|
Yeah, I think it would still need the heavier flywheel. Maybe more realistic to leave TWO cylinders running & only kill the other two. May get away with keeping the stock flywheel that way. And I know my Swift would run - barely - on 2 of the 4 cylinders, but not one.
As far as "de-activating" the valves, I dunno. . . seems the cam would need to be moved away (but that would probably mess up the cam settings, etc.) or else somehow the valves moved away from the cam - - - or some sort of adjustable spacer between the valves & the cam. Maybe adjusted "down" so the cam doesn't activate the valves when the cylinders are turned off, and then "extended" again to start working again. Maybe something like a "lifter" in the old pushrod engines that has some sort of valve to allow it to "pump up" when it's time to work the valves, and "drained" when it's time to shut down the cylinders. I'd think this would have to be part of the original design of the engine - don't know how to try to retrofit an existing engine to do it.
I can't help but wondering if this would have any advantage over the simple kill switches that just shut down the fuel to the whole engine? If you wanted it to keep running, say, because it's an automatic you can't "bump-start", maybe just coast in neutral? I guess sitting at a red light for a couple minutes with the engine idling would be tedious - but even those of us with manual boxes still have to use the starter in that case.
|