A work of pure genius! - Brilliant "Revetec" Engine

[revetec]

Originally Posted by Revetec Raptor

This is simply semantics when it suits Revetec ! (a bit like a wheel stand, sounds good - means nothing)
Drop the conspiracy theory by blaming others on the inability of Revetec to market itself professionally.

So you are critisizing one video on our website? So you think reaching 207g/(kW-h) in independent testing means nothing? There is no conspiracy theory other than in your own mind. It takes time to market the technology in the marketplace. (If you are referring to public marketing, I have already given two interviews.) We are doing well and when it comes time to announce it, it will be on the NSXA first, not a forum. This is the law.

Originally Posted by Revetec Raptor

Many many companies announce what their business strategies are to the public.

They don't announce their business strategies on a forum. The information you refer to is on our website.

Originally Posted by Revetec Raptor

Pouting to this forum that you are only spending a few hours setting up the heads & 15 minutes to set up the new piston configurations, just prior to spending $50`000 for Orbital to test the engine, makes Revetec appear incompetent & brain dead ...to say the least.

I couldn't find my comments on this forum you refer to. We had designed and manufactured parts waiting for the next strip down. These parts we ready, even before the test day. They took about 3 weeks to design and simulate stress, another 3 weeks to manufacture, and a week for hardening. We had a 3 week window from the test day to the supply of the engine to Orbital. We decided to perform the modification within this window to reduce the need for two test configurations (saving money). We spent about a week on the modification and build. We ran the engine in the trike for 15 minutes to make sure there were no issues, then crated the engine for shipping to Orbital. The modification paid off as our inhouse testing prior was 253g/(kW-h) and we achieved 207g/(kW-h) at Orbital.

Originally Posted by Revetec Raptor

On the website we see old photos of a Revetec engine being fitted into a vehicle. I/ we have introduced hundreds of people to the Revetec technology and have found that most people are not stupid to understanding technology. The two most common questions are, "is it like a Rotary engine" or "has it been tested in a vehicle" !
So, why have we not heard of any engine reliability feedback ? An engine in a trike doing wheel stands is spin and bravado. Here is a revolutionary idea how about you show it simply being run in a vehicle ?
Also, why have all the previous engines not been tested for reliability

If the people you have introduced to Revetec can understand our technology, why would they make a comment like "is it like a Rotary engine"? And if they have seen the trike videos, why would they make a comment like "has it been tested in a vehicle"? The test day lasted for quite a few hours driving the engine quite hard. I'm not going to post over an hour of video footage, I posted highlights. We have always promoted the low down torque as a feature of our engine's characteristic. Other than accelerating hard with little throttle and lifting the front wheel, how else could you demonstrate this in a video, rather than physically driving it?

We have performed hundreds of hours of dyno testing of our engines.

Other than one video, we demonstrated it driving on the road (two of the videos in our gallery) The wheelstanding video gets 10 times more hits than any other video on our website.

Originally Posted by Revetec Raptor

What you say to a shareholder should be public, unless you are talking about verbal marketing (pie in the sky conversations) that have no foundation on current reality !
We have always been sceptical to the fact we don't get any detailed minutes nor video (we see a video in the photos) from any previous shareholders meetings. It is not sufficient to satisfy the demands and obligations required by revetec to their shareholders. Inadequate one line spin, that leave us thinking, why is it more convenient to hold shareholders meetings on the Goldcoast?

The shareholder meetings are what the term descibes - for shareholders. You must be a Shareholder to attend, and all shareholders are welcome to listen and give comments or ask questions. If you are a shareholder and want a copy of my speech at the meeting because you can't attend, then you can email me requesting a copy. Information is given at the meeting including strategies and events (good or bad) to provide an overview of where we sit. Non-shareholders are not privy to this information.

The General Meetings must be held within a certain distance from the company's place of business. I have been asked this question many times, and I am still trying to get a Sydney meeting. If I can't get an AGM in Sydney this year, I will try to hold a follow up meeting in Sydney if I can. Believe me, I have tried to do this previously, and I will try again.

A final comment: Again you have tried to use this technical forum for issues other than technical information and discussion. If you have any issues with Revetec other than technical ones, please contact me anytime. I am usually available to take calls on 0433 160643 or via email at brad@revetec.com

[revetec]

Originally Posted by CHOOK

Hi Brad

Interesting news today with the government giving Toyota $35M for building hybrid cars in Australia.
It reminded me of another thread early last year.

Can you shed any more light on the status of this project? I'm sure you'd love to get a piece of that $500M pie to help out.

I have given an interview to the media regarding this about a week ago. I will post the article to our website and this forum (if ok with Ultimatecarpage admin?)

Originally Posted by CHOOK

Good luck with your marketing strategy and negotiations with the auto companies now that the independant testing has been completed.

Thanks, we are starting to make ground with the car companies, now that the oil price is rising.

Originally Posted by CHOOK

This kind of information is confidential and any leakage of your strategies to competitors could no doubt jeopodise any deal being signed. I'm sure your releasing of Revetec's marketing strategy and progress on any potential deals will be made in due course and through the correct channels; not a public forum. Pity a very small minority of shareholders don't understand that you can't disclose certain information unless it is released through the correct channels and with right timing.

This is true. I will state again that when dealing with any potential client, the first thing signed is a non-disclosure document. We make every effort to disclose as much information as we can. Most information we have given in the past has been written by the other party's legal department. This is how it is, and I wish I could say more.

[revetec]

Originally Posted by wagga

Time is money and the directors have too much time, so why will they not move aside and give someone else a go? I am sure out of the 1600+ share holders we would find managers who would work and bring fresh ideas into our company ITS TIME FOR A CHANGE so please keep the share holders more informed with what is going on with the motor and the marketing.

WANTED 3 directors must be able to do as the 3 monkies do see nothing say nothing hear nothing pay is excellent plus benefits good jet ski provided t.a.p

Too much time? I usually get to work at 5-6am and work until around 6-7pm (13 hours a day) Now we are moving through the corporate marketing stage, we are looking for Directors with experience in what is now needed. We have talked to a couple of candidates and evaluating the impact of remuneration for the right people. Further details regarding this will be brought up at the AGM.

BTW: My stress outlet was Jetskiing (my only hobbie at the time) but I no longer do this or own a jetski as I have had no time to do it. (For about two years now). If you think I'm a monkey, so be it. I can't please everyone. What I have done is produce about 30% more efficiency from an engine which is what I said from the start (in independent testing) which is a bit more than a monkey can do.

Thanks for the recognition in doing so. (a sarcastic comment)

[revetec]

Originally Posted by 3yearsharehold

All this said, I have voiced my opinion on Revetec management skills before.
Great mechanics and tool makers do not necessarily have any management and marketing skill.

We have had many meetings with major car companies in the past. All conversations have ended up at them requesting independent BSFC figures to prove the technology. We have now done this.

No extra corporate marketing has been needed until we had completed this phase, so all efforts over the last 2 years has been R&D to produce significantly better and compelling figures. There is a clear proceedure for getting it into the market. In the transition period into marketing we are using several consultants. Once we reach a reasonable stage of marketing we will be ready to bring the correct persons for the board positions required. We have already started looking at several people for suitability for these positions. We will discuss this at the AGM, and hopefully have things arranged for a vote at that meeting.

Originally Posted by 3yearsharehold

It is absolutely ridiculous to have only two people working on and building the most fuel efficient petrol motor in the world.

Well it is ridiculous, and I would have loved more funding and help to get the job done quicker. Firstly it would take more time and a far greater budget to find the correct persons or company, and train them up to speed. Paul and myself took 6 months to design and build the X4v2 engine which achieved 207g/(kW-h) A lot of research, comittment and long hours was taken to achieve such a thing. Does anyone think it was an easy job? Well the two of us achieved what our previous seven man team couldn't, in a quarter of the time frame it took them to build the 1,350cc RHL4 engine. It dioesn't happen from sitting on our behinds. Do some poeple really think we sit around doing nothing? We achieved a better figure of 207g/(kW-h) at Orbital with 0.25% of the budget that a normal car company spends to achieve a BSFC figure of 260g/(kW-h). It would be great for our company to have a $300million budget to design and test an engine.

Originally Posted by 3yearsharehold

The reliance on Orbital to gain info on new head design plus fuel injection is ludricious.

I don't really think you know what Orbital actually does these days. They do exactly what you described for a great deal of the world's top car companies.

Originally Posted by 3yearsharehold

They should have a minimum of 10 teams working on different designs plus fuels to suit different markets.

Let's look at this senario: 10 teams with let's say 3 people per team for a yearly budget. Let's say that these people are highly skilled. The labour rate would be at least $100 an hour. Each person would cost about $200,000, so three would be about $600,000. Times ten teams is $6million. Build for ten prototype (fully machined) engines would be around $1million. Independent test costs per week $50,000. Let's say 4 tests per engine is $2 million.

Total yearly budget $9million. Usually this takes two years to complete, so we need about $18million for the project as you describe. Government funding (if sucessful is $1 for $1) would mean we would need to have $9million to do this as you've described. We haven't even factored in a facility to carry this work out in.

Originally Posted by 3yearsharehold

Revetec have a golden opportunity to hound federal government for as much of the 1/2 billion dollars as possible.
The Victorian government gave Toyota 20 million in lurks and perks, so Revetec should ask all states/ territories for funding.

We are currently hounding.

[revetec]

Originally Posted by 3yearsharehold

BTW have you see this before Brad Harold Caminez: Internal Combustion Engine ~ US Patent # 1,714,847

Yes, I've seen this before (about ten years ago). Without a counter-rotation cam, the application angle from the bearing to the cam produces high side thrusts, thus reduces reliability.

[CHOOK]

Originally Posted by Kozy

What is all this about? This obviously makes sense to those in the know, but for the rest of us?

Kozy - I hope all subsequent posts have now shown you and everyone else who read this thread who actually is in the know and who think they are in the know and those who think they know anything about running a public company but who actually know SFA about anything.

Thanks Brad for your updates. It all sounds promising and we patiently await the publishing of the interviews and any other news coming up. I don't know any other company director who spends his time answering questions in a public forum let alone coming back after being harrassed to the point of reading defamatory statements made against him. I hope you do have a shareholder meeting one day in Sydney and I hope some of these gutless clowns show up and make the same claims at the meeting. But somehow I doubt they would be manly enough.

Cheers

[Matra et Alpine]

Thasnk for the info Brad.

Please, as we recommended before, don't give fuel to the idiots who ask you confidential info or make comments.
Ignore them adn we'll clean the dross out as we go.

Best wishes for the on-going tasks.

[revetec]

I just recieved an email that said the article I did an interview for will come out next week. I know it will be in the Courier Mail (Brisbane) but I don't know who else may pick it up. So now everyone has notice.

Cheers
Brad

[3yearsharehold]

"We have had many meetings with major car companies in the past. All conversations have ended up at them requesting independent BSFC figures to prove the technology. We have now done this."

All I have spoken to are asking about BSFC figures and RELIABILITY.

" Paul and myself took 6 months to design and build the X4v2 engine which achieved 207g/(kW-h) A lot of research, comittment and long hours was taken to achieve such a thing. Does anyone think it was an easy job?"

I'm sure you both have worked your ass off .

"I don't really think you know what Orbital actually does these days. They do exactly what you described for a great deal of the world's top car companies."

Well I know a little in what's going on , when it comes to companies I own shares in , besides revetec.

"Total yearly budget $9million. Usually this takes two years to complete, so we need about $18million for the project as you describe. Government funding (if successful is $1 for $1) would mean we would need to have $9million to do this as you've described. We haven't even factored in a facility to carry this work out in."

You need to apply presser to get any where with governments , the media media media is the only way to go, dont pussie around , let the public know your AUSTRALIAN product is worlds best .
You should know the federal government is great at back flips , as fare as the $1 for $1 is concerned .
If ford gets a chunk and revetec dont I will contact the media myself.
So $20 million only 4% , ask for $100mil at least!

"We are currently hounding."
Good Good , As Fare as facilities, the states + territory have empty buildings every where .

[3yearsharehold]

BTW the Courier Mails just a local free rag , isn't it.

[3yearsharehold]

China Aviation Industry Corp could be interested in you technology

Finance, Business and Company News - Yahoo!7

[3yearsharehold]

Radio Interview 2UE Sydney ....RUDD & LAWS
Australian Labor Party : Green Car Innovation Fund

Rudd: We’re not picking technologies here. That’s what the private sector does best. But we want to say, “Here’s $500 million from government. You get into that on a three dollar for one dollar basis as industry, and you get a slice of that in terms of your innovation”.

[revetec]

Originally Posted by 3yearsharehold

BTW the Courier Mails just a local free rag , isn't it.

No it's not, it's Brisbane's main paper. The article is written by a NewsLimited reporter.

[revetec]

Originally Posted by 3yearsharehold

Radio Interview 2UE Sydney ....RUDD & LAWS
Australian Labor Party : Green Car Innovation Fund

Rudd: We’re not picking technologies here. That’s what the private sector does best. But we want to say, “Here’s $500 million from government. You get into that on a three dollar for one dollar basis as industry, and you get a slice of that in terms of your innovation”.

Thanks for the link, very interesting. I haven't seen in the Media a mention of the 3-1 before, it's always described as a "Gift".

We've been working on getting an audience with Rudd. Hopefully we'll get to meet with him soon.

Cheers
Brad

[revetec]

Originally Posted by 3yearsharehold

China Aviation Industry Corp could be interested in you technology

Finance, Business and Company News - Yahoo!7

But a turboprop is a shaft drive jet, so not our market.



Cheers