PPREs new RX4 project ;)
PPREs new RX4 project ;)
nuff said... crazy people down there 
more info:
http://www.facebook.com/PulsePerformance?ref=ts&sk=wall
more info:
http://www.facebook.com/PulsePerformance?ref=ts&sk=wall
Trending Topics
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,745
Likes: 0
From: North Bay, Ontario
I guess 72* phased rotors just wouldn't sound cool enough?
It would certainly cause some extra work in the engine management department. At least with 6-rotors you could phase 1-4, 2-5, 3-6 together, and with no-split timing it would be somewhat simpler/mainstream as far as ECU's.
I think they'll have three 180° pairs instead.
Think of who's building the shaft (Jeff Bruce?). Think of the way 4 rotor shafts with a 90° firing order are made = two 180° pairs with a 90° offset in the middle and two 45° offset counterweights at the ends only. So it's logical that this 6 rotor will have three 180° pairs. 60° firing order.
It's easy once you break it down for simplicity:
2 rotor = 180°
3 rotor = 120°
4 rotor = 90°
6 rotor = 60°
Rotor pairs of a 6 rotor (as I imagine they would be if only using two counterweights):
1 0°
2 180°
3 60°
4 240°
5 120°
6 300°
^notice each rotor pair is phased 180° apart from each other, then each pair is 120° off from the other pairs.
Leading firing order:
1 0°
3 60°
5 120°
2 180°
4 240°
6 300°
One ignition event every 60°. However you can cheat and only go every 120° by using three FC leading coils triggered like any wasted spark arrangement. This makes it more compatible with most ECUs. Rotors 1 and 2 will fire together. 3 and 4 together. 5 and 6 etc.
It'll run a lot like a 20B, but instead of having three single leading coils and three leading spark plugs firing at 120° intervals, you keep the 120° and swap the coils for dual output coils. That's how I'd do it. Pretty simple.
But the 5 rotor still intrigues me. I'd actually subscribe to a thead where someone's building a 5 rotor and it isn't a hoax.
Think of who's building the shaft (Jeff Bruce?). Think of the way 4 rotor shafts with a 90° firing order are made = two 180° pairs with a 90° offset in the middle and two 45° offset counterweights at the ends only. So it's logical that this 6 rotor will have three 180° pairs. 60° firing order.
It's easy once you break it down for simplicity:
2 rotor = 180°
3 rotor = 120°
4 rotor = 90°
6 rotor = 60°
Rotor pairs of a 6 rotor (as I imagine they would be if only using two counterweights):
1 0°
2 180°
3 60°
4 240°
5 120°
6 300°
^notice each rotor pair is phased 180° apart from each other, then each pair is 120° off from the other pairs.
Leading firing order:
1 0°
3 60°
5 120°
2 180°
4 240°
6 300°
One ignition event every 60°. However you can cheat and only go every 120° by using three FC leading coils triggered like any wasted spark arrangement. This makes it more compatible with most ECUs. Rotors 1 and 2 will fire together. 3 and 4 together. 5 and 6 etc.
It'll run a lot like a 20B, but instead of having three single leading coils and three leading spark plugs firing at 120° intervals, you keep the 120° and swap the coils for dual output coils. That's how I'd do it. Pretty simple.
But the 5 rotor still intrigues me. I'd actually subscribe to a thead where someone's building a 5 rotor and it isn't a hoax.
With a proper ECU (e.g. Pectel SQ-6) 12 coils and 12 injectors can be run fully sequentially without having to be terribly clever at all. Considering the scope of this project, I could even say that it's inexpensive with a straight face.
Regardless, I'm interested to see how it comes out.
Regardless, I'm interested to see how it comes out.
i saw it and was surprised that it wasn't up here. hope they start a thread should be cool i think they said it would have 8-1000hp na pp off-course
but i would really like to hear a 5 rotor, i mean inline 5 race bike engines (rc149) and so did the vr6.
thanks oliver
but i would really like to hear a 5 rotor, i mean inline 5 race bike engines (rc149) and so did the vr6.
thanks oliver
I guess 72* phased rotors just wouldn't sound cool enough?
It would certainly cause some extra work in the engine management department. At least with 6-rotors you could phase 1-4, 2-5, 3-6 together, and with no-split timing it would be somewhat simpler/mainstream as far as ECU's.Didn't think about it like that.
i'd like to see the e-shaft and what they did to offset the deflection of such a long shaft.
if it makes even close to 1000hp reliably i will be surprised, due to the length of the shaft. shorter engines actually can make more reliable power.
call me Mr negative, my GF does everyday.
say even every rotor has a support bearing, with length comes twist and shear. take a steel rod that's 1" long and try to twist it and you can't, take that same rod 20' long and twist even with moderate force and you can easily.
if it makes even close to 1000hp reliably i will be surprised, due to the length of the shaft. shorter engines actually can make more reliable power.
call me Mr negative, my GF does everyday.
say even every rotor has a support bearing, with length comes twist and shear. take a steel rod that's 1" long and try to twist it and you can't, take that same rod 20' long and twist even with moderate force and you can easily.
Last edited by RotaryEvolution; Jul 23, 2012 at 04:03 PM.
