What about the Wankel Engine??

[megotmea7]

they would of beat them if the suppliers of the engines had of gotten them some earlier

Killed by a stinking rotary.

sounds to me like they were killed by a lack of... lmao

[-datsun 1600-]

Some of Australias fastest imports are rotarys ,joe signorellis s6 rx7 7.584-400m and rx3 pacman 7.66-400m you cant tell me these are slow times but it could be just of the light weight and strong chasis

[automotion]

sounds to me like they were killed by a lack of... lmao

It seems many of you in this thread are interested in 'rotaries', but there is not enough information available about them. Two participents are 'on the money', many are just 'grabbing for straws'. It seems, you all want to find out more? Keep it factual; cut out the crappy language.
I read every post & reply.
Some history first: NSU was not killed by the Wankel, but by changing times; they did not dissappaer - Audi bought the company. Many companies bought licenses from NSU for one million dollars at the time, just to be allowed to research and experiment with this potentially promising type of power plant.
Another point: Ford is alowing, even assisting, Mazda to come up with this new generation of Wankel rotary, because they see the potential.
I have worked with Wankels in R&D ...

[crisis]

Some history first: NSU was not killed by the Wankel, but by changing times; they did not dissappaer - Audi bought the company. Many companies bought licenses from NSU for one million dollars at the time, just to be allowed to research and experiment with this potentially promising type of power plant.

Where are they all then?

[Bear87G]

Everyone seems to be having a good old debate and some great points have been put up. I have not read through all of the posts but only skimmed threw so bear with me on my response.

The wankel rotary has many great feature first and formost in my mind (being an F1 fan) is the fact that there are no recipricating masses. Meanign in english that there are no weight parts that have to stop and change direction which cause huge problems in high revs and reliability. In a pistons engine the piston goes up stops comes down stop and goes up again and so on....but in a rotary engine the rotor only moves in one direction so the ability for high end revs on the motor is almost limitless. Through my eyes I would put the rotary in Formula 1 if I could it would probably rev higher than any of the piston engines that participate now as well.

In the end the torque of the engine is there and the engine can be tuned to have torque in different places. Torque values in a rotary are not the same as in a piston engine with just a slight lesser amount for the rotary which is not terrible. Reliability on the engine is rock solid considering in my garage I have a Wankel with major problems yet after 500,000 miles.

The engines have yet to be perfected as they are only being advanced upon my one company and are still some what of a gasoline hog. Emmisions and fuel mileage have been on the rise and continue to get better with the new Mazda rotary the Renesis. When you only have one company using this wonderful motor and still surviving and making it popular how fast do you expect technology advances to be. There are over 100 car manufacturerer's around the world working on advancing the piston engine while one is suposed to do what over 100 can do for a different engine. This speculation shows that to say the rotary will never become a super motor as the piston motor has become is ignorance. The rotary is a wonderful design and I myself as an engineer am working on an new model for the rotary that will not appear for some time due to the complication and preciseness of the experiment.

All I will tell you in the rotor may in a few years have between 5-10 firing processes per rotor revolution. You should be able to figure out from there what I am trying to do and if you acheive this goal before myself congrats.
bear

[Evil Ewok]

The wankel is an amazing design, and an amazing engine. The only things (yes plural) I find wrong with it is that there should have been more though on how to cool one of these thermal plants. The other is, of course, oil pressure. Why the 12a's dump oil....I do not know. But other than those, the engine is amazing. Sure fire power, and torque, rev happy, amazing response, great for drift, speed, anything that you want to do. That's why these engines are always winning races. Or were at least, until the upset at mazda. Le Mans, 24 hours of bathurst, JGTC, 12 hours of sebring (believe) and so many other races that have been one by the commitment of a good idea that runs strong.

[Matra et Alpine]

..
Through my eyes I would put the rotary in Formula 1 if I could it would probably rev higher than any of the piston engines that participate now as well.

Efficient combustion of petrol-based engines is increased the more compressed whilst still a vapour the fule/air combo can be. That is achieved in F1 and GP bikes by HIGH compression. Wankel's can NEVER have high compression because we lack the basic materials to have seals at the tips.
Remember that a 4-stroke will ahve multiple seals(rings) per piston. Each with a different purpose and make-up. VERY difficult in Wankel.

Reliability on the engine is rock solid considering in my garage I have a Wankel with major problems yet after 500,000 miles.

What loads has that engine been under ?
That is NOT on for curent Wankel's run at high loads.
Sports cars run engines at high loads.
2-strokers can go on for ever as well if they're run at low loads !!

This speculation shows that to say the rotary will never become a super motor as the piston motor has become is ignorance.

Sorry but to sugest that beacuse Mazda retain it is because only they know it is superior is a rather odd conclusion. It's more marketing than performance !
Decades ago the MOST ADVANCED engine users played with rotary and walked away. Bike engineers have been producing the highest power/weight ratios and endurance for decades.

The rotary is a wonderful design and I myself as an engineer am working on an new model for the rotary that will not appear for some time due to the complication and preciseness of the experiment.

The Wqnkel concept is an ELEGANT design.
Unfortunately it has drawbacks.
I'm sure the advocates of the Watts steam engine held out against the IC engine 100 years ago :-)

All I will tell you in the rotor may in a few years have between 5-10 firing processes per rotor revolution. You should be able to figure out from there what I am trying to do and if you acheive this goal before myself congrats.
bear

As an engineer and experienced tuner, I'm intrigued at how you will create between 5-10 chambers on a single rotor with reasonable efficiency. What compression ratio for fule/air will their be. How much energy per combusion and what losses with trying to seal 5-10 chambers !
Attempts in the past have proposed chamging chamber shape AS the rotor turns. These failed at early investigation at the realisation that it all added weight and compromised combustion chamber integrity.

Check out the NAGATO cycle engine which was patented in 2001 which handled the 'rotation' in a novel manner - by 'fixing' the seals and having the rotor 'wobble' ( best way I can describe it ) to get the combusiont cycle to run.

Want to go off-line for a more private chat to see if the idea is sound and if lessons from earlier attempts can be passed on. ( Not sure where friends are now, but could maybe find them ) ????

PS: I always felt the equivalency calculation FIA and ACU used was unfair and they should have done it on the physical size of the engine EXTERIOR. There was an advantage 20 years ago when we didnt' have the experience in the exotic materials in todays best engines.

[Matra et Alpine]

Just checked and Dave Renegar has had his patent granted in 2002 for the flexible vanes.
It's about the best way of achieving what you're trying to do, but I still don't know that we have the 'smart' materials needed to make the flexi-vane work.

But hey, HE got the patent - congrats !!

[fpv_gtho]

That's why these engines are always winning races. Or were at least, until the upset at mazda. Le Mans, 24 hours of bathurst, JGTC, 12 hours of sebring (believe) and so many other races that have been one by the commitment of a good idea that runs strong.

that was the bathurst 12 hour race which it won 3 years straight

[NAZCA C2]

The rotary engine is a great design. It only has 2 moving parts. I wonder if it could be used in a motorcycle since it is a compact design.

[crisis]

The rotary engine is a great design. It only has 2 moving parts. I wonder if it could be used in a motorcycle since it is a compact design.

It was but I cant remember which one. Quite some time ago.

[crisis]

The engines have yet to be perfected as they are only being advanced upon my one company and are still some what of a gasoline hog. Emmisions and fuel mileage have been on the rise and continue to get better with the new Mazda rotary the Renesis. When you only have one company using this wonderful motor and still surviving and making it popular how fast do you expect technology advances to be. There are over 100 car manufacturerer's around the world working on advancing the piston engine while one is suposed to do what over 100 can do for a different engine. This speculation shows that to say the rotary will never become a super motor as the piston motor has become is ignorance.

The fact that no one else has adopted it tells me that they dont think it is worth spending money on. If it were truly outstanding and could offer performance, economy or anything else that a conventional motor can , Im sure Mazda would not be the only ones persuing it. Mazda are not the most conventional manufacturer and realise they have a captive market for any rotary they produce. There are a lot of rotary lovers out there. But MAzda only produce one car with it. If Mazda truley belived in the design was the answer to everything they would surely use it in more of, if not all their cars.

[Matra et Alpine]

The rotary engine is a great design. It only has 2 moving parts. I wonder if it could be used in a motorcycle since it is a compact design.

Yep, well remembered, the great NORTON.

There's a good history covering 1969-1987 of the engine and bike development at the Norton Owneres Club. Select 'History' -> 'Rotary' at http://www.noc.co.uk/

The race bikes history 87-94 and specs are at http://www.jpsnorton.com/racebikes.asp and the thing to notice is how SMALL the engine is. It was a 588cc - engine equivalency rules dictated that. But it was TINY compared to the 4-strokers and even smaller then the 2s.


I remember it from the 92 Isle of Man TT where a young Steve Hislop took it to 2nd in the Senior and 1st in the TT. Great sound - here's a video clip of the day
http://www.jpsnorton.com/videoclips/hisloptt.ram
( dont' blame the camera man, on the IoM you sit within inches of the bikes passing at anything from 110 to 170 mph. STILL the best motor spectacle in the world - roll on June )

[Matra et Alpine]

The rotary engine is a great design. It only has 2 moving parts. I wonder if it could be used in a motorcycle since it is a compact design.

Unfortuntely, it MUST have water cooling to ensure plug temparatures so unfortunately it loses on p/w as most bikes don't need water cooling until they're 1000+ cc.
Bike manufacturers have the moving mass of a 4-stroker down so low they can rev them to 20000+ with VERY high efficiency, so it's not got a large advantage. And you want to see the size of the Honda V5. The complete engine AND gearbox fits into a plastic shopping bag and the reports say that big-H could get 250BHP out of it if they want to.

[dupscadi]

IN the early 70's, Johnson made a snowmoblie with a Wankel. It's engine was a small displacement. I don't know power ratings or displacment, but it was a compact design and could be fitted to a small bike if one wanted to waste that kind of time. I'll see if I can find out how big the engine is, it is in the back yard anyway.