Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lonnie who wrote (962)	6/23/1998 2:03:00 PM
From: Sir Auric Goldfinger	Respond to of 3383

AENG Cliff notes through 6/22/1998: Part 5 An annotated summary of all the posts that matter. TECHNICAL PROBLEMS WITH OX-2 ENGINE For those technically-inclined, several of the posters to this thread have provided their analyses of the engine from an engineering standpoint. They have found several problems in the basic engineering of the OX-2 that AENG's website fails to mention. 1) Based on his calculations, OXS seems to defy laws of physics: (from shashyazhi, posting #77, www2.techstocks.com "Don't take this wrong. I'm not trying to shake anybody up. I would LOVE to see this engine work the way they claim it works. But I have calculated the Brake Mean Effective Pressure of this engine using a couple of possibilities, based upon the stated engine displacement and stroke. BMEP is a tool used by engineers to compare the horsepower output of engines of varying sizes and designs. If the stroke of the engine is really 75 millimeters, and the displacement is really 1086 cc, the engine would have to have a mean effective operating pressure though the power stroke of 760.42 psi. No internal combustion engine known to science has this much BMEP. So I recalculated BMEP, assuming that the 1086 cc was the displacement of ONE of the eight cylinders. That would mean the whole engine would be 530 cubic inches. 159 horsepower at 2500 RPM is believable for an engine that big. The calculated BMEP comes out to 253.88 psi. That is still too high to be credible. I would have to believe that whatever method is used to convert reciprocating motion to rotating motion is so much more efficient than a crankshaft that it accounts for this improvement. A turbocharged Indy car only has a BMEP of about 220 psi, and it has to turn 12,500 RPM to accomplish this feat." 2) (from wireless wonk, #313, www2.techstocks.com "2500 RPM in an engine of this design is equivalent to 10,000 RPM in a conventional engine. Only motorcycle engines, Formula I and Indy car engines ordinarily run at these very high speeds.. But the OX2 engine is running at the equivalent of 10,000 RPM, with a 2.955 inch stroke." And also notes "the limited amount of time for cylinder filling and exhausting... torque will begin to drop off rapidly as the engine RPM increases. It works the same way in any engine, OX2 or Chevy V-8." 3) (from Sword, #318, www2.techstocks.com "the sealing technology for sliding planar surfaces at the front of the engine as the cylinders sweep past the exhaust and intake ports is likely to be quite problematic because of the large area exposed intermittently. The seal would be alternately sliding against a suface and then exposed as it sees the opening." 4) (articlight, #434, www2.techstocks.com "concerned about front end sealing at contact points at head and rotating cylinder juncture" 5) (from Sword, #806 www2.techstocks.com "AENG design does NOT appear to use the advantageously spaced port design according to their web page. This may just be the artist's lack of attention to detail. That concept is already in the abstract of patent # 4,022,167." SHELBY'S ENDORSEMENTS ADD LITTLE TO A COMPANY WITH NO FINANCIALS So far, the closest that AENG has come to validating any legitimacy is its endorsement from Carroll Shelby, famous for his race car engine designs in past decades. However, even Shelby's endorsement adds little to the company's attempts at achieving legitimacy. 1) (From Texas Dude, #441, www2.techstocks.com ".so much credence to the association of Shelby with this company. names associated with companies don't alter the financials and prospects of that company...results are what counts." 2) (From WMG, #444, www2.techstocks.com "A very close friend invested in a private Australian spark plug company about twenty years ago. Seems it was going to revolutionize the spark plug industry. Mr. Shelby was associated with that company. But it turned out that the plug required replacing after 2,000 miles. Enough said. This is not intended to cast shadow upon Mr. Shelby's judgment or due diligence in these new innovations that he becomes involved with."