Motor or engine. Again, please....

[Johnnywiffer]

R&TIndianapolisSpeedway

Straighten me out, again, please.

John

[DEEPNHOCK]

Age old conundrum....

(To me...)
Motors are electric.
Engines are steam or gas or diesel (or propane, or LNG, or hydrogen)

But is sounds equally strange to say 'Enginecycle', but completely normal to say 'motorboat'.
I am comfortable to say 'rocket engines', but just as comfortable to say 'rocket motors'.

Now, what should Ion propulsion be called? An Ion engine? An Ion motor?
Semantics abound....

[Gunslinger]

The terms are used interchangeably, but my understanding is than an engine runs from its own internal mechanical actions (internal combustion) and is self-sustaining until its fuel is cut off where a motor runs from an outside source (electricity, whether from a storage battery or power plant). Since all require some fuel...gasoline, diesel, propane, electricity, compressed air, turning a generator by hand, etc., an argument can be made all require an outside source of power and thus all are motors of some sort.

That's pretty simplistic but it is the way it's been explained to me. Like so many correct uses of words they've been corrupted over time to mean any number of things.

[pdrnec]

Sort of like a Stromberg 'backdraft' carb <<g>>

[dictator27]

The terms are used interchangeably, but my understanding is than an engine runs from its own internal mechanical actions (internal combustion) and is self-sustaining until its fuel is cut off where a motor runs from an outside source (electricity, whether from a storage battery or power plant). Since all require some fuel...gasoline, diesel, propane, electricity, compressed air, turning a generator by hand, etc., an argument can be made all require an outside source of power and thus all are motors of some sort.

That's pretty simplistic but it is the way it's been explained to me. Like so many correct uses of words they've been corrupted over time to mean any number of things.

Steam engines use an external combustion source.

Terry

[Greenstude]

Deepnhock has the answer. However, we commonly say "motorist", not 'engineer"; and "motor vehicle". This probably arose in the pre-1910 era when electric motors were much easier to use, and looked more promising, than gasoline or steam engines in a car. Even Studebaker's first cars were electric.

Until someone invents a compact, light-weight battery which operates at highway speeds for 1,000+ km, and recharges in the same time required to refill a gasoline/Diesel fuel tank, vehicles with engines will continue to be the standard in my opinion.

[kmac530]

Semantics. To be exactly correct, engine would be combustion style motor that creates the "drive" or power. A motor is something that is "driven" and transfers that energy into propulsion.
BUT, all of that said, the terms have become virtually interchangeable since both create the propulsion for a vehicle.

It may have been incorrect when someone first started using "motor" for a internal combustion "engine", but now it is the accepted NORM. So it is not wrong from that stand point.

It has been beat to death here....language changes. It always has, and always will change. Meanings and pronunciations change over time. Example, hyphenated words like don't or can't were considered unacceptable 100 years ago...now they are the norm. Lite and nite instead of light and night....very normal these days and often accepted.

It will get worse too now that texting on small devices has become so popular. It is a pain to type a long word on a cell phone, so almost everyone abbreviates or spells out the word phonetically...like using "wud" instead of "would" or "enuf" instead of "enough".

Another example would be common pronunciation that gets butchered by some and then that becomes an accepted "alternate pronunciation". Case in point Nuclear and Nucular, or Nucyeular...thank you Mr. Bush. The best part about him is that he inspired a great album from Green Day called "Ameican Idiot".
Aluminum and Aluminium....tons of examples of language changes.

[pdrnec]

Until someone invents a compact, light-weight battery which operates at highway speeds for 1,000+ km, and recharges in the same time required to refill a gasoline/Diesel fuel tank, vehicles with engines will continue to be the standard in my opinion.

I'd have to respectfully disagree with that - I think it will be necessary for people to adapt their needs to the most efficient available technology, taking into account cost and convenience as well as impact on the environment. As Einstein so aptly put it:
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

The vast majority of people can function effectively with a vehicle that has a range of under 100 miles on an overnight charge. Those who cannot can fall back on dinosaur juice as long as it lasts. Ultimately renewable energy is the only rational solution.
Technology is advancing faster than many would believe - imagine the effect on the power grid if this was implemented in every city:

http://inhabitat.com/the-netherlands-to-pave-roads-with-solaroad-solar-panels/

[Gunslinger]

Another example would be common pronunciation that gets butchered by some and then that becomes an accepted "alternate pronunciation". Case in point Nuclear and Nucular, or Nucyeular...thank you Mr. Bush. The best part about him is that he inspired a great album from Green Day called "Ameican Idiot".
Aluminum and Aluminium....tons of examples of language changes.

Eisenhower and LBJ also pronounced "nuclear" as "nucular"...it's pretty much a speech style from that part of the country regardless of education. Why don't they get blamed for mispronouncing the word?

A lot depends on the education system you were educated by as well. My Dad was taught in school to write the letter "y" backwards and that's how he did for all his life. In elementary school we were taught to spell "hello" as "hell-o" and today" as "to-day".

We need to be more understanding about why some speak colloquialisms that differ from ours.

[comatus]

hyphenated words like don't or can't were considered unacceptable 100 years ago...now they are the norm. Lite and nite instead of light and night

Semantics is the name of a science, and you may not use it as a curse word.

"Nite," as it turns out, was much more popular a century ago than it is now, because it was championed by T.Roosevelt, who fancied himself a reformer of language as well as everything else. When ink was expensive, typesetters loved it. Now there are no proofs or proofreaders, but just because the guy who sets up the net didn't show up does not mean you are playing tennis without it. You're just knocking your balls around.

"Don't" is not hyphenated. That is an apostrophe. The construction is a contraction. No, that hasn't "changed." You got it wrong.

[kmac530]

Comatus,
You are correct I got it wrong on the apostrophy/hyphen comment. And I was not there a hundred years ago so again, I guess I was wrong...but I do KNOW for a fact that at least when I was a kid 40 years ago, at least where I was from, my teachers would not allow words like can't and don't. Now they are accepted as normal. I believe you missed the entire point of my post by focusing on my gramatical or typographical or whatever mis-speakings. My point was, that language changes....period. Ever read Shakespear, or the King James version of the Bible....not how we speak now days.

Different. Changed. Words that were applied to one application have often began to get applied to other things over time. I do not mean to be rude, but I give words like "bitch", "dork", and "dude" as examples of words that actually mean something very different that how they are commonly used now days.
Once something becomes common useage in language, even if it was not technically accurate originally, it is the accepted use now. Engine and motor have BECOME interchangeable even if not technically accurate. Not going to adversely affect anyones life either way...so who cares.
jmho....oops there is another one. Bash me away.

[Marie Mac]

Keep it simple...engine is a machine (mechanical contrivance) that produces force & motion...motor is a small & powerful engine...I conclude they are for the most part interchangeable...

[DEEPNHOCK]

I like mayonaisse

[rockinhawk]

I say it don't matter none, as long as folks know what you're talking 'bout.

[kmac530]

An engine "generates" power so is it also a Generator?
It "converts" fuel into heat and energy, so is it a Convertor?
Where does "powerplant fall into play....is that an electrical generating station or is that a big motor in your hot rod?

My head is spinning.....lol