Decuir Engine Technologies, LLC coworker told me about this today. I started thinking of the possibilities of higher rpm allowance in the older engines. just need a taller valve cover, lol. The videos are kinda neat.

 

I like the Rotary Valve technology.
A Ford 351W that turns 14,000+ RPM
and a 300 Six that is close to that.

 

How could the mass of that OHV system be less than a conventional? Something's got to break.

 

From a fellow member over on the tbird forum: "I spoke with alex, what a pleasure also to be able to talk with someone who started out working on cars at 18 and is heading to age 79 this coming sunday.

There really isnt too much that has happend in Nascar this guy does not know. He's worked for many of the greats in Nascar like Dick Trickle, Richard Petty ect.

He said that every so often he would run the dyno machine and observe/measure the nature of the three connection points a pushrod/ rocker has and its effects on valve float in order to solve it.

He said that he has ran engines to rpm's in the range of 7k and obverserved things you would have never thought posssible like the pushrod or rocker gap for a moment in time having a gap of nearly 3/8 of an inch ect. He said that at higher rpms, the parts will float naturally and that is amazing how it all stays together.

His idea makes the valve opening more contolled and also reduces the hp required to do so, which in turn frees up engine perfromance.
The mods to the connection of the rocker to the valve is done by means of hand made parts to include the clip you see on the roller part of the rocker. That clip is a bike chain clip that he found suitable since it was already heat treated.

Alex went on to explain that a normal engine seat presure is in the range of 90-100psi and that it will require about double that presure to fully open the valve. locating the valve more to the center of the engine and its placement in range with the lifter reduces the amount of spring tension through trial and error, reduces the flopping of parts where the rocker touches the valve and the pushrod touches the rocker, and also controls float and eliminates 66% of crashing a valve. Actually, alex insisted that it nearly eliminates it. The formula he uses,he had to make up along the way but it has a lot to do with the ratio of the distance from the fulcrum of the rocker to the center of the valve stem and its relationship to the hp required by the cam lobe to open and close said valve.

I am to supply my cam/valve/spring/head specs to alex and proceed with getting a conversion set made and supply him with consumer test data as well as dyno / track info of before / after for his records. This guy is really neat. I like older generation types who dont mind teaching when they know there are open ears and closed mouths." I will just wait and see what results from his inquiry using his Ford engine specs.

 

the springless valve is not really that new of a concept.

Ducati has used a pair of basically forks to open and close their valves for decades, not sure if they are still doing it or not on the new bikes. and from what i hear, it is quite an art to adjust them correctly.

but this technology looks pretty interesting for sure. it would be interesting to see how he compensates for heat growth to make sure the valves close tight in his setup. that is the only thing that would concern me, bcause in actuallity that is all the spring is doing in a convential setup is to make sure the valve closes properly at all rpm levels (of course their is also other requirements, but that is the main purpose).

pretty neat concept and looks fairly simple for the most part (of course their is probably lots of engineering and design gone into it).

Rgds
mike