SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Advanced Engine Technologies (AENG)
AENG 0.00010000.0%Dec 5 9:30 AM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: 1411 who wrote (1459)7/17/1998 3:36:00 PM
From: shashyazhi  Read Replies (1) of 3383
 
If anyone would care to go back to the beginning of this thread, he will find that I was the first to reply to the thread.

Greg asked me personally what I thought about this engine, and I finally got around to telling him my thoughts in a few posts.

1411 states: "These computations are based on the premise that the pistons are independent of each other."

You have made a mistaken assumption about the premise of the
calculations.

At any given time, four pistons are rising on either the compression or exhaust stroke, and the other four are descending on either the power or intake stroke.

And each piston completes two four stroke cycles per revolution,
meaning that they reciprocate at a furious rate at least equivalent to
a conventional engine turning four times as fast.

This is apparent from the configuration of the two piston plates. The
fact that two pistons are firing at the same time has the effect of
internal torque multiplication without need for a gear box, and is a desirable feature of the design.

A basic premise of the computations was based, however, on the
torque and horsepower graphs shown on the OX2 website.

If the person who produced these charts had not projected horsepower and torque figures beyond the point where the test engine can be reasonably expected to survive operation over a long
period of time, I would not have used those RPM points in my calculations.

I have no axe to grind here. In fact, I find the OX2 engine to be very
technically interesting as an alternative method to the conventional
IC engine which takes two full turns to fire all of its cylinders.

I do not condemn the OX2 engine to the junkyard of broken dreams.

I simply wanted to point out the test engine itself appears to run past
normal mechanical limitations in order to impress potential investors.

I regard it as a hot rod version of the OX2.

This is something that I would expect of almost any engine manufacturer, having seen quite a few pre-production engines perform much better than the production models.

I enjoy the discussion of the technical aspects of the OX2 and would
welcome its development for experimental aircraft use.

I appreciate the patent research done by other posters.

And I also appreciate civility among posters. Good luck to AENG
investors.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News