are right.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •