skeptical tech from one will transfer to the other.
I used to work for a supercar company, our unit price made certain tech possible, not even thinkable for mass-auto.
That said, Hyundai recently developed their Continuously Variable Valve Duration system, which looks to solve changing valve duration more affordably in an all mechanical system.
BMW started putting them in motorcycles recently.
I have also seen a system that swaps between two different cam lobes entirely, offering two different cam profiles which can also vary valve duration and not just timing, but you're limited to two settings again, where these newer systems offer complete variability.
I might be misremembering, but I thought the new bmw system was dual cam - so exactly what you are suggesting, a trade off in the middle, but not vvt.
At any rate, variable cam systems in bikes have certainly been around since the early 80s with one of the 400c cbrs. They never really caught on but there are a bunch of variations.
[1]: https://www.autozine.org/technical_school/engine/vvt_4.htm
Honda had VTEC engines even back in the 80s, they physically choose between (three, if I recall correctly) cams.
These are not pure VVT systems, although they are not continuous like the Hyundai.
Mechanical cams are going to be more reliable than a pnuematic system.
maintenance is going to be much different than the other 99.9% of cars that use a timing belt/chain.
Skeptical that the incumbents like Bosch wouldn't have already tried this in some form they have the OEM EMS / fuel rail industry major market share.
As with all things mass-auto it's down to unit price economics vs how desperately do we need to put this in the cars to meet emissions regs.
This tech has a long history and research behind it.
IIRC, batteries get 13% cheaper per year, and that means price halves every 5 years or so. Right now 1 kWh of batteries (including BMS) costs about $100. So in 2025 one kWh of batteries will probably cost only $50.
Electric vehicles purchase price will simply be cheaper unless ICE vehicles get subsidies. At that point, for economical consideration you'll need to have pretty compelling reasons to buy an ICE vehicle.
Ultimately even gas station network will be decimated and gradually fade away.
Extreme environments, heavy machinery, etc.
ICE are never going away.
There will always be collectors and niche uses for ICE vehicles (e.g. backcountry 4x4) even if they get largely displaced by EV
No OEM is going to sink billions into R&D when they know everything will go electric in the near future.
So while you may be able to by an ICE Catapillar D10 or a John Deer Tractor or other machinery in 2050, I'd bet it's engine isn't any different to the 2020 version. Same goes for sports cars.
Flat panel yield was a problem in the 1990s, every screen had dead pixels. The magic of film grain and a Pentax SLR wasn't that special, kids today don't even know or care. The warm colours of old lightbulbs are forgotten too. Yet there was amazing analog engineering and precision mass manufacturing with these products.
ICE is going that way. The yield on the battery part is being solved, aka range/price. For performance the electric motor has no equal and things like regen are game changing. In time ICE will have specialist applications such as for creating electricity to charge a battery in remote locations, that will be about it. The tech innovation and investment has moved on to electric power trains. The horse has gone and it is too late to shut the gate. Nostalgia is not enough for ICE particularly when the baby boomers have moved on.
This is obviously not true; when I go to a hardware or home improvement store, there is all sorts of information on the color temperature and purported color reproduction quality of the light bulbs. And "warm white" LEDs that are supposed to imitate incandescent are ubiquitous.
If you look at the temperature variance across the planet, you'll realize that there's vast numbers of people for whom batteries are never going to be an option.