@UAE224455 It never had. The 13B engine (as delivered with the FC3S and FD3S) has 2 rotors, while RX-7s with 3-rotor engines will have had an engine swap (probably 20B) from larger, heavier cars. They were never sold with the 20B engine, though.
than do they say that its more complicated and expensive to fix rotary engine problems???? cuz im thinking bout gettting an RX8 but everybodys telling me that their hard to fix and cost more money
@Alex35J simply because they wear down more quickly. dunno about being more complicated as such but you burn a lot more oil and have to replace things much more often then with a piston.
Rotaries are great in terms of getting a large amount of power in proportion to the displacement of the unit, a 2 "cylinder" rotary engine can put out as much as a 4 cylinder piston engine but obviously at a cost; that being quicker wear, lots of oil burned for lubrication and poor fuel economy.
A spirited driver in a rotary powered vehicle will most likely experience engine failure at around 70-80 thousand miles, while piston engines can operate effectively after 250 thousand miles. Diesel engines can double or even triple that, some still running on original parts for over a million miles. That's why the Rotary engine hasn't replaced anything. The piston engine is more efficient, gets better gas mileage, makes more torque, and doesn't require 9000rpm to make the torque of a 4 cyl.
@Jutzujin so funny that my friend's Turbo 2 has over 150K on it and it's still running strong. and my own NA has 210 on ODO and it's still getting normal compression readings.
if u don't know shit that's ok, but don't comment on things u know nothing about. Thx.
People are forgetting that while Rotary engines have a very simple rotating assembly, are smaller, lighter, and are four stroke, there are a myriad of disadvantages to the design.. The Apex seals on each 'tip' of the rotor are notorious for failing on low, high, and especially turbocharged applications.. The engine itself cannot maintain the torque curve of a conventional cylinder engine without turning thousands of RPM higher, and cannot best even eight cylinder engines in terms of gas mileage.
the rotary would have been way more efficient today if ford didn't buy half of mazda and made them build a bunch of piston engines... now mazda is back on its own two feet and now we will see much change in the rotary industry
Well, the planned-obsolescence is practiced by major automotive industries. If they went with the rotary engines, then they'd stand to lose tons of money. Now imagine if the world suddenly adopted the rotary engine, various automotive industries tailored to the conventional V-engines would suddenly go out of business, but when you look at this possible scenario, it's a positive change that would generate useful jobs with real value rather than wasteful and useless ones.
Yeah, but they didn't do that back then of course, did they? The rotary engine concept was conceived around the mid 20th century and once it was finally commercialized, the engine design was never widespread this whole time.
The engine needs more hands and brains working on it. The solution to all the Wankel's problems will in all likelihood result in an engine very different from the basic engine design. The Vengeance Power Vaned Rotary Otto Cycle (VROC) engine for one.
My dad owns a 2009 mazda rx8 and it says in the handbook U MUST CHECK THE OIL LEVELS EVERY 3 PETROL STOPS witch is every 4 days for him. why do they use so much oil?
it's the way rotary engines work, oil is injected diectly into the rotor housings for lubrication in the mazda engines and is burnt with the fuel. in the nsu engines it's mixed into the fuel feed by an oil metering pump. they don't actually use that much oil, but it's very important to keep it topped up to the max! :)
Compression ignition engines are far more efficient than spark ignition engines and are ideal for puttin' around town because of that torque. Modern technology has nearly eliminated any soot output, commonly seen in the past.
@gav240z I'm not sure what they are doing about Apex seals, but the 16XX looks extremely promising if it lives up to the hype.
People who have owned a rotary know how good they are, unfortunately lots of people are scared of owning 1 because of all the over-hyped horror stories. Turbo rotary's are amazing :).
i know that rotaries are supposed to be more efficient but what are the reasons we are not using them today?i have heard they are heavier and dont produce as much torque?
@S10stev That's a good question. 1st: The seals are spring loaded so they're not rigid enough to rapidly wear away the housing wall. 2nd: The seals are made of a much softer material, so its the seals that wear away, not the housing. Once the engine is WELL over 100k, that's when the seals should be changed. If not, you'll loose compression and horsepower.
I personally like 2 stroke and rotary engines more than 4 strokes.
If some leading car manufacturers put some of their best engineers to work on them there's no question that 2 strokes and wankel engines would take the lead!
the rotary engines r more enficents than otto engines but remmenber that the industry its a busines and they need you to repair the otto engine of your car.. if they put rotary engines in every car ,, they will got less money from the repair and remanufact market.. and the rotary engine fits good to sports cars but not so suitable for large trucks and 4x4 ... remenber you need torque and the rotary produces hi hp but low torque!!
the rotary engines r more enficents than otto engines but remmenber that the industry its a busines and they need you to repair the otto engine of your car.. if they put rotary engines in every car ,, they will got less money from the repair and remanufact market.. and the rotary engine fits good to sports cars but not so suitable for large trucks and 4x4 ... remenber you need torque and the rotary produces hi hp but low torque!!
@bauuau18 Buy a somewhat newer one, always warm it up before you drive it over 3,000 RPM's, always change the oil, check the oil, and always check your coolant. Oh, and redline her daily! All you need to do to keep an NA rotary happy.
@Draelren One problem with RX8's...they're pretty damn slow, and any modifications dont really enhance performance without going turbo. At that stage, its much cheaper to transplant the rx7 motor in.
You ever notice that all the super cars and high performance companies like lambo, bugatti, ferrari, and etc. still use piston and all of them have made a car or two with a wankel in it and gone back. I don't know but maybe just MAYBE thers a REASON for that?
@sunnyjason Actually lots of company like (GM, Ford, Mercedes, BMW, Porsche, Honda) are lic. to build and sell them but don't. Generally they are more efficient and more reliable, but they run dirty (poor emission, lack of valve train timing) But people simply don't understand them and when they don't understand them they don't buy them. This is why Mazda struggles to sell them.
@younkin1 rotary engines are NOT efficient. the problem is thermal waste when combustion chamber is not same place as the intake chamber. its like you running a engine with thermostat stuck open.
I drive an RX8 and Im barely getting 17MPG, for this kinda MPG, you are looking at 6.2L V8's which are way way more powerful than my tiny little 1.3L
timing CAN be changed by having multiple ports and gates. if you look at 6 port 13B-MSP, you'll found the upper intake port opens at higher rpm.
@sunnyjason Efficiency can be measure several ways. When measuring mpg I agree rotary engines don't get the greatest mileage. But measure its liter to horse power ratio, or its weight to hp ratio, or it small external size. There aren't many engine that complish these hp's in such a small package.
2010 Corvette zr-1- 6.2 liter makes 638hp = 103hp per liter. $105,000
2010 Mazda rx-8- 1.3 liter makes 232hp = 178hp per liter. $32,000
@younkin1 well rotary engine size isnt that simple, cuz the eccentric shaft rotate once, the engine makes one bang compare to piston engine one bang per 2 rotation. so really you have to compare to a 4 cylinder 2.6 engine if you have 2 rotors. and honda's S2000 still sits on the top.
and if you take motorcycle engines. theres even more choice. my R6 has 600cc makes 107hp.
@sunnyjason total displacement is 1.3 liter not 2.6. Each rotor has a displacement of about .65 liters and in a 12a engine its aobut .60 liters and yes it is that simple. Also who stated the wankel engine was superior to every engine ever built, I know I didn't. The Honda F20series engine is great, along with most modern motor cycle engine. I guess I fail to see your point for discredit the engine. But I degress. My point is the wankel is a good little engine.
@younkin1 I know the displacement is 1.3L, 650cc per rotor, but its different concept because a rotary engine makes one ignition per output shaft rotation but a piston engine is every two rotation. the rotor is spining 3 times slower than the output shaft.
if you look at the awards the rotary engines have received, they are all in 2.5-3L engine category.
it is a unique engine, but its not as good as it could be. I drive an RX8 and I love this car.
@sunnyjason Your way of calculating displacement is funny. Counting shaft rotations? If use your math a 5 liter engine is actually a 10 liter engine because the crank shaft rotated twice to complete a full cycle. Rotation has nothing to do with it, its not a multiplier.
@sunnyjason Say what you want... It's not a 2.6 nor 2.5, it's a 1.3. I've had this argument many times before and people love to say the word equivelent.
It's displaces 1.3 liters of liquid in a 13b engine. End of debate.
@sunnyjason The thermal waste is caused by the lack of any valve train. And its nothing like running an engine with a thermostat stuck open. Thermal or heat disipation is spead through out the entire cylinder head, where its just pushed out of a rotary engine exhaust port.
@thewhoissuperb24 If you look @ 0:55 you can see the tip of the rotor has a slot of the seal to go into. Apex by definitions is "the highest point; vertex", "the pointed end or tip of something". So the simple answer is yes, the Apex seat is attached to the rotor.
Honestly the 4 rotor engine is a miricle... if you go to the mazda website you can read about all the trouble they had with snapping eccentric shafts on the 4 rotor and they couldn't find a way to make the shaft any longer.
However yes, theoretically there could be 5 or 6 or 8, as long as there was a chassis built for an engine with such length and an eccentric shaft which could withstand all the torque.
Yes there has been a few, however a diesel engine needs to somewhat detonate the fuel to run, and the apex seals of the wankel cannot handle that. They break or shatter when the fuel detonates.
Ok that makes sense. I know very little about these types of engine but. If that is the case (which I'm assuming it's true because I hear it all the time) can't they make the seals with more "exotic" metals that are stronger than what they use now?
I know cost will go up (shouldn't be by much since it's massed produced) but wouldn't maintenance go down which would offset or get close to offsetting the cost of the more expensive material?
Or are investors not into devoting that much into it?
Then it will wear out the housing, and rub off the chrome lining on the housing.
There ARE really good seals, some of which are unbreakable, however they are hard on the housings. Piston rings wear out also, just seems they last longer.
And it's not possible to line the housing with the same material(s)?
I know you're more than likely not involved with the building of these things but it just seems that the people that are cop-out on making them the "proper" way.
diesel engines (compression ignition engines) are fuel efficient because of the high compression ratios (~22:1). in other words, combustion in diesel engines occur at over 300 psi! wankels are limited in high compression ratios due to the relatively fragile apex seals. i believe the rolls royce wankel got up to ~10:1. your average car on the street has a ratio of ~9:1.
That's makes total sense. But doesn't high compression ratios mainly apply to naturally aspirated engines? Wouldn't adding a turbo to the motor lower the compression ratio, add power, and still have decent mileage?
I'm sorry if that has already been answered in the labyrinth off comments for this video.
High ratios do not only apply to N/A engines. Look at turbo-diesels.
Forced induction spark ignition engines are usually designed with a lower compression ratio in order to decrease the stresses under boost and/or eliminate knocking and/or preignition.
Adding a turbocharger nets more power and possibly nets better fuel consumption, than the same engine without it, because the compressor within the turbo increases the compression ratio in addition to the piston's compression.
Ahhhhh. So when it comes to diesel compression in key in N/A and FI applications. Thanks for the lesson. I'm very very new to diesels so my questions pretty elementary. My knowledge of diesels consist of: They are usually loud, they usually smell, they make gobs of torque, and can last forever if maintained properly.
If you own a diesel powered car, or are going to buy one, please consider that posibility.
As you know, the inventor of that engine developed it to run on oil in the first place.
basically, the difference is that the piston compresses air in the cylinder until the highest point at which fuel is injected. some engines heat up the air until the point when fuel ignites by itself, others use glow plugs to ignite the fuel.
If the rotary engine had become as reliable as the piston type, and add on the computerised engine management systems that are in our cars of today, they would have very economical indeed, yes, no?
Really the only problem is the way it is lubricated, the oil is injected from the case pan under the housing into the intake or the housing itself.
Really you just need to premix oil like a two stroke. we have and out RX7 is at 189K miles and has NEVER been into a shop, not once since 89 when we bought it.
Watching this, it seems to me that the Wankel is dominant.
Although, I do agree that because of the issue concerning the sealing of the chamber, it isn't as efficient as it could be. Yet. They're still working on it, right?
@VirtuousSnake Theyre a great engine and all but they are not as fuel efficient as a piston engine, with rising fuel prices, consider this to be one of the reasons they are not more common then the piston engines. They are more efficient in making power, but the amount of fuel they burn to do soo almost defeats the purpose... if it wasnt for the power and the amazing sound they make im sure there wouldnt be many of these around at all anymore.
It's because the major corporations don't want them to.
they are fine with how the things are. If it wasn't for them' we'd be all driving hydrogen fuel cell cars, or oil powered diesel cars (as it was the fuel origionally intended for that engine)
The massive oil companies don't want you to drive something efficient. they need you to burn gas. otherwise they'd be bankrupt.
@VirtuousSnake Because they aren't really all that efficient, don't have great longevity and burn oil so their emissions are worse, not to mention that they make little low end torque (I'm looking at a dyno chart of a stock RX8 making less than 100lb ft of torque at 2700RPM) so the fuel efficiency is hurt as you have to rev the engine higher for even moderate driving.
There's a reason why not even Mazda has switched all their cars over to these engines.
@94XJ Mazda could just change their style of intake manifold on these engines and it would produce more torque. I have a buddy that mods the upper intake manifold just a little and every time we seem to make more and more torque of of these rx7s.
My God I want an RX-8 so bad!!!
oiram1189 1 week ago
how many parts a rotary engine needs to be compare to a 2jzgte engine? ;) maybe 6 rotors xD
manolo44op 1 month ago
@bboyhwoarang
Around 2-4 rotors
stealthlol266 2 months ago
how many rotors or that triagle thingy are in one rotary engine?
bboyhwoarang 2 months ago
@bboyhwoarang The Mazda Rx7 has 3 Rotors
UAE224455 1 month ago
@UAE224455 It never had. The 13B engine (as delivered with the FC3S and FD3S) has 2 rotors, while RX-7s with 3-rotor engines will have had an engine swap (probably 20B) from larger, heavier cars. They were never sold with the 20B engine, though.
schmuhf 3 days ago
than do they say that its more complicated and expensive to fix rotary engine problems???? cuz im thinking bout gettting an RX8 but everybodys telling me that their hard to fix and cost more money
Alex35J 2 months ago in playlist More videos from djphilmanns
@Alex35J simply because they wear down more quickly. dunno about being more complicated as such but you burn a lot more oil and have to replace things much more often then with a piston.
Rotaries are great in terms of getting a large amount of power in proportion to the displacement of the unit, a 2 "cylinder" rotary engine can put out as much as a 4 cylinder piston engine but obviously at a cost; that being quicker wear, lots of oil burned for lubrication and poor fuel economy.
woggleboggle123 2 months ago
A spirited driver in a rotary powered vehicle will most likely experience engine failure at around 70-80 thousand miles, while piston engines can operate effectively after 250 thousand miles. Diesel engines can double or even triple that, some still running on original parts for over a million miles. That's why the Rotary engine hasn't replaced anything. The piston engine is more efficient, gets better gas mileage, makes more torque, and doesn't require 9000rpm to make the torque of a 4 cyl.
Jutzujin 2 months ago
@Jutzujin so funny that my friend's Turbo 2 has over 150K on it and it's still running strong. and my own NA has 210 on ODO and it's still getting normal compression readings.
if u don't know shit that's ok, but don't comment on things u know nothing about. Thx.
ChickonSoup 5 days ago
People are forgetting that while Rotary engines have a very simple rotating assembly, are smaller, lighter, and are four stroke, there are a myriad of disadvantages to the design.. The Apex seals on each 'tip' of the rotor are notorious for failing on low, high, and especially turbocharged applications.. The engine itself cannot maintain the torque curve of a conventional cylinder engine without turning thousands of RPM higher, and cannot best even eight cylinder engines in terms of gas mileage.
Jutzujin 2 months ago
the rotary would have been way more efficient today if ford didn't buy half of mazda and made them build a bunch of piston engines... now mazda is back on its own two feet and now we will see much change in the rotary industry
Tj1056 5 months ago 8
@Tj1056
Well, the planned-obsolescence is practiced by major automotive industries. If they went with the rotary engines, then they'd stand to lose tons of money. Now imagine if the world suddenly adopted the rotary engine, various automotive industries tailored to the conventional V-engines would suddenly go out of business, but when you look at this possible scenario, it's a positive change that would generate useful jobs with real value rather than wasteful and useless ones.
NaziGOPBallmer 2 months ago
@NaziGOPBallmer car companies are already studying the rotary engine now about 3 or so...
Tj1056 2 months ago
@Tj1056
Yeah, but they didn't do that back then of course, did they? The rotary engine concept was conceived around the mid 20th century and once it was finally commercialized, the engine design was never widespread this whole time.
NaziGOPBallmer 2 months ago
Uhh the last video said that when the Rotor makes 1 turn the shaft makes 2 turns
This video says when the rotor makes one turn the shaft makes 3 turns
whats up with that?
KreatorOfDeath1985 6 months ago
The engine needs more hands and brains working on it. The solution to all the Wankel's problems will in all likelihood result in an engine very different from the basic engine design. The Vengeance Power Vaned Rotary Otto Cycle (VROC) engine for one.
DocWolph 6 months ago
Too bad rotaries never really replaced boingers as mainstream engines. At least that makes my RX-8 kind of unique among other sport cars.
marutidriver 6 months ago
My dad owns a 2009 mazda rx8 and it says in the handbook U MUST CHECK THE OIL LEVELS EVERY 3 PETROL STOPS witch is every 4 days for him. why do they use so much oil?
arrancooper69 7 months ago
@arrancooper69
it's the way rotary engines work, oil is injected diectly into the rotor housings for lubrication in the mazda engines and is burnt with the fuel. in the nsu engines it's mixed into the fuel feed by an oil metering pump. they don't actually use that much oil, but it's very important to keep it topped up to the max! :)
djphilmanns 7 months ago 3
@arrancooper69 Tell him to stop driving with a led foot. The harder you push em the more oil is burned.
xblade6500 4 months ago
sooo nice video for all who are beginners and experts
ranaumar92 8 months ago
I know that wankel engines are commonly used in light aviation for their reliability.
dgurevich1 9 months ago
Compression ignition engines are far more efficient than spark ignition engines and are ideal for puttin' around town because of that torque. Modern technology has nearly eliminated any soot output, commonly seen in the past.
kpxfosho 9 months ago
5:35 HEY IT'S THE TEST COURSE!
0GTXR 9 months ago
ehh. both have it's up and downs. Still fascinating to see though.
theyellow240z 11 months ago
I love the rotary and own an RX-7. I think the main things holding the rotary back are:
1. Apex seals - Poor maintenance means people end up with low compression engines.
2. Oil usage. If they could work out a way of reducing the amount of oil they burn this would help reduce emission issues also.
3. Improve the efficiency of the motor and make it more fuel efficient.
4. Increase torque.
Mazda is working on a 16XX prototype engine that should address oil usage, torque, fuel efficiency.
gav240z 11 months ago
@gav240z I'm not sure what they are doing about Apex seals, but the 16XX looks extremely promising if it lives up to the hype.
People who have owned a rotary know how good they are, unfortunately lots of people are scared of owning 1 because of all the over-hyped horror stories. Turbo rotary's are amazing :).
gav240z 11 months ago
Amazing invention. Too bad it's not a fuel efficient one.
tgseason12 11 months ago
i know that rotaries are supposed to be more efficient but what are the reasons we are not using them today?i have heard they are heavier and dont produce as much torque?
musashi1865 11 months ago
@musashi1865
They produce less torque and use more fuel. A modern cylinder engine (otto engine) use less fuel for similar performance.
tgseason12 11 months ago
such an amazing invention....I feel so dumb :(
Rezaroth 1 year ago
i agree with @taloCc the piston engine's heart of torgue production is from their crank shafts...hents their counter wieghts ...
usingtheforce47 1 year ago
@S10stev underneath every apex seal are very tiny springs that look and work exactly like leaf springs.
juanmincia 1 year ago
Awesome upload thanks a lot for those 2 vids!
ClubAverage 1 year ago
Interesting.
But would'nt the three apexes wear out quickly from friction or what keeps them from creating damage to the inside housing?
S10stev 1 year ago
@S10stev That's a good question. 1st: The seals are spring loaded so they're not rigid enough to rapidly wear away the housing wall. 2nd: The seals are made of a much softer material, so its the seals that wear away, not the housing. Once the engine is WELL over 100k, that's when the seals should be changed. If not, you'll loose compression and horsepower.
juanmincia 1 year ago
@juanmincia Thats very interesting, thanks alot!
how are the seals spring loaded though?
S10stev 1 year ago
I personally like 2 stroke and rotary engines more than 4 strokes.
If some leading car manufacturers put some of their best engineers to work on them there's no question that 2 strokes and wankel engines would take the lead!
LIMbuMatAmB 1 year ago
lol it say replace piston motors and this video is hella old but piston motor are every where on the road lol
TaLoCc 1 year ago
@TaLoCc
the rotary engines r more enficents than otto engines but remmenber that the industry its a busines and they need you to repair the otto engine of your car.. if they put rotary engines in every car ,, they will got less money from the repair and remanufact market.. and the rotary engine fits good to sports cars but not so suitable for large trucks and 4x4 ... remenber you need torque and the rotary produces hi hp but low torque!!
MOLOKMAGGOT 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TaLoCc
the rotary engines r more enficents than otto engines but remmenber that the industry its a busines and they need you to repair the otto engine of your car.. if they put rotary engines in every car ,, they will got less money from the repair and remanufact market.. and the rotary engine fits good to sports cars but not so suitable for large trucks and 4x4 ... remenber you need torque and the rotary produces hi hp but low torque!!
MOLOKMAGGOT 1 year ago
@dave97202
Could you list some of the user errors that people make?
I want to buy a mazda rx8 and i am worried i will run into technical issues
Could you please help me
bauuau18 1 year ago
@bauuau18 Buy a somewhat newer one, always warm it up before you drive it over 3,000 RPM's, always change the oil, check the oil, and always check your coolant. Oh, and redline her daily! All you need to do to keep an NA rotary happy.
Draelren 1 year ago
@Draelren One problem with RX8's...they're pretty damn slow, and any modifications dont really enhance performance without going turbo. At that stage, its much cheaper to transplant the rx7 motor in.
privatealpha 1 year ago
@dave97202 Far from an overall failure if people daily drive them just like piston engines, the problem with rotaries lies in user error.
Vortes 1 year ago
......
60UDA 1 year ago
good but very high in fuel comsuntion.it same with concord air plane.
srkkroh11 1 year ago
"It will only be a matter of time until the Highly efficient rotary engine supersedes the conventional reciprocating engine." Sure
Kurtanius21 1 year ago
Why didn't this engine replace the other engines we have in most cars today? if it's much more better?
nartlauz 1 year ago
You ever notice that all the super cars and high performance companies like lambo, bugatti, ferrari, and etc. still use piston and all of them have made a car or two with a wankel in it and gone back. I don't know but maybe just MAYBE thers a REASON for that?
HJ0HN50N 1 year ago
@HJ0HN50N the problem is efficiency and reliability
although they have been improved these years, they still cant compete with cylinder engines.
also only Mazda has the right to make rotary engines.
sunnyjason 1 year ago
@sunnyjason Actually lots of company like (GM, Ford, Mercedes, BMW, Porsche, Honda) are lic. to build and sell them but don't. Generally they are more efficient and more reliable, but they run dirty (poor emission, lack of valve train timing) But people simply don't understand them and when they don't understand them they don't buy them. This is why Mazda struggles to sell them.
younkin1 1 year ago
@younkin1 rotary engines are NOT efficient. the problem is thermal waste when combustion chamber is not same place as the intake chamber. its like you running a engine with thermostat stuck open.
I drive an RX8 and Im barely getting 17MPG, for this kinda MPG, you are looking at 6.2L V8's which are way way more powerful than my tiny little 1.3L
timing CAN be changed by having multiple ports and gates. if you look at 6 port 13B-MSP, you'll found the upper intake port opens at higher rpm.
sunnyjason 1 year ago
@sunnyjason Efficiency can be measure several ways. When measuring mpg I agree rotary engines don't get the greatest mileage. But measure its liter to horse power ratio, or its weight to hp ratio, or it small external size. There aren't many engine that complish these hp's in such a small package.
2010 Corvette zr-1- 6.2 liter makes 638hp = 103hp per liter. $105,000
2010 Mazda rx-8- 1.3 liter makes 232hp = 178hp per liter. $32,000
younkin1 1 year ago
@younkin1 well rotary engine size isnt that simple, cuz the eccentric shaft rotate once, the engine makes one bang compare to piston engine one bang per 2 rotation. so really you have to compare to a 4 cylinder 2.6 engine if you have 2 rotors. and honda's S2000 still sits on the top.
and if you take motorcycle engines. theres even more choice. my R6 has 600cc makes 107hp.
sunnyjason 1 year ago
@sunnyjason total displacement is 1.3 liter not 2.6. Each rotor has a displacement of about .65 liters and in a 12a engine its aobut .60 liters and yes it is that simple. Also who stated the wankel engine was superior to every engine ever built, I know I didn't. The Honda F20series engine is great, along with most modern motor cycle engine. I guess I fail to see your point for discredit the engine. But I degress. My point is the wankel is a good little engine.
younkin1 1 year ago
@younkin1 I know the displacement is 1.3L, 650cc per rotor, but its different concept because a rotary engine makes one ignition per output shaft rotation but a piston engine is every two rotation. the rotor is spining 3 times slower than the output shaft.
if you look at the awards the rotary engines have received, they are all in 2.5-3L engine category.
it is a unique engine, but its not as good as it could be. I drive an RX8 and I love this car.
sunnyjason 1 year ago
@sunnyjason Your way of calculating displacement is funny. Counting shaft rotations? If use your math a 5 liter engine is actually a 10 liter engine because the crank shaft rotated twice to complete a full cycle. Rotation has nothing to do with it, its not a multiplier.
younkin1 1 year ago
@younkin1 no, you still dont get it. gee.
a piston engine 4 stroke needs two output shaft rotations to make one ignition right?
a rotary engine needs one output shaft rotation to make one ignition right?
a twin piston 4 stroke engine needs one rotation to make one ignition.
now a 650cc rotary engine ignites the same displacement per shaft rotation as a 1.3L twin 4 stroke engine right?
1.3L twin rotary = 2.6L 4 cylinder engine.
sunnyjason 1 year ago
@younkin1 a 5 liter v8 is equivelent to a 2.5L quad rotary engine.
if you look at 26B's they are 2.6L quad rotary engine, makes about 500hp-600hp, which is very close to a 6.2L V8 can do.
sunnyjason 1 year ago
@sunnyjason Say what you want... It's not a 2.6 nor 2.5, it's a 1.3. I've had this argument many times before and people love to say the word equivelent.
It's displaces 1.3 liters of liquid in a 13b engine. End of debate.
younkin1 1 year ago
@younkin1 I never said its not a 1.3L, but if you comparing to a piston engine you have to consider how it works.
its like comparing to 2 stroke engine to 4 stroke engine, same displacement, 2 stroke makes twice the power cuz its one ignition per rotation.
sunnyjason 1 year ago
@sunnyjason The thermal waste is caused by the lack of any valve train. And its nothing like running an engine with a thermostat stuck open. Thermal or heat disipation is spead through out the entire cylinder head, where its just pushed out of a rotary engine exhaust port.
younkin1 1 year ago
@younkin1 if theres no thermal waste, why rotary engines run so hot?
sunnyjason 1 year ago
@sunnyjason Who ever said theres NO thermal waste?
younkin1 1 year ago
cool, thanks for the videos....i learned a lot
Fourteen88SoCal 1 year ago
It's funny how the engine on the stand is a 4cyl and when they break it down and lay out the parts becomes a 6cyl. Did anyone else catch that?
younkin1 1 year ago
@younkin1 yea, and he mentions that that, 6 cyls to get the performance of 2 rotars...
jarak36 1 year ago
So from what I understand, Rotaries are much more efficient......... are they not? As they're doing the "job" continuously....
jing713 1 year ago
@thewhoissuperb24 If you look @ 0:55 you can see the tip of the rotor has a slot of the seal to go into. Apex by definitions is "the highest point; vertex", "the pointed end or tip of something". So the simple answer is yes, the Apex seat is attached to the rotor.
jinxtacy 1 year ago
so how many rotors does one engine have?
2020182 1 year ago
@2020182 the most common is 2, but you can have single rotor (as in the NSU Spider or Citroen M35) or 3 ( as in The Eunos Cosmo) or even 4 or more!
djphilmanns 1 year ago 5
@djphilmanns unfortunately it's not replacing it..... why isn't it?
jing713 1 year ago
@djphilmanns ive seen people make 7 rotor enngines wild
xstr33tr4cerx 1 year ago
@djphilmanns 4 'or more' is .....debateable.
Honestly the 4 rotor engine is a miricle... if you go to the mazda website you can read about all the trouble they had with snapping eccentric shafts on the 4 rotor and they couldn't find a way to make the shaft any longer.
However yes, theoretically there could be 5 or 6 or 8, as long as there was a chassis built for an engine with such length and an eccentric shaft which could withstand all the torque.
hellman100 6 months ago
@2020182 2 rotors is like v6
Wtorres996 1 year ago
hah! BRILLIANT FINALLY!
ZPSFILMS 1 year ago
Love the old Mazda logo... Rotary FTW!
odertube 1 year ago
If fuel is compromised with the wankel, why don't they make them diesel powered to somewhat offset the MPG problem?
CCAAASSSCCAAAA 2 years ago
Rolls Royce produced a Rotary Diesel, but they're the only ones as far as I know.
djphilmanns 2 years ago
OH WHAT!?! thats awesome. i learned something new tody
hellsingorg2 2 years ago
sufficient dynamic compression ratio suitable for auto compression ignition in the wankel rotary is extremely difficult.
hhn2002 2 years ago
Yes there has been a few, however a diesel engine needs to somewhat detonate the fuel to run, and the apex seals of the wankel cannot handle that. They break or shatter when the fuel detonates.
whatUsaybob 2 years ago
Ok that makes sense. I know very little about these types of engine but. If that is the case (which I'm assuming it's true because I hear it all the time) can't they make the seals with more "exotic" metals that are stronger than what they use now?
I know cost will go up (shouldn't be by much since it's massed produced) but wouldn't maintenance go down which would offset or get close to offsetting the cost of the more expensive material?
Or are investors not into devoting that much into it?
CCAAASSSCCAAAA 2 years ago
Then it will wear out the housing, and rub off the chrome lining on the housing.
There ARE really good seals, some of which are unbreakable, however they are hard on the housings. Piston rings wear out also, just seems they last longer.
whatUsaybob 2 years ago
And it's not possible to line the housing with the same material(s)?
I know you're more than likely not involved with the building of these things but it just seems that the people that are cop-out on making them the "proper" way.
CCAAASSSCCAAAA 2 years ago
Yes, there is harder metal platings, however then it gets expencive. :D
And yes I don't build them, I just know how it works and how it's built, and one is going in my bug.
whatUsaybob 2 years ago
@CCAAASSSCCAAAA
maybe, its too hard to get the extreme compression ratio needed for diesel from a rotary...
im just guessing...
GOBbluthagain 1 year ago
@CCAAASSSCCAAAA since 2003, they have Hydrogen-powered rotary engines !!!!
engines are running in RX8 and Mazda5 !!!
rx7outlaw 1 year ago
@CCAAASSSCCAAAA
diesel engines (compression ignition engines) are fuel efficient because of the high compression ratios (~22:1). in other words, combustion in diesel engines occur at over 300 psi! wankels are limited in high compression ratios due to the relatively fragile apex seals. i believe the rolls royce wankel got up to ~10:1. your average car on the street has a ratio of ~9:1.
kpxfosho 9 months ago
That's makes total sense. But doesn't high compression ratios mainly apply to naturally aspirated engines? Wouldn't adding a turbo to the motor lower the compression ratio, add power, and still have decent mileage?
I'm sorry if that has already been answered in the labyrinth off comments for this video.
CCAAASSSCCAAAA 9 months ago
@CCAAASSSCCAAAA
High ratios do not only apply to N/A engines. Look at turbo-diesels.
Forced induction spark ignition engines are usually designed with a lower compression ratio in order to decrease the stresses under boost and/or eliminate knocking and/or preignition.
Adding a turbocharger nets more power and possibly nets better fuel consumption, than the same engine without it, because the compressor within the turbo increases the compression ratio in addition to the piston's compression.
kpxfosho 9 months ago
Ahhhhh. So when it comes to diesel compression in key in N/A and FI applications. Thanks for the lesson. I'm very very new to diesels so my questions pretty elementary. My knowledge of diesels consist of: They are usually loud, they usually smell, they make gobs of torque, and can last forever if maintained properly.
CCAAASSSCCAAAA 9 months ago
@CCAAASSSCCAAAA they can also run on used cooking oil.
If you own a diesel powered car, or are going to buy one, please consider that posibility.
As you know, the inventor of that engine developed it to run on oil in the first place.
basically, the difference is that the piston compresses air in the cylinder until the highest point at which fuel is injected. some engines heat up the air until the point when fuel ignites by itself, others use glow plugs to ignite the fuel.
dgurevich1 9 months ago
@CCAAASSSCCAAAA Diesel burns very slowly, rotaries really need a fast burning fuel because of the speed at which they rotate.
hektikethnik 8 months ago
If the rotary engine had become as reliable as the piston type, and add on the computerised engine management systems that are in our cars of today, they would have very economical indeed, yes, no?
Rinty145 2 years ago
@rinty
correct
hhn2002 2 years ago
Really the only problem is the way it is lubricated, the oil is injected from the case pan under the housing into the intake or the housing itself.
Really you just need to premix oil like a two stroke. we have and out RX7 is at 189K miles and has NEVER been into a shop, not once since 89 when we bought it.
whatUsaybob 2 years ago
Fuel economy suffers
JuanPapaNicolao 2 years ago
it efficient in making power not fuel
raviballer101 2 years ago
So why are they wasting their time on Piston engines when they got a highly efficient Wankel engine right there?
I read that the only problem with Rotary engines was closing the front and back, since it's circular.
But that doesn't seem like something that'd stop people from exploring the possibilities...
VirtuousSnake 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
coldinfusion 2 years ago
the rotary is not economical
coldinfusion 2 years ago
Then why would they mention it in the video?
Watching this, it seems to me that the Wankel is dominant.
Although, I do agree that because of the issue concerning the sealing of the chamber, it isn't as efficient as it could be. Yet. They're still working on it, right?
VirtuousSnake 2 years ago
well think about it this way
im not saying the rotary is a crappy engine I love the wankel
im saying that if the wankel was a better engine there would be more of them around rather than piston engines
coldinfusion 2 years ago
Maybe 'cause the piston engine came first?
It's always the same. As soon as something new comes out, everyone else rushes in and takes it to the next level.
This one wasn't invented 'till 1954! The Otto Engine was patented in 1876.
It seems to me that people are just reluctant to leave behind their piston engines. Change has never been welcome.
Go Go Wankel!!
VirtuousSnake 2 years ago
@VirtuousSnake Theyre a great engine and all but they are not as fuel efficient as a piston engine, with rising fuel prices, consider this to be one of the reasons they are not more common then the piston engines. They are more efficient in making power, but the amount of fuel they burn to do soo almost defeats the purpose... if it wasnt for the power and the amazing sound they make im sure there wouldnt be many of these around at all anymore.
watsdissniffinere 2 years ago
My dads gets about 18 city and 23-24 on the highway.
You just need to have it tuned lol.
whatUsaybob 2 years ago
22-23 sorry, I dont know how I missed that.
whatUsaybob 2 years ago
@VirtuousSnake That's simple.
It's because the major corporations don't want them to.
they are fine with how the things are. If it wasn't for them' we'd be all driving hydrogen fuel cell cars, or oil powered diesel cars (as it was the fuel origionally intended for that engine)
The massive oil companies don't want you to drive something efficient. they need you to burn gas. otherwise they'd be bankrupt.
dgurevich1 9 months ago
@VirtuousSnake Because they aren't really all that efficient, don't have great longevity and burn oil so their emissions are worse, not to mention that they make little low end torque (I'm looking at a dyno chart of a stock RX8 making less than 100lb ft of torque at 2700RPM) so the fuel efficiency is hurt as you have to rev the engine higher for even moderate driving.
There's a reason why not even Mazda has switched all their cars over to these engines.
94XJ 7 months ago
@94XJ Mazda could just change their style of intake manifold on these engines and it would produce more torque. I have a buddy that mods the upper intake manifold just a little and every time we seem to make more and more torque of of these rx7s.
xblade6500 4 months ago
RX-500 lol
nice movie!
tupolev16k 2 years ago