You just sold me! I will get one for my next build!

 

also agree, there is no safest way to do it for an engine that has a tuning issue or anything feeding the engine that is having difficulties like ignition break up or fuel drop-off. if the engine doesn't break from twisting it will warp/break the seals, fracture corner seals or dent the thinner/lighter late series rotors.

i prefer milled tension bolts personally, to fit the block snug and not only add additional clamping force but also aid in blocking the ability of the irons to move from the housings due to bore differences between the two.

 

boom.. thats all you need to know.. / close thread

 

Yep... somebody needs to design a girdle to go on the outside.
That would be the way to go me thinks!

 

I could see how to clamp all but the rear Iron for a girdel by using PS mount bolt, emmisions rack bolts and EGR flat plate on center. Maybe use the spot where the thin cover plate gets bolted on? then again those are only 12mm bolts. On the other side of the engine is that large piece of material... intake manifold. I have only seen scrub marks or movement signs on the combustion side so the intake side must have enough to keep it in place.

I think BDC helped make it a bit better by using the entire Dowel pin land on the rear iron (drilled deeper, small dowel spacer in the center iron to make use of more surface).

 

Call Edgar at E&J. He has an engine girdle CNC'd piece.

 

They moved the mounting points for different reasons. Additional power was entirely coincidental.

The FC had the mounts moved to the center because the rack and pinion steering precluded the ability to use the front mount.

The FD had the mounts moved to the rear so that the drivetrain would be balanced on the engine mounts, since FDs do not have transmission mounts, just the PPF.

 

Ahhh... Edgar showed me what he has....think I will get one.
$150. Worth a try.
You need to get longer bolts, but I already have them from a Banzai Racing kit I have installed.

 

^ I would also look into using a spacer for your oil pick up tube, looks like it's going to lower your oil pan 3/8" - 1/2".

 

Good thinking! Yeah, the girdle is 1/2" thick so you would need a 1/2" spacer along with 1" bolts for the oil pan.

 

Wondering about the motor mount with this too??? Guess you could make a mount .5" shorter.

 

I'm running the turboblown studs, with dowels, using wet torque, not dry torque for setting torque..... Their a awesome piece, and worth every panny

 

Will the oil pan clear the front cross member? After you install this & make the motor mount shorter? Overall this would move the oil pan closer to the cross member correct?

 

I just added 4 more pins and called it a day, yes an overkill I know.

 

Yeah... forgot about that

 

That's not a girdle. This is how you girdle something.

 

That goes up and down tho. Different forces at work.

 

Just illustrating the idea. A girdle is used to clamp something together. Imagine turning that engine on it's side. Clamping the combustion side of the rotary engine together just like the engine above has the head clamped on. In this way you could relieve the stress from the dowel areas.

 

the R26B has a big CF stiffener on the top of the engine, and the dry sump plate looks fairly thick too

 

Who is having this issue that have high hp that cant be resolved by Dowels, studs and a good tune?
The high hp rotarys seem to be doing fine with what is already available.
The oil pan girdle is just another chance for the pan to leak imo.

 

Would be nice to have something available that you can just slap on an existing engine without having to tear it apart.

 

True.

 

i doubt a girdle would be strong enough to handle the forces present.

i have seen engines laugh at 1/2" and thicker plates of aluminum on the bottom deck. about the best i can envision is high tensile steel 4240 in a 1/2" thick or thicker deck plate with oversize mount studs would probably work but it would require sumping the oil system unless you could baffle the plate for the oil pan(plasma/water jet the holes for regulator/bypass and pickup tube, ideally the plate would have to be solid though otherwise this could be an effort of futility), this would still require the engine to be removed and the pan bolt holes reamed larger and steel thread inserts installed into the rotor housings.

thing to remember is the irons are not trying to move away from the rotating assembly but the rotor housings are trying to twist away from the combustion forces, and the rotor housings have almost no way of supporting themselves via an outside brace system. aluminum is also a soft and easy to move material so even the decking brace system may not work, although it would definitely help, but so do the following systems.

1)the easiest way is larger tension bolts without reaming the block, for more clamping force. not ideal but it is better than the factory tension bolts/dowels alone.
2)the more difficult but better way is to ream the tension bolts for snug fit tension rods which will not allow the engine to twist against itself, since the tension bolts act as 16 induvidual dowels plus the factory 2. can that really be argued against? technically you do not need to ream all 16(or 18) but i usually do 6 oversize tension rods.
3)about the same as above is adding more dowels, but dowels are hollow and i have seen them still warp/crack and also still allow irons to crack. ideally additional dowels would be solid but the only place you can use solid dowels is in the factory locations due to tension bolts passing through the rest. this also means external oil plumbing to the front/rear iron.

i have to think about these things quite a bit and i simply can't foresee a simple bolt on fix. some things you simply can't upgrade without internal machine work, such as 2 bolt main SBCs and making any real power with them. thicker dowel bossed cast irons has always been the best workaround, but the early engines did not have the luxury. nor was it a fix for extreme conditions. rotor housings could add additional threaded bosses but where? the casting simply won't allow for it aside from the top of the housings but this also wouldn't work for some setups with space limitations under the UIM.

 

that's a sweet piece.. , and pinning over studding is my vote

 

We have made 900+ with xtremerotaries stud kit. However, that was at 36 LBS. Both methods work in my opinion. It comes down to tuning and really tight machining tolerance.