Naturally Aspirated Performance Forum Discussion of naturally-aspirated rotary performance. No Power Adders, only pure rotary power! From the "12A" to the "RENESIS" and beyond.

Calculating optimum CFM for rotaries

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-01-13, 01:20 PM
  #1  
Wankeled 86
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
dr.occa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
TX Calculating optimum CFM for rotaries

I've been going over some path in determining various carb options for the rotary motors. I'm very familiar with the tried and true IDAs (running one on my 12A), DCOEs & 44PHH (running a pair on my 4AG) and the 4 barrels: what I'm scratching my head about is do I use the cc displacement at the taxed 720° rotation or the actual full 1080° rotation in calculating optimum CFM?

Here are the answers for my 12A using both displacement numbers (in cubic inches):

((8000[rpm] x 140[rounded up from 139.866421]) / 3456) X .85 = 275.46CFM


((8000 x 210) / 3456) X .85 = 413.2CFM

Which should it be - the higher one?
Old 03-01-13, 08:16 PM
  #2  
Wankeled 86
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
dr.occa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
doh! uh, path should be math. :/
Old 03-02-13, 06:33 AM
  #3  
Senior Member

iTrader: (1)
 
Pettersen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 604
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
Maby this helps:

https://www.rx7club.com/general-rota...length-199788/
Old 03-02-13, 07:22 AM
  #4  
Old [Sch|F]ool

 
peejay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Posts: 12,504
Received 414 Likes on 295 Posts
Unless you're using a plenum manifold, ignore CFM and just go by the traditional throttle plate/venturi size method.

Like, a "traditional" single 45DCOE with 36mm chokes drives pretty much just like a stock Nikki, so for performance use you will want larger than that. Two of them is just about right... for a street port

My bridge port has what looks like a huge carb on it - Holley 750 - but in reality it's pretty small, the throttle plates are only 42mm in diameter. Difference is independent runners vs. having a plenum.
Old 03-04-13, 09:45 AM
  #5  
Wankeled 86
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
dr.occa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I was planning on taking a factory intake and opening it up from the 4 independent ports that the nikki carb sat right on top of to a single open port. Then fab up a flange with 2 runners to a pair of 40mm flatslide carbs hovering over the motor: similar to how a single dcoe style side draught would mount.
Old 03-04-13, 03:15 PM
  #6  
Moderator

iTrader: (3)
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,792
Received 2,574 Likes on 1,830 Posts
Originally Posted by dr.occa
I was planning on taking a factory intake and opening it up from the 4 independent ports that the nikki carb sat right on top of to a single open port. Then fab up a flange with 2 runners to a pair of 40mm flatslide carbs hovering over the motor: similar to how a single dcoe style side draught would mount.
so if you've picked the hardware, why bother with the maths?

i think if you measured the air going into the engine somewhere, like the air cleaner snorkel, or something, then you'd see something close to the 280 cfm number.

however the carb needs to be able to handle demands at the runner/plenum, and then carbs are rated at a different pressure drop as well, so even with a plenum, a 280cfm carb has a different pressure drop than a 280cfm engine.

this is why a going from a 330cfm stock carb to a 465cfm stock carb makes more power even when the engine only flows 280cfm.

if you like PJ's idea, the factory MFR p port engine runs a 43mm venturi, and the runner is also 43mm, coincidence?
Old 03-04-13, 10:49 PM
  #7  
Wankeled 86
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
dr.occa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by j9fd3s
so if you've picked the hardware, why bother with the maths?

i think if you measured the air going into the engine somewhere, like the air cleaner snorkel, or something, then you'd see something close to the 280 cfm number.

however the carb needs to be able to handle demands at the runner/plenum, and then carbs are rated at a different pressure drop as well, so even with a plenum, a 280cfm carb has a different pressure drop than a 280cfm engine.

this is why a going from a 330cfm stock carb to a 465cfm stock carb makes more power even when the engine only flows 280cfm.

if you like PJ's idea, the factory MFR p port engine runs a 43mm venturi, and the runner is also 43mm, coincidence?
What I'd like to know is what displacement number should be used to determine if the carbs I'd like to use will meet the demands.

I'm looking at a pair of Mikuni TM40(HS40) flatslide carbs. The inner venturi measures at 40mm.
Old 03-04-13, 11:59 PM
  #8  
Moderator

iTrader: (3)
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,792
Received 2,574 Likes on 1,830 Posts
Originally Posted by dr.occa
What I'd like to know is what displacement number should be used to determine if the carbs I'd like to use will meet the demands.

I'm looking at a pair of Mikuni TM40(HS40) flatslide carbs. The inner venturi measures at 40mm.
the displacement is fine, the part you're missing is that the flow thru the carb isn't constant, especially if its individual runner.

and secondly they rate carbs at a different pressure drop than you'd come up with in the formula, that is why a 465cfm carb isn't big enough for an engine that flows 280cfm.

those carbs are meant to be individual runner? if yes, i think they should be about right, maybe a little big
Old 03-05-13, 12:29 PM
  #9  
Old [Sch|F]ool

 
peejay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Posts: 12,504
Received 414 Likes on 295 Posts
If it's worth anything, 2x40 is the throttle plate diameters of the secondaries on a GSL-SE.

That's on a plenum, and they're way too small even for that.
Old 03-06-13, 09:26 AM
  #10  
Rallye RX7

iTrader: (11)
 
fidelity101's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: MI/CHI
Posts: 2,403
Received 92 Likes on 55 Posts
Originally Posted by dr.occa
I've been going over some path in determining various carb options for the rotary motors. I'm very familiar with the tried and true IDAs (running one on my 12A), DCOEs & 44PHH (running a pair on my 4AG) and the 4 barrels: what I'm scratching my head about is do I use the cc displacement at the taxed 720° rotation or the actual full 1080° rotation in calculating optimum CFM?

Here are the answers for my 12A using both displacement numbers (in cubic inches):

((8000[rpm] x 140[rounded up from 139.866421]) / 3456) X .85 = 275.46CFM


((8000 x 210) / 3456) X .85 = 413.2CFM

Which should it be - the higher one?
Well if you plan on getting rid of your 44phh, let me know. I only need 1 though.
Old 03-07-13, 09:34 PM
  #11  
Wankeled 86
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
dr.occa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hey I appreciate it y'all. I'm going to go ahead with the plans and also check in with some Cycle techs regarding a ballpark jetting for the carbs.

Again, much appreciated.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
datfast1
Old School and Other Rotary
18
06-20-19 10:53 PM
Jeff20B
1st Generation Specific (1979-1985)
73
09-16-18 07:16 PM
Under PSI
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
19
09-23-15 11:47 PM
datfast1
West RX-7 Forum
3
09-14-15 06:58 PM
andyvideopro
SE RX-7 Forum
0
09-05-15 06:56 PM



Quick Reply: Calculating optimum CFM for rotaries



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:19 AM.