Crossflow vs. Looper

TWO STROKE DEFINED
The two-stroke engine completes its power cycle in only one crankshaft revolution with two strokes of the piston. There are no valves, camshafts, springs chains, etc. so the engine is much less complex and lighter. Instead of valves There are a series of strategically located transfer ports - intake and exhaust, cut into the sides of the cylinder wall. The ports are on opposite sides of the cylinder. The transfer ports are opened and closed by the up and down movement of the piston. To accomplish a complete power cycle both sides of the piston are used; consequently several events occur simultaneously during each stroke. They are:

Up Stroke - Intake and Compression:
On the up stroke the top side of the piston is compressing an air/fuel mixture in the cylinder. At the same time the BOTTOM side of the piston pulls another fresh charge of air/fuel mixture into the crankcase thru a one way valve called a reed valve. Near the top of the stroke the compressed air/fuel above the piston is ignited by the spark plug and begins to burn. The rapidly burning fuel expands and begins forcing the piston down.

Down Stroke - Power and Exhaust
On the down"power"stroke the piston is forced towards the crankcase reducing its volume and creating a positive pressure. As it continues downward travel it starts first to uncover the exhaust ports. Exhaust gas begins to rush out of the cylinder. Then the intake ports are uncovered. The fresh air/fuel charge in the crankcase is forced into the cylinder and continues to push the remaining exhaust gases out.

The 2 stroke process of purging exhaust gases from the cylinder and filling it with a fresh air/fuel charge is called scavenging. Two stroke engines use 2 different scavenging methods, cross-scavenging and loop scavenging. Both differing designs have particular advantages.

TWO STROKE CROSS-FLOW
two stroke cross-scavenged engines can be identified by the irregular shape of the top of the piston called a deflector. This deflector directs the incoming air/fuel up, towards the top of the cylinder. This creates a wall or column of fresh mix that sweeps across the cylinder towards the exhaust ports. As the column advances it pushes the spent exhaust gases out of the exhaust ports.
See Picture Below Hope this makes since to all and helps all.

cross.jpg


TWO STROKE LOOPER
Pistons in loop scavenged engines are generally near flat. They do not rely on deflectors to aim the fuel/air mix, rather they have shaped intake ports and combustion chambers to control the scavenging of the cylinder. Several intake ports are aimed upwards and arranged such that their combined streams flow upward and then LOOP down toward the exhaust ports.

Cross-Flow engines are better performing at idle and low speed. All older motors of any horsepower are of this design. Until the late 60's it was not economical to try to produce this design in quantity at a reasonable cost.

Looper engines, although having poorer idling characteristics are more fuel efficient and perform better at higher RPM's than crossflow as they have lighter pistons. This lowers the strain on the connecting rods, bearings and crankshaft. OMC created the first US production looper in 1968 with the 3 cylinder 55HP.

loop.jpg
 
Skools, great tutorial, thanks. Having on offline converstaion earlier, I realized that I don't understand exactly how the DFI's are lubing the bottom end. Care to shed any light on that?

Airslot
 
LOOPERS tend to pull better up high and get slightly better milage. CROSSFLOWS pull good off idle but run out up high. OMC increased the bore on the loopers for 88 due to the lack of bottom end grunt(no replacement for displacement). OMC offered the 1.6L(crossflow) sea-drive all the way up to 89 that I've seen. 1.6L and 2.4L and 2.6L were crossflows, 1.8L 2L 2.7L 3L 3.6L and 4L SEA-DRIVES were loopers.

I personally can attest to the power potential that a small-bore looper can make though. The 19' COBRA bowrider in my sigg has run 53 MPH and was still climbing(but chine walking severely and no steering control). The same boat with a 150HP SUZUKI super six BASS pro edition ran 53 as well, and they were the same engine as a 225HP SUZUKI with a lower gear ratio foot.
 
well you can't base a hull on HP the hull design will only go so fast you could put twin 300's on a boat and it still run the same as the same hull with a single 250. all is based on hull design
 
Skools Out said:
well you can't base a hull on HP the hull design will only go so fast you could put twin 300's on a boat and it still run the same as the same hull with a single 250. all is based on hull design
Yep, but my hull with the 125 FORCE it origanally had would only pull off 35-38 with a light load on a good day. I can consistently pull off high 40's with my current prop with all sorts of loads(propped it down to keep from getting up to the uncontrollable speeds).
 
no i was saying all hulls have a top speed an once they reach their top speed you can add all you want but that's all the hull will go. now they may be faster than we want to go but they all have a top speed
 
I was just pointing out that these old loopers can RUN when they're right. Many people right off the JOHNNY-RUDES and say they're slow, but I've talked to many people and found that the small-bore loopers will get it, but there hard to get them right.
 
I fought my 85 for almost 2 years before I got it right. The previous owner gave up on it when he couldn't get it right. Ended up going with a set of early 87 carbs and running the timing at 19 degrees. Jetted the mains up 2 sizes and played with the idle and mid-range air bleeds to keep it from loading up and stalling on accel. It runs like a scalded dog now, but when I first got it it was a train wreck.
 
Now there is some good info. Thanks guys for shedding light on all this.

Speaking of 1968 55hp omc's, thats what I learned to waterski behind when I was a kid. That motor would scream, 23 mph on a 14 ft Westwind!!!!

Ah the good old days.
 
Randle,
I also learned to waterski ... pulled by a '69 era 55hp 3cyl with the electric, push-button shift. Brings back good memories. I seem to remember that motor (on an 18' fiberglass) pulling a skier at 25 mph.
 
I learned to ski behind a 15' Cacicraft trihull with a 1970ish 60hp evinrude with the pushbutton electric shift. There was also an old wooden 15'er with a white merc, but I don't know any specs on the merc.

Airslot
 
Hey Skools,
I'd enjoy learning more about a hulls top speed limitation.   I can understand there exists "a law of diminishing returns" ..... where you keep adding horsepower and not getting as much mph in return.   But I cant imagine a hull has a finite limit.  If I strap a 5000 lb thrust jet engine onto a V20 (assuming that was possible) ... its gotta move faster than one with a 250hp (or 2 250hp) outboards on it.  No ?  
 
lol yeah little different story there, at that point you most likely will join the Darwin Club lol. The coast guard buys 18ft Parkers with twin 300's on them to make you scared i guess cause the engineer said they are 3 mph slower than the same boat with a single 250 lol.
 
Back
Top