|
OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
In article m,
says... On 8/3/2012 4:23 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 05:29:58 +0000 (UTC), John Doe wrote: I'm looking at gas/petrol stabilizers, Sea Foam and STA-BIL. On their FAQ page, both of them refer to a "2-stroke" engine as a "2-cycle" engine. Uhg. It's only semantics, but you would think that those manufacturers would know the difference between a "stroke" and a "cycle". Per Merriam-Webster... stroke: the movement in either direction of a mechanical part (as a piston) having a reciprocating motion; also : the distance of such movement cycle: a course or series of events or operations that recur regularly and usually lead back to the starting point "2-stroke" "4-stroke" engine About 3,270,000 results "2-cycle" "4-cycle" engine About 427,000 results (0.48 seconds) Using "cycle" is not a big deal for casual speakers, but besides being less popular, it's semantical nonsense. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-stroke_cycle I believe that using "4-stroke cycle" is more correct than either 4-stroke or 4-cycle. It takes 4 strokes to make a cycle. Until you get to Wankel engines, in which case I don't think there is anything stroking. DTA Sure there is. It's a four stroke. Does it take 2 revolutions to complete a cycle? If you want to be technical it's an Otto cycle, which is the same as a four-stroke piston engine. A lot of people think that there's something fundamentally different about a Wankel--there isn't, it just uses a weirdly shaped piston. |
OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
In article , says...
On 8/3/2012 10:09 PM, Eisboch wrote: "X ` Man" wrote in message ... On 8/3/12 5:51 PM, JustWait wrote: On 8/3/2012 4:47 PM, BAR wrote: In article , lid says... David T. Ashley dashley gmail.com wrote: John Doe wrote: I'm looking at gas/petrol stabilizers, Sea Foam and STA-BIL. On their FAQ page, both of them refer to a "2-stroke" engine as a "2-cycle" engine. Uhg. It's only semantics, but you would think that those manufacturers would know the difference between a "stroke" and a "cycle". Per Merriam-Webster... stroke: the movement in either direction of a mechanical part (as a piston) having a reciprocating motion; also : the distance of such movement cycle: a course or series of events or operations that recur regularly and usually lead back to the starting point "2-stroke" "4-stroke" engine About 3,270,000 results "2-cycle" "4-cycle" engine About 427,000 results (0.48 seconds) Using "cycle" is not a big deal for casual speakers, but besides being less popular, it's semantical nonsense. I believe that using "4-stroke cycle" is more correct than either 4-stroke or 4-cycle. It takes 4 strokes to make a cycle. I'm not talking about technical correctness, I'm referring to a significant semantical blunder. What matters is the number of strokes per cycle. The number of cycles is irrelevant. At least you aren't calling them motors. "like" Motor is an acceptable synonym for engine. -------------------------------------------- "Happy Motoring" Indianapolis MOTOR Speedway:) Hummm, didn't know they ran electric cars the) There sure is a lot you don't know..... http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/4/prweb9433282.htm http://www.evgrandprix.org/ http://www.indianapolismotorspeedway...entinfo/41451/ |
OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
On 8/4/2012 7:59 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On 8/3/2012 10:09 PM, Eisboch wrote: "X ` Man" wrote in message ... On 8/3/12 5:51 PM, JustWait wrote: On 8/3/2012 4:47 PM, BAR wrote: In article , lid says... David T. Ashley dashley gmail.com wrote: John Doe wrote: I'm looking at gas/petrol stabilizers, Sea Foam and STA-BIL. On their FAQ page, both of them refer to a "2-stroke" engine as a "2-cycle" engine. Uhg. It's only semantics, but you would think that those manufacturers would know the difference between a "stroke" and a "cycle". Per Merriam-Webster... stroke: the movement in either direction of a mechanical part (as a piston) having a reciprocating motion; also : the distance of such movement cycle: a course or series of events or operations that recur regularly and usually lead back to the starting point "2-stroke" "4-stroke" engine About 3,270,000 results "2-cycle" "4-cycle" engine About 427,000 results (0.48 seconds) Using "cycle" is not a big deal for casual speakers, but besides being less popular, it's semantical nonsense. I believe that using "4-stroke cycle" is more correct than either 4-stroke or 4-cycle. It takes 4 strokes to make a cycle. I'm not talking about technical correctness, I'm referring to a significant semantical blunder. What matters is the number of strokes per cycle. The number of cycles is irrelevant. At least you aren't calling them motors. "like" Motor is an acceptable synonym for engine. -------------------------------------------- "Happy Motoring" Indianapolis MOTOR Speedway:) Hummm, didn't know they ran electric cars the) There sure is a lot you don't know..... http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/4/prweb9433282.htm http://www.evgrandprix.org/ http://www.indianapolismotorspeedway...entinfo/41451/ Well, I just noticed this is a crossthreaded troll... and you and harry are either name shifting or my filters are failing again so I am gonna' take a look, but I am not gonna' read your links, cause I really don't care what you think... Plonk again... |
OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
On 8/4/12 7:30 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In article m, says... On 8/3/2012 6:39 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 8/3/12 5:51 PM, JustWait wrote: On 8/3/2012 4:47 PM, BAR wrote: In article , lid says... David T. Ashley dashley gmail.com wrote: John Doe wrote: I'm looking at gas/petrol stabilizers, Sea Foam and STA-BIL. On their FAQ page, both of them refer to a "2-stroke" engine as a "2-cycle" engine. Uhg. It's only semantics, but you would think that those manufacturers would know the difference between a "stroke" and a "cycle". Per Merriam-Webster... stroke: the movement in either direction of a mechanical part (as a piston) having a reciprocating motion; also : the distance of such movement cycle: a course or series of events or operations that recur regularly and usually lead back to the starting point "2-stroke" "4-stroke" engine About 3,270,000 results "2-cycle" "4-cycle" engine About 427,000 results (0.48 seconds) Using "cycle" is not a big deal for casual speakers, but besides being less popular, it's semantical nonsense. I believe that using "4-stroke cycle" is more correct than either 4-stroke or 4-cycle. It takes 4 strokes to make a cycle. I'm not talking about technical correctness, I'm referring to a significant semantical blunder. What matters is the number of strokes per cycle. The number of cycles is irrelevant. At least you aren't calling them motors. "like" Motor is an acceptable synonym for engine. Maybe to you it is. I think you're going to make little progress convincing motorcyclists that the thing that powers their motorcycles is not a motor. There are too many objects and entities that use "engine" and "motor" as synonyms for motor not to be an acceptable term for engine and vice versa. General Motors, Ford Motor Company, outboard motor, Bavarian Motor Works, et cetera. -- 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"
In article , says...
On 8/4/2012 7:59 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 8/3/2012 10:09 PM, Eisboch wrote: "X ` Man" wrote in message ... On 8/3/12 5:51 PM, JustWait wrote: On 8/3/2012 4:47 PM, BAR wrote: In article , lid says... David T. Ashley dashley gmail.com wrote: John Doe wrote: I'm looking at gas/petrol stabilizers, Sea Foam and STA-BIL. On their FAQ page, both of them refer to a "2-stroke" engine as a "2-cycle" engine. Uhg. It's only semantics, but you would think that those manufacturers would know the difference between a "stroke" and a "cycle". Per Merriam-Webster... stroke: the movement in either direction of a mechanical part (as a piston) having a reciprocating motion; also : the distance of such movement cycle: a course or series of events or operations that recur regularly and usually lead back to the starting point "2-stroke" "4-stroke" engine About 3,270,000 results "2-cycle" "4-cycle" engine About 427,000 results (0.48 seconds) Using "cycle" is not a big deal for casual speakers, but besides being less popular, it's semantical nonsense. I believe that using "4-stroke cycle" is more correct than either 4-stroke or 4-cycle. It takes 4 strokes to make a cycle. I'm not talking about technical correctness, I'm referring to a significant semantical blunder. What matters is the number of strokes per cycle. The number of cycles is irrelevant. At least you aren't calling them motors. "like" Motor is an acceptable synonym for engine. -------------------------------------------- "Happy Motoring" Indianapolis MOTOR Speedway:) Hummm, didn't know they ran electric cars the) There sure is a lot you don't know..... http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/4/prweb9433282.htm http://www.evgrandprix.org/ http://www.indianapolismotorspeedway...entinfo/41451/ Well, I just noticed this is a crossthreaded troll... and you and harry are either name shifting or my filters are failing again so I am gonna' take a look, but I am not gonna' read your links, cause I really don't care what you think... Plonk again... I've not changed anything, dummy. And those links aren't what *I* "think", they are links to actual events that have taken place at Indy, where YOU said you didn't know they ran electric cars. |
OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
On 8/4/12 9:04 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On 8/4/2012 7:59 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 8/3/2012 10:09 PM, Eisboch wrote: "X ` Man" wrote in message ... On 8/3/12 5:51 PM, JustWait wrote: On 8/3/2012 4:47 PM, BAR wrote: In article , lid says... David T. Ashley dashley gmail.com wrote: John Doe wrote: I'm looking at gas/petrol stabilizers, Sea Foam and STA-BIL. On their FAQ page, both of them refer to a "2-stroke" engine as a "2-cycle" engine. Uhg. It's only semantics, but you would think that those manufacturers would know the difference between a "stroke" and a "cycle". Per Merriam-Webster... stroke: the movement in either direction of a mechanical part (as a piston) having a reciprocating motion; also : the distance of such movement cycle: a course or series of events or operations that recur regularly and usually lead back to the starting point "2-stroke" "4-stroke" engine About 3,270,000 results "2-cycle" "4-cycle" engine About 427,000 results (0.48 seconds) Using "cycle" is not a big deal for casual speakers, but besides being less popular, it's semantical nonsense. I believe that using "4-stroke cycle" is more correct than either 4-stroke or 4-cycle. It takes 4 strokes to make a cycle. I'm not talking about technical correctness, I'm referring to a significant semantical blunder. What matters is the number of strokes per cycle. The number of cycles is irrelevant. At least you aren't calling them motors. "like" Motor is an acceptable synonym for engine. -------------------------------------------- "Happy Motoring" Indianapolis MOTOR Speedway:) Hummm, didn't know they ran electric cars the) There sure is a lot you don't know..... http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/4/prweb9433282.htm http://www.evgrandprix.org/ http://www.indianapolismotorspeedway...entinfo/41451/ Well, I just noticed this is a crossthreaded troll... and you and harry are either name shifting or my filters are failing again so I am gonna' take a look, but I am not gonna' read your links, cause I really don't care what you think... Plonk again... I've not changed anything, dummy. And those links aren't what *I* "think", they are links to actual events that have taken place at Indy, where YOU said you didn't know they ran electric cars. Let's not get the weekend off to a bad start by having to watch Scotty explode again, eh? -- 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"
J. Clarke wrote:
I think you're going to make little progress convincing motorcyclists that the thing that powers their motorcycles is not a motor. G Nicely put. -- Kawasaki GTR1000 Honda CB750 Four, 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 8/4/2012 8:43 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 8/4/12 7:30 AM, J. Clarke wrote: In article m, says... On 8/3/2012 6:39 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 8/3/12 5:51 PM, JustWait wrote: On 8/3/2012 4:47 PM, BAR wrote: In article , lid says... David T. Ashley dashley gmail.com wrote: John Doe wrote: I'm looking at gas/petrol stabilizers, Sea Foam and STA-BIL. On their FAQ page, both of them refer to a "2-stroke" engine as a "2-cycle" engine. Uhg. It's only semantics, but you would think that those manufacturers would know the difference between a "stroke" and a "cycle". Per Merriam-Webster... stroke: the movement in either direction of a mechanical part (as a piston) having a reciprocating motion; also : the distance of such movement cycle: a course or series of events or operations that recur regularly and usually lead back to the starting point "2-stroke" "4-stroke" engine About 3,270,000 results "2-cycle" "4-cycle" engine About 427,000 results (0.48 seconds) Using "cycle" is not a big deal for casual speakers, but besides being less popular, it's semantical nonsense. I believe that using "4-stroke cycle" is more correct than either 4-stroke or 4-cycle. It takes 4 strokes to make a cycle. I'm not talking about technical correctness, I'm referring to a significant semantical blunder. What matters is the number of strokes per cycle. The number of cycles is irrelevant. At least you aren't calling them motors. "like" Motor is an acceptable synonym for engine. Maybe to you it is. I think you're going to make little progress convincing motorcyclists that the thing that powers their motorcycles is not a motor. There are too many objects and entities that use "engine" and "motor" as synonyms for motor not to be an acceptable term for engine and vice versa. General Motors, Ford Motor Company, outboard motor, Bavarian Motor Works, et cetera. Acceptable is not a synonym for correct. |
OT Semantics of "2-cycle" versus "2-stroke"
On 8/4/2012 9:05 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 8/4/12 9:04 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 8/4/2012 7:59 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 8/3/2012 10:09 PM, Eisboch wrote: "X ` Man" wrote in message ... On 8/3/12 5:51 PM, JustWait wrote: On 8/3/2012 4:47 PM, BAR wrote: In article , lid says... David T. Ashley dashley gmail.com wrote: John Doe wrote: I'm looking at gas/petrol stabilizers, Sea Foam and STA-BIL. On their FAQ page, both of them refer to a "2-stroke" engine as a "2-cycle" engine. Uhg. It's only semantics, but you would think that those manufacturers would know the difference between a "stroke" and a "cycle". Per Merriam-Webster... stroke: the movement in either direction of a mechanical part (as a piston) having a reciprocating motion; also : the distance of such movement cycle: a course or series of events or operations that recur regularly and usually lead back to the starting point "2-stroke" "4-stroke" engine About 3,270,000 results "2-cycle" "4-cycle" engine About 427,000 results (0.48 seconds) Using "cycle" is not a big deal for casual speakers, but besides being less popular, it's semantical nonsense. I believe that using "4-stroke cycle" is more correct than either 4-stroke or 4-cycle. It takes 4 strokes to make a cycle. I'm not talking about technical correctness, I'm referring to a significant semantical blunder. What matters is the number of strokes per cycle. The number of cycles is irrelevant. At least you aren't calling them motors. "like" Motor is an acceptable synonym for engine. -------------------------------------------- "Happy Motoring" Indianapolis MOTOR Speedway:) Hummm, didn't know they ran electric cars the) There sure is a lot you don't know..... http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/4/prweb9433282.htm http://www.evgrandprix.org/ http://www.indianapolismotorspeedway...entinfo/41451/ Well, I just noticed this is a crossthreaded troll... and you and harry are either name shifting or my filters are failing again so I am gonna' take a look, but I am not gonna' read your links, cause I really don't care what you think... Plonk again... I've not changed anything, dummy. And those links aren't what *I* "think", they are links to actual events that have taken place at Indy, where YOU said you didn't know they ran electric cars. Let's not get the weekend off to a bad start by having to watch Scotty explode again, eh? You have 4 choices A prevent the explosion B cause the explosion C watch the explosion D ignore the explosion My money is on you choosing B and C |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:19 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com