Condor V12 diesel

In 1932 Rolls-Royce developed the Condor C.I. 480 hp diesel, two engines were tested.


Perkins once part of RR have a Condor V12 engine of 1200-1500hp.


Question are these two engines connected and is there any history between 1932 and 1983?
 

SsgtC

Banned
In 1932 Rolls-Royce developed the Condor C.I. 480 hp diesel, two engines were tested.


Perkins once part of RR have a Condor V12 engine of 1200-1500hp.


Question are these two engines connected and is there any history between 1932 and 1983?
Other than the fact that they both use diesel for fuel, no.
 
Could the RR Condors have been adapted for armored vehicle or marine use?
That’s what I was thinking as on Perkins web site they both have the same displacement and the modern one appears to be a twin turbo version.
As Some Bloke point out there is a great time difference and nothing appeared to come out it.
 
Perkins Condor
hqdefault.jpg


Rolls Royce Condor
Rolls-Royce_Condor.jpg
 

Driftless

Donor
I still think the Rolls Royce Condor might have been a missed opportunity if it had been developed for military use on land or water. Tanks, APC's, Prime Movers, etc for the Army and small patrol or rescue craft for the Navy.
 
I still think the Rolls Royce Condor might have been a missed opportunity if it had been developed for military use on land or water. Tanks, APC's, Prime Movers, etc for the Army and small patrol or rescue craft for the Navy.

By the late 20s it was an outdated design with its seperate cylinders. It was basically an enlarged WWI RR Eagle and Curtiss had already shown the way to build a modern engine with monoblock cylinder castings. I think the Buzzard might have been a good engine for boats and a 6 cylinder version (one bank of cylinders) with 300hp could have been a great engine for early war tanks.
 
Soviet V-2 diesels started out as Mikulin AM-34, that were inspired by the BMW VI that they were building under license, and first used in gasoline version as the M-17 in BT tanks
 
By the late 20s it was an outdated design with its seperate cylinders. It was basically an enlarged WWI RR Eagle and Curtiss had already shown the way to build a modern engine with monoblock cylinder castings. I think the Buzzard might have been a good engine for boats and a 6 cylinder version (one bank of cylinders) with 300hp could have been a great engine for early war tanks.
It would have been an improvement over the smaller Nuffield Liberty (also a WWI design based on the Mercedes D.III and ultimately the Austro-Daimler 6), but yes, not as much as more modern engines. Though it's larger size, similar to the Buzzard that replaced it, would allow it to be converted to diesel without losing too much power to run a tank. It would be larger, necessitating larger engine compartments (and probably larger tanks), and transmission design would have to improve to handle its power. Those considerations also apply to the Buzzard. As a marine engine, either engine would work well, similar to the DB 602 or the Packard 1A-2500, both aircraft engine designs.

Soviet V-2 diesels started out as Mikulin AM-34, that were inspired by the BMW VI that they were building under license, and first used in gasoline version as the M-17 in BT tanks
The V-2 started out as an aircraft diesel from Charomskiy known as the AD-2. It has nothing in common (to my knowledge) with the AM-34, but might be closely related to the larger ACh-30 and M-40 aircraft diesels, also from Charomskiy. That being said, the AM-34 was used in the SMK and T-100 prototypes as the GAM-34, and the ACh-30 was developed into the TD-30 and M-50T tank engines used on the IS-7 prototypes.

I would love to link the history of the V-2 but unfortunately my main source for this, kampfpanzer.de, is no longer online and the Internet Archive doesn't archive complex interactive sites like that well, so that information is lost.
 
Top