Posted on 10/19/2005 10:59:55 AM PDT by Jack of all Trades
Forgot to mention: one of these engines is scheduled to race in an Indy V8 Ute class this weekend at the Lexmark 300.
I don't post much, is there a "gearhead" ping list?
BTTT
That is prety cool. The IC engine still has a few tricks up its sleeve and won't be going away anytime soon.
Seems like the bearings might be the weak point.
"I don't post much, is there a "gearhead" ping list?"
Don't gearheads hate pings? (I'd get some gasoline additive).
Doh! I didn't see that one coming.
seems to me it would vibrate....
Seems that bar moving back and forth is generating as much loss as a piston engine.
THANKS for the post! I am always interested in new technology!..........
If you ran just 2 cylinders, the engine would definitely be seriously out of balance. My first impression is that a 4 cylinder version would not be nearly as smooth as conventional 4s, as you still could not balance the forces and moments as well. A flat 8 from this could potentially be pretty smooth, though, as that's the point in which you could balance forces well. A Y6 might be an option (not V, but Y)... but I haven't done any calcs....
Interesting find. Thanks for the post.
That was my first thought too, but now I'm not so sure especially for a multicylinder version. As I look at the cam rotate, I see two lobes of the cam at BDC each time the piston is at TDC. It might balance out. One thing is for sure, I'd love to hear one run.
"I don't post much, is there a "gearhead" ping list?"
I'm not sure. If there is, I wouldn't mind being on it.
Good post. Very interesting.
Wow, that is pure elegance. Most of these breakthrough improvements to the piston engine are flops, but this looks truly promising. It's always good when you can improve through simplification.
I remember the Wankel hype. It just seemed so elegantly simple, but the details is where that engine lets us down.
Very interesting
Very cool. What is missing from the animation is the cylinder, which is still what is driving the whole thing. So whats really different is the replacement of the main shaft set up with the direct cam things. It's not a Wankle variant as I first thought.
I don't get this comment at all "The piston assembly slides rigidly through the block eliminating piston to cylinder-bore contact."
How can you eliminate piston to bore contact. Presumably the piston still has to be tight to the cylinder to facilitate controlled combustion, and preventing fuel from blowing back into the cams (which must require lubrication).
Anyone get what they are talking about?
It looks too bulky for motorycle application.
What's wrong with the Wankle? Why did only Mazda use it?
Funny you say that. I had the Wankel engine in mind as I wrote my comment. I wonder if this thing has an Achilles heel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.