Another engine design.............

[LearjetMinako]

Weird looking design. I wonder if they can fit that X looking engine under the hood. And if all else, isn't one of their pictures of a Boxer (H) design.

I like the Rotary engine. Nothing else says love better than an engine screaming at 16,000rpms with a turbo whistle louder than the wind shear the car creates. So what if it is has some problems, if you think about, don't we all?

 

[Captain Ledd]

why do you say it has good torque, cause it is able to pull a wheelie with 300lbs sitting on top of the wheels.

it has torque because that triangle-dohickey is basically a planetary gear, sort of. It makes it so that you get more power strokes per revolution. it's a slow moving engine in terms of crankshaft RPM's.

Check out their youtube video's posted on Wicked Sludge's post, check out the timing belt and look how large the gear is on the crank. it actually has to reciprocate the piston assembly back and forth a ton before it makes one revolution, the cams are spinning faster than the crank is.

It's a very direct gear reduction engine that according to them makes better use of where power is made in a reciprocating piston engine, yielding higher efficiency.

 

[rangerbum]

really?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Gxx6OB7CMs

cause it sure looks like its working there!
the cam only sees force from one piston (and thus, one side) at a time...theres not that much force.

and you can get a good idea of the exhaust note with it mounted on this trike:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Gxx6OB7CMs&feature=related

sounds neat!

I stand Corrected. I was thinking of a bigger engine with more cylinders. But i suppose if you used completely seperated cam systems it would still work.

 

[rangerbum]

really?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Gxx6OB7CMs

cause it sure looks like its working there!
the cam only sees force from one piston (and thus, one side) at a time...theres not that much force.

and you can get a good idea of the exhaust note with it mounted on this trike:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Gxx6OB7CMs&feature=related

sounds neat!

I stand Corrected. I was thinking of a bigger engine with more cylinders. But i suppose if you used completely seperated cam systems it would still work.

 

[Wicked_Sludge]

The AMC gremlin was supposed to have a 4 rotor wankel in it, but it got canned and they stuffed the 258 and 232 I6's in there at the last minute.

so was the delorean DMC-12...but the wankel sucked too much fuel and couldnt meet emissions requirements.

 

[Bent Bolt]

A new and interesting engine. Time will tell if it's " revolutionary "

 

[94STXRanger]

why do you say it has good torque, cause it is able to pull a wheelie with 300lbs sitting on top of the wheels.

Sure. Like Captain ledd said, look how slow that thing turns. At that rate its probably produce a lot of power in the low rpms, and i would imagine quite a bit of torque, even if it is just a few hundred pounds sticking out 6 or so feet from the axle.

Imagine have a couple more sets of those pistons in a row. Id really be interested in the horsepower and torque ratings, and at what rpm.

One thing i cant quite see is how the change the counter rotating trilobe cam direction to match the other? is it just gears?

 

[94STXRanger]

Another thought: wouldnt this engine run perfectly smooth? Or damn close to it? If two pistons are firing the opposite direction at the same time, shouldnt they get real close to canceling the forces exerted on the motor? Especially if there were four sets of pistons in a row. just a thought

 

[MAKG]

Something else that's odd:

Have you tried to convert their BSFC numbers to conventional units? They report 212 g/hr/kW. I get 0.63 lb/hr/HP, using 452 g/lb and 0.742 kW/HP. That's significantly worse than a good conventional gasoline engine, which consumes around 0.5 lb/hr/HP.

Something isn't right here.

 

[Ozwynn]

I would be interested in seeing it in a 15 liter (thats right fifteen liter) I-6 diesel configuration.

 

[MAKG]

I would be interested in seeing it in a 15 liter (thats right fifteen liter) I-6 diesel configuration.

Umm, you can't make an opposed engine into an I-6.

 

[Ozwynn]

did you read their WWW or are you making an assumption. They have an Inline config........

 

[MAKG]

did you read their WWW or are you making an assumption. They have an Inline config........

Sure did. That's an opposed config. Opposed pistons are critical elements to their design.

 

[Ozwynn]

Sure did. That's an opposed config. Opposed pistons are critical elements to their design.

apparently not. read a little more before calling me a liar

http://www.revetec.com/development8.htm

 

[94STXRanger]

now im even more confused. Where is the counteracting force on the v and inline engines? how do the pistons travel back up?