Can we please stop hotlinking pics?

The pictures on this page are not very cohesive.

How about a fiat 1100 for page 1100

1100T

NGTD wrote:

Curmudgeon wrote: Now THAT looks like a machinist's nightmare. Wonder what the advantage was supposed to be?

The rules at the time restricted bike to 4 cyl. Honda wanted to run a 8 cyl. They basically made a 4 cyl. out of a 8 cyl. by taking the middle out of each pair of cylinders. It never did well.

Honda released that by eliminating the adjoining cylinder wall it also lowered internal friction for more power.

Honda is very sneaky.

For those that like their race bikes to look like future VFR Interceptor replacements

Austin Hydrolastic diagram:

The Honda pistons and cylinders probably would not be all that hard to machine. OTOH, those VW diesel elliptic bores make machining a rotary epitrochoid look like something a high school shop class could do.

Since I'm gonna use big words like epitrochoid, here it is in CAD form:

and 'in the flesh'.

Since I am going to use big words like failure I will post a pic

I love the rotary but why can't they get it right? Seal failure, abysmal fuel economy, and oil consumption just to name a few.

I love the sarcasm in this one. If everyone wasted their vote on a third party candidate...

Rotary oil consumption is for the same reason 2 strokes burn oil: that's the only way to keep the apex seals alive and when properly cared for they will last a very long time. There is just no other way to keep them lubed. Fuel consumption is because it has twice as many power strokes as a conventional piston engine of the same displacement.

FlightService wrote:

Atkins Rotary drag race car:

Runs a 9" Ford rear axle and a Mark Williams transmission. Seems to make pretty good torque.

Curmudgeon wrote: Rotary oil consumption is for the same reason 2 strokes burn oil: that's the only way to keep the apex seals alive and when properly cared for they will last a very long time. There is just no other way to keep them lubed. Fuel consumption is because it has twice as many power strokes as a conventional piston engine of the same displacement.

The fuel consumption may be because of that but it is a poor excuse. The power cycle should not be that inefficient.

In reply to FlightService:

Some of the 12As were getting near to 30MPG on the highway and still putting out decent power for their size.

As we rotor fans have said before, if the Wankel had as much time and money thrown at it as the piston engines have, it'd be a lot more efficient and powerful.

I'm not the type of person who will say "OMG! Rotary is the best EVER for everything!!!111". Likewise, I'm not getting the hate.

Also, just because I saw this car for the first time last night: