I was thinking it would be nice to have streetports and peripheral ports on the same engine. There would be a seperate throttle body for each port (6) and there would be some type of oil pressure solenoid that would open or close the peripherals. The hardest part would be locating the "valve" that will open the ports because I would think that it would be best to make it as close to the inner part of the housing as possible. Do you think if you made it on the outside of the housing, and thus when it was closed had a "pocket" of air, that would mess up something. I think it might compress some air into that pocket as the volume decreases, however then it would just come out in the next chamber. Any and all insight appreciated.

 

how would you fit 6 throttle bodies???

 

i dont know, they could be small, doesnt really matter about the 6 tho i was just rambling

focus!!!

 

So only a few rotors would work at once? Sounds like a waste to me. Could you imagine all of the throttle cables?

 

no theres still 2 rotors, its like vtec, at low rpm it uses the street port, at high it uses the street port and the peripheral port

 

that's what 5/6 ports are for... mazda came up with the idea way before honda did.

it's the exact same thing. bigger cam at higher RPM.

 

yea it is, but the peripheral would be way more effective.... I just want feedback on implementing this.

 

it's been done before I think... no idea how.

 

People have been doing this with bridgeports for a long time (not including the ITB idea, obviously).

 

Oh i c, your thread is title "VTEC 4 Rotors" which made me think there would be 4 rotors, nevermind.

 

what have they been doing with bridgeports? you mean the aux bridgeport thing?
just now thought about it, i guess that is kinda the same thing....I still think the full peripheral would give enough advantages over that to make it worth it tho.


srry bout that bdoty

 

Little Kid: "OOOOooo please tell us your opinions and thoughts on making an "auxiliary" peripheral port."

:P

 

have a look at powervalve designs for 2 strokes... same concept.

 

what in the heck are you thinking?? and how long do you think this beast of a motor would last?

 

Has anyone made a peripheral port motor that retained the side ports?

The manifold would be hard to make, but why isn't it feasible?

 

it is scoot makes them. and theres no reason it wouldnt last....

 

Peripheral port motors don't make it very far into life before they pop. Probably 40k if you are lucky IF

If peri ports were good for the engine life mazda would have kept the design but they did not and instead went to side ports and now with the new renesis all ports are on the side and not on the periphery.

Peri ports are good for power yes this is true but you need to build a very strong motors to be able to go up to the RPMs where it makes power and I hear this is about 10k RPMs.


This kind of engine would not last at all maybe a couple of years at most. It would wast so much gas you would not beleive it. It would be so loud your ears would bleed if you drove agressively a lot. you will in no way be able to run cats because it will be pointless I am not sure but I think they would clog after the first couple of times you used the peri port. Not to mention your exhaust would be designed for only one of the port styles so you would lose power down low or up high any way you look at it.

Basically just leave this idea with the 8 rotor school bus and let it die out man.

Santiago

PS and also you would be spending a ton of money probably like 6-10k dollars.

 

I was under the impression that they did that for emissions and efficiency reasons.

 

Well yes that is also a factor. But it has always been my understanding that peri ports will not last long. I am no authority though. Please ask someone with the proper experience for a good oppinion on this. I am just repeating what I have read on some websites and what most people agree on this forum. If you read up on the early rotary engines in the cosmo(I think) they were peri port designed and would fail withing 50k miles or so. I read this in one of the books Wankel7 lent me.

Santiago

 

the 787b was a 4 rotor peripheral port engine. and from my understanding it was one of the most reliable cars in the race. Who knows if he's talking about for street use or the track??

 

Yes but compared to our cars it probably would not last half as long as most of our 13B's

 

I believe it was the most 'cost effective' way of reducing emissions...One of the key reasons the FD was discontinued was because the emissions standards were getting tighter, especially in california.

as for efficiency, i remember reading somewhere that it reduces the amount of blowby gases that find their way back into the intake in the housing.

 

umm...FD sales went straight down the toilet...i am sure if it was like a super hot selling car they would have fixed the emissions problems with it and kept it alive.

 

we talked to koby and he says the 787b motor could have gone another 24hours, keep in mind after 24 hours everything was still in spec. the peri ports basically have little effect on reliability by themselves, the reason they live short lives is because the available housings have port timing for max power at super high revs, its totally possible to build a pp motor with lower rpm timing, nsu did it. and also until recently you HAD to use the carbon apex seals which dont last as long as the iron ones do

mike