/o/ - Auto

Hmmm I never timed and ohv. How would you time it? Is there a cover on top that gives you access or something?

Free valve in series production when?

My car has a pushrod OHV engine, so I am compelled by the laws of auto discussion to promote it unwaveringly and shit all over everything else for no good reason.

>>7184

Basically

>muh v8

>>7184

Hello, fellow poster. I have seen that you are currently vouching the benefits for the valve system your eight cylinder internal combustion engine currently uses. I, on the other hand, have a different type of combustion engine, utilizing four cylinders in a single line. Mine uses the opposing valve system yours does, and I will now vouch for my valve system, conveniently ignoring all flaws the system may possess.

While I can't deny my favoritism for OHV because

>muh B18

>muh V8s my dad had when I was a kid

>muhrrica

I do like other valvetrains a lot as well.

Each to his own and each application has advantages and disadvantages so there isnt much point in arguing shit that makes no sense, right? It's like asking if chocolate cake is better than steak.

>>7202

DA OHC a shit, causes valve stems to flex, bad port angles for intake/exhaust flow and less lift and flow capability than either SOHC, DOHC, or pushrod

>>7202

Whats the diffrence between a DAOHC and a normal OHC?

Also this is one of the few things you cant argue about as each system has its own pros and cons.

For example ohc v8s are a big nono. Look at the poor bmw fellas scared shitless when ever they hear a rattle fearing it might be the timing chain guides.

Also you wouldnt want a ohv inline as you would need some extra block space to house the cam parallel to the engine plus inlines rev igher than any other non inline engine, you wouldnt want to be stressing flimsy rods at 8k would you?

This thread should be more about the new designs and break thru in controling intake/exhaust cycles on a 3+ cycle engine.

Electro driven cam anyone? How about the Rotating cylinder valve? Or the all glorious rotary wankel engine and its flawed apex seals design?

>>7187

Greetings, my mentally-challenged compatriot. You have stated – and I quote – "I will now vouch for my valve system, conveniently ignoring all flaws the system may possess."

It seems you have made a fundamental error in your assessment of the situation. Were you not retarded, perhaps you would have realized that your preferred valve system does not possess flaws. Rather, your preferred valve system itself is the flaw. To say your system possesses flaws implies that the overall situation may be salvageable, if only these flaws could be corrected. This is not the case, as the system itself is intrinsically faulty, and ought to be abandoned completely. Good day.

>>7217

Good evening and salutations, my distant knowledgeable being of lacking mental skills.

It is with great regards I have read your previous message to me, and have carefully valued the data it contains. After careful evaluation, I have formulated my response.

It is as follows:

Hurr Muh vee tek dee oh haich see effin gas guzzln v8 be hatin muh vee vee tee I import Jayy dee Emm fartcan civic timing duul cam preformance shitboxes Japcrap initial durr can't turn lol suk Dix hater stance.

I do hope my response is taken with good spirits, and do wish you and your family great wishes.

With regards, Anon.

>>7223

>>7217

Both of you are, subjectively, wrong. I do believe that instead of arguing over very different valvetrains and engine formats, I will make my case for a mix of both, which would be a mid-displacement OHC six-cylinder in line engine, and then proceed to -then again- ignore any and every critiscism, valid or not, against this type of engine, before calling both of you retards.

>>7242

My word, I must propose a contradiction.

"No, u"