Low Cost Gas Engine Innovation Doubles Fuel Economy
Revetec, a little known company from the Gold Coast region of Australia, may be on to something huge: they’ve created an engine that is 50% smaller, 50% lighter, has 50% lower emissions and is cheaper to manufacture than a conventional internal combustion engine of the same horsepower. Oh yeah, did I mention that it doubles the fuel economy too.
What that means is a car like the 2007 Toyota Yaris, which is rated at 40 mpg on the highway, would get 80 mpg with a Revetec engine.
This isn’t some hoax… They have a prototype which has been attached to an actual vehicle and independently tested to substantiate their claims.
- » See also: GM Working On Efficient, Shape-Changing, Memory Metal Engine
- » Get Gas 2.0 by RSS or sign up by email.
In personal communication with Mr. Brad Howell-Smith, the Chairman, Inventor and CAD Designer for Revetec, he says “road tests have estimated that [the engine] uses around 50% less fuel than a conventional engine” and if it were converted to run on diesel, that performance gain could be much higher.
Also, because the engine delivers higher torque, and can perform and operate well at much lower rpm’s than a conventional one, the noise levels are lower.
To illustrate how serious he is, Mr. Howell-Smith said that since 2001 his company has been in touch with the US Military Head of R&D for the Southern Hemisphere on a “regular basis” for the purpose of developing one of their engines for light aircraft.
The current prototype engine, the X4v2, is what Revetec calls a “controlled combustion engine.” The meat of the engine comprises two counter rotating multilobate cams, which are acted upon by two pairs of diametrically opposed pistons which are rigidly interlinked by connecting rods.
If that sounds like complete gibberish to you, you’re not alone. Which is why I included an animation of the process to the left. A more simplified animation of the general motion of an engine of this sort is also included below.
Mr. Howell-Smith said that “if [the engine] uses 50% less fuel given that it has the same top end as a conventional engine, emissions would be reduced by 50% if the bottom end was utilized.”
What does all that stuff about “bottom end” and “top end” mean? The X4v2 has a huge amount of torque over a much larger range of rpm’s than a conventional internal combustion engine.
If a person were to drive a vehicle fitted with this engine in a non-aggressive fashion and keep the rpm’s at the “bottom end” (meaning no “jack-rabbit” starts) they could expect to see a 50% reduction in emissions.
Alternatively, according to Mr. Howell-Smith, a person could see a 30% reduction in fuel use and a 30% reduction in emissions if they used the full acceleration power of the X4v2 all the time. This would provide a 20% increase in acceleration capabilities.
We could debate about whether or not the internal combustion engine has a place in the future of transportation or whether it’s going to be all-electric or fuel cell or whatever… but in the meantime, Revetec has a product that could revolutionize the the transportation industry now, and provide a much needed large reduction in fuel consumption and emissions.
Just imagine a bunch of 80 mpg Toyota Yarises (Yarisi??) running around all over the place. A little scary, I know, but… an 80 mpg conventional automobile? I must be dreaming, wake me up before I get too excited.
Posts Related to Engines and Fuel Economy:
- Turbine Engine: No Pistons, No Lube, 30% Better Fuel Economy
- Six New Technologies Will Help Manufacturers Reach the 35 MPG Goal (Without Hybrids)
- Formula 1 Racing to Go Hybrid from 2009-2013
- Scania’s Ethanol Diesel-Engine, Runs On Biodiesel Too
- How Biodiesel Fuel-Cells Could Power The Future (And Your Car)
- Need a New Car? Nope, Just a New Engine!
- U.S. Fuel Economy Standards Boosted to 31.6 MPG by 2015
Image Credits: Revetec
I like the cam-drive trick. But I think once you’ve greatly
reduced piston side force, you could use a simple sleeve-valve
instead of poppets. And also a suitable cam shape allows
different compression and expansion ratios - e.g. 10x
compression, 20x expansion would recover about 1.2x more work.
I’m also toying with the idea of a single-cylinder cam-drive
engine - with suitable counterweights on the counter-rotating
cam shafts you can balance the piston mass without introducing
a side-to-side net force, leaving only some torsional
vibration.
I agree with the commenter who said torsion on the conrod
looks like possible problem. That could be avoided with a
three-cam ABA arrangement (A=clockwise, B=counterclockwise).
Hmmm … maybe that can also eliminate the twisting
vibration.
Even doubling the fuel efficiency doesn’t sound like a permanent solution to our fuel crisis. Given that the price of oil has increased to 10 times of what it was in the beginning of this decade, the bottom-line is, we need to come up with an alternate fuel source.
Justin, hydrogen is not the best solution to this problem. Apart from the obvious risks that would come from its explosive nature, manufacturing pure hydrogen (by hydrolysis) requires electricity which in turn comes from petroleum.
[...] Cost engine doubles fuel Economey, Makes same power! Low Cost Gas Engine Innovation Doubles Fuel Economy : Gas 2.0 [...]
I have a friend that races Mazda’s with rotary engines. I’ve done some wrenching on them with him over the years and help out in the pits. Displacement is restricted in his class of racing. The rotary engine is the least fuel efficient of the engines in the class. Take that for what it’s worth.
[...] Low Cost Gas Engine Innovation Doubles Fuel Economy : Gas 2.0 Revetec, a little known company from the Gold Coast region of Australia, may be on to something huge: they’ve created an engine that is 50% smaller, 50% lighter, has 50% lower emissions and is cheaper to manufacture than a conventional internal combustion engine of the same horsepower. Oh yeah, did I mention that it doubles the fuel economy too. [...]
Check out this free calculator that will determine whether high(er) octane fuel will save you money, in the long run. http://tinyurl.com/57zdz5
[...] Engine. X4V2 Low Cost Gas Engine Innovation Doubles Fuel Economy : Gas 2.0 [...]
About the Caminez /Revtec engine
I think less foul negative language and more positive reinforcemnt/i.e contributing ideas to enhance further development and improvements would likely serve us all better as the “fuel’ that canbe used in it can vary to almost anything the mechanical efficiency is inherently obvious as it maximizes the use of distance travelled. plus the ‘cam shaft’ is technically a cam plate.I say this guy deserves some credit because I didn’t see any ‘new’ ideas coming out of canada or the USA lately that could be transferred to the market as quickly and cheaply. I for one would throw a few million at it and help it grow.
Hi John
re my reference to a combo with a Wankel I meant with regard to closely machined radial shapes controlling combustion and torque transfer, and removing the conrod - not a very good comparison in retrospect
On;-
“there is quite a lot of reciprocating weight ”
you say
“Not so. The opposed pistons are all one unit (a double ended piston)”
But thats my point, a double ended piston is double the reciprocating weight compared with a twin boxer where the pistons go in opposite directions. You make a very good point about no side forces on the piston/bore, I hadnt considered that. With no side load then the piston can be made lighter and the whole assembly could very well be made to have less reciprocating weight !
On Electric, it will have to happen now that the technology is really there, but I doubt that the IC engine will dissapear from vehicles compleletly. But the IC engine in small vehicles will diminish to where the total enviromental effect will not matter. Large engines in big trucks, busses etc are probably as efficient as need be but proper use of propane and diesel make these engines less of an issue — provided they are not worn out as per all LA “exempt” vehicles !!!
1st: can be atached to my car? fiat uno 1300cc transverse engine, . 2nd. the engine size of your engine, horse power, total weigth, fuel sistem and
ignition. 3rd.the dimensions of this.
At last, how many kmts. per liter can obtain for this in a 850 kgs car? please show in wath car you tested the engine to obtain this %.