Anybody hear about 2 stroke engine coming back?

UncagedShadow

UncagedShadow

New Member
Jun 6, 2010
811
3
0
H-Ville, Texas
The OPOC or opposed piston opposed cylinder engine is new radial design. It is a stroke design and can be run off of gas or diesel. Originally thought of for use by helicopters, but now being theorized for the everyday vehicle. Capable of producing high torque for its size and able to acheive over 100 miles to the gallon, makes this a favorable engine of mine. It even boasts slightly lower emissions than most engines today.

Check out this video. Very good information and will help you understand how it works.

An Introduction to EcoMotors with Prof. Peter Hofbauer | EcoMotors
 
I feel there are a few flaws to the concept, One if you need to spool up a turbo to provide sufficiant air for emissions pryer to starting. It won't make mass production as I know it (thou he may know something I don't). Second unless he has a working example he is theorizing the fuel consumption. Thou the rough design may well be more efficiant for the energy used than the standards used today. Which have an inherent loss, Mostly heat from the combustion. And there aren't many vehicals that make over 60mpg today that aren't overly complex in how they control the combustion.
I have heard of engines that they plan to produce that actually inject fuel into the cylinder to eliminate predetenation, And there for can run leaner mix for better economy and no pinging. Can't burn what's not there till it's injected, which would make for a vary controled burn.
 
Yes nd jat. The injection you are talking about would be gasoline girect injectoin or GDI already a proven concept but not widely used in gas cars. Used very much in diesel. Diesel uses direct injection which is why they end up being more efficient in the long run and are still able to make 800 ft. lbs. of torque stock. GDI is being utilized on many 2010-2011 vehicles and up. GDI will take the gas engine to a whole new level of performance and fuel economy. The computer will control the injection of the fuel and will actually spray the fuel into the cylinder up to 5-7 times from the time the piston passes mid stroke to right before top dead center. This improves burn time and efficiency, and will keep the a/f mixture in a mist form instead of allowing it to liquidize at all. The amount of sprays and the amount of overall fuel that is sprayed can be varied from cylinder to cylinder by the cars pcm based on always monitered engine characteristics. This is another great aspect. Each cylinder is treated individually in GDI, therfore greatly increasing power and efficiency...

And the OCOP engine has proven its efficiency because it is being used in small private helicopters as we speak. Bill gates actually donated 24 million dollars to this company a few months ago to aid in their research of use in cars and trucks.
 
Pertaining to your "can't burn whats not there" statement also goes along with the awesomeness of GDI. If the computer senses you have set the cruise control at say 65-70 and there is little load on the engine, it can cut fuel to say 2-4 cylinders to save fuel. Why use all 8 cylinders when you only need 2 or 4 to keep the car moving. That is the concept at least.
 
UncagedShadow said:
Pertaining to your "can't burn whats not there" statement also goes along with the awesomeness of GDI. If the computer senses you have set the cruise control at say 65-70 and there is little load on the engine, it can cut fuel to say 2-4 cylinders to save fuel. Why use all 8 cylinders when you only need 2 or 4 to keep the car moving. That is the concept at least.
Click to expand...

What I had understood was they injected fuel in time of ignition, Hence no preigniton. if the fuel isn't present it can't burn before or close to TDC. Yes I know diesel engines have direct injection. Thou that is were the idea has transpired from.
I have been looking into the OPOC motor. It is in use on limited basis as far as I've found. But the claims sound a little to good to me for what it is. 2 strokes are great if kept in an rpm range with a pipe for fuel scavanging. But weight has little to do with fuel efficiancy when cruising, It's friction. Dad work for the rail road and asked me what train would go fast? Both have 2 power units up front, both have the same cars. same # of cars pulled behind them. Only differance one is loaded with coal the other is not. Which train goes fast?
Incase your woundering both are limited to 60mph down the track. and it my blow your mind, But makes sense when thought about.
 
Interesting theory and design, but I wouldn't get too hopeful for it. There is too much invested in modern 4 stroke design and current development for people to break off on a tangent to invest in theory and previously thought of inferior designs....especially in this economic state.
 
wtf does his quad have to do with the topic? so what if mommy and daddy built it. you jealous?
 
GDI is not the answer to all the world's woes.... It's a small technological hop towards slightly better fuel economy. It also has drawbacks, like particulate generation (soot) which still have a way to come before the regulations catch up with GDI and put it out of business.

Also, most GDI's will only spray more than one injection pulse during the "cruise" phase. During heavy acceleration, the engine still has one good old puff of gas like before.

The OPOC engine would probably be best suited for stationary power generation purposes because there's one SERIOUS drawback to opposed piston engines (even the junkers 200 series). They have a LOT of recirprocating weight because of either needing two crankshafts and a geartrain between them or having the "yoke" style secondary rods driving back to the single crankshaft.

Being that they would best be suited for low speed operation, they wouldn't fully take advantage of gasoline's high flame front speed and would be better suited to diesel operation. But then we have the problem of regulations on engine manufacturers and the potential market of an engine like this. Because this design is a 2 stroke engine, it MUST burn it's lubrication and produce smoke (which is boat loads of particulate matter) which will not fly (no pun intended) for a new engine manufacturer. Also, because the best use of this engine would be stationary power generation, they would have FIERCE competition from already developed 4 stroke diesel engine markets. At best this would be a fairly limited market production like places where extreme energy density is valued (sailboat generators or perhaps RV generators for underfloor installation) and the person acquiring it would be willing to pay for that space premium.
 
hudack said:
was that coment realy needed?
insults go both ways here and that one was as unneeded as all of 99lrd's
now i will bet my bottom dollar this thread goes to hell now.......
Click to expand...

I can always provide receipts if he actually thinks that. :D

My Blaster isn't really all that built up but I hate to admit that I've invested way more $$$ into it than I want to admit....addiction kills. :-[
 
^^^ Yes addiction does kill. Especially when you have almost no money because tuition keeps going up lolz. And no need to start any BS on this thread. I simply intended for this thread to present some new info on a new concept engine and for people to comment on their thoughts. Some of the younger crowd could benefit from threads like this were very mechanical information is being presented.
 
I beleive america and most of its citizen's have reached the point of "I don't care how it works, as long as it works". I am very different. You show me something new and first thing I wanna know is how does it function and operate. I know that most on this forum are like that too. And I would like to see more people be interested with the operation of th everyday things we take for granted.
 
Back to the subject at hand, I have heard of highly modded injected banshee motors. I have not seen the article myself but I know dirt wheels judt did an article on it that theorized it could bring back the two-stroke. However, I will admit I am not knowledgeable enough about it though do not believe you will ever see a new production two-stroke ATV as the EPA would like to get rid of all of them. If injection could lower emissions though it might be a possibility though I agree with whoever stated it that most companies are pulling even four-stroke models so R&D into injecte4d two-strokes does not sound likely except by one-off builders.
 
The EPA doesnt hate 2 strokes per say... It hates emmisions which the early 2 stroke had lots of of hence all the hating on 2 strokes. All the big atv/dirtbike companies dumped money into the r&d of 3 strokes cuz that is where technology was centered at the "big change" if you will. If the 2 stroke engine design had as much money dumped into it as the modern 4 stroke, you can bet your tail it would be low emmision, high power, and reliable. Another look from a marketing and sails view, is that a run of the mill 4 stroke can be bought and ridden fairly easy by almost anyone while the 2 stroke takes a little skill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
for the 2 strokers
Replies
8
Views
1K
Off Topic
blasterdad
blasterdad
Top Bottom
Back