Current ridicule

[raburgeson]

The simple definition of a gasoline engine is a (heat pump). As the piston is moving and both valves are open, even without the vacuum in the intake considered, the piston is not moving air in it's entire stroke. This limits the compression of the engine, there is literally less fuel/air mixture to compress. Removing valve overlap can quickly result in compression so high you can't start the engine. Add to this the vacuum of the intake manifold and you have less than one atmosphere of pressure for the compression stroke. As the intake valve is still open at a crucial time the vacuum lowers the chamber pressure and sucks heated exhaust into the chamber which is expanded already. This makes the power stroke far weaker.

Best situation is to suck in all the fuel/air mixture you can and and ignite the charge. Gasoline engines perform best around 15 to 1 compression. They have dropped the compression from 10 to 12 to 1 down to what you have today. It was common to have a horse power per cubic inch of displacement when I was young. In other words a hi proformance engine 350 had 335 HP and a 427 had 435 HP. You can still get hi proformance engines today but not from the factory. Example:

http://www.proformanceunlimited.com/

Of course they will not have factory cams and will be higher compression. Gasohol probably does not have a high enough octane to start these engines. I had a 1962 Jetstar convertible that required 104 octane to start, the label under the hood told you this fact. Lower octane fuel causes detonation damage in an engine with compression that high.

If you don't believe me grab a 2 1/2 or 3 1/2 horse power used lawnmower engine and grind the valve overlap out with a hand grinder. You will not be able to turn it over.

[MarkE]

The simple definition of a gasoline engine is a (heat pump). As the piston is moving and both valves are open, even without the vacuum in the intake considered, the piston is not moving air in it's entire stroke. This limits the compression of the engine, there is literally less fuel/air mixture to compress. Removing valve overlap can quickly result in compression so high you can't start the engine. Add to this the vacuum of the intake manifold and you have less than one atmosphere of pressure for the compression stroke. As the intake valve is still open at a crucial time the vacuum lowers the chamber pressure and sucks heated exhaust into the chamber which is expanded already. This makes the power stroke far weaker.

Best situation is to suck in all the fuel/air mixture you can and and ignite the charge. Gasoline engines perform best around 15 to 1 compression. They have dropped the compression from 10 to 12 to 1 down to what you have today. It was common to have a horse power per cubic inch of displacement when I was young. In other words a hi proformance engine 350 had 335 HP and a 427 had 435 HP. You can still get hi proformance engines today but not from the factory. Example:

http://www.proformanceunlimited.com/

Of course they will not have factory cams and will be higher compression. Gasohol probably does not have a high enough octane to start these engines. I had a 1962 Jetstar convertible that required 104 octane to start, the label under the hood told you this fact. Lower octane fuel causes detonation damage in an engine with compression that high.

If you don't believe me grab a 2 1/2 or 3 1/2 horse power used lawnmower engine and grind the valve overlap out with a hand grinder. You will not be able to turn it over.

What are you talking about?  Engines are routinely available in cars and trucks that have much higher power density than 1HP/in³.  Many of the engines offered by Honda, the world's largest manufacturer of ICEs, feature greater than 1.6HP/in³ burning today's gas, including with its HP robbing ethanol, and when measured using the SAE 2005 certification standards that are far more conservative than the standards used in the 1960's and 1970's. 4 cyl: K20Z3 1.61 HP/in³, K20Z4 1.64 HP/in³, K23A1 1.71 HP/in³... Honda's 6 cylinder engines tend more to 1.3HP/in³.  GM's supercharged Northstar engines came in around 1.7HP/in³

[raburgeson]

All HP and no torque. I noticed that they must be using those 1 foot tall dinosaur horses now days too. Look a 383 magnum would flip a charger right on it's back if you let it when I was a kid. That 62 Jetstar with the 400 Rocket Olds ran like this! First gear terrible screaming of the tires. Shift. Tires slowing down and catch. You can't miss second when car jumps ahead. Engine slows and car jerks slower. You bounce ahead and floor the accelerator. There is a brief squeal from the rear tires and you hear the countershaft of the transmission ricochet off the pavement and hope it doesn't hit anything expensive. The Hurst Olds transmission couldn't take half the beating a super T could. I tell you that from experience. These new cars don't have it. They have had a lot of time to figure out how to improve engines.

Take 150 inch engines. 4 cylinder, six cylinder, 8 cylinder, 12 cylinder as the number of cylinders go up so does the horsepower. The reason why is the higher the number of cylinders the more power overlap you have. Power overlap is more than one cylinder in the power stoke at one time. 4 cylinders have no power overlap unless they are 2 cycle. I think there was one tried in the past (4 cylinder) that fired on both sides of the piston. It didn't pan out and was never developed. Brickland Turners joint effort developed an engine that was very interesting, check that one out. It was all horsepower and torque. It could have been scaled down to 300 HP and used. It wasn't to bad on gas either. The test engine had a single barrel carburetor and had around 700 HP, to much for a factory car.

One more time, what happened to the guy building ford V8s that was well over 200 MPG and fighting to get 300. He has disappeared from the net completely. Some one in here must remember.

[CuriousChris]

The ridicule leveled at some here is not current.

It is persistent and long standing.

Unlike overunity believers who swing to and fro in the prevailing winds, those that see fault in the false claims remain steadfast and consistent.

Criticism usually comes with an explanation as to why the claim is incorrect or off the mark or just a straight fabrication. That is the difference between believers who "want to believe" and skeptics who while they may want to believe as well, don't allow that desire cloud their judgement.

While every person on these forums is seeking to find cheaper, more efficient sources of energy. Not every person on this forum is prepared to be taken by fools, fakes and frauds.

[bugler]

Things are not going to improve cause most people behave like kids uncapable of learning new things and, more difficult, changing concepts.
Until we identify the enemy things will get worse and worse.


The enemy is described clearly in this book: [size=78%]http://vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres/reeedcontrov.pdf[/size]


But most people cannot face the truth. Most attack the informer after a whole life being manipulated by the system.