Thinking of installing a Turbo Encabulator in place of my LA motor.

-

340inabbody

FABO Gold Member
FABO Gold Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2018
Messages
1,022
Reaction score
525
Location
Arizona
So, I am seriously thinking of replacing my 340 with a Turbo Encabulator for a performance boost. I am working out the details on how to miniaturize it now so it will fit in the bay.
Let me know if you guys have any suggestions on what gearing I should go with. I have not estimated the horsepower yet, but I’m sure it’s gonna be very bigly.

If you’re not familiar with this technology, here’s a link that will help you understand it really clearly.

 
This comes up every once in awhile. I would not be surprised to learn that the actual origin of this involved cavemen and camp fires.
 
This comes up every once in awhile. I would not be surprised to learn that the actual origin of this involved cavemen and camp fires.
Yeah, the theory is old but sound, but we’ve never been able to implement it until now. I’m seeing if I can miniaturize and get it in the engine bay. I need two more Bradley controllers and some phase adapters. Hopefully someone here can sell me some real cheap.
 
Last edited:
Meh. I always liked the idea of a rocket powered rear axle. At least that was an actual thing at one point.
IMG_2835.png

IMG_2837.png
 


Nice try. As I said, it MAY have originated in the cave man days. Wiki claims 1944

Turbo encabulator - Wikipedia



he turbo encabulator is a fictional electromechanical machine with a satirical technobabble description that became a famous in-joke among engineers after it was published by the British Institution of Electrical Engineers in their Students' Quarterly Journal in 1944.[1][2] Technical documentation has been written for the non-existent machine, and there are a number of parody marketing videos.
...The original machine had a base-plate of prefabulated aluminite, surmounted by a malleable logarithmic casing in such a way that the two main spurving bearings were in a direct line with the pentametric fan. The latter consisted simply of six hydrocoptic marzlevanes, so fitted to the ambifacient lunar waneshaft that side fumbling was effectively prevented. The main winding was of the normal lotus-o-delta type placed in panendermic semi-boloid slots in the stator, every seventh conductor being connected by a non-reversible tremie pipe to the differential girdlespring on the "up" end of the grammeters...
— John Hellins Quick, 2nd paragraph of "The turbo-encabulator in industry", Students' Quarterly Journal, Vol. 15, Iss. 58, p. 22 (December 1944)

 
Nice try. As I said, it MAY have originated in the cave man days. Wiki claims 1944

Turbo encabulator - Wikipedia



he turbo encabulator is a fictional electromechanical machine with a satirical technobabble description that became a famous in-joke among engineers after it was published by the British Institution of Electrical Engineers in their Students' Quarterly Journal in 1944.[1][2] Technical documentation has been written for the non-existent machine, and there are a number of parody marketing videos.

— John Hellins Quick, 2nd paragraph of "The turbo-encabulator in industry", Students' Quarterly Journal, Vol. 15, Iss. 58, p. 22 (December 1944)

It a fascinating concept! :rofl: :rofl:
 
The problem with worn out original encabulators is when a guy gets his hands on one and he thinks the side fumbling is best solved by replacing the ambi-facient lunar wane shaft torsion rods for girdle springs and Sperving bearings. The forecent score motion can be achieved with modest upgrades to the OEM equipment.
The unilateral phase detractors and reciprocation dingle arm angles can be improved and further reduce soinocoidal repleneration.
Binford provides no empirical evidence that it is better than a factory based nover trunnion.
Rebuilding one with original Rockwell stuff won’t work either, especially when set to the old 1944 BIofEE specs. Rebuilding the original with beefier 1.08” unilateral phase detractors and Speedwell dingle arms will have you competing with modern nover trunnion systems.
 
They are cool but take forever to get into reverse

The problem with worn out original encabulators is when a guy gets his hands on one and he thinks the side fumbling is best solved by replacing the ambi-facient lunar wane shaft torsion rods for girdle springs and Sperving bearings. The forecent score motion can be achieved with modest upgrades to the OEM equipment.
The unilateral phase detractors and reciprocation dingle arm angles can be improved and further reduce soinocoidal repleneration.
Binford provides no empirical evidence that it is better than a factory based nover trunnion.
Rebuilding one with original Rockwell stuff won’t work either, especially when set to the old 1944 BIofEE specs. Rebuilding the original with beefier 1.08” unilateral phase detractors and Speedwell dingle arms will have you competing with modern nover trunnion systems.
The dingle arm angle will get you every time!
 
I bent my Lunar Wayneshaft during heavy testing. Definitely a dingle arm angle issue!
My wife helped me with mine back in the 90s but by early 2000s, she was having back problems. After that, I never got the dingle arm angle to work out.
I miss the good ole days.
 
-
Back
Top Bottom