Talk:Interference engine

Why design an interference engine?

Once people discovered engine interference and the possibility of associated damage, why would anyone keep designing engines that featured interference? Does an "interference-positive" design confer any advantages, and if so, what kind?

165.176.7.3 (talk) 19:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Desire for high compression ratios limits the available space above the piston at TDC. Low restrictions in the valves are also desirable for efficiency and power so the valves either need to be large in diameter or lift by a significant amount. Since there are physical restrictions on valve diameter it is clear that any engine requiring high compression and flow rate will probably be an interference engine, hence nearly all diesel engines are interference engines. It is less of a problem for larger engines because of the square/cube scaling laws. 86.16.36.95 (talk) 11:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's a very useful explanation! Could you, or some other person with good knowledge of the topic, maybe expand on this aspect in the article? Currently, it's sorely lacking this kind of context. Destynova (talk) 00:40, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"non-interference" engine

I think that i've heard somewhere that the antonym for "interference engine" is an engine with the "freewheeling" feature. But perhaps the mechanic who was taking to me then (a long time ago) had just come up with it on his own. --Jerome Potts (talk) 21:40, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
…and huh, apparently in German that's the term they use: Freiläufer, which translates as "freewheeler". --Jerome Potts (talk) 22:35, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]