Well, you know that everyone who comes up with something new to sell
finds that it is better than what already exists.  It is up to
independent analysts to determine the reality of the claims.  DMc

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 9:45 AM, pdooley wrote:

> That's interesting but I don't understand the claims of how this 2
> stroke
> motor has lower emissions and less oil consumption than a four stroke.
> This motor may have fewer cylinders, but the swept area is the same.
> Maybe the shared combustion chamber somehow reduces emissions, but I
> still
> don't buy the oil consumption thing, especially being a 2 stroke.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On
> Behalf Of
> Allan Streib
> Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 9:55 AM
> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> Subject: LVC: OPOC engine
>
> Been waiting for Friday to post this....
>
>
> http://www.autoblog.com/2009/11/30/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy/
>
> Now, I would not go as far as the author and call this a "radically
> new"
> type of engine.  But it's interesting, and the layout looks a lot like
> a
> boxer.  If these things make it to market, they might be a great
> option
> for engine transplants.
>
> Another VW connection, according to this article, the engineer who
> designed this spent 20 years at volkswagen.
>
> Allan
> --
> 1991 Vanagon GL