Camless motor

[MichelM]

Frankly stall the distribution with current engines and benchmarks etc it does not seem very complicated. For the cylinder head gasket it is rather the disassembly of the pipes, accessories, etc. and the angular tightening of the cylinder head with several passes which takes me the most time ...
To change the mapping it is already not simple just for the injection and at the risk level without major consequences (if a tightening by too poor mixture) then for the distribution diagram I doubt. The valves have a certain inertia one will surely not be able to do what one wants ... And the manufacturers will have already optimized well with all the modes.
We're not there yet!
Michel

[MobyleX]

The advantages I assume:
_ Easily applicable variable intake,
_cycle miller (passable in "economic" mode not example),
_filling maximized on short valve opening periods with these faster valves (during idling in the presence of a variable intake for example).
_suppression of certain engine elements such as the air butterfly, with a variable intake controlled according to the desired speed.
_reduction of pollution with variable intake adapted to all situations (engine filling, engine speed, composition of exhaust gases, composition of intake gases, etc.)

[MichelM]

In fact me the Camless I would do it well but with a camshaft (!) With the minimal profile for safety not to explode the engine if failure of an electromagnet or the computer but it is obviously not simple .. and economical to build.

[Christophe]

The advantages I assume:
_ Easily applicable variable intake,
_cycle miller (passable in "economic" mode not example),
_filling maximized on short valve opening periods with these faster valves (during idling in the presence of a variable intake for example).
_suppression of certain engine elements such as the air butterfly, with a variable intake controlled according to the desired speed.
_reduction of pollution with variable intake adapted to all situations (engine filling, engine speed, composition of exhaust gases, composition of intake gases, etc.)

I would also add:

- possibility of turning with 2 valves (on 3, 4 or 5) in low power ... CF the VTEC system of the VFR800 of 2002. But imagine a little the electronic program which should manage all this?

[MichelM]

Frankly the VTEC HONDA it is not a success considering the tests, consumption, torque curve, and driving pleasure down. Keep preciously your VFR 750 which consumes so little, (surprising even such a low consumption for a VFR!).

[Christophe]

Yes indeed..The VTec has "just" compensated for the injection problems of the PGM-FI

But it was for the basic idea that I said that ... which, I think, is good even if it is "bastard" (either we make a multi-valve engine or not)

For my VFR this is what I intend to do ... at least up to 150 km (history of amortizing it econologically)! Me too this "low" consumption surprised me ... but after information a VFR000 rarely consumes more than 750L per 8 (average 100) ... am therefore not bad actually but nothing extraordinary ..

[Philippe Schutt]

the advantage of variable intake diagrams would be to remove the air butterfly, see the diagram here:

it is clear that there is much less effort to be made. That said, I can't say how much it represents ...

(edition by ex-océano 31/03 / 06-21: 17 - hosting the image on personal website then inserting image in this response)

[vincent27]

I think it's a good system for optimizing engines:
With the controlled injections and the controlled valves, it is possible to perfectly adjust the engine parameters according to the variable conditions (load, speed, outside temperatures, humidity, ...).

On the other hand, the after-sales services of the different brands must evolve.
With motors stuffed with electronics and automation, no more tinkering in the back of the yard. And this is a problem for the democratization of the automobile.

And then, no revolution in there, just an optimization of an existing system (oil will always become scarce, and the engine will always release CO2).
Especially since the less the systems consume (fridge, car, ...), the more the energy needs increase.

[Philippe Schutt]

On the other hand, the after-sales services of the different brands must evolve.
With motors stuffed with electronics and automation, no more tinkering in the back of the yard. And this is a problem for the democratization of the automobile.

NOT SURE ! thanks to electronics, reliability has taken a huge leap, without raising prices. 15 years ago, a 205 already cost around 60 francs! And don't forget that 000% of people don't get it ...

And then, no revolution in there, just an optimization of an existing system (oil will always become scarce, and the engine will always release CO2).
Especially since the less the systems consume (fridge, car, ...), the more the energy needs increase.

I don't know ... the needs increased during a period of cheap energy. Our lifestyle includes more and more trips. expensive energy could block or even reverse this development. The court of auditors recommended increasing the TIPP to force us to change our behavior, but Chirac was not hard enough to do it, lol!