# cilindrada de 462 cm3



## isabel.de.ilocos

I am not experienced in technical translations concerning engines, and would appreciate confirmation that I've rendered the technical specs properly in English -- it's about the first car built by Karl Benz and this is the context:

Conocido como “Motorwagen”, era un vehículo de tres ruedas a combustible. Tenía un carburador de evaporación, dos relaciones de transmisión mediante poleas de distintas medidas, _el chasis era de madera reforzado con acero y tenía un solo freno de mano sobre las rudas traseras. Alcanzaba como velocidad máxima los 18km/h. *La cilindrada era de 462 cm3 y 1,1 CV* a 600rpm de potencia_. 

I am unsure about how to render "1,1 CV" most of all.

My try:

It had a wood chassis reinforced with steel, and had just one handbrake over the rear wheels. It could reach a maximum speed of 18 km/h with a *462 cubic cm, 1.1 Cv engine *delivering 600 RPMs of power. 


THANKS VERY MUCH!


----------



## grubble

Cv = caballo de vapor = horsepower = hp
rpm = revs per minute

rpm describes the speed of rotation of the engine not its power.
1.1 hp means 1.1 horse*power* so you don't need to repeat the word _power
_
.............................................................................................................

My suggestion

...with a single 462 cc cylinder producing 1.1 hp at 600 rpm.


----------



## Juan Jacob Vilalta

grubble said:


> Cv = caballo de vapor = horsepower = hp
> rpm = revs per minute
> 
> The single 462 cc cylinder produced 1.1 hp at 600 rpm.



Sí, claro, ¿pero por qué _single_? Suponemos que así era, un solo cilindro, pero nada lo indica en el texto.

Curioso que todavía se hable de CV... y ojo, 600rpm NO es de potencia... como indicado, son las revoluciones por minuto. Como que ese texto no está del todo enterado tampoco.
Normalmente, se pone así, por ejemplo: 
Potencia máxima hp/rpm: 110 @ 5750
Torque NM/rpm: 1140 @ 3750 (Esta es otra medición... el torque, medido en newton meter, NM)



(Esta máquina SÍ que es vieja: ¡solamente 1.1 hp! ¡Mi linda moto tiene 130! ¿Así se llamaba... el coche... Motorwagen?)


----------



## grubble

Juan Jacob Vilalta said:


> *1.* Sí, claro, ¿pero por qué _single_? Suponemos que así era, un solo cilindro, pero nada lo indica en el texto.
> Curioso que todavía se hable de CV... y ojo, 600rpm *2.*  NO es de potencia... como indicado, son las revoluciones por minuto. *3.* Como que ese texto no está del todo enterado tampoco.


I think we cross-posted. I was editing my post while you were entering this one.

*1.* I agree, the word "single" is superfluous - I have deleted it
*2.* I mentioned the same point
*3.* The original text is correct though. It says that the engine produces 1.1 hp *at* 600 revs.


----------



## Juan Jacob Vilalta

Estamos entonces de acuerdo... un saludo.


----------



## grubble

Juan Jacob Vilalta said:


> Estamos entonces de acuerdo... un saludo.



.........................


----------



## isabel.de.ilocos

Se pasaron.  Thank you gentlemen, much obliged.  Buen domingo


----------



## Juan Jacob Vilalta

isabel.de.ilocos said:


> Se pasaron. Thank you gentlemen, much obliged. Buen domingo



Hoy es lunes. 
Saludos.


----------



## isabel.de.ilocos

Oh Right!!!  It's a holiday in Santiago, it feels like Sunday


----------



## mijoch

CV and hp are not the same.

M.


----------



## dancings

grubble said:


> Cv = caballo de vapor = horsepower = hp



Un _caballo de vapor_ (CV) no es equivalente a un _caballo de potencia_ (HP).
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caballo_de_potencia

Deberías revisar las especificaciones traducidas para comprobar que la potencia está bien.


----------



## Juan Jacob Vilalta

Pues es verdad, no es lo mismo... bueno, casi, casi...
No lo sabía. Saludos.


----------



## isabel.de.ilocos

Podría colocar Cv sin traducirlo. O vapor power.


----------



## isabel.de.ilocos

Encontré esto en 

http://dictionary.reverso.net/spanish-english/collaborative/679311/caballo de vapor

caballo de vapor = horsepower


----------



## Juan Jacob Vilalta

Sí, cuidado, no conocía la diferencia (aunque ligera) entre CV y HP.
O sea, son iguales, pero no es lo mismo.


----------



## isabel.de.ilocos

Es un material de marketing...no es un manual técnico, y la diferencia entre vapor horsepower y horsepower es muy poca.

What say you?


----------



## dancings

Es simplemente erroneo, por que asume que como _caballo_ es _horse, caballo de vapor _tiene que ser_ horsepower. 
_


> *caballo**.*(Del lat. _caballus_ 'caballo de carga' ).
> 
> *~** de vapor.*
> 
> *1. *m._ Mec._ Unidad de potencia de una máquina, que equivale a 745,7 W y representa el esfuerzo necesario para levantar 75 kg a 1 m de altura en 1 s. (Símb. _CV_).
> 
> _Real Academia Española © Todos los derechos reservados_



Estoy buscando una fuente primario de una autoridad para HP, pero el enlace anterior de la Wikipedia es totalmente correcta, y la versión inglesa esta bien referenciada con fuente primarias, y también marca la ciferencia entre un _cavallo de vapor_ y un HP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepower

Dice que _horsepower_ es el nombre genérico en inglés de la unidad que nosotros llamamos _caballo_ a secas, y también dice la diferencia entre el HP americano y el CV que se usa en varios paises europeos.

edit. Todo eso se podría evitar si no fuera por la costumbre que tienen los países de no usar el sistema de medidas internacional, que establece que la única medida para potencia es el vatio (W). Leo en la wikipedia que desde 2010 es normativo europea su uso, y el CV solo podrá usarse como herramienta suplementaria. Aun así, seguro que todo el mundo sigue usando el caballo.


----------



## mijoch

Yes----both hp and cv refer to power output of a engine in watts . In that sense they are "similar", but not the "same".

1.1cv=808,5watts

1.1hp=820.6watts

Your text is about an engine specification------it should be technically correct. 

The difference is not so small for an engine with 100cv

M.


----------



## isabel.de.ilocos

OK so do you think using cv could be a good solution?


----------



## dancings

Sorry, there was the horse power issue in another post, and i got mixed up, I just looked your original post.


Still, you have it wrong;

"It could reach a maximum speed of 18 km/h with a *462 cubic cm, 1.1 Cv engine *delivering 600 RPMs of power."

You state it delivers 600 RPMs of power, but the RPM is not a measur of power. You have to rephrase that.

My try:
Featuring a 462 cc engine, reaching 1.1CV at 600rpm, it could speed up to a maximum 18km/h.

Note that vehicle had that amount of cv when it worked at 600rpm.


----------



## SydLexia

I doubt that the original figure had a margin of error of less than 2 percent. To add another decimal place would be to claim a completely unjustified increase in precision.

syd


----------



## grubble

Here is an official document from Mercedes Benz

_The "grandfather clock" weighed only 92 kilograms, and developed an output of 
*1.1 hp (0.8 kW) from a cubic capacity of 462 cc*. These figures amply illustrate 
the great achievement of Daimler and Maybach_
http://media.daimler.com/Projects/c2c/channel/documents/1960758_PM_125_Jahre_Innovation_en.pdf


I stick with my original suggestion:

...with a single 462 cc cylinder producing 1.1 hp at 600 rpm.


----------



## mijoch

But do now agree that cv and hp are similar terms for specifying engine power, but are not the same?  Probably not. Although there is confusion in the use of the terms, it's not a bad idea to reduce that confusion on the forum, rather than contribute to it.

M.


----------



## dancings

After reading the English Wikipedia, the spanish Wikipedia and the RAE, now I'm even more confused.

The RAE, on it's definition of 'caballo de vapor', rates it at 745.7 W, exactly the same of a 'mechanichal horsepower' in the English Wikipedia. But the spanish version rates it at 735.5 W, giving the 745.7 W value to 'caballo de potencia'.

And the English wikipedia states:


> CV is a non-linear rating of a motor vehicle for tax purposes.[11] The CV rating, or fiscal power, is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , where _P_ is the maximum power in kilowatts and _U_ is the amount of CO2 emitted in grams per kilometre.



I think this is the very reason EU wants the Watt being stated as the main unit from 2010, to avoid the never-ending issues in mesuring standards and embrace the SI.

I'm going to open a report ticket so a moderator con move this topic to the Specilized Terminology forum and mechanical students and professionals can help.


----------



## SydLexia

Let's not get this out of proportion. We are talking about a measurement made in 1886. If we also consider that it was also one of the first such measurements ever made, the difference between 0.735 and 0.745 pales into insignificance.

1.1 x 0.745 = 0.8195
1.1 x 0.735 = 0.8085  

The difference here is less than 1.5% and experimental (and publicity?) errors are likely to have been far more than this.

Mercedes themselves quote the result to +-5% (i.e they have rounded the figure to one decimal place) 

As for CV (in capitals), Wikipedia makes it clear that this is an artificial calculation used for tax purposes





> In addition, the capital form _CV_ is used in Italy and France as a unit for tax horsepower, short for, respectively, _cavalli vapore_ and _chevaux vapeur_ (_steam horses_). CV is a non-linear rating of a motor vehicle for tax purposes......... [see post #24 for continuation]


syd


----------



## mijoch

My car (and every other) registered in Spain is rated in cv. Mine is D55----diesel55cv--------55x735watts-----40.425kw.

M.


----------



## grubble

mijoch said:


> My car (and every other) registered in Spain is rated in cv. Mine is D55----diesel55cv--------55x735watts-----40.425kw.
> 
> M.


That's okay but the car in question was manufactured in Germany and preceded any idea of vehicle registration by years. It was in fact the first motor car ever made.

_The *Benz Patent-Motorwagen* (or motorcar), built in 1886, is widely regarded as the first automobile, that is, a vehicle designed to be propelled by a motor._
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benz_Patent-Motorwagen

I agree with SydLexia. All this dancing on the head of a pin is not very productive. Especially if we consider that the phrase we are being asked to translate is presumably already a translation from German or even English. Not only that but the measurement of horsepower in those days was pretty crude anyway.


----------



## mijoch

Hi grubble

That's absolutly right. I've known for a long time that engines have been, and are differently rated in different places. I don't know when the imperial rating of one hp=746watts was invented Nor do I know when the metric rating system was invented in Germany and called PS=735watts, and other names. It just seems that people for some reason people referred to the metric rating as hp. Just a general incorrect assumption that the imperial and metric ratings are the same.

I understand that some action is underway to correct this, and that engine ratings will all be in kilowatts. I think this has already happened in Germany----not sure.

So in popular use----1hp=1cv. In technical use 1hp(metric)=1cv seems to be a reasonable compromise until it's sorted out. At the moment it's amazingly possible to buy a car and not know the true engine power rating.

This forum is full of surprises.

M.

I've got a German Stihl 023 chain saw----manual------potencia según DIN 70 020 1,9 kW--------no cv/hp------well done.


----------



## sergio11

isabel.de.ilocos said:


> Conocido como “Motorwagen”, era un vehículo de tres ruedas a combustible. Tenía un carburador de evaporación, dos relaciones de transmisión mediante poleas de distintas medidas, _el chasis era de madera reforzado con acero y tenía un solo freno de mano sobre las rudas traseras. Alcanzaba como velocidad máxima los 18km/h. *La cilindrada era de 462 cm3 y 1,1 CV* a 600rpm de potencia_.
> 
> I am unsure about how to render "1,1 CV" most of all.
> 
> My try:
> 
> It had a wood chassis reinforced with steel, and had just one handbrake over the rear wheels. It could reach a maximum speed of 18 km/h with a *462 cubic cm, 1.1 Cv engine *delivering 600 RPMs of power.
> 
> 
> THANKS VERY MUCH!



*Conocido como “Motorwagen”, era un vehículo de tres ruedas a combustible: _Known as "Motorwagen," it was a fuel-powered three-wheel vehicle.

_*Tenía un carburador de evaporación: _It had an evaporative carburetor.

_*dos relaciones de transmisión mediante poleas de distintas medidas: _Two transmission ratios with pulleys of different sizes.

_*el chasis era de madera reforzado con acero: _the chassis was made of wood, reinforced with steel, _*or*_ it had a steel-reinforced wooden chassis. 
_
*tenía un solo freno de mano sobre las ruedas traseras: _it had only one handbrake on the rear wheels.
_
*Alcanzaba como velocidad máxima los 18km/h: _Its maximum speed was 18 km/hr (11.2 miles/hour)_

**La cilindrada era de 462 cm3*: _The displacement was 462 cubic centimeters (28.2 cubic inches)_ —cilindrada es _piston displacement, engine displacement_ o simplemente _displacement._ 

**1,1 CV* a 600rpm de potencia —Aquí hay un error de sintaxis; "de potencia" debe estar antes de las rpm. Debe ser "*1,1 CV* de potencia a 600rpm," o mejor aún, "una potencia de 1,1 CV a 600 rpm": _1.1 metric HP at 600 rpm._ —CV es _"metric horsepower"_

Finalmente, para simplificar, como la diferencia entre el HP y el CV es muy pequeña, se podría decir también "_*approximately *1.1 HP_" y no molestarse por el "metric," que mucha gente no lo va a entender.

La otra cosa que hay que tener en cuenta es que muy probablemente esto se tradujo del inglés al español, y si lo buscas bien, en algún lado vas a encontrar la versión original.


----------



## SydLexia

According to the Wikipedia article cited by grubble, the engine for the first version of the Benz Patent-Motorwagen was of 954 cc and the chassis was constructed of steel tubes. The power output was 2/3 hp at 250 rpm.

According to this Wikipedia page (German) the third version had engines with capacities ranging from 1 to 2 litres. I suspect there was in fact no 462 cc engine.....

syd


----------



## dancings

Since Daimler and Benz merged, either at some point they made a Motorwagen with a 462cc motor, or someone mixed up the Benz Motorwagen with the Daimler one, which indeed had a 462cc.
http://www.remarkablecars.com/for-sale/showproduct.php?product=28250&cat=all


----------



## SydLexia

Well spotted, dancings. Yes, there does seem to be some confusion here.

syd


----------

