Twin rotor Peripheral port

[Ricco_04]

The tubbie would win!  :cool

[Brett]

I thought rotors were travelling at 1/3rd crank speed?

[Martiny]

Just out of interest if the propshaft is running at 10k does this mean that the rotors are running at 30k. Don\'t they turn 3 times for every turn of the prop shaft. Thats some shifting if true !

Shaun

Shaun, I think you mean the ECCENTRIC shaft.

The Rotors turn at 1/3 the speed of the Eccentric shaft. THerefore, if shaft speed = 10 000 rpm, then Rotor speed 3 333 rpm.

[Martiny]

McCarthy, the problem is with these ports that they really dont work at low rpm. Per port is not conducive to a road car.

[McCARTHY]

to be honest i\'m just playing with ideas at the mo. i have the FD as you know but i\'m building that for track use and so it will become more of a fun car thatn an everyday car like it is at the moment.

i\'m looking at buying something old skool kind of mk1 escort shape (i\'m not saying i\'m buying a mk1 escort to to give you an idea of what i may be looking for) and may do the PP rotary engine in that. a bit of old skool cool :cool

[iaint]

Noise might be easier to control for track use on a non-turbo rotor...  The turbos really respond well to a lack of back pressure (assuming you can control boooooost) and n/a genreally copes with a little more.  Might allow you to run more sliencing and be more track friendly.

Reliability would be interesting - much less to go wrong and temps in the system would be significantly lower.

Simplified intake system and exhause would be more efficient than directing both through the turbos as well.

Clearly a 3-rotor n/a would be very cool and help somewhat with torque issues.

[Brett]

I promise noise will be an issue, you would deffor have to fit a proper silencer :yes

[McCARTHY]

i looked at three rotor option just the cost more than doubles in cost, longer fuel rails, 2 more injectors, another throttle body new crank shiftting the motor back to get weight distribution a little better..... this will just a bit of fun if i do it

proper silencer will go on i would be interested in having a silly loud run around

[20B_boy]

Noise might be easier to control for track use on a non-turbo rotor...

Hmm, N/A rotors often are louder, no turbo to adsorb any thing...

[McCARTHY]

the bore isn\'t as big on the exhaust so that must help a little and with a decent silencer

[Brett]

A silencer is the only thing thats going to help I\'m afraid :yes

[oldone]

so if you have 2 FDs both with 350 bhp one turbo charged one P ported then the turbo will generate more torque .

on track tho how would the performance compare

The only real advantage the turbo has on the circuits ,is the sheer accelleration(sp) in a straight line.It is extremely difficult to set the turbo car up for the circuit.Non turbo is a lot more user friendly and more predictable... :Typing

[MikeLMR]

I would have thought a well built turbocharged car would last longer (engine wise) than an N/A engine too, high rev\'s = high maintenance

Another point to note is the cost of building is it more realistic to DIY build a relatively low power turbocharged lump as apposed to pushing the ragged edge with an N/A engine.

[oldone]

I would have thought a well built turbocharged car would last longer (engine wise) than an N/A engine too, high rev\'s = high maintenance

Another point to note is the cost of building is it more realistic to DIY build a relatively low power turbocharged lump as apposed to pushing the ragged edge with an N/A engine.

A well put together motor is the answer both ways,more stress in a turbo motor.....higher revs does not always mean high maintenance.Yes it easier horsepower with a turbo for those who cannot build a decent carb fed motor....heheheheheheheheh

[McCARTHY]

Around 5k is the price after speaking to WGT for a P ported engine with all the right lightened toys.

Also the standard FD gears are not the best suited for a PP engine with the final drive being to high. Apparently close ratio gears are the best way forward on this.