new 4 stroke engine

dark_fairytales · 11-27-2009, 07:41 PM

http://www.new4stroke.com/

looks interesting, check it out

This ad is not displayed to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on Yotatech!

stormin94 · 11-27-2009, 08:23 PM

Interesting design. I wonder how it incorporates a spark plug, or if it runs on compression like a diesel.

Built2Grind · 11-27-2009, 08:30 PM

i see some possible drainage issues of the pistons run upside down like how it shows, the oil wont be able to get out and make lots of blue smoke and lots of HC's. im also wondering how the spark is introduced, this thing seems to have a few problems.....

iamsuperbleeder · 11-27-2009, 08:40 PM

seems to over-complicate things... now you'd have another 2 sets of rod bearings for every cyl that could go bad, lol

why must people try to reinvent the wheel...

**DeathCougar** · 11-27-2009, 08:59 PM

You would eliminate the head gasket, the valves, valve stem seals, guides, cylinder head, camshaft, valve springs, valve buckets (or rocker arms/push rods) etc.

I would prefer a set of rod bearings to ALL the moving parts in a cylinder head.

iamsuperbleeder · 11-28-2009, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeathCougar

You would eliminate the head gasket, the valves, valve stem seals, guides, cylinder head, camshaft, valve springs, valve buckets (or rocker arms/push rods) etc.

I would prefer a set of rod bearings to ALL the moving parts in a cylinder head.

another "crank shaft" (if that's what they would be called), which means another set of main bearings, rod bearins, wrist-pin bushings, piston rings... seams like there's just as many points of failure to me...

**DeathCougar** · 11-28-2009, 12:33 PM

Eliminates the troublesome headgasket, if anything.

Take a 3VZ engine for example. What part ALWAYS fails? The head gaskets. Most rebuilds posted on here are not for mains or rods, its for the head gaskets. If we could figured out how to eliminate cylinder heads, I think engines would last much longer.

vital22re · 11-28-2009, 12:51 PM

i dont know why, but to me it seems like a diff version of a rotary engine. I saw that diagrams and started thinking rotary. dunno why

dark_fairytales · 11-28-2009, 01:03 PM

the only real issue i see from intake and exhaust pistons was stated before, the oil drainage into the combustion chamber. It may be passable to use a more viscous oil to reduce that issue.

i just found it interesting thought i would share, really could bring some life in to an old 22re with that setup.

the_ocho · 11-28-2009, 02:04 PM

maybe sealed bearrings for the "cam" and you wouldn't have to have oil up there tho i don't know how you would install bearings in the middle of the shaft lol

peow130 · 11-28-2009, 02:21 PM

this really wouldnt be very practical...
The engine now has to be taller, has 3x the pistons to worry about, etc etc.
what happens when the "valve" pistons go out? then the truck won't even be driveable...

Feliks · 01-17-2010, 03:29 AM

Hi all

One Greek guy made this animation....

Weight popped 75 mm 1000 G
weight piston & rod 76.5 mm 850 G
weight popped 62 mm 400 G
weight piston & rod 62 mm 370 G

But the window of the flight of the valve of 75 mm is only 64 mm, what is very similar to the window of the flight piston 62 mm .

That is it results from it that the valve of 75 mm is giving the same flight as the piston 62 mm that is 1000 G to 370 G !!!!!

==~~ 2.5 more weight popped to piston& rod !!

It only looks impossibly. but this way is.

In principle ,for them greater popped/piston diameter, it is this difference in weight will be to the benefit of pistons.

Regards Andrew

yoterr · 01-17-2010, 07:05 AM

basicallly this design doubles the capacity of the existing motor, only change is the head...could be some interesting capabilities if given the funding for research, doesent say if anything new was built besides the 1984 motor...also seems like you could put this on an existing engine....if it came in a kit with a new head intake n such for your motor, could double its output say our 2.2 would be a 4.4

and says it has ALOT of torque that would be nice...possibly turbo or supercharge it to fill that huge void

turboale · 01-18-2010, 06:05 AM

Looks like its closer to a diesel... B/c it was talking about how you have to lower compression when using a head/valves. Interesting indeed!

11-27-2009, 08:23 PM	#2 (permalink)
stormin94 Contributing Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Lake County, CA/Sacramento Posts: 4,006	Interesting design. I wonder how it incorporates a spark plug, or if it runs on compression like a diesel. __________________ 1994 Toyota 4Runner SR5 4X4 220,000 miles and counting 3.0 V6, 5 speed 10/15 MPG city/hwy(with 33's) Current Mods Headers, 2.5" Flowmaster custom exhaust, K&N FIPK KC Daylighter 100 Watt lights Ranchos x4, 2" Lift Downey coils 33-12.50 M/T's, 1" t-bar lift, 1" body lift Tow pkg w/ lighthookups Silverstar Headlights, Pioneer Deck w/XM Brushguard 250Watt JLAudio 8" W3 Sub Future Mods 12V Aux outlet-400/800peak inverter roof basket/lights Air locker 4.88 gears H.O. Alternator

11-27-2009, 08:30 PM	#3 (permalink)
Built2Grind Registered User Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Glendale, CA Posts: 99	i see some possible drainage issues of the pistons run upside down like how it shows, the oil wont be able to get out and make lots of blue smoke and lots of HC's. im also wondering how the spark is introduced, this thing seems to have a few problems..... __________________ POS 3vz-e, 4x4, extra cab, SR5, glasspack, swaybarless and never going back!

11-28-2009, 12:51 PM	#8 (permalink)
vital22re Registered User Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: kirkland washington Posts: 1,388	i dont know why, but to me it seems like a diff version of a rotary engine. I saw that diagrams and started thinking rotary. dunno why __________________ 92 toyota truck 3.4 5spd 4.56 gears magna flow cat and muffler2 1/4 piping isr mod to intake 1.5 bjsfront add a leafs and 2inch lift shackles rear rancho shocks all around sitting on 265/75/r16 nitto terra grapplers

11-28-2009, 01:03 PM	#9 (permalink)
dark_fairytales Registered User Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Sacramento, Crawlifonia Posts: 376	the only real issue i see from intake and exhaust pistons was stated before, the oil drainage into the combustion chamber. It may be passable to use a more viscous oil to reduce that issue. i just found it interesting thought i would share, really could bring some life in to an old 22re with that setup. __________________ 86 longbed/ build date Sep. 85/ build # 1131 3" body lift 6.5" rear shackles 35" tires/ 15x10 beadlocks 5.29 gears/ ARB rear/ lockrite ront Custom 3 gal. onboard AIR Cobra LT 29 CB/ wilson 1000 ant. next mod 3" drive train lift dual t-case and bj spacers sitting on my carpet wait for install

11-28-2009, 02:21 PM	#11 (permalink)
peow130 Registered User Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 1,242	this really wouldnt be very practical... The engine now has to be taller, has 3x the pistons to worry about, etc etc. what happens when the "valve" pistons go out? then the truck won't even be driveable... __________________ 1987 Toyota Pickup DLX. 30" Cooper Discoverer S/T's. 1" AAL lift and Tbar crank. and two KC HiLites. IFS Club #5 1978 Camaro Z28, 454 Big Block V8 with a 4 Speed.

01-17-2010, 03:29 AM	#12 (permalink)
Feliks Registered User Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 1	Hi all One Greek guy made this animation.... Weight popped 75 mm 1000 G weight piston & rod 76.5 mm 850 G weight popped 62 mm 400 G weight piston & rod 62 mm 370 G But the window of the flight of the valve of 75 mm is only 64 mm, what is very similar to the window of the flight piston 62 mm . That is it results from it that the valve of 75 mm is giving the same flight as the piston 62 mm that is 1000 G to 370 G !!!!! ==~~ 2.5 more weight popped to piston& rod !! It only looks impossibly. but this way is. In principle ,for them greater popped/piston diameter, it is this difference in weight will be to the benefit of pistons. Regards Andrew

01-17-2010, 07:05 AM	#13 (permalink)
yoterr Registered User Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Inverness,FL Posts: 1,257	basicallly this design doubles the capacity of the existing motor, only change is the head...could be some interesting capabilities if given the funding for research, doesent say if anything new was built besides the 1984 motor...also seems like you could put this on an existing engine....if it came in a kit with a new head intake n such for your motor, could double its output say our 2.2 would be a 4.4 and says it has ALOT of torque that would be nice...possibly turbo or supercharge it to fill that huge void __________________ new to me 86' toy on 35" procomp mud terrains, with a 4" lift and 3" body and palm fron camo for now... 04' Dodge 2500 4x4 QC hemi leveled, home made CAI and flowmaster exhaust

01-18-2010, 06:05 AM	#14 (permalink)
turboale Contributing Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 4,870	Looks like its closer to a diesel... B/c it was talking about how you have to lower compression when using a head/valves. Interesting indeed! __________________ --Austin 06 M45 Sport - Beauty 96 4Runner - The Beast

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search