Template talk:Piston engine configurations
In today's world, Template talk:Piston engine configurations has gained great importance in various aspects of daily life. Both on a personal and professional level, Template talk:Piston engine configurations has left a significant mark, generating debates and reflections around his impact on society. From its origins to its present day, Template talk:Piston engine configurations has become a topic of interest that arouses curiosity and wonder. In this article, we will explore the different dimensions of Template talk:Piston engine configurations and analyze its influence in various contexts, providing a complete overview of this topic of current relevance.
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
I think the template should be renamed into “Engine configurations” or the other, for there’s already contradiction with pistonless engines and we can’t put “internal combustion engine configurations” because it might as well be, say, steam engine or something else. theUg 20:49, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
- I actually copied the name from Category:Piston engine configurations, and that category also contains pistonless rotary engine and the others mentioned here. I'm not familiar with all the details, but if this should be renamed, then the category should probably be renamed at the same time. --Interiot 21:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
One cylinder
Why is the one cylinder engine not listed here? Vince (talk) 09:03, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
- It is on the top row. --Biker Biker (talk) 10:12, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Why is this listed under two-cylinder? The split configuration can have any even number of cylinders - the article lists examples up to 16 cylinders, with various arrangements including inline, V, and radial. The ones with more than one combustion chamber should be called split- twins, split-fours, etc. but they're all presently covered under the split-single article. Since the split design is independent of # of cylinders and arrangement, it would clutter things to refer to every type of split- design engine but it so far has always been two-stroke, so maybe it should be listed as a sub-type of two-stroke, and the article name should be changed to "split-cylinder"? Enon (talk) 03:41, 25 March 2019 (UTC)