gun5l1ng3r

tieman55 seems to be repeating the same info without actually adding any detail.

Just go to the website, I guess, but it still does not explain exactly how it works. Have you done any testing on a spintron to see how the valve acts?

I still don't understand how it is supposed to work.

sandiegofrc

Hey tieman, what's that website again?

DarricksZ28

The website is in the very first post.

This thread sucks and should be deleted. This should be added to the tornado, electric supercharger and ebay computer chip threads.

Sounds more like a plug for this company than someone actually asking to learn more about it.

dohc

When I was following the thread on VWVortex a couple of years ago, they claimed that the added valve seat acted as a floating valve. What it did was only allow flow from the intake port into the cylinder when the pressure in the port became greater the the pressure in the cylinder.

The benefit was supposed to be that if you have a late IVC, the cylinder pressure would be able to build even at low revs. In effect you always get the perfect amount of cylinder filling even when you run a huge cam.

In theory its a good idea...but the thread on the VWVortex just died and nothing ever came of it, so who knows

Ragtop 99

iTrader: (7)

If it could do what they claim and spin to 6200, you could run something like a 228/232 106 and have just an amazing midrange. Might not be quite as fast as a TRex spinning to 7000 rpm, but it might be a good daily driver.

FWIW, stock idle speed on a 1999 A4 is 550 rpm, so having a big cam idle at 650 rpm would be fine for oil pressure.

zlover129

iTrader: (10)

Kind of hard to do that since peak torque from the electric motor is instant, and i doubt that changing the valves is going to give you instantaneous peak torque right off of idle.

xfactor_pitbulls

iTrader: (16)

No doubt, thats the first thing that I thought. You would need to run a large relief with them which would lower compression. However, you would get it back in the depth of the valve into the chamber, thus causing some fucked up quench scenario and seemingly poor flame spread. Thats just my common sense approach to looking at them.

99fordcobraguy

It was thought at one time that the wright brothers would never build a flying machine, +1 for new ideas, better mileage, more power, reduced emissions are the future in cars. Not everyone wants, nor does anyone really need a 750hp, 10,000 r.p.m. machine to go to work in. Why be so skeptical of the small claims made? Yes, in building a serious drag car this seems stupid, there are better cheaper ways to do a lot of things. But remember back in the day you had to machine your own parts to go faster, now you need your dad's credit card and domestic rice, the attitude I see from fellow 4th gen owners, mainly younger college aged, is that they are better than others for having an ls1 car. why do you have to hate hondas, someone else is always faster than you, you aren't cool for buying parts, an ls1 doesn't make you more of a man. My deepest apologies to the majority of car enthusiasts who don't fit this description, but why does everything new and imaginaitve have to be **** on for no reason?

DarricksZ28

Post this crap somewhere else not here. There's enough BS in this forum already.

we_todd_did

iTrader: (97)

Well I have used omni power stuff many times in other engines, and other cars, they seem to know what there doing, im sure they wouldnt spend all the money for r&d if it didnt make some kind of advancement for the engine.

2000TransAmWS6

iTrader: (12)

while i would agree with some of the points and disagree with others,... i think that most of us are skeptical because of the fact that there has been no mention as to how this valve actually works.

tieman55, how come no major auto manfacturers are using this valve's technology?

DarricksZ28

Actually I'm not skeptical and don't doubt that there are gains. But I don't know many people building their engines to be low RPM fuel efficient emissions friendly engines. That's what our daily drivers are for. The engines I and those around me build don't spend much time in the lower RPM ranges where we would spend a considerable amount of money to improve it. That's my point, I didn't say it wouldn't work. A heavier than normal valve would hurt mid to high RPM performance and reliability. The benefit of emissions, improved idle quality, and low RPM torque aren't worth the hassle/money of such a design to most of us. We're happy with the benefits of EFI and programmable timing computers and power adders. Any combination of those allow us to still maintain a fuel economy and driveability that is tolerable during cruises, trips to the spot, and runs.

white2001s10

iTrader: (4)

*retracted*

xfactor_pitbulls

iTrader: (16)

Well said, thats why this product is not applicable to this forum or basically any high performance engine.

Camaroholic

iTrader: (1)

Well I for one say bring on the pictures and the video. And if possible, detail the buildup of the motor with pictures - how deep, if any, the pistons are dished, pictures of the pistons, pictures of the valves in the heads, and pictures of the valvetrain. Not necessarily enough detail to give away any "trade secrets", but just to satisfy the curiosity of the skeptics. Just showing a motor on a dyno and then a graph likely won't be enough (as I could put a motor on a dyno, claim something whiz-bang about it, etc).

Guys, I say let him develop his stuff and bring it and post it. I don't think *we* have anything to lose by him doing so.

And then put a turbo on it, of course.

hazard2k

iTrader: (10)

I disagree. Walk into a room and tell people you have an LS1.. you WILL get respect

hammertime

iTrader: (1)

I love how everyone in this forum has a 5000 stall converter and low rpms mean nothing to them. The people who are saying this technology has no place in a race car are right. The rest of us who sit in traffic, have to follow the 25 mph speed limit without bucking and surging, and generally need some manners in a car might stand to benefit from something like this.

Picture this, instead of spending money on a higher stall converter and gears, keep your stock components and just replace the cam and valvesprings. If the product does work as claimed, now you can put in that over the top cam and still have decent low rpm throttle response without the heat and wasted energy of a converter slipping. Perhaps it can be tuned well enough that you can even pass emissions with that cam because the overlap isn't an issue.

As far as major auto manufacturers using it - I'm sure they would want to know it offers them 150,000+ mile durability before they start mass producing such a design. They are the ones who would really stand to benefit from this technology. If OEM's could boost low speed throttle response and keep the same power throughout the rest of the rev's and reduce emissions while increasing economy at idle & low engine speeds, you'd bet they'll jump on it.

Nobody is forcing you to buy this product or saying that your next car will have it. If the stated benfits aren't there, then I'm sure this will just go away. To say it has no merit whatsoever is discounting how the vast majority of cars are operated.

DarricksZ28

I love how everyone expects to have an idle-7000RPM powerband, 30mpg, low road/engine/drivetrain noise, and still run 10s. Oh and I love how they don't want to have to work on it, and get pissed when **** breaks. My car doesn't have a 5000RPM stall converter, and I still don't care about idle-2500RPM as much as 2500RPM and up. Why? Because I don't win races or get my jollies off below 2500RPM. Once you're WOT and your vehicle is setup properly and you can drive the hunk of junk then it won't drop below 3500RPM or even higher than that. Bucking and surging stems mainly from improper tuning and/or wrong component selection more than actual cam design. If the cam design adversely affects driveability to that extent in a properly designed/built/tuned setup then it's not meant to be on the street.
I don't see this design being used in OEM either on gasoline engines. Because of reliability issues the weight of the valve adds to the system. OEM is moving towards lighter valves not heavier valves with "floating seats". Why? Because less weight in the valvetrain means longer spring life, cams won't go flat in 150k+ miles. The mileage OEM vehicles are reaching stems from those and other advancements in engine/drivetrain design. 100k used to be the pinnacle for OEM, now that's tripled. And it's not from adding weight to the moving parts in the engine or oversimplifying current designs. OEM design is improving cylinder head design along with electronics to improve idle, driveability and emissions. No need to reinvent the wheel.

Besides, if this design would be used in OEM guys like me would have to figure a way how to remachine the head to get rid of that crap. Just like low performance heads, SMOG pumps, AIR pumps, heat risers, EGR, skip shift, CAGS, DOD, catalytic converters, 200+ degree thermostats.......I could keep going.

patriotformula

iTrader: (28)

...wow 99FORDCOBRAGUY I think you must have some built up anger towards LS1ers... This guy comes out of leftfield and attacks the "younger" crowd who owns ls1s. I am in college, I do have an ls1, I do think my **** is better then a hondas. But all for good reason. IMHO you're stupid to start yourself on an unlevel playing field. Just my .02 but then again I'm not your average college student who's mommy and daddy bought his LS1 car for him.

Adrenaline_Z

I'm really starting to like this "DarricksZ28" guy. Right to the point and doesn't
take much B.S. Seems to know a thing, or two as well.