Rootes Lister Blackstone (3 cylinder 2 stroke) TS3 engine in action.

[NearAbbeyRoad]

Type in youtube "OPOC Engine designed by Eco Motors"

Ecomotors have been given $25 million by BIll Gates to develop this opposed piston diesel and petrol engine.

"A promising looking engine that is 25% the size, 30% lighter and 50% better fuel economy than a conventional turbo-diesel engine.

The OPOC engine was designed by Peter Hofbauer, who spent 20 years at Volkswagen designing diesel engines and the VR6"

It uses long conrods instead of the TS3 rockers. Back to the future.

[spentacle]

See watch?v=hhxhNz5bCKE for the other type of Lister TS3

[tpvalley]

good flat profile but heavy on fuel and potentially unreliable.

[NearAbbeyRoad]

@tpvalley

It was the opposite.

1) A high power/weight ration.

2) Excellent mpg for 3 litres

3) Reliable.

It was made for 18 years.

[tpvalley]

@NearAbbeyRoad

they guzzled fuel when in trucks like every 2 stroke diesel.

and 3 litres? whats the bore and stroke again?

[NearAbbeyRoad]

@tpvalley

Not so. Do Goo gle on TS3 mpg Commer. About 18-19 mpg

the first was 3200cc the later 3500cc

Most similar trucks were consuming TWICE as much fuel as the TS3. The TS4, only prototype, was superior. If the engine was kept on it would have been improved as time went on. Simple add ons like intercooler, turbo, more advanced injection, synthetic oils, etc, would make this engine shine even more today.

The Lister TS3 was the same as the Rootes/Commer TS3 engine.

[tpvalley]

@NearAbbeyRoad

mmm I'll keep an open mind on that, but 19mpg isnt good for a 3500cc diesel, low side of average.

parasitic blower doesnt help with mpg either.

[NearAbbeyRoad]

@tpvalley

19mpg for a truck, that was even an articulator, was superb! Compare like with like, others used TWICE as much fuel. TS3 was dropped before oil crisis in 1972. Was loud but overcome by a more advanced exhaust. The engine was physically small, designed that way to go right under the forward cab.

On YT type in "Rootes TS4" for the 4 cyl prototype - rebuilt, smooth as hell - went over a million miles in tests. Was to go in the Commer Commander. TS3 one of the best engines EVER!

[tpvalley]

@NearAbbeyRoad

ok that sounds good for a truck.

but I dont think the prototype 4 cylinder did millions of miles as it didnt have certain parts hardened like production parts would and do in the ts3- crank, liners etc. thats what it said when I googled it anyway!

It has very good torque figures.

[NearAbbeyRoad]

@tpvalley

Prototypes had over 1.3 million miles in all without problems whatsoever.

TS3 was half the weight and physical size and twice everything in mpg, power/weight, etc. The first gave 105HP with 3.2 litre - a Gardner in 1954 needed 8 litres to get that, with twice the size weight, complexity, etc. Commers beat all. Highly popular in Aus and NZ as fuel was very expensive there. Highly reliable - few moving parts. Aussies and Kiwis adore these engines/trucks. The finest auto diesel ever.

[tpvalley]

@NearAbbeyRoad

although to compare truck engines power is not where its at, the torque is, and gardners had mountains of it.

[NearAbbeyRoad]

@tpvalley

The TS3 has mountains at the right rev ranges. It never revved highly, although it could, not having valves and camshafts. Get the BIG PICTURE. The TS3 was only 3.2 to 3.5 litres and very small in size. Make the TS3 to 8 litres, like the Gardner, then compare it. in power & torque. No contest, NOTHING touches the TS3. Commer TS3 was not aimed for very heavy use, but was by the Kiwis.

The TS3 was the finest diesel engine ever made - apart from the TS4 which will be put in a truck.

[NearAbbeyRoad]

@tpvalley

TS3 was smaller than US car engines in the 1950s, and even today. Yet it pulled very heavy loads. The 2-stroke meant high torque at low revs, hence why the engine never revved so high. 2-strokes can rev very highly, but there was no need. 3500cc it gave 140hp in a simple uncomplex design. Put the complexities of modern diesels: turbo, intercooler, electronic injection, etc into a TS3 and the HP will jump - still in a small smooth package. Similar prototypes are in planes - Dieselair

[tpvalley]

@NearAbbeyRoad

although each cylinder has 2 pistons and 4 con rods, not really uncomples.

and they cant rev due to harmonic resonance.

and u could only effectively turbo charge it if u change the exhaust port timing/ advance the exhaust piston so exhaust closes before inlets like deltics and fairbanks and morse opposed piston engines.

dont get me wrong, I am a huge fan of this engine but I understand the shortcomings of 2 stroke diesels.

[NearAbbeyRoad]

@tpvalley

Simple engine despite the two conrods, which vastly reduce side thrust - only one crank. TS3 could far higher without problems.

Turbo is possible. Compressors have improved since 1954. TS3 is not a normal diesel 2-stoke (which are the most efficient engines in the world), so do not generalize. Light weight, small size, simple, less parts failing, smooth, high low end torque - why the types is considered for aircraft. No prop reduction gear. Dieselair.

Back to the future.

[NearAbbeyRoad]

@spentacle

So this is not the Commer knocker?

[spentacle]

@NearAbbeyRoad Yes, this is a Knocker. As per my second comment, there is another video on Youtube about a Lister TS3, which is a 4 stroke 3 cyl.. Sorry to cause confusion, but how do you remove a comment once posted.

[NearAbbeyRoad]

@spentacle

The down arrow next to reply on the right

[wonjat5]

Easy

[peppersdog1]

love these two stroke diesels 

[douro20]

Nice little opposed-piston engine. How hard is it to pull injectors on these?

[vetoevo]

When these were on the test bed at listers they were great for governor checks. The check was running at full load and taking the load off all at once and revs shouldn't rise by more than 60rpm. the scream that came from a TS3 when the load was taken off was brilliant to listen to.