Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Off-Topic Tech
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-04-2016, 10:04 PM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Willisburg, KY
Posts: 1
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Question Beare head 2.0?

I am currently designing a new and improved version of the beare head motor.
The following specs were claimed by Michael Beare:
40% more fuel economical than a 4 stroke,
9% power increase.

However i notice it can do WAY more than this.

The six stroke engine takes the power of the crankshaft spinning three over the other one spinning once 3:1 ratio. To me this causes a power "tension" meaning there can be so much more power if it is given the oportunity.

I am taking the power from the lowest rpm crank to give it a great torque rating (which helps with vehicle load in my opinion) AND the faster crank helps drive the lower rpm crank. Giving it over 33% more power.

I have some issues however, in order to make it a feasible, beastie motor. I need to know if i can get away with reed valves on both intake and exhaust, a valve system, or i can try another approach (maybe a tesla one way valve?), Second, how tight do i need to make the bolts so that both crank cases fit properly? Third is about Direct Injection or carburretor fed.

There are theoretical equations that make this new design more powerful. Like Gasoline motors have the capability to run diesel applications, and diesel versions? Got one hell of a torque buster, fuel savin ravin beast!

As i am a learning and growing gearhead, i am asking your help because all i see is specs and not the knowledge behind it all.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 02-04-2016, 10:47 PM   #2 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
You won't find much in your research until you look for MALCOLM Beare.

I don't know where you get the 3:1 crankshafts ratio. It's 2:1.

I'm no engine engineer but I don't think there are any reed valves that withstand exhaust heat.

Look up the difference between power and torque.

Beare's been playing with it about 20 years now. It's gonna be a long road.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Frank Lee For This Useful Post:
Xist (02-05-2016)
Old 02-05-2016, 10:33 PM   #3 (permalink)
Master Novice
 
elhigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SE USA - East Tennessee
Posts: 2,314

Josie - '87 Toyota Pickup
90 day: 29.5 mpg (US)

Felicia - '09 Toyota Prius Base
90 day: 49.47 mpg (US)
Thanks: 427
Thanked 616 Times in 450 Posts
I'm pretty sure extra weight flopping around isn't going to make an engine run smoother. Buyers are woefully unimpressed by fuel economy, but they sure do complain when their engine feels rough. For a long time that was a really strong selling point for straight sixes.

I think such concepts as the Crower Six Stroke are a better approach, taking the cooling effect of the water and appropriating its steam expansion for power production.

__________________




Lead or follow. Either is fine.
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Tags
diesel, gasoline, six-stroke





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com