I usually don’t chime in on these debates and I don’t claim to be anything more then a shade-tree DIY’er. I haven’t seen anyone use this analogy (that I described below) to explain why reversing the pistons could add ‘something’ to the motor. This analogy is exaggerated, but it makes it easier to understand.
Compare it to using your 18” HF breaker bar to loosen lug nuts... Put the socket on a lug nut so the bar is clocked to the
11:30 position (looking at the wheel like a clock). Then attempt to break the lug nut loose by pushing straight down, (straight down in the key here) perpendicular to the ground on the handle. Your force is not being affectively applied in the arrangement, most of it is traveling straight down (through) the handle because the angle is so slight.
Now re-clock the bar on the lugnut to 9 o’clock and push straight down on the handle. In the arrangement you are applying the force at a 90° angle making the most use of the level effect.
Same idea with the piston/rod alignment. Reversing the offset give the rod some lead into more angle on the crank when peak combustion/work is being applied from the flame.
I think Richard will need to start the pull as low as possible to see the effect. I think the torque curve will see maybe 10lbs better in the 2,000-3,500 range and then be no different at the top end. Once everything is moving 5 or 6,000 that lead is going to be negligible.
This is why Tony’s says your more likely to feel it in a car and not see it on a graph…
Just my 3 cents…