1) you delight in fine craftsmanship
2) love tiny things
3) dig engines
4) are constantly amazed by human ingenuity
5) want to see bits, bars, and rounds of metal spring to life.

You don't need to be engineering oriented to appreciate this.  Note that
his is not CNC technology either and this impressive gentleman made
everything at home on his lathe and drill press.  It took 1220 hours to
make the 261 pieces.  Providing particular joy to me are the "underhead"
cams with push rods to rockers in the heads, the tiny rods and pistons, and
the12 individual cylinder heads. Also fun is how he chose to do the
break-in.

http://www.wimp.com/tiniestengine/

-Paul, in gloomy San Francisco
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wonder what he torqued things to...

Ed

On 2/20/2012 1:04 PM, Paul Gardner wrote:
> 1) you delight in fine craftsmanship
> 2) love tiny things
> 3) dig engines
> 4) are constantly amazed by human ingenuity
> 5) want to see bits, bars, and rounds of metal spring to life.
>
> You don't need to be engineering oriented to appreciate this.  Note that
> his is not CNC technology either and this impressive gentleman made
> everything at home on his lathe and drill press.  It took 1220 hours to
> make the 261 pieces.  Providing particular joy to me are the "underhead"
> cams with push rods to rockers in the heads, the tiny rods and pistons, and
> the12 individual cylinder heads. Also fun is how he chose to do the
> break-in.
>
> http://www.wimp.com/tiniestengine/
>
> -Paul, in gloomy San Francisco
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cute little devil. What did I miss about the break in period?  I was
wondering about the odd valve flutter.  Obviously a diesel since no spark
plugs, is it modeled after a train engine?

On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Paul Gardner <yoyopg@g...> wrote:

> 1) you delight in fine craftsmanship
> 2) love tiny things
> 3) dig engines
> 4) are constantly amazed by human ingenuity
> 5) want to see bits, bars, and rounds of metal spring to life.
>
> You don't need to be engineering oriented to appreciate this.  Note that
> his is not CNC technology either and this impressive gentleman made
> everything at home on his lathe and drill press.  It took 1220 hours to
> make the 261 pieces.  Providing particular joy to me are the "underhead"
> cams with push rods to rockers in the heads, the tiny rods and pistons, and
> the12 individual cylinder heads. Also fun is how he chose to do the
> break-in.
>
> http://www.wimp.com/tiniestengine/
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi,

It runs on compressed air. It's not as good as that scale model Ferrari
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bubln27gyE

Pete

Peter Michael Maddex Mad Bad and Dangerous to Know WPS Workplace
Services Nottingham Trent University

-----Original Message----- From: oldtools-bounces@r... [mailto:oldtools-
bounces@r...us.law.cornell.edu] On Behalf Of Kirk Eppler Sent: 22
February 2012 05:44 To: Paul Gardner
Cc: oldtools@r... Subject: Re: [OldTools] Off topic but you'll
    love it if...

Cute little devil. What did I miss about the break in period? I was
wondering about the odd valve flutter. Obviously a diesel since no spark
plugs, is it modeled after a train engine?

On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Paul Gardner <yoyopg@g...> wrote:

> 1) you delight in fine craftsmanship
> 2) love tiny things
> 3) dig engines
> 4) are constantly amazed by human ingenuity
> 5) want to see bits, bars, and rounds of metal spring to life.
>
> You don't need to be engineering oriented to appreciate this. Note
> that his is not CNC technology either and this impressive gentleman
> made everything at home on his lathe and drill press. It took 1220
> hours to make the 261 pieces. Providing particular joy to me are the
> "underhead" cams with push rods to rockers in the heads, the tiny rods
> and pistons, and the12 individual cylinder heads. Also fun is how he
> chose to do the break-in.
>
> http://www.wimp.com/tiniestengine/
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 2/22/2012 12:28 AM, Maddex, Peter wrote:
> It runs on compressed air.

  I really would have enjoyed the miniature spark plugs had there been any.
Would it be fair to say instead, that it's driven by compressed air?
Or rather it converts the energy in compressed air onto a rotary motion.
Lovely little toy the all the same
------------------------------------------------------------------------

>
>  It runs on compressed air.
>>
>
>  I really would have enjoyed the miniature spark plugs had there been any.
> Would it be fair to say instead, that it's driven by compressed air?
> Or rather it converts the energy in compressed air onto a rotary motion.
> Lovely little toy the all the same
>
> Sort of a highly complicated air motor.  Imagine if that was how your air
tools ran.  It would be quite difficult to get enough RPM for anything like
a die grinder or sander.  However,  I wonder if, using this idea (perhaps
fewer moving parts via fewer cylinders), one could make an air drill or air
ratchet that would run at lower rpm, but produce higher torque.  I imagine
that in so doing, the final size and weight of the tool would be too
cumbersome.

Doc

-- 
John Holladay
DocHolladay0820@g...
205-229-8484
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I couldn't see any ignition so thought it may be compression ignition.

-Paul Gardner, in sunny SF

On 2/23/12, John Holladay <docholladay0820@g...> wrote:
>>
>>  It runs on compressed air.
>>>
>>
>>  I really would have enjoyed the miniature spark plugs had there been any.
>> Would it be fair to say instead, that it's driven by compressed air?
>> Or rather it converts the energy in compressed air onto a rotary motion.
>> Lovely little toy the all the same
>>
>> Sort of a highly complicated air motor.  Imagine if that was how your air
> tools ran.  It would be quite difficult to get enough RPM for anything like
> a die grinder or sander.  However,  I wonder if, using this idea (perhaps
> fewer moving parts via fewer cylinders), one could make an air drill or air
> ratchet that would run at lower rpm, but produce higher torque.  I imagine
> that in so doing, the final size and weight of the tool would be too
> cumbersome.
>
> Doc
>
>
> --
> John Holladay
> DocHolladay0820@g...
> 205-229-8484
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> OldTools is a mailing list catering to the interests of hand tool
> aficionados, both collectors and users, to discuss the history, usage,
> value, location, availability, collectibility, and restoration of
> traditional handtools, especially woodworking tools.
>
> To change your subscription options:
> http://ruckus.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools
>
> To read the FAQ:
> http://swingleydev.com/archive/faq.html
>
> OldTools archive: http://swingleydev.com/archive/
>
> OldTools@r...
> http://ruckus.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------