Jump to content

New Engine Coming.

unit731

By unit731
in Future GM News & Rumors

Recommended Posts

unit731 Senior Enthusiast

unit731

Posted
Posted

Ursula Zerilli

Automotive News -- July 12, 2010 - 3:34 pm ET

 

 

 

DETROIT -- EcoMotors International has received $23.5 million from Microsoft Corp. Chairman Bill Gates and investor Vinod Khosla for engineering and testing of its trademarked Opoc engine technology.

 

EcoMotors said in a statement today that the investment marks a key advance in commercializing its opposed piston-opposed cylinder engine. The engine maker plans to use the funds for completing testing and building demonstration units.

 

Further details about the funding have not been disclosed.

 

EcoMotors CEO Don Runkle said it is terrific to have the support of prominent investors. He also said EcoMotors' engines will be built in Michigan because of the state's resources and talent. Runkle is a former executive of General Motors and Delphi Corp.

 

EcoMotors, based in suburban Detroit, says the Opoc architecture allows its opposed piston-opposed cylinder engines to use 50 percent fewer parts than standard engines, while providing 50 percent more fuel efficiency. Runkle says the company is working on its sixth-generation engine and the new funds may be used for the next engine configuration.

 

Touting the tech

 

Gates, also co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, said in a statement that the technology may be a stepping stone in advancing affordable, low-emission transportation.

 

Khosla co-founded Sun Microsystems in 1982 and was a general partner of the venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins, Caufield & Byers in California. In 2004, he founded venture capital firm Khosla Ventures of Menlo Park, Calif., to invest in various green technologies. The firm owns 47 percent of EcoMotors

 

 

Edited because I forgot to do a "preview".

unit731 Senior Enthusiast

unit731

Posted
  • Author
Posted

BLOOMBERG BUSINESS WEEK

 

By David Welch and Mark Clothier

 

Retired Ford (F) engineer John Coletti got a call in 2007 from Vinod Khosla, the Silicon Valley venture capitalist. Khosla, co-founder of Sun Microsystems, wanted advice on a new engine technology in which he was considering investing. A mutual friend suggested he contact Coletti, who had served as the chief of Ford's performance division. Coletti was skeptical that the design in question could deliver a promised 50 percent improvement in fuel economy. "Any time you hear about a new engine technology, you look for the Achilles' heel," the engineer said.

 

He pored over the EcoMotors International opposed-piston, opposed-cylinder (OPOC) engine. To his surprise, he concluded that it could perform as advertised. Coletti joined the company as president and chief operating officer in February 2008. Khosla and Microsoft (MSFT) founder Bill Gates were impressed, too, and together have invested $34 million in EcoMotors. They are attracted by a motor that, in theory, would allow a large pickup to achieve 27 miles per gallon. The company plans to license the technology to carmakers that would make their own OPOC engines, or manufacture and sell the engines through joint ventures.

 

Traditional engines have one piston per cylinder; EcoMotors' version has two. The design saves space and weight, allowing for a 95-pound engine that is one-third the heft of a small, conventional four-cylinder motor and 15 percent to 19 percent more efficient. Designed by Peter Hofbauer, a former Volkswagen engineer and founder of EcoMotors, the small, modular engines can be hooked together to power autos of different sizes. A pair would yield a 150-horsepower motor suitable for a midsize car like a Toyota Camry. When the car is coasting, one of the engines shuts down, delivering a 50 percent boost in fuel economy. That's a similar efficiency gain to what a hybrid gets, only EcoMotors says its model is less expensive. An OPOC engine will add roughly $600 to $900 to the cost of a vehicle, compared with an extra $3,000 for a hybrid, according to Don Runkle, chief executive officer of EcoMotors. Says Coletti: "This technology is disruptive to the industry."

 

The question is whether it will be so disruptive that manufacturers won't adopt it. The OPOC engine's flat, rectangular shape is different from that of traditional motors, which typically have vertical pistons in a taller, square block. The EcoMotors pistons are horizontal. To accommodate an OPOC engine, carmakers would have to overhaul assembly lines and redesign models. That would be a huge effort for automakers that already have billions tied up in current engine designs, says James N. Hall, principal of 2953 Analytics, a Birmingham (Mich.) consulting firm. "Engine plans are usually 10 years out," Hall adds. "They'll have to find someone who is willing to alter their plan." Coletti says that it takes $280 million to retrofit a factory and make it OPOC-ready, compared with $400 million to build a new plant.

 

Khosla emphasizes that EcoMotors has potential outside the U.S. Zhongding Holding, a Chinese auto-parts maker, has tentatively agreed to invest $18 million in the technology and has plans to build diesel and gasoline versions. In India, Khosla says, the hot car is a $2,500 Tata Nano subcompact. Increasing efficiency by adding hybrid-electric hardware could double the price the manufacturer can charge and put it out of the reach of most consumers. The EcoMotors design would be more cost-effective. "A lot of technologies have a 10- to 20-year payback," Khosla says. "This has a payback in the first year."

 

Runkle acknowledges, though, that it could be a couple of years before the engine is running in a saleable car. Finding early adopters will be critical. "Somebody will be very aggressive," he says. "I don't know who it is yet, but somebody will be."

 

The Bottom Line: Backed by Vinod Khosla and Bill Gates, EcoMotors plans a new engine that may appeal to automakers in India and China

Daryl LBZ Senior Enthusiast

Daryl LBZ

Posted
Posted
Im sure that engine will run as smooth as a Windows OS will... :thumbs:

 

That would be the smoothest running engine in the world, then.

 

 

 

 

Lol what are you smoking! :thumbs:

unit731 Senior Enthusiast

unit731

Posted
  • Author
Posted

"EcoMotors has a design called OPOC, Opposed Piston Opposed Cylinder. The design is just what it says, as you can see above, with 2 cylinders and 4 pistons. Peter Hofbauer came up with the idea when he was at Volkswagen, the outboard pistons take the place of the cylinder head and each piston only travels half the distance necessary for the full stroke, allowing higher engine speeds. An electrically controlled turbocharger can be used when necessary with adjustable boost, it can even spin up before the engine starts to give instant boost.

 

The engine can be built in a modular fashion, allowing more cylinders to be added in pairs with a clutch between the modules so one pair can be used at start or light load with the clutch adding more cylinders when required.

 

Emissions are said to be very low, meeting EPA standards for both gasoline and diesel configurations.

 

They're looking for 100 mpg in an automotive application, so just think what you could do with something like this in a motorcycle"

 

LINK

Daryl LBZ Senior Enthusiast

Daryl LBZ

Posted
Posted
If you're on a mac, the best of luck to you with that overpriced thing you got.

 

 

 

 

Lol Hell no!

Daryl LBZ Senior Enthusiast

Daryl LBZ

Posted
Posted
If you're on a mac, the best of luck to you with that overpriced thing you got.

 

 

 

 

Lol Hell no!

 

 

Oh, o.k. It's all good then! :thumbs:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yea I think macs are overpriced and I never really liked how they were set up.

tylerjenkins92@aol.com Senior Enthusiast

[email protected]

Posted
Posted
If you're on a mac, the best of luck to you with that overpriced thing you got.

 

 

 

 

Lol Hell no!

 

 

Oh, o.k. It's all good then! :thumbs:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yea I think macs are overpriced and I never really liked how they were set up.

 

I don't like it for lack of script friendly coding, thus not many programs for it. Every software must be signed by mac, or it won't work. But, most of all, I don't really care for the half eatin' apple on the front. I bet Bill Gates ate that part of the apple one day when he got hungry.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • richard wysong
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By richard wysong · Posted

      I had an 88 K1500 with a 5.7 that had those symptoms, I know totally different, it ended up being the ECM. Once you get the fuel system fixed if it still runs lousy you may want to investigate that. it didn't set any codes, stalled ,ran rough at times etc
    • James Beyer
      Trading 7.3 (Godzilla) for G.M.C gas

      By James Beyer · Posted

      Congratulations Isttype, on your gmc. Really like my 2024 2500hd sle doublecab now with 85,500 miles.  I checked the oil today at 4800 miles since last oil change and barely reading on the stick.  I don't care if GM says it's Acceptable adding a quart every 2000 miles because that is 100% BS, It is not a 1966 Harley Shovelhead! Sounds like it's setting up a future failure like I had with my 1500 6.2l. Other than oil consumption problems, I really like the 6.6l gas and 10 speed is really nice.  Towed a light 4000 pound trailer last week and averaged 14 mpg.  I was pretty impressive that a 7300 pound gas truck did 14mpg towing, Later-
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Long Term Cold Cycle Limited Testing   Back to the 1990's and XOM's million mile test. Since then there have been others and there will be more. Schaeffer's, AMSOIL to name two. Of these Schaeffer's is the stand alone which I will explain in a bit later.    http://papers.sae.org/600190/:   http://papers.sae.org/850215/:   Up to 75% of  engine wear occurs on cold starts. These two links (above) provide the technical reasons for engine wear. In a nut shell, and by a large margin, cylinder wear is what takes out most motors and even with a pre-oiling system that part of the engine is dry enough on cold starts and cold warm up to pierce Stribeck.   So when you put a motor, or a car, on a dyno for a million miles stopping only for oil changes, (yes fuel is uninterrupted) or break down maintenance, you are depriving the test of the most important part of it's wear cycle. Yes a million is then a pretty easy walk even for a mineral oil under those conditions.    How about cleanliness during the long test cycles? Same thing. Varnishes that stick rings and insulate parts are laid down by repetitive 'heat cycles'. It's the cool down the precipitates the varnishes. These long runs also hinder acidic attack caused by cold start richness and less than optimal cold start ring sealing. They hinder water formation and enhance breathing of the crankcase; the petri dish of acid formation, the first step in sludge formation, amalgamation and precipitation. These motors are also monitored and controlled for water and oil temperatures to within the "normal operating range".      https://www.swri.org/sites/default/files/sequence-iiih-test.pdf Note the test sequence in some boutique oils literature for testing, API IIIH, is not the standard used for the ILSAC G7 testing. Does that mean it is irrelevant? No, not as used. As used as a 'visual guide' it makes it's point. The G7 weighted piston deposit minimum is lower.      Back to Schaeffer's. That was a cyclical test of an engine in fleet service and not a dyno mule and if you saw the video it was not mirror clean but wear was low.    There are oils like BioSyn and other 'Renewable" source oils that taught cleanliness and have proven themselves in fleet testing. Havoline an other example.    The newest ILSAC G-7 test prioritize cleanliness, LSPI mitigation and fuel economy OVER WEAR. In comparison Porsche C30 Specification Verses ILSAC G-7 Specification below:      Some will balk that this graph isn't apples to apples and I will challenge that in that this graph represent the SPECIFICATION and not the any One Oil Performance.   It is absolutely possible to minimize wear, maximize cleanliness and mitigate LSPI etc., It just isn't cheap and currently I see none that are not walking toward profit over performance.     
    • asilverblazer
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      I don't think you will need a split, separate product, etc., the OBD port should be able to deliver everything you need. Since your device would be plugged into it all the time, it wouldn't miss anything.    Hardware in this case will be the easiest part of your project - ELM 327 devices will already deliver all the data you need. Reporting/software is where your advantage/marketability is.
    • Coastie05
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Coastie05 · Posted

      I do too. I’ll never be stuck again 😂

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...