Honestly I think he's more along the lines of giving us a more viable solution for conversion of ICE-EV. And in the vary least it's something interesting, to ponder.
I thought of replacing my engines cylinders with magnets and the head block with coils but it would still have all the downsides of oil leaks and complexity
Funny story, I was driving to the gas station, and I was listening to the radio and I heard a loud beep and almost if it was a voicemail, and I heard a subtle "Bet" and my car started shaking almost if two cylinders fired at the same time. Does anybody know how to fix it??
@@tjpg5083 My car squeaks when it goes over speed bumps but that's ok, it's just some rubber bushings. But I don't wanna hear some weird engine noise hahahha
I caught that, too. I know some engines that were designed to do that for one reason or another. One that always comes to mind is the Yamaha tuned v6 engine that went into the OG Taurus SHO. I think it did a thing where it would do a secondary ignition at some point during the exhaust stroke of an opposing cylinder. I spent over 10 minutes trying to find details, but Google is worthless and I couldn't find anything on the Dual Ignition System. I had 5 of them in my early driving years and did just about anything (including engine pulls/rebuilds), and they're notoriously easy to futz firing order on because of it haha
@@illitero the V6 SHO motors had secondary intake runners to have a wider power band, but they did NOT have a secondary ignition event that did any work. All engines with 2 wire coild have a wasted spark setup, it does nothing for power. Source: Built and base tuned a turbo SHO 3.2L ATX. The SHO powered 1995 Z28 is also my work.
It's that there aren't more catastrophic engine failures that always gets me... Like, I know engines have been modernized and such, but the sheer number of them that are operating just in North America at any given time, compared to the number of them that fail in a way that scraps the engine, is just incredible.
@archietiberius5005 Give the manufacturers another penny to squeeze and there will be more failures. If it wasn't for planned obsolescence and EPA regs, they could make million mile engines all day. That is IF they wanted to. But there's no money in that.
NOPE 🤔🤔, gasoline engines are a bunch of NONSENSE, especially engines made today. The engine has ONE JOB, and that's to make RPM. You don't need all that foolishness under the hood, it's complete BS. 😒😒😒😒
for anyone wondering...no its not practical to make this in real life. very cool demonstration though. theres power loss just as with gas cars in the transmission and axles and such. better to put electric motors right at the wheels like they alrdy do. and it would probably still be mostly silent and make clicking noises such as here, bc theres no combustion of gases to make nice exhaust sounds.
As someone who has only ever played this game at the table with 4 newer players over 6 hours - the most impressive part about this is it being finished in 30 some minutes.
For a second.. sure. But then it sounds quite interesting. The first thought is that is less efficient since there is a lot more bearings. But then you realize that friction is just a small part, and maybe there is some advantage somewhere else. So, now I am really curious, if this somehow can be more efficient. I higly doubt, knowing at what level works performant electric motors.
@@ehombaneIt would never work altogether. The torque required to move the crankshaft enough would require a much much much much bigger engine, that would not only make it super impractical, but also god awful expensive. The engine to car ratio would be like putting the Burj Khalifa into a penny. Less efficient? Not at all efficient. That’s why current EVs aren’t doing it and never will. If there was a way for it to get done it would’ve. This design can’t even be used in lower torque applications like a RC car. Mostly because it cannot compensate for its weight. This can be used to like… stir your coffee in the morning at most
Reminds me of a mail order add that used to be in the back of popular science/mechanics. He was selling plans and coils made to go in a raised head and magnets for top of the pistons. Some versions also had coils on top of the pistons with contacts connecting at TDC. Supposedly the HV pulsed output of your existing ignition coil powering these electromagnets was so impressive that this was stronger than gasoline. God only knows how many people tore down engines trying to do this, but I don't see any of them now. Of course if it did work I'm sure they would suppress it being this would be in an over-unity energy source.
@@splitloopgaming3523 🤣 I knew there would be one or 2 of you douches. No shit I never spent time looking at engines numbnuts, I was too busy getting buns and being the man 🤣
@@mojojojo6400EV's do sound real, real fast. Otherwise, there's no way to get a combustion engine sound from a non combustion engine, unless you use a speaker. Further, I'm going to need an explanation on how they can possibly "never run out of" energy. I'm pretty sure Newton made pretty clear what's required to convert energy.
Never say never. Opposed-piston engines fire two cylinders (functionally two pistons in one cylinder) at the same time. Among others, the engines made by German manufacturer Jumo successfully powered several airplanes in the 1930s and 40s.
@nehart1938 He specified internal combustion engines, which would include all possible configurations. Also, the famous Deltic British locomotive engine was an opposed-piston type and it was "V-shaped" any which way you looked at it. As I said, never say never.
That's why a high lobe cam cause a hot rodded engine to sound as it does, which is actually strange because it actually sounds like the engine is about to shut off at idle but if you rev it up it sounds like a MONSTER 😱🫣😮😲🚦🚙🚗
@@paulwood4056 who's going to tell this guy That you can make animations Of stuff That happens in real life? Like if I made an animation of a plane, does that automatically mean planes don't exist? Dumbass logic 💀
There’s some proper dickery happening in this comment thread. So, the 4 people who replied above me, do you bully everyone in your lives or just people you find on the internet? That’s a rhetorical question, I think everyone already knows the answer…..
@@strangepetscmtyThere are more electric cars than just teslas lmfao. And like it or not, they’re going to be the standard pretty soon. You can cry about them all you want lmfao
@@uncomfortableshirt3870till we run out of electricity. 💀 we do not have enough (also want to point out the batteries in the cold issue) they can try but it won’t happen.
@@amil89 yeah, because typing on a phone keyboard is perfect. I totally don't know how to spell love, you're right. Let me guess.... Chevy fanboy? Smug and dumb. Thats you.
Neat for a model, but completely impractical for real use due to losses from friction and unnecessary moving parts. A standard electric motor is much more efficient and powerful.
@@mizan-mq3me electric motors have way more torq than internal combustion engines, that's why on trains you have electric engines that are powered by generators
Why do you need pistons in an electric engine? They're used in gasoline engines because the micro explosions in the cylinders need to be synchronized so that there are always micro explosions happening to maintain the thrust. The chambers need to be reloaded with fuel after ignition, so there's a pause after ignition in each cylinder. That's not necessary in an electric engine with constant thrust. Electric motors are much simpler than gasoline engines.
You don’t; this is just a fun little model. He goes into it in the full video about how this isn’t useful when electric motors are already good at creating rotational motion directly.
There are plenty of engines that fire multiple cylinders at the same time. Mostly diesels and mostly on very very large engines, but they do exist in small engine applications too.
They’ll hide the digital record that makes a broom broom noise somewhere unobtrusively. Still the younger generation will fall for it hook line and sinker.
@@sawajyd the dodge viper had an odd firing order, meaning the pulses between the firing intervals weren't spaced out evenly, but no 2 cylinders fired at the same time
“You never intentionally fire two cylinders at a time” However, Fairbanks Morse engines have Opposed Pistons and the vertical inline pairs ALWAYS fire at the same time. Granted, pistons/cylinders are not the same.
@@Ferrari255GTOjust because it doesn't, doesn't mean it can't. It's working on a small scale, which means it could potentially work on a large scale. I don't know how much power it produces, but it's an idea to make an electric car have a sound similar to a gas.
@@ogshotglass9291 let me explain why this design is stupid: even though it could technically work, it'd be a HUGE waste of energy, because you take the main advantage from electric engines, wich is that they have no mechanical energy loss, and you completely obliterate it. The engine would be RPM limited, wich means the engine would need a gearbox, wich is more wasted energy on conversion. Now you have to add to that the fact that there's X amount of motors instead of a large one or four small ones (one per wheel) wich need to work with each other. To top it all off, since the engine has cranks and a crankshaft reliability goes down, costs skyrocket and maintenance goes up too since the engine would need oil. Safe to say this just isn't happening at a full size scale. Also, the sound wouldn't really be there as there is no need for compression, exhaust or intake, so it'd be an unsealed system with no pressure variability, otherwise it'd be even more complex and even less eficient, as the electric motors would need to fight the engine's friction and displace the air.
People that care about efficiency; you need to understand that generally speaking: *the more you can hear an engine, the less efficient it is* (sound is "lost" energy)
That Is just completely wrong Edit: it's not wrong in the fact that sound is wasted energy but loud=inefficient is wrong, almost no energy is lost from sound and some engines are more quiet and less efficient than louder engines. Also straight piping an engine doesn't make it less efficient, it would make it run leaner but your o2 sensors will compensate, it will be louder and the same efficiency.
Uhh, maybe in a motor with the sound from shaft bearings rotating and the air displaced by said movement. But that isn’t really going to be anything substantial. For an ICE engine, you’re not really hearing sound energy from similar sources. You’re hearing the sound of combustion, which isn’t really an energy you could utilise. There’s advancements in fuel injection, timing and component design, which alter aspects such as flame propagation and burn velocity. You want a controlled, yet high burn velocity to minimise heat loss, utilise the most energy from the fuel and to reduce emissions. If you alter the intake or the exhaust for sound energy, you’re probably going to make negative gains while interfering with intake temperatures as well as the scavenging properties of the exhaust. Essentially, you’re not wrong that sound is energy wasted, but to attempt to recover it primarily to sound more efficient is misguided.
...and why would you do this instead of electric motors on 2 or all 4 of the wheels? It introduces vibration, wear & tear, transmission dependency, reduced per-tire torque control, etc...
Couldnt use this in a vehicle really because it would go through a battery way faster than normal but this is actually an amazing concept for a simulator with a "functional" manual transmission for learning stick.
