Alternative engines

PGkelly · 03-13-2001, 04:42 PM

granted, the rotary doesn't make very much torque at low rpm's. But i like the idea of pure rotary motion, and i think it should be pursued. I also think that with increased development, the rotary could really improve by leaps and bounds. also, when you think about it, one rotor does the work of three pistons. And I've read reviews for Ducati's that have said their electrics are rather unreliable, and FI systems on some of the bikes would take more than a minute to warm up. but they sound good, and look good, and have a whole lot of torque, and handle well, and go fast. BTW, a little while ago i read something about a turbine-powered motorcycle that makes 415 ft-lbs of torque, which is constant through the rev range. it had a maximum engine speed of 50,000rpm's and its transmission had one forward gear and neutral. but back to the RX-7, it is one of the winningest cars in GT history. which says a lot. and you seem to be ignoring the obvious, that the RX-7 is 1.3L. you can't get very much torque out of 1.3L. in the 70's Mazda made an engine called the 21A, that was built to go into a 'vette/jag competitor. it had a single chamber displacement of 1050cc, giving it a total displacement of 2.1L. preliminary tests showed 180hp, but a production version could have had 200+ production N/A. they also toyed with 3 and 4 rotor designs, but ran into problems with the eccentric shaft. Like they say, there is no replacement for displacement (except money). Both of these engines were killed by the oil sheiks during the oil crisis. as for the oil problem, older rotaries (L10A, L10B) had a carburetor that mixed oil with gas a-la 2 stroke. this was to lubricate the trochoid housing. the issue of decreasd performance in high-mileage engines comes from the apex seals. they are made of (at least in gen. 2 rex's) cast iron and are 2mm thick. they wear, sometimes as much as 1mm over 80,000 miles. all you need to do to repair performance is replace the seals. relatively simple, the apex seals are the same as the piston ring seals in a recipro engine.

p.s. my RX-7 will spin trochoids around your mustang

p.p.s. i don't really have an RX-7

------------------
If it ain't broke, make it go faster

[This message has been edited by PGkelly (edited 03-14-2001).]

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Best Crate Engines?	B2r3y	Windsor Power	6	03-28-2003 05:09 PM
Post Pics Of Your Engines And Rides	Onerare91LX	Blue Oval Lounge	29	07-24-2002 11:38 AM
Stupid Question?	SilverGT02	Modular Madness	4	07-06-2002 11:01 AM
anyone heard of les shepperd who sells engines from beech grove IN.	stalker95	Windsor Power	0	11-12-2001 10:56 PM
high or low compression engines	Mustangboy89	Windsor Power	6	01-26-2001 03:04 PM

03-13-2001, 04:42 PM	#1
PGkelly Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 274	granted, the rotary doesn't make very much torque at low rpm's. But i like the idea of pure rotary motion, and i think it should be pursued. I also think that with increased development, the rotary could really improve by leaps and bounds. also, when you think about it, one rotor does the work of three pistons. And I've read reviews for Ducati's that have said their electrics are rather unreliable, and FI systems on some of the bikes would take more than a minute to warm up. but they sound good, and look good, and have a whole lot of torque, and handle well, and go fast. BTW, a little while ago i read something about a turbine-powered motorcycle that makes 415 ft-lbs of torque, which is constant through the rev range. it had a maximum engine speed of 50,000rpm's and its transmission had one forward gear and neutral. but back to the RX-7, it is one of the winningest cars in GT history. which says a lot. and you seem to be ignoring the obvious, that the RX-7 is 1.3L. you can't get very much torque out of 1.3L. in the 70's Mazda made an engine called the 21A, that was built to go into a 'vette/jag competitor. it had a single chamber displacement of 1050cc, giving it a total displacement of 2.1L. preliminary tests showed 180hp, but a production version could have had 200+ production N/A. they also toyed with 3 and 4 rotor designs, but ran into problems with the eccentric shaft. Like they say, there is no replacement for displacement (except money). Both of these engines were killed by the oil sheiks during the oil crisis. as for the oil problem, older rotaries (L10A, L10B) had a carburetor that mixed oil with gas a-la 2 stroke. this was to lubricate the trochoid housing. the issue of decreasd performance in high-mileage engines comes from the apex seals. they are made of (at least in gen. 2 rex's) cast iron and are 2mm thick. they wear, sometimes as much as 1mm over 80,000 miles. all you need to do to repair performance is replace the seals. relatively simple, the apex seals are the same as the piston ring seals in a recipro engine. p.s. my RX-7 will spin trochoids around your mustang p.p.s. i don't really have an RX-7 ------------------ If it ain't broke, make it go faster [This message has been edited by PGkelly (edited 03-14-2001).]