Talk:Nakajima Homare

Displacement

Bore and stroke as listed give 35.8 litres (2187cuin), not the 32L (1940) in the article. AMCKen (talk) 21:40, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Number Built

Two spots, two different numbers. Which is correct? AMCKen (talk) 21:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

The Nakajima articles don't add up

Allegedly the Homare and Sakae have the same cylinders, just 18 in the first versus 14 in the latter. In which case the displacement should be in the ratio 18:14 (128%). Yet the articles list the actual ratio as being (115%) so the cylinders must be different. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.145.32.96 (talk) 12:17, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

I have flagged the key numbers which seem controversial (number built, displacement) as being Dubious until they can be resolved. There are two contradictory values for number built on the page, and the displacement seems to be contradictory with the bore x stroke x no.CylindersB0ned0me (talk) 12:00, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

The infobox total produced was changed here with no explanation or source cited, I would change it to agree with the text (as it did before), noting that the figure in the text doesn't appear to be cited either.

Engine displacements can not always be calculated correctly and there is advice against self-calculation at the engine article content page, we have a big problem on Wikipedia with editors calculating their own figures and inserting them into cited specification sections, even against figures cited directly from the manufacturers. This engine most likely has two master connecting rods with articulated rods for the other 16 cylinders, we don't know the exact geometry or the stroke of these other rods, the figure may well be correct. In the absence of blueprints or an engine manual we have to use figures published in reliable sources (even if they may appear to be wrong or are indeed wrong). This principle is described at Wikipedia:Verifiability which is a policy (as opposed to a guideline). Both Jane's and Gunston give 32 litres as the capacity. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:40, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

This whole discussion is pointless - feed the japanese page http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%AA%89_(%E3%82%A8%E3%83%B3%E3%82%B8%E3%83%B3) through google translate and even with the usual ropey translation you get a far more comprehensive and infinitely better-cited article, which contradicts at least half the numbers cited on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.32.30.50 (talk) 12:16, 6 August 2014 (UTC)