ClioSport.net
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
Wankel Vs Otto
- Thread starter Tom
- Start date
Audi TT Stronic
good example of a wankel (animated) for complete engine noobs (like me)
http://www.keveney.com/Wankel.html
http://www.keveney.com/Wankel.htmlhttp://www.keveney.com/Wankel.html
you can click on the link now....
Your find that even though the wankle on that mazda is a 1.3 the petrol usage and emmisions it produces is more like a 2.5/3l engine..... They are engines like the type r as they are not very torqy and need high revs for the bhp...
Advantages is the fact that its lighter and less to go wrong... Turbochaged they are mentle!!!
Audi TT Stronic
Just looking at the two variations of engines (wankel and 4 stroke) I can see why the wankel is such a more simpler engine to work on.
But how the hell can they get 220bhp from a 1.3 lol, thats crazy, I will assume there is virtually no torque ?
*edit* okay it took me so long to read the articles and then write this that some of it has already been said.
Why the high emmisions ?
Wow u learn something new everyday ! Is the wankel the engine used in the new mazda that they keep going on about ? Always wandered what they were on about in the advert !
Rotary engines ARE otto cycle classed engines. THey use the same 4 stroke principal to pricess fuel & air.
Rotary engines dont have a reciprocating motion and fewr moving parts, less pumping losses, less friction, less complexity and for the same CC they run more power because they have more combustion sequences per rotation of the output shaft. A piston engine has one combustion per 4 strokes, a rotary has 1 for ever 1/3 of a turn. And a rotary always has each stage intake/combustion/exhaust occuring at any one time.
A problem with rotarys is how to work out the actual CC rating of the engine. They run lower CRs and combust fuel worse due to chamber shape and CR. But they make better use of the burn and torque is tranferred until the apex seal reveals the exhaust port, whist a piston engine only really uses the pressure rise for a short few degrees of crank rotation, generally around 25-35 deg.
Wankels process more air per rpm, simple. more power.
dont get engine braking from a wankel either so you need fooking good brakes to stop them, mate of mine had an old rx7 and you should see the pads on them, another issue they used to suffer from in the past was people putting in non gen spark plugs which were too long and the electrodes used to hit the tips on the rotors
Getting back to your question... WHICH IS BEST......
The Wankel is obviously good in the fact that you could get 200bhp and still pay reduced road tax (1.3)
Both engines have there strong points though, the wankel never really took off coz people are scared of change, i want one though!!
neither are good !! Fred Flintstone got it right !
Wankels never took off for several reasons.
Apart from the massive R&D costs needed to create one that could live with an average driver and be durable enough for daily use and the occasional missed service they are cheap in theory to produce, but expensive in practice.
Although there are only 4 major parts to produce. Theoretically there is less to go wrong as there are less parts. The lack of vehicles that can use them and meet stringent emissions regulations means that the number of units made dont benefit from economies of scale so remain expensive to produce.
Merc made the C111 which was initially a triple rotary engine but then changed to a quad rotary engine. Made some silly bhp and allowed them to reach 250mph in tests. But they didnt carry on with development, much like other manufacturers due to brand pollution its more about cost and politics than weather or not its a better engine.
They are horrible sounding, flat and rather boring to drive. They dont sound or feel alive and a flacid sports car is the last thing you want to sell.
Much like Hondas VTEC system. It can come from the factory as a much better an linear drive than they do, but without that kick it wouldnt feel like anything special to the average punter.
Similar threads
