Naoki Watanabe April 28, 2016 07:17 AM "12 to 17 percent improvement". Great but combustion engines need about a 400% improvement to get close to electric cars and even then they still have the pollution thing working against them. Donald Vitez April 28, 2016 08:14 AM "Electo-Hydraulic-Pneumatic", fancy terminology for what is an air over oil, system used to control a cylinder. I was first exposed to this technology in the early nineties while working as a controls Engineer in the thick film industry. They were used to move one or more squeegees across the screen of screen printing machines, because of their very smooth, consistent motion. yawood April 28, 2016 10:27 AM Makes sense in this era of computer control. It will be interesting to see where this goes. HerbertShallcross April 28, 2016 12:35 PM "- eke more power from a more compact package..." Koenigsegg makes high performance supercars. Do they use this idea on their own cars? 17% improvement in power to weight, if it was achievable would seem ideal. Naoki Watanabe- While electric motors can be much more efficient than internal combustion engines, as a complete system, when battery efficiency is considered, they are not. Batteries are, at present the limiting factor on electric cars. Show me an electric family sedan that carries four comfortably with a little luggage that you can take from a 1/4 energy storage state to a complete energy storage state in five minutes that can then travel non-stop for 350 miles, and in five minutes reach it's full energy storage potential again. I can, and have done this several times in my Volvo S60, a gasoline sedan with comparable range to Camrys and the like. Current electric cars are limited to about 250 miles, and even that range is reduced by cold weather and accessory use. Try to recharge those batteries in five minutes when still hot from high discharge and they would almost certainly be damaged. Electric cars may be the future. They still operate at a disadvantage in the present. Lewis M. Dickens III April 28, 2016 12:37 PM It would be interesting to know if it were quieter.Sounds like less is more to me.Maybe the wind engine guys might wake up and realize that more blades pull more power. Too much lemming crap going on in this field that refuses to discuss and post efficiencies. Huge missing integrity for that covert omission. telocity April 28, 2016 12:58 PM It would be nice to see this tech in a direct injection diesel. Maybe we can finally achieve in a production car what Craig Henderson with partner Bill Green achieved in 1984, a 100+mpg car. http://jalopnik.com/5628752/from-canada-to-mexico-on-one-tank-of-diesel CraigDaliessio April 28, 2016 01:09 PM A: Electric sucks. B: Ducati has been doing a variant of this for years. The Desmodromadic valvetrain uses very similar technology but it's entirely mechanical. Primecordial April 28, 2016 02:20 PM Nice video graphics of the exploded engine - there are some really talented people out there BobAlgie April 28, 2016 02:51 PM This is definitely a step in the right direction. However, the main problem still lies in the fact that there are valve springs involved. This is the weak link in any overhead valve engine. Back in 1968 I came up with a design that involved cylindrical, timed fuel release "valve" trains. We did not have sophisticated computer design at the time. It was only on paper and in my head. By completely eliminating the valve train, downsizing, the internal moving mass of the valve train, and increasing the system efficiency, we could then move on to the other reciprocating parts of the engine such as crankshafts and connecting rods. Of course, the biggest problem is the unit cost. As long as we can cheaply produce engines with conventional valve trains manufacturers will continue to be wooed by high profits rather than efficient and practical technology. The 12 to 17 percent fuel efficiency estimates are ridiculously low for a "new" technology. This new design also appears to be accomplished by using a large number of small parts, We need to eliminate moving parts, decrease reciprocating mass, increase volumetric efficiency, and design engines around new fuel sources. VincentBrennan April 28, 2016 03:06 PM Nothing totally new here even for engines. The original Renault F! cars from the 1980s turbo era with gigantic horse power out of small engines had a very similar valve system. Seemed like a good idea then and with today's much enhanced computer controlled systems it makes good sense. There is quie a bit of parasitic friction power loss from turning a cam and forcing those springs open. This system is free of that.