New Engine design...

[W7LPNRICK]

WW2 Junkers diesel engine

(Image removed from quote.)

Notice the operation of the pistons.

This heavy beast was half way there, but with 2 crankshafts it was very heavy...

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Yeah....porsche would never stoop to using an audi engine or a mercedes transmission or a volkswagen engine or a volkswagen unibody.

Back to the ecomotor.....

What they have achieved is a two cylinder engine that requires 6 piston rods and 4 pistons instead of 2 piston rods and 2 pistons along with the associated drag required to actuate them.

Yep I'm sure the doctors are wrong and you nailed it 

[icepac]

I'm curious as to what part of my post you are referencing with your attempted skewer.

[W7LPNRICK]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeKdgybl6SI&feature=player_embedded  

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/07/inside-ecomotors-revolutionary-high-efficiency-engine/

The engine is surprisingly compact, though it looks a bit wide. Hurden says that width is deceptive. The M100 engine on the stand is a 300HP direct injected two-stroke diesel engine. It has a displacement of 2.5 liters, cylinder bores of 100mm (with very short strokes), and has dimensions of (LxWxH): 22.8 x 41.3 x 18.5 – note the short length and low height. With aluminum construction, it weighs only 300 lbs.  Compare that to the 300HP engines from Cummins and Navistar that respectively weigh 1,100 and 900 lbs. and have dimensions that dwarf the OPOC. Runkle says that production OPOC engines will easily weigh less than half what similarly powered diesel and gasoline engines weigh. Though the current prototypes run on diesel fuel, the OPOC engine can run on a variety of fuels including gases and alcohols as well as gasoline.

These guys aren't shade tree mechanics...

[CAP1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeKdgybl6SI&feature=player_embedded  

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/07/inside-ecomotors-revolutionary-high-efficiency-engine/

The engine is surprisingly compact, though it looks a bit wide. Hurden says that width is deceptive. The M100 engine on the stand is a 300HP direct injected two-stroke diesel engine. It has a displacement of 2.5 liters, cylinder bores of 100mm (with very short strokes), and has dimensions of (LxWxH): 22.8 x 41.3 x 18.5 – note the short length and low height. With aluminum construction, it weighs only 300 lbs.  Compare that to the 300HP engines from Cummins and Navistar that respectively weigh 1,100 and 900 lbs. and have dimensions that dwarf the OPOC. Runkle says that production OPOC engines will easily weigh less than half what similarly powered diesel and gasoline engines weigh. Though the current prototypes run on diesel fuel, the OPOC engine can run on a variety of fuels including gases and alcohols as well as gasoline.

These guys aren't shade tree mechanics...

 what';s its torque?

[Charge]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MBYg1NPzMY&feature=related

Same idea recycled again and again.

-C+

[zack1234]

My point

The OPOC design is being developed by numerous companies

The rotary engine not massed produce.

Other efficient engine designs not massed produced.

The major car producers have trillions of dollars to developer these designs and they have.

If they do developed and put into production of these engines they will lose revenue from maintenance and the revenue from fuel used to run these new designs. (Ford will have shares in oil companies)

Steam car engines are the most efficient power unit.(not been developed since 1930's due to oil companies stiffling research).
How do you make a steam car go faster? you let more steam into the chamber, in the 1930's the fastest cars in the world were steam cars. (Did they exist or were they fiction)

There is a device that can be fitted to a standard engine to inject water vapour into the petrol mix, it was used in military vehicles at the height of the cold war.

[CAP1]

its torque is much more important than its horsepower.

 take for instance the 7.3 liter power stroke in the f-350's. ever wonder how only 250 hp can pull down a house? it's because it's making well over 500 pound feet of torque. that's how.

 if this design is making 300hp, and only making 250-300 pound feet of torque, it's gonna be a big disappointment.

[icepac]

Is that 2.5 liter displacement from two crankshaft revolutions or one?

[W7LPNRICK]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MBYg1NPzMY&feature=related

Same idea recycled again and again.

-C+

No. Read the entire article. These TOP engineers got 32 million invested already... It is a 2 stroke diesel....IMO a very sound design. None of these people are less informed than you. 

[W7LPNRICK]

what';s its torque?

n current development, the M100 OPOC engine tuned to meet current North American emissions standards, on the dyno generates 240 HP and 487 foot-pounds of torque, so they aren’t too far away from meeting both power and emissions goals.

Please read the entire article. It's very informative. 

[W7LPNRICK]

its torque is much more important than its horsepower.

 take for instance the 7.3 liter power stroke in the f-350's. ever wonder how only 250 hp can pull down a house? it's because it's making well over 500 pound feet of torque. that's how.

 if this design is making 300hp, and only making 250-300 pound feet of torque, it's gonna be a big disappointment.

It has a long stroke developed with 2 short stroke pistons in unison. It has not been over rev'ed yet because they want to test for a while before they intentionally break it. It performed very well o0n the dyno. 

[W7LPNRICK]

its torque is much more important than its horsepower.

 take for instance the 7.3 liter power stroke in the f-350's. ever wonder how only 250 hp can pull down a house? it's because it's making well over 500 pound feet of torque. that's how.

 if this design is making 300hp, and only making 250-300 pound feet of torque, it's gonna be a big disappointment.

487FP Torque off the dyno...read the article. 

[W7LPNRICK]

Is that 2.5 liter displacement from two crankshaft revolutions or one?

There is only one crank shaft...they measured displacement traditionally with total cylinder volume with piston(s) full stroke away from the compression point.  

My personal pet peeve is non-engineers, criticizing the work of dozens of engineers who are successful in their field & have been for decades, & why? Not because they've been working with GM as development engineers most of their lives but just to be negative naysayers. IMO  

The engine is surprisingly compact, though it looks a bit wide. Hurden says that width is deceptive. The M100 engine on the stand is a 300HP direct injected two-stroke diesel engine. It has a displacement of 2.5 liters, cylinder bores of 100mm (with very short strokes), and has dimensions of (LxWxH): 22.8 x 41.3 x 18.5 – note the short length and low height. With aluminum construction, it weighs only 300 lbs.  Compare that to the 300HP engines from Cummins and Navistar that respectively weigh 1,100 and 900 lbs. and have dimensions that dwarf the OPOC. Runkle says that production OPOC engines will easily weigh less than half what similarly powered diesel and gasoline engines weigh. Though the current prototypes run on diesel fuel, the OPOC engine can run on a variety of fuels including gases and alcohols as well as gasoline.

[icepac]

I've seen 50 engines like this get millions invested only to find out the mtbo is 11 hours.