EcoMotors' OPOC is not closer to "reality production" than the mentioned pattakon engines.
There are several difficult technical issues (problems) EcoMotors has yet to address (to solve) before production.
For instance, think about OPOC's lubrication.
The OPOC is a conventional two-stroke engine (actually, it is a pair of Junkers-Doxford
sharing the same crankshaft for the sake of the vibration-free operation).
Take the near to the crankshaft exhaust piston of the OPOC.
Its skirt opens and closes the exhaust ports; it also thrust heavily onto the hot cylinder wall above the exhaust ports (there is where the torque is generated); plenty of oil is necessary around the exhaust ports (to avoid scuffing) increasing the specific lube consumption (gr / kWh) and the emissions.
Take also the EcoMotors variable capacity (deactivation of OPOC modules) and compare it to the variable capacity mentioned at http://www.pattakon....takonPatPOC.htm
On the other hand think how close - technically speaking - to production is the PatMar engine of pattakon.
With the proper equipment PatMar could get into production in a few weeks.
EcoMotors has several famous investors (like Bill Gates); all doors are wide open.
For several years EcoMotors has the necessary funds to start producing OPOC engines (did you see one?).
EcoMotors has not a good product to produce and they know it.
The OPOC engine is not yet good enough to compete the existing Diesel Engines.
If I were a big investor of EcoMotors I would seriously consider asking for a license to built PatPortLess engines instead of OPOC engines (they are so similar – take alone the distant piston of the OPOC - and at the same time they are so different).