Another expert in design

[PWR4360-59B]

Isn't it funny all these incorrect youtube examples of radial engine operation?

 

[Jugman]

What's so wrong about it? That's exactly how a master/link rod arrangement works. Or are you talking about some of the commenters in the comments?

 

[GrumpyOldCrewChief]

I believe our intrepid intial poster is referring to the number of cylinders used. While the math may be easier, ain't nobody got time for no even-numbered cylinder radial...

 

[tyrodtom]

Even cylinder radials were rare, but Curtiss made a 6 cylinder radial in the 1920's.
There are surely a few more engine makers that tried it too.

 

[kmccutcheon]

Even cylinder radials were rare, but Curtiss made a 6 cylinder radial in the 1920's.
There are surely a few more engine makers that tried it too.

Yes, but the Curtiss Challenger was a two-row engine, and two-row radials with even cylinder numbers are common. Much less common are four-stroke radials with even numbers of cylinders per row. The 12-cylinder Curtiss H-1640 Chieftain is an example of one such "hex" engine. Later, Curtiss-Wright experimented with a larger hex engine, the H-2120. These are discussed in more detail at http://www.enginehistory.org/Piston/Wright/wright_aero.shtml#Hex. The British Bristol company built a 16-cylinder "Hydra" with 8 cylinders per row.
By the way, the engine pictured at the top of this thread would work fine as a two-stroke.

 

[tyrodtom]

There is so little setback on those banks, I didn't even notice the Curtiss 600 was 2 rows of 3 cylinders.

 

[PWR4360-59B]

At first I thought he had no master rod as well, an illusion of sort.