It's nice to see a couple of actual working prototypes rather than just computer models 🙂

noooice... love your videos dude keep them up. if you ever need ideas dont be afraid to ask your subscribers for future ideas

Love how straightforward your videos are not like others who keep spitting non related bs at the start of the video. KEEP IT UP

graphics/animation and commentary are very well done!

I didn't know there were companies actively working on fusion engines, very intresting, it'd be nice if you made a video covering that field in more detail

Great content! Each of these needs a video of its own.

The Avadi engine caught my eye in this lineup.. its got the minimalism of a rotary (somewhat with sightly more rotating parts) where it looks like a traditional piston engine mated with a differential to produce this gyroscopic 4stroke wonder. I'm guessing the low-end torque is what would compele some to choose this over a rotary engine, or the inversed cousin (liquid piston).

Nice video,thank you for sharrng it :)

How can I not like this? Thanks for the engine talk.

Wow. New vids from this channel are always great to find. This channel really does a great job explaining and presenting this new tech. Thanks. 😷STAY😷SAFE😷 👁

Love your videos keep up the good work

Great video!

Sehr interessant! Gerne mehr davon! Zum Beispiel, was macht der Kugelmotor?

Awesome video as always!

This was a cool video, glad I found it 👍

I love these videos...def one of my guilty pleasures (but, I don't need to feel guilty about my love of learning).

Hey, really good video dude!

Love the video Keep em comin

I've owned and played with just about every type of internal combustion engine that's ever existed (so far as I know). My favorites are 1. The OG Model T engine, because when it was introduced there was no standard fuel like today, so that lump of iron could run on the gasoline of the day, ethanol, naptha, kerosene, and even turpentine. On the tin lizzy's steering wheel you had 2 levers for controlling the ignition systems advance or retarding function basically you were the engines ecu 2. The Ls3 of the C6 corvette which maintained a rediculously simple cam in block design with two valves per cylinder, a narrow low profile long block, and even with 6.2 liters and 400+ hp/tq was able to get better fuel economy than my wife's 2020 ford escape with a 3 cylinder turbocharged engine and 8 forward gears

Omega 1 does have "seals" its just they dont use any intermediatory seal to do the sealing. It will necessarily suffer from heat expansion problems due to the tight fit and the gap tolerance compromise needed to prevent it seizing will create the very same seal problems every other engine of this form has had. I hope I'm wrong, but really.... who's kidding who?

The GX100 is genius! With a few modifications you could turn it into a turbo-ram-jet, meaning it could achieve speeds of nearly mach 5, theoreticly of course. However, that would not come cheap.

Coaxial engine has a number of longevity issues, all those sliding parts will eventually fail unless the engine is highly maintained, not to mention tolerances will inevitably be a nightmare to deal with. there's a reason why there's not many linear parts in engines, pistons use slightly sprung rings to make up for clearance tolerances, and stem valves do eventually need their components replaced; though stem valves also don't see the forces of the piston itself, the linear bearings in the coaxial engine will see these forces and should have an expected shorter lifespan. Not to mention the issues with the rollers with the cam groove, more than likely their bearings will be the first parts needing replacing yet they're at the heart of the engine, which isn't good design. The MA-250 is interesting, but also problematic. The engine cannot scale without a geartrain. Any attempts of scaling that doesn't involve linking two separate motors externally will inevitably make it a swashplate engine, like what Duke had designed, which has it's own issues. The internal gearing really isn't ideal, though is entirely needed, because the moment any other component fails in a way that produces shrapnel, those gear teeth are getting destroyed. Not to mention assembly will become a pain in the ass with how gears need to be set, a lot of dry assembly, disassembly, and reassembly just to shim the entire gearset correctly. The rotary disc valve is an interesting addition, but tolerances and sealing will be one of the biggest issues with this engine; iirc, rotary disc valves have always been problematic. Plus if you scale an individual cylinder, you start having to question the strength of the connecting rods, as it's a split design, the rods are inherently weaker than a singular, more solid rod. CV Motion's motor is promising on paper but not in reality. Again, it's based on gearing, the moment you have particulate in you oil, those gear teeth are getting chewed up; then again the issue of if there's shrapnel from an explosive failure, like if a detonation happens to blow through a cylinder, if a bearing gets destroyed and shits its guts, etc. Gears are bad when there's a number of other components that could break and get caught in them, it's why transmissions and differentials, any geartrain component, are their own separate cavity; even a camshaft's drive, whether it's geared or chained, is in it's own separate assembly and cavity. Plus there's such little engagement between the rotary and linear components, if a set of teeth break you have a pair of dead cylinders. It's just not good for longevity, plus scaling becomes an issue as you'll need beefier components as you add more pairs of pistons. Omega 1 is interesting, it's essentially combining a rotary valve with the combustion chamber. My main issue with it is that half of the volumetric footprint goes entirely unused, the top half serves no purpose other than having a matched disc for the intake and exhaust discs. If they could find a way to mirror the setup so that both the top and bottom halves functioned as an engine, then it'd be interesting, otherwise there's just so much dead weight and unnecessarily used space. I also don't see why there can't be more combustions per cycle, the current engine only has one per cycle, but due to the way it's made this seems unnecessarily low given how large the discs are. Between the two improvements, you could get at least four combustions per revolution, though this number could probably be pushed further. But all of this is just trying to reinvent the wheel when there's not much reinventing to be done. We're at the point that we can't squeeze out more efficiency with simplistic designs, it's why the typical engine design is becoming so complex with different variable systems, because we're at the point that we need to minmax every little variable to squeeze out additional efficiency. I just don't see the point in making overly complex designs that do essentially the same thing as a typical crankshaft, or trying to find alternate designs that'll inevitably fall behind due to lack of being able to be variable. The designs are interesting, but they won't realistically lead anywhere, and it's far too late in the internal combustion engine's life cycle to be questioning new designs, as everything is moving onto alternatives for a variety of reasons.

Best of luck with your new ideas

2022: Developing new petrol engines is a bit like wagon wheel innovation.

I recall a MYT engine. Rotating piston combustion chamber. Have seen a few KZfaq videos. Has been around for 20+ years. Any comments? John

incredible, most of these have real working prototypes or look to be reasonably real

Thank you

The mach effect drive relying on rubber washers. What could possibly go wrong?

i followed the mega (mach effect) drive for some time. im not convinced. its supposed to exploit local mass fluctuations that arise due to the nature of mass. the idea is that mass doesn't mean anything unless you have another mass to compare it to (applying general relativity to the origin of mass). the theoretical backing has some serious science cred, and if not for that id have passed it by like i did em drive. you push a mass while its heavier and pull when its lighter, its essentially a vibrator. typical reactionless drive shenanigans. supposedly, according to its creator, there is a "magic frequency" that will produced thrust if you hit it. thats where i lose interest. i dont think it would be that simple. you would either need to model, predict or measure the mass fluctuations you are trying to lock in on, and then synchronize your oscillations to it with some kind of control loop. using something like gravitational wave interferometry might be a good place to start. i think they are currently trying to re--jigger their experiment until they get the results they want. until they get their thrust above their noise floor its really not worth anyone's time.

capillary kăp′ə-lĕr″ē Interesting video. On the last one, if it is an IC engine I suspect it is still dependent on fuel air ratios, unless I am misunderstanding something. Diesels are much less so, but highly volatile fuels, as far as I know, require a fairly tight fuel air ratio to run. They did not need to be full stoichiometric though, until catalytic converters were installed for emissions reduction. That is what drives the exceedingly narrow band of fuel/air required in today's gasoline fueled cars. Cars used to go pretty rich under full throttle (power valves in Holley's, etc). I doubt they do this to that degree now, but am not certain. It would just surprise me if they did, because the manufacturers want long converter life.

good stuff!!

that directed energy weapons in the future statement sure aged well

I see some promise in a couple of these designs to change the vacuum industry

"Less" is for things which can't be counted. "Fewer" is for ALL things which can be counted. This is basic English: Less corruption. Less milk. Less juicy. Fewer job openings. Fewer nails. Fewer heart attacks. Fewer grammar mistakes! Do you see how this works?

I'd like to see the omega1 come to life and put it in a bush plane.

Nice to see an engineering video that isn’t all computer animation.

5:50 I think this is the stat that interests me the most because, 25 000 rpm, I WANT TO HEAR THAT!

The Omega 1 has the greatest potential for power to weight ratio and ease of manufacturing because of the lower number of moving parts. Been mentioned before but the sealing issues, if they can be overcome, could be an incredible move forward in the development of the ICE (Internal Combustion Engine). I see it as the final gasp for automotive and aeronautical use. Once battery tech greatly improves the energy density then EV's will bury the combustion engine.

You the people only not a great people but you work Hardly to achieve the leadership..And you desrve it Thank you for sharing the knowledge...

The most amazing part is a tech countdown video that isn't some bs.

That Plasma engine....tells me I need to get the frik moving on getting my own prototype out or I'm gonna be left in the dust. thanks.

More engine plce ilove to hear frome you

Charles Duell: "close the patent office, everything that can be invented has been invented". I don't know, was this invented before 1889?

That last one talks about how the engine redline is 25,000 RPM. However, their home page does not show any gear reduction system -- and doesn't even show an output shaft!!

As regards the last one, the Omega One, I watched their promo video or something and it looked like they had a runner at the end. Feel free to correct me as long as we're civil

Better video than I expected - slightly disappointed with the lack of a(t least an honorable) mention of the 'LiquidPiston' engine (kind of a wankel-rotary turned inside-out)

I invested in the Liquid Piston engine due to the three firings per rotation, dual lobe, tri-chamber reverse type Wankel.. It is a simpler design, more compact than the Omega engine, but not 'stak-able'. I would like top see it in the light aircraft market.. It's developers are touting the military market instead of the lawnmower market..

Got me. Subbed.

Very interesting 🧐

LOL… Directed Energy Weapons… They are going to be surprised when they realize how small the window is for that, and that the Navy things it is already closed.

I don’t know, happy to watch tho!

I want funding to make my own omega 1!!! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

I didn't understand how that last one worked!!

What's the projected thermal efficiency of the Omega 1? I think at this point the marginal gains in efficiency/weight are not going to be enough to differentiate them from new 100+ horsepower, 80lb electric motors... super expensive, half-ton battery packs notwithstanding.

Right ! About how the Permanent Magmatic Motor could we'll use a reverse spinning half( correcting it's pull to the right tendencyg) so that in Space, it's finally proven how the Top replacing the Prop, how it pulls forward !

Do one on the Zubrin DiPole Drive! (It offers similar propellant-less propulsion to concepts like the mach effect drive, but without relying upon... controversial... physics).

No mention of the free piston linear engine?

more detail on the last one would be nice. i have no idea how it is supposed to operate.

Would you like to go over that last one again, I didn't get anything out of that. I don't think your peddling perpetual motion so I obviously missed something LOL

Number 1 will work with hho Making it the best out there. Two injectors 1 for hydrogen 1 for oxygen. No air intake. It would be completely carbon free. Vegetable oil to keep the lube. This is where we should be going

You can't really call anything an engine until it actually works as one. Until then it's just an idea for propulsion. So the few engines shown were at best, eh. Aside from the direct pulsar drives that are currently making some progress

that CV is just another boxer with more complicated parts.

1:10 "...22 Foot/pound of torque" 🤣

I want an Omega 1 motorcycle... 25k rpm down the highway.... woof

If there is NO WORKING PROTOTYPE, then concept is not tangible and can't be reasonably claimed to function. A working sample gives a real & testable model on which to build.

*fewer parts

Not sure why the tamiya rs540 motors werent mentioned here.

i thought of that type of engine years ago dont know hoe to get it made lol

Does it have "less parts" or "fewer parts"?

Very interesting. I would have though that the Liquid Piston Engine would have deserved a place in that line up, though.

The boxer looks like a modified Bourke.

If they can make a efficient engine running on plasma particles millions of degrees why the hell can’t we use that in modern tech

The only engine concepts that are real , is the actually built ones. You can do all sorts of things with 3 D models, you have to build them actually and see !

Still waiting for brilliant men to produce an engine as powerful and efficient as the flagellum

25,000 rpm Hell yeah

Tok-tok engine always make me amazed by its simplicity 😀😀

Too many too fast but then I watched it cause it was short. Go into more detail about the fusion engines. Space craft engines need to get light and powerful so that part of this is very interesting!

Definitely the Omega 1

"fewer parts" not "less" parts

Rotary engine = better than the piston engine. Improve the rotary engine and let the piston engine rot.

All are good

The Omega 1 is a Tesla engine (boundary), but as a commenter stated earlier, it is not a good version of it.

Don’t understand why there are still companies spending money developing internal combustion engines.

If the Mach effect works, then the star trek impulse engine will be realised. One of the scientists has spent 30 years working on it. There is a good KZfaq clip about its development

Magnetic engines final answer.

Cv motion is a bad day just waiting for some sucker.

Would be nice to know how these comppare to exhisting engines in terms of efficiency.

= for piston fire? = for fish oil?

TY. /.

The last engine is just a screw super charger with fuel injectors and an ignition system , it's already been done .

The Omega 1 has my vote. Using hydrogen there would be no or little emissions and 4 of them stacked in a small car would be awesome. Would love to see this motor in mass production but probably wont.

Would be better if the Omega 1 engine weren't coverage weren't so superficial. We never really get a good look at how it works. It's like that with coverage of it all over.

Nice video. However these all seem very heath robins based on a decline technology internal combustion engines. More innovation on electric motors is needed to align with better energy density of batteries perhaps

PLANETARY GEARING SUPPLEMETAL

There are conspiracies where in GM, engineers invented a modified version of the regular piston engine that would have an average lifespan of 30 years but GM shelved it. Another engineer invented a new type of engine that is extremely efficient and then BMW bought the whole idea and shelved it also.

Don't give the first engine to Morty ! (from the Rick and Morty) Sorry I couldn't resist with that bad joke 🙈😅😅😅

challenge for the OMEGA is sealing.......................

Also… re: Flying Cars. We don’t have Flying Cars for the same reason we don’t have Hovercraft Tanks. They are a VERY BAD IDEA. And in the case of Flying Cars, we have had the technology to make them since the first patented Flying Car in 1919/1920. It turns-out that they are a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist (not on Earth, at any rate). Flying Cars are something that is really better suited to a planet like Mars, albeit with a denser atmosphere. Were Mars to have an Atmosphere that was 5x to 10x denser than it is (allowing us to actually breath that atmosphere were it sufficiently terraformed to provide O2), then Flying Cars could be developed alongside the Infrastructure, which would really only be needed in the exterior of the cities (which would need to be subterranean pending a Magnetic Field being created).

Omega? Whey would they name an engine after the Oldsmobile X car?

Apparently there IS a working prototype of the Omega.......