DON'T READ THIS CAUSE IT ACTUALLY WORKS YOU WILL BE KISSED ON THE NEAREST POSSIBLE FRIDAY BY THE LOVE OF YOUR LIFE. TOMORROW WILL BE THE BEST DAY OF YOUR LIFE. HOWEVER IF YOU DON'T POST THIS TO AT LEAST THREE VIDEOS OR YOU WILL DIE WITHIN TWO DAYS. NOW UV STARTED READING THIS DON'T STOP THIS IS SO SCARY PUT THIS ON AT LEAST FIVE VIDEOS IN 143 MINUTES WHEN YOUR DONE PRESS F6 AND YOUR LOVER NAME WILL APPEAR ON THE SREEN IN THE BIG LETTERS THIS IS SO SCARE CAUSE IT WORKS
I had an odd dream where I had invented a rotary valve engine it was the ultimate engine lol From what I googled it seems like its harder to accomplish than it would seem.
Why in God's name to people upload videos that are this shitty in quality. It's like you took a first generation consumer vhs video camera.... transferred that video at least 28 times... then used the first, cheapest video camera with a USB connector and then loaded it into an old 386 computer running Dos..... then used the oldest possible compression codec to turn this into the pure CRAP that's on the screen above... I had to shut it off at it was making my eyes and ears bleed.
@2tallbrandon Coates is a criminal and has been fined by the SEC for lying about this shit engine of his. He has been claiming his shit engines will go into mass production for decades and it has gone no where.
yeah right... GM turned down his offer cause the fat cat oil companies that support their R&D said no way, that would be to efficient. Besides do you have any idea what it would cost to mass produce these heads? they are not cast, they are milled. BIG difference in time and cost there.
@2tallbrandon BS, you have NO evidense to support your claim. And Harley Davidson did test his engine for their bikes and found the coates design to be fatally flawed. The engine is incapable of sealing the combustion chamber gases and burnes out the seal around the rotating valves. This design is terrible and the fact NO ONE in the world ( THE WORLD) uses it proves that fact. If it were such an efficient design then our military and NASA would be all over it. Facts are facts.
Coates is saying that their CSRV is now being licensed for production and just signed a contract for up to 30M in funding from a company in texas. As far as everything I previously stated you can find on their web page. Where the hell did you hear this crap. And why are you so hostile, relax dude.
@2tallbrandon Coates has been saying his engine is going into mass production for decades and it NEVER happens. The website is full of nonsense and the fact no major investors nor financial firms own shares of coates company speaks volumes. This guy needs to be arrested again by the SEC and made to pay back the other suckers who bought shares of this failed company.
many years ago (15?+) i think it was coates, that advertized a converted head for vw watercooled eng also.with the rotary valve.. the tech never took off, and never heard about it again
oh, so let me get this straight. at 0:07, based on my observations, the two blurry blobs rotate in the white rectangle, gotcha. and at 0:10 as far as I can see they placed some sort of square grid on the gray blob rotating in the center, but i can only imagine what is powering the white blob at 0:18
We have a vital important message to convey to the masses !! - It will revolutionise life as we know it! - The planets eco system will be saved by our amazing technology! - hmmm wonder why no one has made any enquirys about it? Damn! - wish we spent more that a tenner on our camera , we filmed it in spako-vision and no one can understand a word we are saying or see what we are doing! - haha ah all that money in R&D ruined by cheap assed camera!
they don't sell any conversion kit for a 350 chevy v8 so dont bother calling I already tried lets face it unless you have a expensive machine shop good luck trying to make one of these heads they only sell to large corps. in power generation
My god, did someone shit their pants and wipe their butthole with the production equipment to make this video? It looks and sounds like DIARRHEA. :-)
Now they are making a line of motorcycles and are adapting their valves to many engines. People who want this, will buy it and have their vehicles running rotary valves. So, when you look under the hood of a vehicle, or something that uses a engine, you might just see this on them. It's a good idea and the time has come for a change and I am glad it has.
one of the greatest examples of how modern corporations destroy innovation. if it were up to me every internal combustion engine should have similar designed valves.
imagine the rpm's you can achieve without springs and the flow rates are incredible without a valve blocking the path of the air.
i would love to see a 4 cyl motorbike engine like this, maybe spinning to 30,000 rpms.
The pistons would shatter the rods, but for a while it would be cool. Being able to push past 100hp/liter w/o any boost would be awesome. Having 500hp that gets better that 40mpg would be literally having your cake and eating it too.
I don't know if corporations are destroying innovation or just universally opting to ignore it. Again I have to ask if this is a case of one company owning the tech and no one else being willing to pay to use it.
@yizzer2 JUst how inefficent do you think poppets are? At times a naturall asp engine can do over 100%, so let's say they are 80% avg. So this rotary is perfect, 20% more flow, big deal. The thing is we hardly ever use full throttle, so the flow is restricted before it get's to the valve anyway. This guy is full of shit, rotary valves ain't new and they have never worked and I doubt they ever will. If yer gonna dream about valves then dream about an iris like a camera uses.
This is such an absurdly simple improvement for an ICE. Skip the springless valve train. I postulated something like this back in my junior year of high school. Yeah no one took me seriously.
So the question remains, how long till we see this in cars? It can't be that hard to add this to existing car engines. Or is this a case of one company owning the design and no one is willing to shell out for royalties?
you will never see it in cars thanks to the corporations. its much more profitable to make engines that are inefficient and less reliable, and of course to make sure everyone does the same.
That's not how big companies work. Competition is cutthroat. Unless this engine technology is too costly to bring it to the consumer within a price range they find worthwhile, then it certainly WILL appear in a car. Why do you think cars now have 260 horsepower and get 30 mpg? If companies thought the way you think they do, we'd still all be driving Model Ts that have 30 HP and get 14 mpg.
What does the volume of any material depend on? It depends on it's AREA which is a factor of it's DIAMETER (In this case ,we are talking of a cylindrical object).
hp produced is the energy avaliable to move the car. No other energy is being put into the system, i.e. moving the car. the amount of crank tq is irrelavent. AS long as it has some. The higher the thing can rev, the more your tranny can reduce the rpms and gain tq. Which is why no matter the tq at the crank, 2 motors of the same hp will make the same amount of tq at the same output rpm. To "increase wheel tq" at any and every speed, you need hp. Think about this simple example...
Money is earned by amount per time. like 5$/hr. seems easy enough, but how often you work is also just as important. now. think of the hourly wage as the tq. And how often or how much you work, in hrs, or rpms. Thus, 5$/hr@10hrs= 10$/hr@5hrs. Both situations make the same amount of money, or energy, i.e., hp. To make anything faster, you need to increase the average hp output given the time of even. Whether drag or circuit. hp is energy. having tq and hp about the same means motor likes 5250rpms
430 Hp isn't shit for a diesel engine. Plus there is no way in hell you could run 300+ homes on a generator from this motor. It takes at least 10 to 20 HP to run one home.
I don't get this thumbs up and thumbs down system! cookiehead2 is absolutely right (thumbs down ?!?)and pulsafreak756 gets thumbs up for what exactly?
It's all relative. Do you know how big the engine is?
About torque: Yes, diesel engines have more torque than petrol engines (same HP output). And? U need HP and not torque (well torque is part of the power anyway) for this purpose.
this is only half true, HP is merely Torque at a given rpm, so if you have a 2 litre diesel and a 2 litre petrol engine then the diesel will have roughly 10 to 15 percent more torque at the same rpm.
this is due to the fact that diesel has (if i remember correctly) 10 to 15 percent more energy than petrol
saying that a diesel has more torque than petrol is not necessarily true, if you gear a petrol engine down than the hp output will be the same but there will be more torque
Maybe 10 to 15 % more efficient. Petrol engines produce more heat, thus, are less efficient then diesel engines. One reason why diesel engines have more torque is because most of them have turbos. Another reason is the stroke. Due to the higher compression of a diesel engine the stroke is longer and that results in more torque as well (increased leverage of the crank).
they are not 10 to 15 percent more efficient, petrol engines only produce more heat due to the fact that there is a more complete burn. not only that, you can have a longer stroke and still have less compression
because diesels use direct injection and no spark plug, the area within the piston closest to the injector is very rich, and the area on the other side of the injector is very lean when the fuels combustion occurs, the rich area does not fully burn and leaves as soot lowering efficiency
yes diesels usually have around twice the compression ratio but petrol engines can have equal or higher stroke and still have less compression
an example is VW 1.6 FSI 85kW petrol engine which has a 86.9 mm stroke and a 12:1 compression ratio while VW 1.7 SDI 44kW diesel engine has 86.4 mm stroke and a 19.5:1 compression ratio
both engines have roughly the same stroke with the diesel having a higher compression and a lower power output both of these engines are i4 and are still used today
Hey, I just watched the video,and read about comparison between two VW engines of roughly the same stroke,but the diesel having higher compression ratio; I don't know the actual strokes of the two engines you compared,but if those are the actual strokes, then the piston for the diesel would need to be considerably smaller (in diameter). The other thing is the shape of the top of the pistons, one would need to be a dome, the other a depression,assuming ,the two pistons are of same diameter.
Hey lets take a 2 liter gasoline engine with a compression ratio of 1:10
Then we´ll switch cylinder head to one that has ½ the volume. voila, you have a engine with displacement of 1:20. no change in piston shape or diameter. it´s not exactly rocket science you know.
Well,I don't need to argue ,I spend my days redesigning,improving and making prototypes of all sorts of engines..When you wrote 1:10 compression ratio, do u mean 10:1?. It's obvious,if one reduces the piston height by 1/2 ,you now have the original volume + the new volume created by halving the piston's height.Now ,the question is this, in reality,except for truck pistons, tell me what car piston is that long,and you would be able to reduce it in half in order to increase the chamber volume ?.
Well , there must be some misunderstandings. The original statement was in reponse to the previous guy who stated that a particular VW engine runs on gasoline in some VW cars,and also runs on diesel in some other VW cars,and my response was that ,if everything were the same as he claimed ( i.e bore sizes, piston head design etc) that the strokes for the two engine must be different for one to have a CR of 10:1 for gas,and 20:1 CR for diesel.
Well there you go. :) I appologise, for having misunderstood your post. And if that is the case. I completly agree.
Would like to add that the series III landrovers had a 2,25 litre engine that shared engine block and cylinder head between petrol and diesel. Had different pistons, crankshaft, camshaft, pushrods.
Injectors where placed instead of sparkplugs. and ignition removed and replaced by a fuel pump. Quite simpel design. using higher pistons to achieve compression. just like you said.
gas engines produce more heat because of the throttle plates. At idle the air is restricted so it may take say 1/4 or less of the CFM a diesel will take at idle, but even with the same BTU's and efficiency the air will be much hotter because of the low airflow. At full throttle the difference is much smaller, and turbocharged diesels can get much hotter than gas engines do.
I don't know, for 430hp, that engine is enormous. If it has such low friction and thus runs much cooler, one of reciprocating engines main obstacles, why isn't it more powerful? I would think that now it has a much higher rotating mass.
It should be common sense by now that if you want power production, ie. 100% duty cycle, you go turbines.
yes, it is big, but im guessing its designed to be reliable and last for long periods of time at a constant rpm, if they wanted huge power output it wouldnt last for as long.
But you just described the premise for using turbine instead of a recip... And yes, it should have more power not because they are pushing over the edge, but because of its inherent design that they are saying is so extraordinary. If you take a normal engine and get rid of friction and lubrication, the result is a more powerful engine (or you would only need an engine at a fraction of the displacement to get the same power output). So how is this neither smaller nor more powerful?
well im guessing its old for starters, and still like i said, it probably doesnt do that many rpm's because it doesnt need to, and low rpm means low power -(in most cases), like i said its not a high performance engine it was probably used to turn a turbine or pump or something similar-low rpm-high torque-constant speed. small power required.
rpm and horsepower does not have any relation to each other. torque and horsepower are dependent upon one another.
and what´s this crap theory about pumps and turbines low power required ? how about i mension a ships ballast pump requiring 900hp. would that be your assumption of low power ?
rpm and horsepower have every relation! the more fuel and air you get through and engine, i.e. the more revs it does, the mor bhp you are producing, and 900hp could be achieved from say a 7-10litre turbo'd engine, ship engines are many many times the size of that, they are big engines, producing LOW horsepower for there size.
Well, yes if you are talking about getting the engines as small as possible. Then you have to resort to rpm to get high effect out of them. But still. A engines horsepower is a product of torque x rpm. with some variables within the engine. Such as frictions, aerodynamics.
My point is you can have a engine producing 50hp at 750 rpm or you can have a engine producing 50hp at 12.500rpm It is still 50hp. Only difference is that you can propably better utilise the low rpm engine for hard work.
yes i know, they use larger engines to increase reliability, producing similar bhp from a tiny engine and screaming it would mean it would not last long at all.
It would also mean for instance in a tractor that you would need to have a million gears in the gearbox, so that you always would find a gear that keeps the engine in the narrow powerband.
A low rpm engine has a wider torque band and is therefor easilier utilized. as well as more fuel efficient.
holy crap you idiots, this is not a rotary engine, such as the Wankel or Renesis. They are talking about rotary valves for the valve train instead of using traditional intake and exhaust valves that reciprocate.
[facepalm] moron, this isn't a rotary engine. it's a standard piston engine with rotary valves. what makes this motor better then one with standard push type valves is the fact that there are hardly any moving parts in the valve train. Also, with no valve springs, theres no resistance for the cam or in the case of the rotary valve engine, valve shaft to push aganist. this should allow the engine to produce more power with less fuel used.
also, rotary valves mean that there is no valve float. If this valve train could be used in a race engine, it theoretically would allow a much higher redline.
(I think) Rotary disc valves where invented by Felix wankel in the 30's to be used in Aircraft engines for the virgining Luftwaffe. Wankel also used a rotary disc valve engine in a V8 torpedo due to space restrictions.
The Rotary disc valve was the lesser known inventions of this interesting German & easily outshadowed by his rotary engine.
Felix Wankel is also the inventor of the Rotary engine made famous by the Mazda RX-7
No the Rotary was made famous by NSU the original company to use it in a motorcycle & a car. If by famous because of LeMans then I'll agree that its Mazda as their the ONLY company to have a license to build & design and research Rotary Engines (not rotary valve piston engines ppl); not even former parent company Ford (early 90's) could do so.
btw, Mazda has had a running Wankel Rotary running on Hydrogen gas for over 12yrs now.
Good arguement! But if NSU didn't make it famous, then how do you think Mazda became interested in the technology for a license to research, further develop, and manufacture the Wankel Rotary engine in the first place ;) Times change along with generations perception of whats important; but if an ideal or technology is sound it will remain popular even if its released too early.
for example if i asked almost anyone who invented the incandescent light bulb, they would either not know, or say Thomas edison, but it wasnt, it was Warren De la Rue in 1820 who made the 1st, and he had made a good version, just it was expensive.
no while de la rue invented the incandescent light bulb, edison made it famous.
the rotary valves are nice, but since theyre these big spheres they look heavy(saw it on the website). plus, the valves in there diagram are further back than the poppet valves, resulting in less compression, and less efficiency, but im not for sure about this. this would be great if it were refined and put into trucks for long distances. definitely good for reliability but, ive never really heard of the valve train giving out or breaking. so i dont see ow this thing is better.
Coates is actually in the middle of a trucking contract right now. Taking current big rigs and converting them over. Thier test engines have been tested to very high (around 16:1) compression on normal petrolium based gasoline. And yes, those spheres are huge, and possibly heavy, but they never change direction. This continuous motion means they can rev extremely high without problems. Oh, and conventional valves fail all the time, and they're the main reason for any redline on engines.
My engine runs on propane...I've had it for about 9 years...(It runs good and much cheaper...It is a 400 small block chevy..Converted to run on Propane
Its awesome. Just the big three dont want to spent the money to retool for production. That and the oil companies have thier finger on it. Becuase of the better millage you can get with this engine. Unfortunately the price tag for a set of 302 heads is around 20,000.00 and there you have a major problem.
To the naysayers, this engine is significantly better than typical ohv engines.
At the outer limits of motorsports (Indy racing league, 24 hours of Le Mans, etc) engine builders have pretty much hit a wall. Even with the best parts money can buy, the #1 downfall of OHV and OHC engines is the valves and springs. At high RPM's the springs are closing the valves with so much force that the valves bounce off the valve seat.
I just wish they'd do something with involving aftermarket heads for SBC's
Well this problem has been solved some 25 years ago when Cosworth introduced to Formula 1 engine that used compresed air to close valves. Since then F1 engines are reving well over 12000 rpm (which is limit for springs). Currently a rev limit for F1 cars has been imposed and set at 19000 rpm but 22K rpm and over is possible.
"Well this problem has been solved some 25 years ago when Cosworth introduced to Formula 1 engine that used compresed air to close valves."
Yep but F1 is a taboe for most americans I guess. Look at what they have NASCAR (aka the Amish aproach to motorsport and engine technology in general).
Too bad i couldn't watch the whole thing my ears couldn't take the noise. I am far from an engineer but I often wondered why the conventional gas engine didnt use rotary valves instead of reciprocating ones.
Sure would like to know what it looks like, but I'm so sea sick from trying to watch that through the photographers bathroom window!!!! Somebody help this guy learn how to post a video !!!
Yes the vid is a little poor but they have a web sight. No oil they said in the beginning, carbon ceramic. Lower friction, more cmf and higher RPM potential. I don't think this is real new but it is a large step in the right direction.
@oOXENONOoN1 There are 396 pixels so you would have 396$ ;)
TheRafal813 2 months ago
I think they recorded this with a calculator :(
BuckyGoldstein 4 months ago
Holy fuck was this filmed with a potato?
CRFbadass 4 months ago
I hate when ppl uload vids off their phone
GeneralG1810 5 months ago
@GeneralG1810 ....yeah...especially when they're uploaded off a rotary phone
Firewrench 4 months ago
This has ruined my eyesight!
Squarerig 5 months ago
what a terrible add for this product, must be a con
1stMrSceptical 5 months ago
did you see that mosquito at 0:39
redkingrd 5 months ago
nice slideshow
JasonMann8 5 months ago
Horrid Video
SSRifleman 5 months ago
thanks for the pixel art
crudeoilsystems 6 months ago
suppression of technolgy @ work again.
circusboy90210 6 months ago
wait, I counted three, maybe four whole pixels!!!
torino390 6 months ago
Cool SNES game
lolfake111 6 months ago
You record this vid in the 1920's?
DominicRiv 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DON'T READ THIS CAUSE IT ACTUALLY WORKS YOU WILL BE KISSED ON THE NEAREST POSSIBLE FRIDAY BY THE LOVE OF YOUR LIFE. TOMORROW WILL BE THE BEST DAY OF YOUR LIFE. HOWEVER IF YOU DON'T POST THIS TO AT LEAST THREE VIDEOS OR YOU WILL DIE WITHIN TWO DAYS. NOW UV STARTED READING THIS DON'T STOP THIS IS SO SCARY PUT THIS ON AT LEAST FIVE VIDEOS IN 143 MINUTES WHEN YOUR DONE PRESS F6 AND YOUR LOVER NAME WILL APPEAR ON THE SREEN IN THE BIG LETTERS THIS IS SO SCARE CAUSE IT WORKS
konatafan9 6 months ago
Which pixel is the engine??
rockhead261 6 months ago
can you make this lower def? oh i guess not.
booomhauer 6 months ago
video suck why post
O7ROADKING 6 months ago
If i get 1 $ for 1 Pixel in this vid, i will have 1 $
Alexander470815 7 months ago
what kind of dog turd video is this ?
stevef474 7 months ago
watch it with divx plugin for firefox
Alienware421 7 months ago
WHAT WATCHING,
I AM?
MY EYES WERE SLICED BY PIXELS!
khe, khe
This video is bad quality. Seriously.
ostrowczanin 7 months ago
why would they record this with a toaster
paintballgundown8 7 months ago
Comment removed
18BND88 7 months ago
HELP my eyes are being destroyed by the bad quality of this video!
DEADmetal3 7 months ago
worst video quality contest candidate.
86Ivar 7 months ago
Quality, quality, quality...
anycolouryoulike75 7 months ago
Did anyone see or hear somethink on this vid?
Pitchplus8 8 months ago
the new pixel engine, amaizing
Go1d3nZ 8 months ago
Watching before you upload a video is like proof reading......it's a necessity!
flownder28 8 months ago
If I get 1$ for every pixel on this video I would have 1 $
oOXENONOoN1 8 months ago 7
@oOXENONOoN1 Actually, a lot more than that, but still not much.
Myrtone 2 months ago
video resolution = 18x24
COREopa 8 months ago
i can count the pixels :)
beou1980 9 months ago
i counted this vid literally has only 500 pixels...
mrthejumpingflea 9 months ago
0.006 nano pixel camera
russotragik 9 months ago
For more info on the valve system see...
"COATES valve engine" videos..
RotorMedic7 9 months ago
After watching this atrocious video I have square eyes!Terrible quality but could be extremely interesting.
Squarerig 9 months ago
Can you please re-upload this vid now that the 240p youtube compression has been abolished.
RetroGamerr1991 10 months ago
wow! that is one high definition video!...........
sidevalve337 1 year ago 3
Did u stack a wall of transparent lego brisk infronta the cam or sumth'in?..
Spartan117JMC 1 year ago
DAmn he stole my idea, lol.
Motorfordtoyota 1 year ago
If only they kept some money for a decent camera
VEVeight 1 year ago
I agree with everyone else. Plz delete. However Please also re-upload in better quality audio and video.
funtarded 1 year ago
can`t see shit
bigboud1973 1 year ago
How the Christ does this piece of crap video have over 300,000 hits?
rockhead261 1 year ago
Aspin tried this years ago - even with ceramics the valves will soon get buggered
trevortrevortsr2 1 year ago
Why bother downloading shite like this? What's the point?
uraldneprvw 1 year ago
this video is from 2 centuries
TheGoodInventor 1 year ago
Over modulated sound, bad frame rate, distorted sound, over compressed video... this should just be deleted.
Polybun 1 year ago 33
I had an odd dream where I had invented a rotary valve engine it was the ultimate engine lol From what I googled it seems like its harder to accomplish than it would seem.
MrROTD 1 year ago
e un video in braille per non vedenti ?
stg58l1a1 1 year ago
Why in God's name to people upload videos that are this shitty in quality. It's like you took a first generation consumer vhs video camera.... transferred that video at least 28 times... then used the first, cheapest video camera with a USB connector and then loaded it into an old 386 computer running Dos..... then used the oldest possible compression codec to turn this into the pure CRAP that's on the screen above... I had to shut it off at it was making my eyes and ears bleed.
StarbucksChunks 1 year ago
che video di merda
91ilgrosso 1 year ago
Awesome resolution video! Dang I can see every small detail!
royalbrainwave 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i can see this video.....
aditioRM 1 year ago
And the winner of worst picture goe's to
RobbieG205 1 year ago
coates is awesome! to bad greedy oil companies told them to go fuck them selfs
2tallbrandon 1 year ago
@2tallbrandon Coates is a criminal and has been fined by the SEC for lying about this shit engine of his. He has been claiming his shit engines will go into mass production for decades and it has gone no where.
wqvsaa 1 year ago
yeah right... GM turned down his offer cause the fat cat oil companies that support their R&D said no way, that would be to efficient. Besides do you have any idea what it would cost to mass produce these heads? they are not cast, they are milled. BIG difference in time and cost there.
2tallbrandon 1 year ago
@2tallbrandon BS, you have NO evidense to support your claim. And Harley Davidson did test his engine for their bikes and found the coates design to be fatally flawed. The engine is incapable of sealing the combustion chamber gases and burnes out the seal around the rotating valves. This design is terrible and the fact NO ONE in the world ( THE WORLD) uses it proves that fact. If it were such an efficient design then our military and NASA would be all over it. Facts are facts.
wqvsaa 1 year ago
@wqvsaa
Coates is saying that their CSRV is now being licensed for production and just signed a contract for up to 30M in funding from a company in texas. As far as everything I previously stated you can find on their web page. Where the hell did you hear this crap. And why are you so hostile, relax dude.
2tallbrandon 1 year ago
@2tallbrandon Coates has been saying his engine is going into mass production for decades and it NEVER happens. The website is full of nonsense and the fact no major investors nor financial firms own shares of coates company speaks volumes. This guy needs to be arrested again by the SEC and made to pay back the other suckers who bought shares of this failed company.
wqvsaa 1 year ago
another vote up for the worst quality vid on YT! ;)
fab069 1 year ago
That SOUNDS interesting...engine looks like shit. Did you play this video on an Atari?
adamlesh 1 year ago
Look like the pizza I barfed all over the bed.
cusanusnicolas 1 year ago
many years ago (15?+) i think it was coates, that advertized a converted head for vw watercooled eng also.with the rotary valve.. the tech never took off, and never heard about it again
grayson991966 1 year ago
I could make a better video out of Legos...
gmtech26358 1 year ago 3
Presumably this footage was shot using the original prototype video machine designed by Leonardo Davinci and assembled in China.
anguspauline 1 year ago
i voted this down because of the crappy ass video quality!
vancouverbluz1 1 year ago
32x32 pixels :D
COD5252 1 year ago
oh, so let me get this straight. at 0:07, based on my observations, the two blurry blobs rotate in the white rectangle, gotcha. and at 0:10 as far as I can see they placed some sort of square grid on the gray blob rotating in the center, but i can only imagine what is powering the white blob at 0:18
3HaloODST 1 year ago
We have a vital important message to convey to the masses !! - It will revolutionise life as we know it! - The planets eco system will be saved by our amazing technology! - hmmm wonder why no one has made any enquirys about it? Damn! - wish we spent more that a tenner on our camera , we filmed it in spako-vision and no one can understand a word we are saying or see what we are doing! - haha ah all that money in R&D ruined by cheap assed camera!
paulofpings 1 year ago
@paulofpings ha
AKAxAUTO 1 year ago
they don't sell any conversion kit for a 350 chevy v8 so dont bother calling I already tried lets face it unless you have a expensive machine shop good luck trying to make one of these heads they only sell to large corps. in power generation
hazmat440 1 year ago
This is COATES company's design. Excellent invention ! Google it up !
demios99 1 year ago
My god, did someone shit their pants and wipe their butthole with the production equipment to make this video? It looks and sounds like DIARRHEA. :-)
waterfordjim 1 year ago 4
Now they are making a line of motorcycles and are adapting their valves to many engines. People who want this, will buy it and have their vehicles running rotary valves. So, when you look under the hood of a vehicle, or something that uses a engine, you might just see this on them. It's a good idea and the time has come for a change and I am glad it has.
elan578 1 year ago
what on earth man, make a descent video...
Psychopathis 1 year ago
looks like a Mack em6 block on one of those engines.....maybe wrong
fixitdude74 2 years ago
Rotary Valves were used in British aircraft engines in the 1920's--nothing new!
TheStubbleking 2 years ago
can't see shit on this vid
gienadi 2 years ago 104
one of the greatest examples of how modern corporations destroy innovation. if it were up to me every internal combustion engine should have similar designed valves.
imagine the rpm's you can achieve without springs and the flow rates are incredible without a valve blocking the path of the air.
i would love to see a 4 cyl motorbike engine like this, maybe spinning to 30,000 rpms.
yizzer2 2 years ago
@yizzer2
The pistons would shatter the rods, but for a while it would be cool. Being able to push past 100hp/liter w/o any boost would be awesome. Having 500hp that gets better that 40mpg would be literally having your cake and eating it too.
I don't know if corporations are destroying innovation or just universally opting to ignore it. Again I have to ask if this is a case of one company owning the tech and no one else being willing to pay to use it.
DocWolph 2 years ago
@yizzer2 JUst how inefficent do you think poppets are? At times a naturall asp engine can do over 100%, so let's say they are 80% avg. So this rotary is perfect, 20% more flow, big deal. The thing is we hardly ever use full throttle, so the flow is restricted before it get's to the valve anyway. This guy is full of shit, rotary valves ain't new and they have never worked and I doubt they ever will. If yer gonna dream about valves then dream about an iris like a camera uses.
505197 1 year ago
To bad fossil fuel owns this patten two.
Sadetree 2 years ago
This is such an absurdly simple improvement for an ICE. Skip the springless valve train. I postulated something like this back in my junior year of high school. Yeah no one took me seriously.
So the question remains, how long till we see this in cars? It can't be that hard to add this to existing car engines. Or is this a case of one company owning the design and no one is willing to shell out for royalties?
DocWolph 2 years ago 2
Worst case, patents last 17 years.. Got any documentation? You could kill their patent.
unaclocker 2 years ago
Nah. I was a dumbass back then.
DocWolph 2 years ago
you will never see it in cars thanks to the corporations. its much more profitable to make engines that are inefficient and less reliable, and of course to make sure everyone does the same.
yizzer2 2 years ago
@yizzer2
Well you should be able to buy the parts and use them on your car, at any rate. I am looking at that, if possible for my current car or my next one.
It is a shame though. But if someone breaks ranks, they all will. Big if, I suppose.
DocWolph 2 years ago
@yizzer2
That's not how big companies work. Competition is cutthroat. Unless this engine technology is too costly to bring it to the consumer within a price range they find worthwhile, then it certainly WILL appear in a car. Why do you think cars now have 260 horsepower and get 30 mpg? If companies thought the way you think they do, we'd still all be driving Model Ts that have 30 HP and get 14 mpg.
39Chevy 1 year ago
so good but not true nuff said
maxpaul11 2 years ago
poor, poor quality..
Opatiger 2 years ago
that thing must rev smooth
JuanPapaNicolao 2 years ago
yeah like this will see the light of day.. it'll be buried as soon as the oil companies hear about it
xadam2dudex 2 years ago
Well, Compression Ration =(Displacement+Piston Volume+Deck Clearance Volume+Gasket Volume+Combustion Chamber Volume)/(Piston Volume+Deck Clearance Volume+Gasket Volume+Combustion Chamber Volume) ;that is
CR=(D + PV + DC + G + CC) / (PV + DC + G + CC)
What does the volume of any material depend on? It depends on it's AREA which is a factor of it's DIAMETER (In this case ,we are talking of a cylindrical object).
324Ben 2 years ago
Power sells engines, torque wins races...
TK42138 2 years ago
torque or newton is pressure over the piston, horsepower is the measured effect. you'll want these 2 at the same value for best overall performance
goreziad 2 years ago
(kilo)watts are more like up-to-date unit for power than horsepowers
pik171 2 years ago
hp produced is the energy avaliable to move the car. No other energy is being put into the system, i.e. moving the car. the amount of crank tq is irrelavent. AS long as it has some. The higher the thing can rev, the more your tranny can reduce the rpms and gain tq. Which is why no matter the tq at the crank, 2 motors of the same hp will make the same amount of tq at the same output rpm. To "increase wheel tq" at any and every speed, you need hp. Think about this simple example...
logic2reason 2 years ago
Money is earned by amount per time. like 5$/hr. seems easy enough, but how often you work is also just as important. now. think of the hourly wage as the tq. And how often or how much you work, in hrs, or rpms. Thus, 5$/hr@10hrs= 10$/hr@5hrs. Both situations make the same amount of money, or energy, i.e., hp. To make anything faster, you need to increase the average hp output given the time of even. Whether drag or circuit. hp is energy. having tq and hp about the same means motor likes 5250rpms
logic2reason 2 years ago
Anything yu want we got it right here in the USA!!
Squarerig 2 years ago
they can run at 4,500rpms
richard5rs 2 years ago
430 Hp isn't shit for a diesel engine. Plus there is no way in hell you could run 300+ homes on a generator from this motor. It takes at least 10 to 20 HP to run one home.
dougthewelder 3 years ago
thts fuck loads of hp for a diesel!!! diesels produce more torque than horsepower. and to get that much horsepower from it is crazy!!!!
pulsarfreak756 2 years ago 7
Torque doesn't matter for electrical power production, only the total power output.
cookiehead2 2 years ago
I don't get this thumbs up and thumbs down system! cookiehead2 is absolutely right (thumbs down ?!?)and pulsafreak756 gets thumbs up for what exactly?
buggable 2 years ago
100% correct.
sixmagpies 2 years ago
WHAT !!! torque is what moves work dude... ponies is how fast it can turn under load so yea, torque does matter ;o)
JayandJenn07 2 years ago
It's all relative. Do you know how big the engine is?
About torque: Yes, diesel engines have more torque than petrol engines (same HP output). And? U need HP and not torque (well torque is part of the power anyway) for this purpose.
buggable 2 years ago
this is only half true, HP is merely Torque at a given rpm, so if you have a 2 litre diesel and a 2 litre petrol engine then the diesel will have roughly 10 to 15 percent more torque at the same rpm.
this is due to the fact that diesel has (if i remember correctly) 10 to 15 percent more energy than petrol
saying that a diesel has more torque than petrol is not necessarily true, if you gear a petrol engine down than the hp output will be the same but there will be more torque
deathparade32 2 years ago 2
Maybe 10 to 15 % more efficient. Petrol engines produce more heat, thus, are less efficient then diesel engines. One reason why diesel engines have more torque is because most of them have turbos. Another reason is the stroke. Due to the higher compression of a diesel engine the stroke is longer and that results in more torque as well (increased leverage of the crank).
buggable 2 years ago
they are not 10 to 15 percent more efficient, petrol engines only produce more heat due to the fact that there is a more complete burn. not only that, you can have a longer stroke and still have less compression
because diesels use direct injection and no spark plug, the area within the piston closest to the injector is very rich, and the area on the other side of the injector is very lean when the fuels combustion occurs, the rich area does not fully burn and leaves as soot lowering efficiency
deathparade32 2 years ago
The Diesel engine has twice the compression ratio of a petrol engine. So the diesel engines have a longer stroke to get that kinda compression.
buggable 2 years ago
Comment removed
deathparade32 2 years ago
yes diesels usually have around twice the compression ratio but petrol engines can have equal or higher stroke and still have less compression
an example is VW 1.6 FSI 85kW petrol engine which has a 86.9 mm stroke and a 12:1 compression ratio while VW 1.7 SDI 44kW diesel engine has 86.4 mm stroke and a 19.5:1 compression ratio
both engines have roughly the same stroke with the diesel having a higher compression and a lower power output both of these engines are i4 and are still used today
deathparade32 2 years ago
Hey, I just watched the video,and read about comparison between two VW engines of roughly the same stroke,but the diesel having higher compression ratio; I don't know the actual strokes of the two engines you compared,but if those are the actual strokes, then the piston for the diesel would need to be considerably smaller (in diameter). The other thing is the shape of the top of the pistons, one would need to be a dome, the other a depression,assuming ,the two pistons are of same diameter.
324Ben 2 years ago
Comment removed
deathparade32 2 years ago
You havent got a clue about engines do you ?
Hey lets take a 2 liter gasoline engine with a compression ratio of 1:10
Then we´ll switch cylinder head to one that has ½ the volume. voila, you have a engine with displacement of 1:20. no change in piston shape or diameter. it´s not exactly rocket science you know.
johanj81 2 years ago
Well,I don't need to argue ,I spend my days redesigning,improving and making prototypes of all sorts of engines..When you wrote 1:10 compression ratio, do u mean 10:1?. It's obvious,if one reduces the piston height by 1/2 ,you now have the original volume + the new volume created by halving the piston's height.Now ,the question is this, in reality,except for truck pistons, tell me what car piston is that long,and you would be able to reduce it in half in order to increase the chamber volume ?.
324Ben 2 years ago
Okay ! i don´t mean to argue either. If you work with engine design. Then i´m sure our dispute is based on misunderstandings.
I don´t know why you talk about whole and half pistons ???
As far as i know and on every motor i have been under the cylinder head.
When the piston is on TDC its level with the cylinderblock top surface.
The difference in compression ratios is mostly due to bigger volume in the cylinder heads.
johanj81 2 years ago
Well , there must be some misunderstandings. The original statement was in reponse to the previous guy who stated that a particular VW engine runs on gasoline in some VW cars,and also runs on diesel in some other VW cars,and my response was that ,if everything were the same as he claimed ( i.e bore sizes, piston head design etc) that the strokes for the two engine must be different for one to have a CR of 10:1 for gas,and 20:1 CR for diesel.
324Ben 2 years ago
Well there you go. :) I appologise, for having misunderstood your post. And if that is the case. I completly agree.
Would like to add that the series III landrovers had a 2,25 litre engine that shared engine block and cylinder head between petrol and diesel. Had different pistons, crankshaft, camshaft, pushrods.
Injectors where placed instead of sparkplugs. and ignition removed and replaced by a fuel pump. Quite simpel design. using higher pistons to achieve compression. just like you said.
johanj81 2 years ago
gas engines produce more heat because of the throttle plates. At idle the air is restricted so it may take say 1/4 or less of the CFM a diesel will take at idle, but even with the same BTU's and efficiency the air will be much hotter because of the low airflow. At full throttle the difference is much smaller, and turbocharged diesels can get much hotter than gas engines do.
castirondude 2 years ago
@pulsarfreak756 The whole point of diesels generally is having more torque. That's just what makes them superior in many industrial applications.
ruiferreira89 10 months ago
I don't know, for 430hp, that engine is enormous. If it has such low friction and thus runs much cooler, one of reciprocating engines main obstacles, why isn't it more powerful? I would think that now it has a much higher rotating mass.
It should be common sense by now that if you want power production, ie. 100% duty cycle, you go turbines.
getoffmyinternet 3 years ago
yes, it is big, but im guessing its designed to be reliable and last for long periods of time at a constant rpm, if they wanted huge power output it wouldnt last for as long.
buzzender 3 years ago
But you just described the premise for using turbine instead of a recip... And yes, it should have more power not because they are pushing over the edge, but because of its inherent design that they are saying is so extraordinary. If you take a normal engine and get rid of friction and lubrication, the result is a more powerful engine (or you would only need an engine at a fraction of the displacement to get the same power output). So how is this neither smaller nor more powerful?
getoffmyinternet 2 years ago
well im guessing its old for starters, and still like i said, it probably doesnt do that many rpm's because it doesnt need to, and low rpm means low power -(in most cases), like i said its not a high performance engine it was probably used to turn a turbine or pump or something similar-low rpm-high torque-constant speed. small power required.
buzzender 2 years ago
wrong !
rpm and horsepower does not have any relation to each other. torque and horsepower are dependent upon one another.
and what´s this crap theory about pumps and turbines low power required ? how about i mension a ships ballast pump requiring 900hp. would that be your assumption of low power ?
johanj81 2 years ago
rpm and horsepower have every relation! the more fuel and air you get through and engine, i.e. the more revs it does, the mor bhp you are producing, and 900hp could be achieved from say a 7-10litre turbo'd engine, ship engines are many many times the size of that, they are big engines, producing LOW horsepower for there size.
buzzender 2 years ago
Well, yes if you are talking about getting the engines as small as possible. Then you have to resort to rpm to get high effect out of them. But still. A engines horsepower is a product of torque x rpm. with some variables within the engine. Such as frictions, aerodynamics.
My point is you can have a engine producing 50hp at 750 rpm or you can have a engine producing 50hp at 12.500rpm It is still 50hp. Only difference is that you can propably better utilise the low rpm engine for hard work.
johanj81 2 years ago
yes i know, they use larger engines to increase reliability, producing similar bhp from a tiny engine and screaming it would mean it would not last long at all.
buzzender 2 years ago
It would also mean for instance in a tractor that you would need to have a million gears in the gearbox, so that you always would find a gear that keeps the engine in the narrow powerband.
A low rpm engine has a wider torque band and is therefor easilier utilized. as well as more fuel efficient.
johanj81 2 years ago
yes indeedy.
buzzender 2 years ago
rotary valves were use in a very early car but in those days they had wear and sealing problems, modern materials should now make them practical.
pinballrobbie 3 years ago
holy crap you idiots, this is not a rotary engine, such as the Wankel or Renesis. They are talking about rotary valves for the valve train instead of using traditional intake and exhaust valves that reciprocate.
bptryp 3 years ago 3
As far as know, the Renesis is a Wankel engine, so you sortof fail by putting in an 'or' in between them.
v6power88 3 years ago
they have high power outputs but no tourqe
would like to see an RX8 tow a caraven up a hill
Paisley37 3 years ago
[facepalm] moron, this isn't a rotary engine. it's a standard piston engine with rotary valves. what makes this motor better then one with standard push type valves is the fact that there are hardly any moving parts in the valve train. Also, with no valve springs, theres no resistance for the cam or in the case of the rotary valve engine, valve shaft to push aganist. this should allow the engine to produce more power with less fuel used.
pchamberlain 3 years ago
also, rotary valves mean that there is no valve float. If this valve train could be used in a race engine, it theoretically would allow a much higher redline.
joness105639 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
high quality please..
benzvibal 3 years ago
I like my rotary design, less parts and very powerful.
TommeyLeeReed 3 years ago
Amazing technology they say.
(I think) Rotary disc valves where invented by Felix wankel in the 30's to be used in Aircraft engines for the virgining Luftwaffe. Wankel also used a rotary disc valve engine in a V8 torpedo due to space restrictions.
The Rotary disc valve was the lesser known inventions of this interesting German & easily outshadowed by his rotary engine.
Felix Wankel is also the inventor of the Rotary engine made famous by the Mazda RX-7
DMRH69 3 years ago
RX7?? NSU RO80!! and what about the Mercedes C111 recordbreaking Wankel prototype?
jfv65 3 years ago
the rotary was made famous by mazda either way
mageac 3 years ago 2
No the Rotary was made famous by NSU the original company to use it in a motorcycle & a car. If by famous because of LeMans then I'll agree that its Mazda as their the ONLY company to have a license to build & design and research Rotary Engines (not rotary valve piston engines ppl); not even former parent company Ford (early 90's) could do so.
btw, Mazda has had a running Wankel Rotary running on Hydrogen gas for over 12yrs now.
Jaggabone 3 years ago
nsu did not make the rotary famous, most people don't even know what nsu is. if no one knows what they are how can they make anything famous.
almost anyone who knows about cars at all on the planet, knows mazda made the rotary famous. may not be the 1st to use it, they made it FAMOUS
mageac 3 years ago
Good arguement! But if NSU didn't make it famous, then how do you think Mazda became interested in the technology for a license to research, further develop, and manufacture the Wankel Rotary engine in the first place ;) Times change along with generations perception of whats important; but if an ideal or technology is sound it will remain popular even if its released too early.
Jaggabone 3 years ago
for example if i asked almost anyone who invented the incandescent light bulb, they would either not know, or say Thomas edison, but it wasnt, it was Warren De la Rue in 1820 who made the 1st, and he had made a good version, just it was expensive.
no while de la rue invented the incandescent light bulb, edison made it famous.
same as NSU and mazda.
mageac 3 years ago
sounds like henry ford and the car he made it famous but, didn't invent it.
cdoublejj 3 years ago
tell them to switch it off,they are wasting gas.
gilessmokey 3 years ago
I doubt that weight is a problem. The spheres could be made hollow.
Sockmonkey666 3 years ago
the rotary valves are nice, but since theyre these big spheres they look heavy(saw it on the website). plus, the valves in there diagram are further back than the poppet valves, resulting in less compression, and less efficiency, but im not for sure about this. this would be great if it were refined and put into trucks for long distances. definitely good for reliability but, ive never really heard of the valve train giving out or breaking. so i dont see ow this thing is better.
sb6lb3 3 years ago
Coates is actually in the middle of a trucking contract right now. Taking current big rigs and converting them over. Thier test engines have been tested to very high (around 16:1) compression on normal petrolium based gasoline. And yes, those spheres are huge, and possibly heavy, but they never change direction. This continuous motion means they can rev extremely high without problems. Oh, and conventional valves fail all the time, and they're the main reason for any redline on engines.
gollumandsmeagol 3 years ago
it happened to me...Daewoo Tico
ready4anyting 3 years ago
My engine runs on propane...I've had it for about 9 years...(It runs good and much cheaper...It is a 400 small block chevy..Converted to run on Propane
scott93257 3 years ago
OK this video gets the "Worst quality on Youtube" award
jrcstudios 3 years ago 56
I DO agree
griffith5000 3 years ago
what you said, also what the hell is with the audio? It sounds like robot ghosts.
despite the inadequacies, kudos to the op. rotary valves = less work = more power :)
bogux 3 years ago 5
What the fuck is that am I blind! i cant focus!
cosast54 3 years ago 4
Has the photographer ever heard the word "focus"? Or, he is trying to sell a $100,000 engine with a $2 camera from K-Mart.
JGMagoo 3 years ago
its called shitty compression
alexander1485 3 years ago
search brush engine malta/
search under ground flour mill malta
brush1934 3 years ago
I wish the video and audio were better.
fonephat 3 years ago
Its awesome. Just the big three dont want to spent the money to retool for production. That and the oil companies have thier finger on it. Becuase of the better millage you can get with this engine. Unfortunately the price tag for a set of 302 heads is around 20,000.00 and there you have a major problem.
DobermansRock 3 years ago
If they went into production it would be reasonable.
ncmeinc 3 years ago
That's a big if. They've been talking about it for 15 years!
Einstiensblackid 3 years ago
To the naysayers, this engine is significantly better than typical ohv engines.
At the outer limits of motorsports (Indy racing league, 24 hours of Le Mans, etc) engine builders have pretty much hit a wall. Even with the best parts money can buy, the #1 downfall of OHV and OHC engines is the valves and springs. At high RPM's the springs are closing the valves with so much force that the valves bounce off the valve seat.
I just wish they'd do something with involving aftermarket heads for SBC's
theepirate 3 years ago
Well this problem has been solved some 25 years ago when Cosworth introduced to Formula 1 engine that used compresed air to close valves. Since then F1 engines are reving well over 12000 rpm (which is limit for springs). Currently a rev limit for F1 cars has been imposed and set at 19000 rpm but 22K rpm and over is possible.
Marine475 3 years ago
"Well this problem has been solved some 25 years ago when Cosworth introduced to Formula 1 engine that used compresed air to close valves."
Yep but F1 is a taboe for most americans I guess. Look at what they have NASCAR (aka the Amish aproach to motorsport and engine technology in general).
blork5 3 years ago
They also have done a 302 v8 and was running 19 to 1 compression ratio. The heads do work I have a customer that makes the heads for them.
ncmeinc 3 years ago
Too bad i couldn't watch the whole thing my ears couldn't take the noise. I am far from an engineer but I often wondered why the conventional gas engine didnt use rotary valves instead of reciprocating ones.
ironheadtroy 3 years ago
Sure would like to know what it looks like, but I'm so sea sick from trying to watch that through the photographers bathroom window!!!! Somebody help this guy learn how to post a video !!!
67Cowboy 3 years ago
Yes the vid is a little poor but they have a web sight. No oil they said in the beginning, carbon ceramic. Lower friction, more cmf and higher RPM potential. I don't think this is real new but it is a large step in the right direction.
badsupra 3 years ago
A step in the right direction is what they said about Ethanol. This thing has way more problems than potential.
Einstiensblackid 3 years ago