Find out about the inventer of the internal combusion engine, here:

http://www.brighthub.com/engineering/mechanical/articles/77502.aspx

Of course, the engine design would be different if the engine was supposed to run on diesel. I’m sure they don’t claim one engine design would be able to use both fuels.

The OPOC engine is not as compact as the pattakon OPRE engine;

The OPOC engine is not as simple and cheap as the OPRE engine (the OPOC is based on an external scavenging pump);

The OPOC engine, having a basic unit comprising four pistons and two cylinders, cannot be as smooth and vibration-free as the simpler/smaller OPRE engine that has a basic unit comprising two pistons and one cylinder. For application with divided load (like electric generators, like out-board twin propeller engines, like the portable flyer that is based on OPRE’s power-to-weight-ratio and on OPRE’s abolute vibration free operation) the single cylinder OPRE is perfectly balanced, better than the Wankel Rotary Engine.
In divided-load applications the two crankshafts is a significant advantage.

The OPOC engine has a narrow rev range (long connecting rods, tuned external scavenging pump etc) while the OPRE engine has a wide rev range because of its architecture, because of its built-in volumetric piston-type scavenging pumps and because it provides some 40% additional time to the fuel to get prepared and burned in-time, i.e. more efficiently than the current direct injection Diesel.

And there are more. Take a look at pattakon OPRE engine at http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonOPRE.htm

The OPOC engine is an alternative for the conventional engine, yet there are other alternatives, too.

The OPOC engine is not as compact as the pattakon OPRE engine;

The OPOC engine is not as simple and cheap as the OPRE engine (the OPOC is based on an external scavenging pump);

The OPOC engine, having a basic unit comprising four pistons and two cylinders, cannot be as smooth and vibration-free as the simpler/smaller OPRE engine that has a basic unit comprising two pistons and one cylinder. For application with divided load (like electric generators, like out-board twin propeller engines, like the portable flyer that is based on OPRE’s power-to-weight-ratio and on OPRE’s abolute vibration free operation) the single cylinder OPRE is perfectly balanced, better than the Wankel Rotary Engine.
In divided-load applications the two crankshafts is a significant advantage.

The OPOC engine has a narrow rev range (long connecting rods, tuned external scavenging pump etc) while the OPRE engine has a wide rev range because of its architecture, because of its built-in volumetric piston-type scavenging pumps and because it provides some 40% additional time to the fuel to get prepared and burned in-time, i.e. more efficiently than the current direct injection Diesel.

And there are more. Take a look at pattakon OPRE engine at http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonOPRE.htm

The OPOC engine is an alternative for the conventional engine, yet there are other alternatives, too.

This is exactly right. Anybody who thinks that we’re just going to flip a switch and make oil consumption go away is nuts. The path ahead is to keep pushing technologies to get our average consumption down to about 100 MPG or so. Technologies like this new engine give us a path to do that.

Of course, if we pursue this very vigorously, then there could be an oil SURPLUS on the world market, and that will LOWER the price of gasoline. The only course that will actually work is one that makes us less dependent on oil at the same time the oil supply drops post peak. Of course, politically we can have a little influence over this by making it more difficult for companies to drill offshore.

But the irony in all of this is that we actually need gas prices to remain high in order to create the economic opportunity for alternate technologies. If we ever find ourselves with a vast surplus of clean energy, it can be turned into hydrogen and oxidized in engines such as this one with zero emissions.