OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 07:53:53 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:
SNIP
Acceptable is not a synonym for correct.

What is the technical definition of "motor?"



Seems to me that a definition from the Oxford English Dictionary is
"technical" enough to suffice:

"An agent or force that produces mechanical motion." All-encompassing.
Motor and engine frequently are synonyms. Among rational, intelligent
people, there is no need to split hairs between the two words when
referring to the assemblies that burn fuel to produce motive force for
cars, motorcycles, boats, et cetera.

BINGO!


In the present discussion, as has been cited, the devices are called
"motorcycles," not "enginecycles."

OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
 

Sarah Ehrett wrote:

In the simplest terms
Krausie : Motors are powered by electricity. Engines have internal
combustion.

I l*love it* when somebody pretends to be an absolute authority and
****s up on the most basic thing.

Here we go.

Steam engines. Internal combustion?

And you even referred to steam engines later on.


--
Honda CB400 Four Triumph Street Triple Ducati 800SS
Yamaha 660 Tenere Suzuki GN250, TS250ERx2
So many bikes, so little garage space....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
 

On 8/8/12 3:47 PM, The Older Gentleman wrote:
Sarah Ehrett wrote:

In the simplest terms
Krausie : Motors are powered by electricity. Engines have internal
combustion.

I l*love it* when somebody pretends to be an absolute authority and
****s up on the most basic thing.

Here we go.

Steam engines. Internal combustion?

And you even referred to steam engines later on.



It's just the stupid hair-splitting over nonsense that posters with
nothing to add engage in to have something to post.

--
I'm a liberal because the militant fundamentalist ignorant
science-denying religious xenophobic corporate oligarchy of modern
Republican conservatism just doesn't work for me or my country.

OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
 

Sarah Ehrett wrote:
Definition of motor
noun

a machine, especially one powered by electricity or internal combustion,
[...]
Motors are powered by electricity. Engines have internal combustion.

Sorry, I see a contradiction here.

This is a really puzzling discussion. To take the confusion further: in
German, everything is a motor. Dieselmotor is perfect, I never said
anything different to my Savage motor. If it's an electric motor, we say
that using a special term (Elektromotor). Hence the notion, that a motor
necessarily has an electric chord and a plug, sounds completely nuts to me.

"Engine" virtually doesn't exist in German. Of course there are terms
describing in general the propulsion method (e.g. "Antrieb", though with
bikes this may also mean "chain" or "belt" driven), but sometimes they lack
the "machine meaning" of engine.

I think, it's a matter of language and habits of using it, not a technical
necessity to draw the line just between "electric" and "internal
combustion".

Bob Myers:
Once again: Per current usage and etymology, all engines are motors.

I go with this.

Not all motors are engines.

But I don't quite understand this: "My shaver's engine is an electric
motor." That wrong? I can't quite think of a motor clearly not being an
engine, since a motor always drives some device, and this device has an
engine consisting of or including that motor. ;-)







Viele Grüße
Klaus

OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
 

Klaus Cammin wrote:
To take the confusion further: in German, everything is a motor.

That's also incorrect: we don't say "steam motor" but "steam machine", let
alone "steam engine", which doesn't exist.



Viele Grüße
Klaus

OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
 

Sarah Ehrett wrote:

Automobile. Motor vehicle?

Steam engines on tracks.

Steamshps on water.

Old Stanley Steamer on road.

Can't think of a steam-driven aeroplane, though.

I didn't. You're referring to the text in the cited article.

You referred to a reference.

Thanks for playing. Two posts, and you've been made to look a twonk in
both. I'll leave you now. Too easy.


--
Honda CB400 Four Triumph Street Triple Ducati 800SS
Yamaha 660 Tenere Suzuki GN250, TS250ERx2
So many bikes, so little garage space....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
 

On Aug 8, 11:46*am, Sarah Ehrett wrote:

LOL. *My dear Herr Krause, even rocket scientists debate the differences.

The first two paragraphs from the cited article.

"On the rare occasions we encounter one, we refer to a steam locomotive as
an engine, the same word that we give to the motive power of an aircraft.
But all electrical devices are driven by motors. In Britain at least, one’s
personal transport is a motor car (with compounds such as motor trade,
motor vehicle and motor sport), even though it’s always powered by an
engine. Small boats may have outboard motors and then are often called
motor boats.

However, the propulsion device of a rocket can be called either a rocket
motor or a rocket engine, and usage here seems not to have settled on one
or the other. The IEEE Spectrum magazine for June 1998 (which Ron Jeffries
has thoughtfully sent me) reports that the debate has been so intense, and
yet so inconclusive, that some rocket scientist has coined the phrase
whoosh generator as “the humorous, genderless, politically correct way to
refer to the propulsion device in a hobby rocket, thus avoiding the great
motor/engine debate”. "

(Yawn). This failed to wake me up, even *after* riding my
enginecycle to work on the engineway, this morning after staying up
late last night watching an enginesports telecast on TV.

OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
 

On Aug 9, 10:46*am, Sarah Ehrett wrote:


Thanks for playing. Two posts, and you've been made to look a twonk in
both. I'll leave you now. Too easy.

Pity the entire article went right over your head.

Run away....

Q: Do these lies make you feel better about yourself, little troll?

I ask because it's obvious that you're badly in need of *something*
and hope to find it on Usenet.

OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
 

On 8/9/12 5:48 PM, Twibil wrote:
On Aug 9, 10:46 am, Sarah Ehrett wrote:


Thanks for playing. Two posts, and you've been made to look a twonk in
both. I'll leave you now. Too easy.

Pity the entire article went right over your head.

Run away....

Q: Do these lies make you feel better about yourself, little troll?

I ask because it's obvious that you're badly in need of *something*
and hope to find it on Usenet.



Bingo. "Sarah" is a guy hiding behind a woman's name to post on usenet.

--
I'm a liberal because the militant fundamentalist ignorant
science-denying religious xenophobic corporate oligarchy of modern
Republican conservatism just doesn't work for me or my country.

OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
 

On Aug 9, 5:06*pm, Sarah Ehrett wrote:


Q: * Do these lies make you feel better about yourself, little troll?

I ask because it's obvious that you're badly in need of *something*
and hope to find it on Usenet.

Krausie brought his off topic political crap into my group.

Tsk! Lying again.

You don't own a group of any kind so it isn't "your" group.

But feel free to defend your fat friend.

And yet again: I didn't defend him, I don't know him from Adam, and
you don't know whether or not he's fat.

Life is so much easier when you devote a neuron or two to actual
thought before clicking on "send".