Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: W7LPNRICK on August 02, 2012, 07:03:11 PM
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73eBhTLP0Cc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73eBhTLP0Cc) :rock I hope I didn't already post this... :banana:
-
I don't see how it would improve efficiency up to 50%, displacement is displacement. However, I can see a major cost savings in parts and size, but an ignition miss may be a bit ruff. A good power plant for a hybrid car.
The guy says the engine has "fundamentally better architecture." Maybe the magic is in shortening the piston stroke and lowering its maximum velocity (near mid stroke) vs. a double only piston setup?
-
I don't see how it would improve efficiency up to 50%, displacement is displacement. However, I can see a major cost savings in parts and size, but an ignition miss may be a bit ruff. A good power plant for a hybrid car.
The guy says the engine has "fundamentally better architecture." Maybe the magic is in shortening the piston stroke and lowering its maximum velocity (near mid stroke) vs. a double only piston setup?
The "magic" is that you moving two pistons per ignition versus one. So in theory you got power of two cylinders in one.
-
I see something that will beat itself to death in short order.
It might work for a slow speed diesel like the napier deltic.
-
just marking so i can watch the vid at home tonight
-
IcePac- "I see something that will beat itself to death in short order. It might work for a slow speed diesel like the napier deltic."
The trick is he's getting long stoke torque with 2 short stroke pistons...short stroke pistons allow higher velocity, long stroke power equals increased torque & better fuel economy because the fuel has enough stoke to completely burn., the loss of power related to inertia potential of a true Long Stroke is overcome in 2 different directions of short stroke, also lateral forces are more harmonious due to truly opposing forces which I believe is an improvement over the Subaru/VW designs. I bet the harmonics will be greatly improved...I bet it's a winner...guess we'll see. :salute
-
Reminds me of the commercial I keep seeing with the car "with the world's first horizontal boxer engine". Looks nice.
-
That's a toyota with a subaru engine.
About time toyota had a rear drive small car again.
-
That's a toyota with a subaru engine.
About time toyota had a rear drive small car again.
with new toyota fuel injection....
-
That's a toyota with a subaru engine.
About time toyota had a rear drive small car again.
my favorite thing about that commercial is that they say "rear wheel drive driving is back!". yet to those of us that like to go fast, it never really went anywhere.
-
Reminds me of the commercial I keep seeing with the car "with the world's first horizontal boxer engine"
The Subaru? Ya, I see that alot lately, and keep looking outside at my Porsche and wondering....wth? :)
-
so they have a higher up from gm....that's a bad thing. at least they offset it with a higher up from ford. that's a good thing. :devil and he's from volkswagen.
that all said, does he have a working model, or just the computer thing?
-
Cap's gone nuclear! :O
-
Cap's gone nuclear! :O
maybe that's why all my dam hair's falling out!! :devil
-
The Subaru? Ya, I see that alot lately, and keep looking outside at my Porsche and wondering....wth? :)
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.
-
If we use the logic that the lowest number of parts and associated drag with them determines reliability and efficiency, wouldn't that make the Wankel engine the best design? :neener:
-
Can you not see the wood for the Trees :rofl
It makes no odds what engine design anyone makes if it affects revenue for oil manufacturers its dead in the water.
Any claims on efficiency will be countered by claims from those parties who do not want the current state of engine production and oil consumption altering.
In the 1960's Felix Wankel design the rotary engine which reduced the complexity of engine design dramatically.
All the major car companies bought rights to produce the said engines,NSU,Mazda actually produced a engine lol
Felix Wankel was one of the few engineers to make millions from not having his ideas put into major production.
The fact that this new engine is on Youtube on not on the front pages of everyone newspaper in the world is quite obvious, or maybe the engine is crap :rofl
You Yanks like big fat cars with big fat engines anyway,how do we make it go faster? lets make it bigger :rofl
Efficentcy is a dirty word in the US its loaded with political and climate arguments, everyone who reads this last statment will be loading his gun a milisecond :rofl
-
You Yanks like big fat cars with big fat engines anyway,how do we make it go faster? lets make it bigger :rofl
everyone who reads this last statment will be loading his gun a milisecond :rofl
Spot on!!!! Only one correction, our guns are already loaded :devil
(http://i888.photobucket.com/albums/ac82/mbailey166066/cid_00828322003032010-37F5.jpg)
(http://i888.photobucket.com/albums/ac82/mbailey166066/AR1.jpg)
:aok :aok :aok
-
Can you not see the wood for the Trees :rofl
It makes no odds what engine design anyone makes if it affects revenue for oil manufacturers its dead in the water.
Any claims on efficiency will be countered by claims from those parties who do not want the current state of engine production and oil consumption altering.
In the 1960's Felix Wankel design the rotary engine which reduced the complexity of engine design dramatically.
All the major car companies bought rights to produce the said engines,NSU,Mazda actually produced a engine lol
Felix Wankel was one of the few engineers to make millions from not having his ideas put into major production.
The fact that this new engine is on Youtube on not on the front pages of everyone newspaper in the world is quite obvious, or maybe the engine is crap :rofl
You Yanks like big fat cars with big fat engines anyway,how do we make it go faster? lets make it bigger :rofl
Efficentcy is a dirty word in the US its loaded with political and climate arguments, everyone who reads this last statment will be loading his gun a milisecond :rofl
uh huh.
shelby for the win./
-
:rofl
-
:rofl
:D :salute
-
In the 1960's Felix Wankel design the rotary engine which reduced the complexity of engine design dramatically.
I had a friend who owned an 80's Mazda with a rotary engine. I never asked about the gas mileage, but the engine had to be replaced around 80-100k miles. The rotary part of the engine wore out causing the engine to lose its efficiency, something to do with leaky compressed gasses. As a matter of fact cold starting the engine did not work so well, which was the main reason for the maintenance. The mechanics popped in a used replacement motor, but it was not the exact match. The replacement motor killed his old transmission do to some slight difference in the motor design (at least that is what the mechanics said). I think the he had to buy a 2nd replacement motor (the correct one) and a replacement transmission also. It was not a cheap fix.
Dude, since you are using the word "Yanks," I assume you are from the UK. DUDE! The UK makes a lot of money supplying oil to the US and other countries. The people turning the knobs may be a lot closer than you think.
PS, I currently drive a full size car with a V8. I like it because it is comfortable and safe(r). Personally I am for efficient cars, but prefer to let other people drive them.
-
The UK is just as daft as everyone else :)
We in the UK cope well to criticism we are used to it, so please don't get defensive its only some one who likes pies having a point of view.:ROFL
Oil was the worst thing to happen to the the UK as the economic progress of the nation was turned to the financial sectors of London at the expense of the manufacturing base of the rest of the country. The financial sectors of the UK have over recent months been exposed by their underhand dealings and criminal activities :rofl
Efficient and more Eco friendly systems for energy use be it "automobile or domestic" is not going to happen when economic systems are based on generation of wealth based on said energy.
Wankel engines for years had leakage problems in regards to the three points in the chamber, apparently this has been solved by development of new alloys and lubrication :)
If I lived in America I would have a big gun and a fat car.
-
The UK is just as daft as everyone else :)
We in the UK cope well to criticism we are used to it, so please don't get defensive its only some one who likes pies having a point of view.:ROFL
Oil was the worst thing to happen to the the UK as the economic progress of the nation was turned to the financial sectors of London at the expense of the manufacturing base of the rest of the country. The financial sectors of the UK have over recent months been exposed by their underhand dealings and criminal activities :rofl
Efficient and more Eco friendly systems for energy use be it "automobile or domestic" is not going to happen when economic systems are based on generation of wealth based on said energy.
Wankel engines for years had leakage problems in regards to the three points in the chamber, apparently this has been solved by development of new alloys and lubrication :)
If I lived in America I would have a big gun and a fat car.
Come on over Zach, theres plenty of room......your first gun is on me :aok As long as i can get a recipe for a pie or 2 that is :cheers:
-
Can I have a thompson please? :old:
-
Can I have a thompson please? :old:
If a thompson is too much. I would recommend the Hi-Point .45 ACP carbine $250-$300.
-
exactly how much RPM and power is that 3 foot connecting rod going to take before snapping :headscratch: Also how exactly is that thing breathing, I don't see any cams, valves, or anything else of that nature moving :headscratch:
:salute
BigRat
-
exactly how much RPM and power is that 3 foot connecting rod going to take before snapping :headscratch:
:salute
BigRat
\
if it doesn't get too bad of an angle, then it may be able to take pretty much. i'd like to see an actual working model myself.
-
WW2 Junkers diesel engine
(http://www.billzilla.org/Junkers1.jpg)
Notice the operation of the pistons.
-
exactly how much RPM and power is that 3 foot connecting rod going to take before snapping :headscratch: Also how exactly is that thing breathing, I don't see any cams, valves, or anything else of that nature moving :headscratch:
:salute
BigRat
It is a 2 stroke...reed valves etc. :cheers: Rods look longer because of long stroke, but actually not that long...also short stroke means less lateral inertia so rods have less stress :old:.
-
WW2 Junkers diesel engine
(http://www.billzilla.org/Junkers1.jpg)
Notice the operation of the pistons.
This heavy beast was half way there, but with 2 crankshafts it was very heavy... :salute
-
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 :devil
-
I'm curious as to what part of my post you are referencing with your attempted skewer.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeKdgybl6SI&feature=player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeKdgybl6SI&feature=player_embedded) :aok
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/07/inside-ecomotors-revolutionary-high-efficiency-engine/ (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... :old:
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeKdgybl6SI&feature=player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeKdgybl6SI&feature=player_embedded) :aok
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/07/inside-ecomotors-revolutionary-high-efficiency-engine/ (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... :old:
what';s its torque?
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MBYg1NPzMY&feature=related
Same idea recycled again and again.
-C+
-
My point :old:
The OPOC design is being developed by numerous companies :old:
The rotary engine not massed produce. :old:
Other efficient engine designs not massed produced. :old:
The major car producers have trillions of dollars to developer these designs and they have. :old:
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. :old: (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.
-
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.
-
Is that 2.5 liter displacement from two crankshaft revolutions or one?
-
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. :salute
-
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. :salute
-
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. :salute
-
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. :banana:
-
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. :salute
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 :ahand
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.
-
I've seen 50 engines like this get millions invested only to find out the mtbo is 11 hours.
-
Can you not see the wood for the Trees :rofl
It makes no odds what engine design anyone makes if it affects revenue for oil manufacturers its dead in the water.
Any claims on efficiency will be countered by claims from those parties who do not want the current state of engine production and oil consumption altering.
In the 1960's Felix Wankel design the rotary engine which reduced the complexity of engine design dramatically.
All the major car companies bought rights to produce the said engines,NSU,Mazda actually produced a engine lol
Felix Wankel was one of the few engineers to make millions from not having his ideas put into major production.
The fact that this new engine is on Youtube on not on the front pages of everyone newspaper in the world is quite obvious, or maybe the engine is crap :rofl
You Yanks like big fat cars with big fat engines anyway,how do we make it go faster? lets make it bigger :rofl
Efficentcy is a dirty word in the US its loaded with political and climate arguments, everyone who reads this last statment will be loading his gun a milisecond :rofl
Our roads are much larger and can handle the size. :D
-
I've seen 50 engines like this get millions invested only to find out the mtbo is 11 hours.
Sooo? this has to end that way? or are you just bored & rather not hope for something better? just asking...to me it takes much more effort to be negative. :salute
-
I've seen 50 engines like this get millions invested only to find out the mtbo is 11 hours.
Yes :salute
Everyone is discussing the engne and its design which is very nice :)
The basic idea of the engine is to reduce fuel consumption :)
As has been stated above its engineering dogma, they are continuing up the same same road everytime - "Fuel reduction and efficiency" of oil based fuels,
If steam engine technology had been developed at the same rate as the oil based engines you would have a steam engine the size of suitcase with little internal mechanisms. (ie complicated gearboxes)
In the 1920 steam cars were driving at 120mph
Engine design is based on need to use oil and to maintain the use of oil. (dogma)
In the UK our roads are rubbish and our cars are small and we have the safest roads in the world, then again you cannot drive very fast because we have speed camera's hidden in every tree :rofl
If I had large amounts of money I would buy a E Type Jag and drive all day long :)
-
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.
300 lb*ft of torque is pretty respectable for a car
-
"on the dyno generates 240 HP and 487 foot-pounds of torque...." so is 487FP
-
LOL
I do have a steam engine the size of a suitcase. I made it with only twenty moving parts for a V-6. 100% torque at zero rpm too.....
(http://i570.photobucket.com/albums/ss146/Thorgierr/CIMG0126.jpg)
I am speaking at the world SF convention this year in Chicago. (end of the month)
Regards,
Kevin
Yes :salute
Everyone is discussing the engne and its design which is very nice :)
The basic idea of the engine is to reduce fuel consumption :)
As has been stated above its engineering dogma, they are continuing up the same same road everytime - "Fuel reduction and efficiency" of oil based fuels,
If steam engine technology had been developed at the same rate as the oil based engines you would have a steam engine the size of suitcase with little internal mechanisms. (ie complicated gearboxes)
In the 1920 steam cars were driving at 120mph
Engine design is based on need to use oil and to maintain the use of oil. (dogma)
In the UK our roads are rubbish and our cars are small and we have the safest roads in the world, then again you cannot drive very fast because we have speed camera's hidden in every tree :rofl
If I had large amounts of money I would buy a E Type Jag and drive all day long :)
-
:rofl
-
The UK is just as daft as everyone else :)
We in the UK cope well to criticism we are used to it, so please don't get defensive its only some one who likes pies having a point of view.:ROFL
Oil was the worst thing to happen to the the UK as the economic progress of the nation was turned to the financial sectors of London at the expense of the manufacturing base of the rest of the country. The financial sectors of the UK have over recent months been exposed by their underhand dealings and criminal activities :rofl
Efficient and more Eco friendly systems for energy use be it "automobile or domestic" is not going to happen when economic systems are based on generation of wealth based on said energy.
Wankel engines for years had leakage problems in regards to the three points in the chamber, apparently this has been solved by development of new alloys and lubrication :)
If I lived in America I would have a big gun and a fat car.
At least the UK is the only place on earth where Tidal powered turbines are being developed. I'm stuck in an area where they keep building wind turbine factories but nobody realizes they're only expected to last 20 years and are only economical because of huge subsidies.
Although it is cool to see the enormous tractor trailers hauling them around.
(http://wpcore.wpe.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/wind3.jpeg)
Hey Zach, since you probably don't like the Chrysler 300, what about their Charger?
(http://www.modelcars.com/model-kit-zoom/revell-2007-dodge-charger-srt8-super-bee.jpg)