Rotary Car Performance General Rotary Car and Engine modification discussions.

smaller better?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-12-03, 09:50 AM
  #226  
Registered Offender

Thread Starter
 
QuagmireMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by pinkfloyd
it would only lesson the overall power and be economical...and if you build this thing you are not woried about saveing money on gas. its all about power....grrrr...manly power. it would only build something like this if i was going to race it or something to cruse around town. imo
it wouldnt lesson the power at all, if it only kicks in at cruise speed...... you dont use all 200HP when your crusing down the road do you....... nope........ you would not lose any power but it could add the the complications of things to go wrong but hey its not too advanced
Old 12-12-03, 10:22 AM
  #227  
not sure anymore

 
pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: leawood,kansas
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
moveing two rotors takes power laws of physics. Im afraid i dont understand how this will work out. its a cool idea but i see no reason to do this.
Old 12-12-03, 03:49 PM
  #228  
Registered Offender

Thread Starter
 
QuagmireMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
the rotors will be like a supercharger for the other 2 rotors that are being used at cruising speed... while the unused rotors spinnin a pipe would take the compression the make and force it into the chambers of the rotors being used, providing a better combustion, improving economy ect ect
Old 12-12-03, 04:23 PM
  #229  
not sure anymore

 
pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: leawood,kansas
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
cool....i dotn know how that would work but cool
Old 12-12-03, 07:08 PM
  #230  
50mpg - oooooh yeah!

 
chairchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But when the other rotors enter the exhaust cycle, they would effectively create a vacuum - sucking the air back into them, and out of the other rotors - that is what I meant
Old 12-12-03, 09:52 PM
  #231  
Registered Offender

Thread Starter
 
QuagmireMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
not if the was a SOV where the combustion takes places


(Suck Off Valve )
Old 12-13-03, 04:50 PM
  #232  
50mpg - oooooh yeah!

 
chairchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
but it would still create a vacuum at some point of rotation though, it would need a valve to shut it off at certain points, and it wouldn't be much help towards VE, because there would be a point where fuel can exit during normal running (when it's not being used as a compressor)
Old 12-15-03, 07:56 PM
  #233  
Registered Offender

Thread Starter
 
QuagmireMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
could you clearify that a little more.....?
Old 12-16-03, 06:05 PM
  #234  
50mpg - oooooh yeah!

 
chairchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Where the pipe would be for the compressed air to exit, it would create a point of low-pressure in the combusion chamber. The fuel would "flood" this area, and it would bog-down.

Unless you had some kind of v.v.expensive flush-sitting valve against the housing internals to re-create the air-tight surface again.

Also, what happens AFTER the point of combustion? The space expands, and if this space isnt being filled with expanding gasses, then it will create a vacuum.

You get around this problem by having the take off point earlier in the rotor housing, but this would see virtually no extra pressure whatsoever, and it could only supply around 1/4 of what it takes in (due to the area it has to move, and the extra heat involved from the rotor)

sorry man, it would be good if it worked, but rotaries and economy are two words that will never be heard in the same sentence (unless you include "lack-of"!!)
Old 12-16-03, 10:41 PM
  #235  
Registered Offender

Thread Starter
 
QuagmireMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
it could be done but . . . .. $
Old 12-17-03, 05:21 PM
  #236  
50mpg - oooooh yeah!

 
chairchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The only rotaries i can think of that dont use a couple of gallons for every mile, are the ones that are so small, you can fit them in your palm (or dead rotaries - they CAN'T use any fuel!!)
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Jeff20B
1st Generation Specific (1979-1985)
73
09-16-18 07:16 PM
Wicked93gs
2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992)
42
10-07-15 11:58 PM
Turblown
Single Turbo RX-7's
1
09-30-15 05:58 PM
BLUE TII
Single Turbo RX-7's
10
09-26-15 10:12 PM



Quick Reply: smaller better?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:45 PM.