I’m sure they’ve run it past legal. You missed out the part about noise in your excuse section. Anyway I wish them the best of luck.
Perhaps I should have included the next bit when I quoted that name:
Patented 1 Stroke® technology: 400% Specific power
400% ??? Like, 100% for a four stroke, 200% for a two stroke…
???
INNengine is the first one to introduce 1 Stroke technology, meaning our engines have 2 power events per revolution in every cylinder.
This allows them to deliver twice the power of a 2-Stroke and 4 times that of a 4-Stroke.
Sorry snooks, they gave the game away in their own words.
Specific power is a measure of power to mass. The entire video was impressed by the power they got from the weight.
Have they even built one?
Regardless, this:
INNengine is the first one to introduce 1 Stroke technology, meaning our engines have 2 power events per revolution in every cylinder.
This allows them to deliver twice the power of a 2-Stroke and 4 times that of a 4-Stroke.
is fraudulent bullshit.
They’re fishing for investors, and they’re using made up bullshit to do it.
I’ve seen this kind of thing too many times before, and my spidey senses went off immediately when we got to “1 stroke engine technology* (*not a one stroke engine)”
Jeez, you didn’t watch the video at all.
What, where they show an ordinary two stroke (no opposed pistons) with a wavy thing, that they still call a one stroke engine?
Or the bit where they claim to power a MX-5 with “no turbocharger” (please ignore the supercharger). Well, if you need forced induction, you’re just the same as any other two stroke that doesn’t need oil in the fuel.
Frankly, given all the dodgy business going on, I’d have to be there to see the engine powering stuff with my own eyes before I’d believe any of it.
I see no reason why it couldn’t actually run, but these supposed benefits compared to other designs?
Which one is it?
edit: just adding this edit after the fact. Can’t be bothered arguing. Clearly I’m pointing out that you agree that they are not calling it a one stroke engine (first quote) but you then say that they call it that (second quote).
Where is what?
The engine that works the way they say it does, producing the types of figures they claim it does?
What the fuck are you even trying to say?
Can you explain a contradiction that needs explaining?
If you actually care to understand exactly why opposed piston engines are capable of being very efficient, I’d start here.
If the creators of it want to convince @drumphil of all their claims they simply need cat lady to do the PR
If you insist.
Damnit man. I was thinking about posting about that engine, continued watching the video, and then decided not to. I guess I somehow submitted the post any way.