| |
GM7HUD > CARS 14.07.08 11:34l 38 Lines 1734 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 995165GM7HUD
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: engines.
Path: DB0FHN<DB0FOR<DB0MRW<DK0WUE<DB0RES<ON0AR<VK6HGR<GB7ESX
Sent: 080714/0811z 16354@GB7ESX.#31.GBR.EU $:995165GM7HUD [Witham, Esx]NNA V3.1
G0TEZ wrote:-
>
> I am no petrol head so changed channel meanwhile thinking that the oldest
> presenter was just getting born when the Wankel came into being.
Perhaps you should have watched, you might learn something?
> This is germane to the topic as one of the advantages of the Wankel was
> that it was more efficient than a piston engine
It's not more efficient, it's horrendously inefficient. The advantage the
Wankel offers is that there is no loss converting reciprocating motion of
the pistons into rotary motion. It's already rotary. The engines breathe
better, but 40 years of head design for normal engines has solved that
advantage. The result is the engine swept volume is much less for the power
produced than an Otto engine but the fuel consumption per BHP is much
worse.
Mazda still produce a Wankel engine. Years of production experience have
got the life to 60000 miles before a major engine overhaul and rebuild is
needed. However, the life is patheric compared to the expantancy of modern
engines. It makes a great engine for a sports car where performance is more
important that running costs.
NSU who made the 1st production Wankel engined cars offered a lifetime
warranty on the engine as a way of convincing buyers they would not be
ruined by buying one. Suffice to say the rate the engines failed bankrupted
the company in a few years. This alone is the main reason why car
manufacturers are traditional in many of their engineering outlooks. A fact
that even the dumbest person should comprehend with ease... if your advance
is unreliable you'd better have a big bank balance.
73 de Andy GM7HUD
Sent for the benefit of packet users other than 'Ostrich' G0TEZ who blocks
anyone he disagrees with!
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
