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 : AENG THREAD without TRAV, OX2 Engine ONLY! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cornbread who wrote (25)	3/6/1999 10:45:00 PM
From: david travis	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 38

Did cornbread answer your questions Janet? Let's face it your much better suited for the bedroom than the boardroom. TRAV

To: cornbread who wrote (25)	3/7/1999 4:18:00 PM
From: E. Charters	Respond to of 38

ok. what is the power coupling? Swash plate? and how about a diagram.

To: cornbread who wrote (25)	3/8/1999 5:14:00 AM
From: 246810	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 38

I encourage everyone to go back to the other thread and read the posts from March 1998 on. Well, read the technical ones, the character assassination you can skip. cornbread, I know you are a technical guy, but your rose colored glasses are on again. That long explanation of the OX2 contains many self contradictory statements. For example: it says the piston speed is constant and then it says the pistons dwell at the top of the stroke. It says there are only 3 moving parts, but fails to mention the pistons, rings, cam followers, bearings and output shaft. I could go on and on but any person who understands a crankshaft engine and looks at the patent drawings of the OX2 will get the picture. Speaking of patents, let's mention that this design was first patented in 1909 and has not seen any commercial application. It was used on some racing motorcycles in Canada by the fellow who received the US patent in 1985. If you study the patents and the drawings, you will find several clever characteristics that could promise improved performance. However, the OX2 design fails to claim one of them and its simplistic design approach will not operate for any reasonable life. (That is why the other patented designs became more and more complex over the years since 1909.) I don't feel it necessary to repeat all the technical information that I and more astute engineers put on the other thread last year. Everyone can go there and read it. However, I did feel it necessary to debunk the misleading and contradictory description of the engine published by the OX2 company.. Good Luck 246810