ESE's works engine tuner

[crbbt]

Frits, you don't seem to be struggling with the minimum word length anymore!

I'm wondering if it would be better to put the Ryger cylinder and induction/spacer plate onto a 4t bottom end. Say a 250 dirt bike, with it's pressurised oil system?

Sorta annoyed I just had my classic nx4 cases turn up

[wobbly]

I agree JonnyQ that the real issue with current 2T crank life expectancy is down to the big end bearing - more specifically the
cage.
It is this that is the weak link currently, in that the KZ2 engines we run have peak power at 13,000 and will rev easily to 15,000.
But in doing so, the cranks last reliably for around 60L of fuel - 2 meetings.

The late model 4T engines run in MX can run roller bearing or plain bearings,but all run high pressure lube thru the crank direct into the pin.
They run ( unreliably,and very expensively ) up to 35M/Sec piston speed, so quite a jump up from the current 2T engines level - simply due to the lube and bearing.
Sadly the Ryger has splash lube, so trying to convince me it will last at over 50M/Sec just isnt going to happen no matter what size the big
end pin is or the bearing type, with its conventional crank and conrod.
With peak power at 17,000 maybe it will have the same reliability as we have now ie minimal YES - acceptable, NO.

I really did think there was something clever happening downstairs in the new engine,now im really pissed off there is nothing to see or get interested in.

And regarding what is going on with the information and the apparent ruckus over the NDA issues.
Basically we now know what is going on inside - no patent number for this current engine spec appears to have been issued - whats stopping anyone from now building anything,
an outboard, a jetski, a lawnmower, a 500GP bike, using the ideas we have already seen, as it for sure isnt protected.
All the old patents are very different, so in no way apply to THIS engine spec.

[WilDun]

Going back a little and as I said before somewhere, there is a lot of fuss about the 30,000 rpm, but as I understood it the 30K thing was a one off ie when they let it go to see what would happen.
The other thing was when the idea of no ring friction came up, someone asked Frits when there would be no ring friction and he replied - 'when the rings don't touch the piston' but he didn't say that this was actually the case here, seemed to me it was meant as how it would be in a hypothetical situation.
Everyone grabbed at the idea that all this was to be the norm - also there never was any report on the condition of the big end bearing afterwards by the way! (this is all just from what I remember - please correct me if I'm wrong).

Much ado about nothing I reckon!

[Flettner]

Going back a little and as I said before somewhere, there is a lot of fuss about the 30,000 rpm, but as I understood it the 30K thing was a one off ie when they let it go to see what would happen.
The other thing was when the idea of no ring friction came up, someone asked Frits when there would be no ring friction and he replied - 'when the rings don't touch the piston' but he didn't say that this was actually the case here, seemed to me it was meant as how it would be in a hypothetical situation.
Everyone grabbed at the idea that all this was to be the norm - also there never was any report on the condition of the big end bearing afterwards by the way! (this is all just from what I remember - please correct me if I'm wrong).

Much ado about nothing I reckon!

No, Harry did state that the ring did not touch the piston.

[Norman]

Hi Wobbly, If I remember correctly, a patent can be issued and kept secret from the public for 18 months. I read about a guy that during 2014 worked on the Ryger engine including things for the patent(s?). I do hope that they issued the most relevant patents latest during the autumn of 2014 so that we do not have to wait too long.

[WilDun]

No, Harry did state that the ring did not touch the piston.

Ah well, the human memory tends to fade with advancing years!

Guess that explains why there is a cover on the piston rod? stem? for the gudgeon pin, makes sense now.

[tjbw]

Going back a little and as I said before somewhere, there is a lot of fuss about the 30,000 rpm, but as I understood it the 30K thing was a one off ie when they let it go to see what would happen.
The other thing was when the idea of no ring friction came up, someone asked Frits when there would be no ring friction and he replied - 'when the rings don't touch the piston' but he didn't say that this was actually the case here, seemed to me it was meant as how it would be in a hypothetical situation.
Everyone grabbed at the idea that all this was to be the norm - also there never was any report on the condition of the big end bearing afterwards by the way! (this is all just from what I remember - please correct me if I'm wrong).

Much ado about nothing I reckon!

I agree, it's unfortunate that 30k was ever mentioned, but I guess it helped gain publicity and sales.

As I said before if I had one of these I'd want revs to be limited to just above peak power.

I've never understood the 'when the rings don't touch the piston' comment, and assumed it to be a misquote.

The engine is simpler than I expected, and I look forward to seeing it win races. I wonder how long before we see the next Ryger model.

[husaberg]

I agree JonnyQ that the real issue with current 2T crank life expectancy is down to the big end bearing - more specifically the
cage.
It is this that is the weak link currently, in that the KZ2 engines we run have peak power at 13,000 and will rev easily to 15,000.
But in doing so, the cranks last reliably for around 60L of fuel - 2 meetings.

The late model 4T engines run in MX can run roller bearing or plain bearings,but all run high pressure lube thru the crank direct into the pin.
They run ( unreliably,and very expensively ) up to 35M/Sec piston speed, so quite a jump up from the current 2T engines level - simply due to the lube and bearing.
Sadly the Ryger has splash lube, so trying to convince me it will last at over 50M/Sec just isnt going to happen no matter what size the big
end pin is or the bearing type, with its conventional crank and conrod.
With peak power at 17,000 maybe it will have the same reliability as we have now ie minimal YES - acceptable, NO.

I really did think there was something clever happening downstairs in the new engine,now im really pissed off there is nothing to see or get interested in.

And regarding what is going on with the information and the apparent ruckus over the NDA issues.
Basically we now know what is going on inside - no patent number for this current engine spec appears to have been issued - whats stopping anyone from now building anything,
an outboard, a jetski, a lawnmower, a 500GP bike, using the ideas we have already seen, as it for sure isnt protected.
All the old patents are very different, so in no way apply to THIS engine spec.

MR ryger
There is talk of 20,000 revolutions but in my first tile to find the exact information.
With Luc we find a good solution to limit the speed at about 20,000 rpm max is 30,000 at the moment.

Mr Ryger
in my first design we have indeed -Well lesser extent-had this problem.
if you prefer this, I can just send a new confidentiality agreement and demonstrate the new concept.
It is not intended that the motor is 30,000 rpm draaien.want then one would request the material gods.
The maximum capacity is between 17 and 18k rpm.
However, the speed limit at 30,000 rpm is far he reaches continues.

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/sh...post1130890695

[tjbw]

Frits, you don't seem to be struggling with the minimum word length anymore!

I'm wondering if it would be better to put the Ryger cylinder and induction/spacer plate onto a 4t bottom end. Say a 250 dirt bike, with it's pressurised oil system?

Sorta annoyed I just had my classic nx4 cases turn up

I'd go for the 4t bottom end, with pressurised oil system, and more oil holes in the piston.

[SS90]

No, Harry did state that the ring did not touch the piston.

No. The statement was "How can an engine achieve 30,000 rpm? Easy..... The rings must never touch the piston" I don't take that as "I have made an engine that achieves 30,000 RPM, because the rings don't touch the piston." Frits also never wrote that "This engine achieves either 70hp", or "Makes it at 30,000 rpm." It's all in the wording.
Some people only see what they want to see.
I can't recal exactly, but Frits did write clearly that it made something like 58 P.S at 18,000.
This sounds feasible.

[Flettner]

No. The statement was "How can an engine achieve 30,000 rpm? Easy..... The rings must never touch the piston" I don't take that as "I have made an engine that achieves 30,000 RPM, because the rings don't touch the piston." Frits also never wrote that "This engine achieves either 70hp", or "Makes it at 30,000 rpm." It's all in the wording.
Some people only see what they want to see.
I can't recal exactly, but Frits did write clearly that it made something like 58 P.S at 18,000.
This sounds feasible.

SS, I'm not going to argue the point.

[TerraRoot]

I'm not a fan of getting into online discussions, but I can see how the ryger can survive 17K.

2 statements,
four strokes last longer because they are better lubricated.
two strokes have a less stressful time because the piston is cushioned at the top and bottom of the stroke (compare a 4t and 2t conrod)

Ryger's design has the best of both world, doesn't it?

The rygers piston's stem (think thats the best tech term for it) is lubricated almost like a four stroke, I'm sure the 90mm rod and the splash lube are compromise's for karting, and it keeps the piston off the barrel wall, cutting down on lots of friction.

[wobbly]

A normal 2T piston has no more cushioning at BDC than i can fly to the moon - without serious chemical assistance, as prescribed by Hunter S Thompson.
The Ryger does have serious BDC compression going on, but several orders of magnitude less than the useless compression assistance we see at TDC.
Rod stretch at stratospheric rpm can easily overcome combustion pressure and the piston can unfortunately hit the head - why do we need at least 0.75mm clearance
in a 14500 rpm 125 - way less than the the Ryger will need with a 54.5 stroke at its 17,000 rpm peak power rpm as stated regularly by several commentators.
If it does make a peak, of version one at 58Hp or, 70Hp at 17,000 version two ( some argument there, with no dyno results - highly suspect for a start ) then it really needs overev to 19,000.
Thus piston cushioning is a joke,so please stop cracking Irish jokes that have no meaning in reality - we in the know call inertial physics., and like the dyno, it doesn't lie.

[Frits Overmars]

someone asked Frits when there would be no ring friction and he replied - 'when the rings don't touch the piston'!

No, Harry did state that the ring did not touch the piston.

That's right, I never said that. I never even understood that statement.

[WilDun]

That's right, I never said that. I never even understood that statement.

Frits,
My apologies if I have misquoted you here, but I do remember words to that effect being said by someone somewhere on the thread (on a discussion on the Ryger).

You say you never understood that statement - can you remember when and by whom it was posted? - Harry? (as Neil said).
I felt at the time it might just have been a sarcastic statement about the chances of zero friction on the "stem"

I also said a few posts back that I was relying on memory, rather than going back through all the posts to find out, so sorry about that.