Can I get this... in a car, please!??!?!?!?!

[sillymofo]

The little engine that could!

To sum it up, it's only 300 lbs, produces 650 ft/lbs of torque @2000 rpm and 200 HP (that's right), and that's the 377 cubic inch model. They have a 427 cubic inch model that would produce 300 HP, >700 ft/lbs of torque and it only weight little more.

I wil definitely try to fit this in a kit car, one on each axle :laugh:

 

[sillymofo]

Damn... where did all the car buffs go?

 

[badmouse]

Originally posted by: cr4zymofo
Damn... where did all the car buffs go?

They're sleeping off their weekend car-tinkering orgies.

Looks like a sweet device.

 

[halik]

i'd imagine it would take a decent amount of energy to get the cam up and in motion, the rotational inertia would be quite a bit to handle seeing as only the perpendicular component of the force is driving the shaft and cam. (the max force would be at pi/4 on the sin. cam... someone wanna do math of whats the max sideways force?)

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Makes me wonder about the efficency and reliability of it.

 

[LTC8K6]

They have been fooling around for a long time with that design. It actually goes back to 1946.

Dyna cam was making promises back in 1995, I believe, and it looks like they are still trying to get one into an airplane. The price for one was 25G's back then.

 

[virtuamike]

The initial model of the Dyna-Cam Engine (the DC375) is ready for production and we intend to initially target the kitbuilt segment of the experimental aircraft market with this model

The last thing I want to be in is an experimental aircraft. Airplanes either work or they don't work.

 

[Black88GTA]

I think this one looks cool. Should be interesting to see what happens with this type of motor in the future...if it catches on, etc.

Summaries of CCE advantages are as follows;

approximately one quarter the size and weight of a conventional engine (for similar applications) combined with improved output substantially increases power/weight and torque/weight ratio.

fewer moving and total components. As a result of fewer components, more easily manufactured than conventional engines.

identical cylinder head assembly (?top end?) to conventional engines. Most existing head technology can be either adapted or utilised.

Flexible design - can be four-stroke, two-stroke, petrol, diesel or gas, natural of forced aspiration.

Eliminated irregularly reciprocating components such as connecting rods.

Output shaft can be run in either direction if multilobed cams with symmetrical lobes are employed.

All rotational forces are counteracted via the counter rotating cam ? eliminates the need for a heavy flywheel.

Torque and power output can be varied using a fixed capacity and piston stroke.

The CCE can be designed to operate at greatly reduced operating speeds while delivering high torque output.

Substantial reduction in stroke reduces heat loss through cylinder wall.

Extended piston dwell is possible because engine design allows a lower than normal compression ratio to be used reducing power loss from compression cycle.

Maximum mechanical advantage can be applied to output shaft at only 10 degrees ATDC utilising high cylinder pressure early in the stroke, compared to around 60 degrees ATDC for conventional engines.

Lower emissions can be achieved due to increased control over combustion.

Extremely low idle speed due to increase in mechanical efficiency at the top of the stroke.

Little or no bore contact/piston side thrust, which reduces wear on cylinder bore.

Can have different port timing on compression stroke than power stroke allowing better control two-stroke).

Lower centre of gravity.

Due to controlled piston acceleration rates the CCE reduces engine vibration.

A hollow output shaft can be utilised for specialty applications, such as peristaltic pumps.

 

[Kipper]

PM Roger.

 

[The Stigenator]

sounds interesting...