I understand specific applications etc.  I just assumed 2 strokes could be scaled if everyone used those instead.  And since the smallest and the largest engines I know about use the 2 stroke, I just wondered if it was "green" politics.

1 hour ago, Tirefryr said:

The 4 stroke hasn't even been nearly perfected yet.  The Mercedes F1 team just last year reached 50% thermal efficiency from their engines.  This is unheard of and never been done before.  Their nearest competitors are in the low 40% range.  Compare this to commercial vehicles which are a little less than half and you see how far off we are. 

Hell, I'm seeing some very ingenious designs coming around lately.  I saw an engine not to look ago that was actually pre-igniting the mixture.  This is just blasphemous to the normal train of thought in regards to the internal combustion engine.  Since the dawn of the engine, the goal has been to eliminate pre-ignition.  It's destructive in nature, but somehow, engineers are now using it advantageously.

Been working with Achates for a long time already.

http://achatespower.com/our-formula/opposed-piston/

 

56 minutes ago, dem beats said:

Not to be contrarian, but ships use some of the largest engines in the world and they are 2 strokes, specifically because of they can burn anything and they are incredibly more efficient at that scale.  Again, I'm not sure why.  

 

I thought it might be due to the power band, but then transmissions could make up for it?

If you only had ships and cars.  The emission follow of ships is something like 10x that of all cars combined.  The lack of regulation on the shipping industry is single handedly the largest contributor to emissions concerns.

13 minutes ago, dem beats said:

2 strokes just deal with more wear parts eh?

Based on the scale argument is it saying that you can get away with cheaper parts on a 4 stroke and get similar power with less maintenance even though it's more complex less efficient and the fact it can stay sealed up for so much longer and doesn't consume oil is the real benefit right?

Less wear parts, but they do not survive.

12 minutes ago, dem beats said:

I understand specific applications etc.  I just assumed 2 strokes could be scaled if everyone used those instead.  And since the smallest and the largest engines I know about use the 2 stroke, I just wondered if it was "green" politics.

That is actually just a lack of green politics in the places that make sense.

The air in CA is cleaner coming out the exhaust pipe than going into the intake according to the standards.  Obviously they are stupid and only due to politicians.  Considering shipping is global and the chinese dominate no one is stepping up.

9 minutes ago, ///M5 said:

The air in CA is cleaner coming out the exhaust pipe than going into the intake according to the standards.  Obviously they are stupid and only due to politicians.  Considering shipping is global and the chinese dominate no one is stepping up.

That's where I was going.  I thought some misguided politician with even less sense than myself got talked into pushing 4stroke tech.

 

Even in green tech.  Some of my family worked in solar panels and even though they were working on a better tech that was a bit more work but provided much better results was pushed to the side from some government push.  

 

It was really bad because when Trump came in a lot of the money went away.  Without uncle sams teet, this new tech cant be cost effective at any scale without as you guys mentioned, the benefit of an existing large scale push.  The new pannels only worked because subsidies helpd pay for mass production of live failures.

 

It fucked the biz so bad, that they went directly from green tech to defense....

17 minutes ago, ///M5 said:

The air in CA is cleaner coming out the exhaust pipe than going into the intake according to the standards.  Obviously they are stupid and only due to politicians.  Considering shipping is global and the chinese dominate no one is stepping up.

I remeber the video of the 6.0 raptor literally cleaning the air in LA.  The engine was so well done it fucking cleaned the air.  I cannot even.

 

I need a turbo raptor.

 

Save the planet 6 boosted liters at a time....

Edited February 7, 20187 yr by dem beats

The brass is even worse now pushing electric vehicles.  It isn't for better emissions, but does have one benefit there.  It moves the emissions from where the cars are driven to where the power/batteries are made.

8 minutes ago, ///M5 said:

The brass is even worse now pushing electric vehicles.  It isn't for better emissions, but does have one benefit there.  It moves the emissions from where the cars are driven to where the power/batteries are made.

The Chinese Congo will be a giant acid pool.  Hooray.

Then again a brushless block of copper windings that gives me 1500 pounds of TQ and revves to 25000 rippers sounds ok.

Perfect for a 911.

There is only one problem Sean...

que paso?

39 minutes ago, ///M5 said:

que paso?

The turbo's will just be for looks

: /

Edited February 7, 20187 yr by dem beats

I halfway expect Polaris to release a Turbo 2 stroke in 3 weeks.  It is either that or a 3cyl 2str or some other power adder.

Sean..I have a question you may be able to help me with...I was talking to a guy I know who is in the business of rebuilding transmissions..Anyway I was telling him in the near future I will be doing a LS swap in this 2000 blazer I have most likely a 5.3 and when I was telling him I will most likely slap a 4l80 in with it he asked why saying my 4l60e would be fine just to update the sunshell and shaft..I remember we discussed this a couple of years ago  about the 4l60e in my camaro and you suggested if I was planning on doing something that produces a good amount of hp to go with the 4l80..What do you think my best bet would be price wise? In the blazer now is a low milage 4l60e basically stock except a corvette servo..I really aint trying to dump a fortune in the tranny at first so if it would be cheaper and fairly easy to convert to the 4l80 I would rather do that..Also he told me something about if I left the 4l60e in and did the 5.3 I could use a torque converter out of a 4.2 Trailblazer to keep from having to buy a stall..Do you know anything about this?What the hell is he talking about? I know your the 5.3 man if you could give me any insight to this it would be awesome ..

I am not a 5.3 man...but I did a poop ton amount of research on all the LS stuff.  Any conversion is spendy and should be avoided.  That being said at a certain power and weight threshold you have no choice.  How "built" of a motor are you planning?

Pretty sure he meant a TBSS converter...but if you look on the TBSS forums you will see a ton of guys who swapped for 4l80s as any power adder and even a built 60 kisses itself goodbye

Btw.  I would buy a 4.8 before a 5.3 if it were me....but it would also get a big ole turbo

I thought the LS4 5.3 was fwd? Or are you talking about 5.3 vortec?

5.3 came in a ton of stuff.  Just an engine block.  Like the 350 of old.

4.8 makes more sense though as it spins a turbo better.  

And are SUPER cheap at scrap yards

Seen some buys for <$100 if you pull it yourself.  All for a motor that with a turbo can easily hit 600+ for nearly no dough.