Why Do Rotaries Suck?

[bigmikespec]

^^^case in point^^^

E. The rotor Fanboiz Are the rudest bunch of chuntz to ever grace these boards. Plain and steadfast arguments have been proffered by the piston brigade only to be met by personal attacks from the egg beater crowd. Some of them have offerred damn fine arguments in favor of the rotor but let their credibility fly out the window With their personal remarks. Bring it on rotor heads but dont sully a damn good debate by attacking the man rather than the argument.

[rotorhead15]

i dont understand why sydneykid is going on about the mazda lies? its not as if he owns one, why should he care

this is a dumb thread, ive read so many DUMB things, 12a single rotor? 18 litre rotaries? conspiracy theories over mazda lies? tin foil hat wearers? I think you skyline boys should stick to what you know, skylines, if you want a wealth of information, and instead of posting dumb questions on a forum dedicated to skylines, check out the ausrotary forum. All the info you wil ever want in the world is in there. Because just about everyone in this thread has been gravely misinformed about pretty much everything except combustion cycles, which RICE is totally 100% correct about.

Some guys cant even get the amount of rotors right? who was the bloke that said the 13b was a triple rotor or something like that? this thread is pretty much LOL, and all the ausrotary guys have been having a great old time laughing about the dumbness located in this thread, and we thank all you guys for providing these laughs. You have just proved your all the bunch of retards that we thought you were

[Birds]

Hence why I will respond.

What you are describing is gear ratio, diff ratio and tyre diameter effects. If I want to travel 50% less distance, then I simply lower the gearbox/diff ratio. or fit some smaller diameter tyres What has that got to do with engine capacity? Nothing.

Nobody halves the true capacity of a piston engine just because it combusts every second revolation of the cranshaft. So why should we allow a rotary engine to devide its true capacity by 3 just because the rotors turn at one third eccentric shaft speed. There is no logic there.

Regardless, I'm not falling for the trap of comparison, the fact remains a 13B pumps 3.9 litres for every complete cycle of its rotors. Whether that's the same as a 3.9 litre piston engine is irrelevant.

The difficulty the blind rotary supporters have with me is I can point to a number of rotary engined cars and say I built/helped build them. I don't have an anti rotary agenda, my agenda is quite simply to tell the truth, expose the 40 years of Mazda lies and dispell the urban myths surrounding them. The fact remains a 13B is a 3.9 litre 2 cycle rotary engine where the rotors (the all important combustion components of the engine) only rev to 3,000 rpm. Don't confuse that with saying a 13B is the same as a 3.9 litre 2 cycle piston engine where the pistons (the all important combustion components of the engine) only rev to 3,000 rpm. That's not my argument, because that would be attempting the impossible, equivalency is a fallacy.

Cheers

Gary

You're doing it again man. Do you down a bottle of scotch before you read my posts? You keep stating that I'm the one who is using piston engine terminology to describe a rotary engine but THIS IS YOU. I'm the one saying that the only thing they have in common is the speed of their output shaft, thanks to the eccentric shaft's gear ratio. You keep calling factual examples where you get proven wrong "traps" and "muddy water". Can you not deal with the truth or something? Have you devoted too much of your life towards believing this 'equivalent to a 3.9 litre 4 stroke' crap?

The gear ratios are completely relevant because if you can follow my example for a second...we are comparing rotary vehicles to piston vehicles for the purposes of fair motorsport competition. Now with two cars, one rotary and one four-stroke piston, that both have identical gearbox ratios, diff ratios, tyre size and are both driven at the same engine RPM...emphasis on crankshaft RPM...all that is left to compare in these vehicles is the air displacement during combustion cycle of the engines. Now if we give these engines each a full combustion cycle, the rotary car ends up travelling 50% further than the 4 stroke piston car. Hence why you cannot say the 1.3 litre rotary is fairly matched to a 3.9 litre 4 stroke...because if both cars are made to travel the exact same distance, the 13B has actually only pumped 2.6 litres of air because it never completed its full combustion cycle.

IMO, in this thread RICE RACING has demonstrated the best understanding of these concepts (which lets face it, are actually quite simple outside of argumentative people who keep arguing points that don't actually exist). I would be happy to share a beer with you.

If I was feeling more charitable I'd send Sydneykid and his blind supporters (who seem to concentrate on how many posts he has made in this thread rather than the actual content of them, which I'll point out for most part is just a bunch of "that's a trap", "that's a fallacy", "that has nothing to do with it", "your flawless examples don't make sense to me because I want to remove from the equation a vital part of the rotary engine", "I work on rotaries therefore I am king") a lego set with some pieces that demonstrate the very basics behind gear ratios and physics. It's really NOT that hard people.

[Birds]

^^^case in point^^^

E. The rotor Fanboiz Are the rudest bunch of chuntz to ever grace these boards. Plain and steadfast arguments have been proffered by the piston brigade only to be met by personal attacks from the egg beater crowd. Some of them have offerred damn fine arguments in favor of the rotor but let their credibility fly out the window With their personal remarks. Bring it on rotor heads but dont sully a damn good debate by attacking the man rather than the argument.

Have to agree here, whilst we have plenty of dumbasses on board, some of these Ausrotary guys haven't shown much in the way of diplomacy. Leave the personal feelings at the doors boys...we don't want an RB vs rotary thread here, just facts.

i dont understand why sydneykid is going on about the mazda lies? its not as if he owns one, why should he care

this is a dumb thread, ive read so many DUMB things, 12a single rotor? 18 litre rotaries? conspiracy theories over mazda lies? tin foil hat wearers? I think you skyline boys should stick to what you know, skylines, if you want a wealth of information, and instead of posting dumb questions on a forum dedicated to skylines, check out the ausrotary forum. All the info you wil ever want in the world is in there. Because just about everyone in this thread has been gravely misinformed about pretty much everything except combustion cycles, which RICE is totally 100% correct about.

Some guys cant even get the amount of rotors right? who was the bloke that said the 13b was a triple rotor or something like that? this thread is pretty much LOL, and all the ausrotary guys have been having a great old time laughing about the dumbness located in this thread, and we thank all you guys for providing these laughs. You have just proved your all the bunch of retards that we thought you were

Does it make you feel somewhat superior that there are people posting in this thread who have never had anything to do with a rotary engine before? This thread, however uninformed some comments in it may be, has done alot of positive for your favourite engine...by way of better informing those who don't know what they are all about. You sound like the kind of person who would laugh at someone for wanting to learn? Bunch of retards? Come on guys...the representation of your forum thus far has been pretty lack-lustre and unfriendly. Sure makes me want to stay clear of Ausrotary.

[RICE RACING]

Waiting for more pics of boobs

[bigmikespec]

This is pretty interested for those wanting to learn and understand what Gary is trying to explain with regard to the rotation of the rotors and the eccentric shaft.

One complete rotation of the rotor (one complete combustion cycle) relates to three rotations of the eccentric shaft. So where should you measure from? IMO it should be from the rotor; we don't measure RPM in a piston engine from the gearbox and that is essentially what is being done in a rotary engine.

Also, it is pretty easy to understand that if you take into account the volume of each face, one complete cycle from two rotors... 3.9L.

I think it is just difficult for passionate rotary engine fans to accept the above which is understandable, no GTR fan wants to hear about the oil issues with RB26's. Personally I like both piston and rotary engines for what they are...

Mike

...more boobs please!!!!!

Edited September 20, 2009 by bigmikespec

[ylwgtr2]

Waiting for more pics of boobs

[ylwgtr2]

This is pretty interested for those wanting to learn and understand what Gary is trying to explain with regard to the rotation of the rotors and the eccentric shaft.

One complete rotation of the rotor (one complete combustion cycle) relates to three rotations of the eccentric shaft. So where should you measure from? IMO it should be from the rotor; we don't measure RPM in a piston engine from the gearbox and that is essentially what is being done in a rotary engine.

Also, it is pretty easy to understand that if you take into account the volume of each face, one complete cycle from two rotors... 3.9L.

I think it is just difficult for passionate rotary engine fans to accept the above which is understandable, no GTR fan wants to hear about the oil issues with RB26's. Personally I like both piston and rotary engines for what they are...

Mike

no....the e shaft is not a selectable ratio.....im for the piston engine and rotary engine with identical gearbox/diff ratio theory

[Munkyb0y]

Gary,

When was the last time you have had sex with a female?

Far from it, its me knowing you are an idiot for your delusional ranting baseless posts on a topic you obviously know very little about

ETC ETC ...

Hahahaha what an absolute tool. Just like that little fat kid that has a hissy fit when he doesnt get his cake.

You've proven yourself by your own conduct. No one here could have made you look more of a tool than you've done for yourself.

BTW, I like rotaries. I like rx7's very much too. And this was never a rotary bashing session. This was a very interesting debate, until you and your monkeys came in and pissed all over the place.

[bigmikespec]

no....the e shaft is not a selectable ratio.....im for the piston engine and rotary engine with identical gearbox/diff ratio theory

It is not selectable but it is a ratio nonetheless hence a bit misleading when people say... "oh man a 13b can do 13000rpm!!!!" with little knowledge as to how.

[RICE RACING]

This is pretty interested for those wanting to learn and understand what Gary is trying to explain with regard to the rotation of the rotors and the eccentric shaft.

One complete rotation of the rotor (one complete combustion cycle) relates to three rotations of the eccentric shaft. So where should you measure from? IMO it should be from the rotor; we don't measure RPM in a piston engine from the gearbox and that is essentially what is being done in a rotary engine.

Also, it is pretty easy to understand that if you take into account the volume of each face, one complete cycle from two rotors... 3.9L.

I think it is just difficult for passionate rotary engine fans to accept the above which is understandable, no GTR fan wants to hear about the oil issues with RB26's. Personally I like both piston and rotary engines for what they are...

Mike

...more boobs please!!!!!

You missed the important point in my many posts.

Gary is wrong. The reason why is as I explained that the piston or rotor is directly linked to the shaft. You piston is link by a mechanical leverage system so somehow you are cheating and we should be measuring the linear speed of the piston and rating it that way! < that is ridiculous just as is the point Gary is trying to push. its a pointless and has no logic at all.

The only thing that matters here is power pulses! that is the definition that all positive displacement internal combustion engines need achieve and it reveals their displacement from this very basic fundamental fact.

I will say it again.

A Wankel rotary has one power pulse per 1 output shaft revolution per rotor. It takes three full revolutions of this shaft for one Wankel engine cycle to be completed. So it is very basic that for a 13B of single chamber displacement of 654cc that you have the following.

1 revolution

= 654cc x 2 (rotors) x 1 (rev or 360 deg)

= 1308cc

2 revolutions

= 654cc x 2 (rotors) x 2 (revs or 720deg)

=2616cc

3 revolutions

= 654cc x 2 (rotors) x 3 (revs or 1080 deg)

=3924cc

Again the Wankel satisfies ALL of the above conditions and it can be called any one of the three for comparison arguments or option 1 as a Wankel Rotary Combustion Cycle, so far as displacement goes its is ONLY complete after 1080 deg or 3 full output shaft revolutions, this simply serves as telling people who would otherwise not know that it takes this long for ALL combustion faces to be account for........................ as is defined by the Wankel engine cycle. It really is that basic at the end of the day.

So for comparison reasons you can pick any one of the 3 options to see how much the 13B breaths as compared to any other internal combustion engine.

IMHO reputable bodies worked all this back out in the 70's be they insurance, taxation or racing regulators. It is not that hard, hell if I can figure it out anyone can

[RICE RACING]

ETC ETC ...

Hahahaha what an absolute tool. Just like that little fat kid that has a hissy fit when he doesnt get his cake.

You've proven yourself by your own conduct. No one here could have made you look more of a tool than you've done for yourself.

BTW, I like rotaries. I like rx7's very much too. And this was never a rotary bashing session. This was a very interesting debate, until you and your monkeys came in and pissed all over the place.

I came here and set you delude fools straight be a man get over it and sell the Datsun and get a real car

[Munkyb0y]

hahaha. i'm laughing and want to strangle you at the same time. its very frustrating

Calling them Datsuns isnt offensive to us. We love our Datto's around here

[bigmikespec]

You missed the important point in my many posts.

Gary is wrong. The reason why is as I explained that the piston or rotor is directly linked to the shaft. You piston is link by a mechanical leverage system so somehow you are cheating and we should be measuring the linear speed of the piston and rating it that way! < that is ridiculous just as is the point Gary is trying to push. its a pointless and has no logic at all.

I understand exactly what you are saying. However, for a single piston stroke there is one revolution of the crank. And with the rotary for one complete revolution of the rotor three rotations of the eccentric shaft.

Measure piston speed? Come on, that is irrelevant.

I know what I just did was compare rotary and piston but I have broad shoulders

[FineLine]

in your articulate reply you forgot point F...........

You are a tool

It is better to remain silent and have people think you are a fool rather than open your mouth and prove it.

In your case however, it is too late.

[RICE RACING]

I understand exactly what you are saying. However, for a single piston stroke there is one revolution of the crank. And with the rotary for one complete revolution of the rotor three rotations of the eccentric shaft.

Measure piston speed? Come on, that is irrelevant.

I know what I just did was compare rotary and piston but I have broad shoulders

See with our engine we have distinct separate zones in which different parts of the otto cycle are conducted. This basic cycle in the RCE takes 1080 degrees to complete (as defined by geometrical relationship of its rotary combustion cycle V's your reciprocating versions), any engine is rated on all of its elements completing one cycle be it two stroke, 4 stroke or Wankel.

If you want to count all of the engine for a Wankel (as I do) then you find its full displacement is 3.924lt for a 13B engine. < How this compares to other principles for fairness in all forms of life I have explained many times already

For anyone in doubt I will spell it out for you....... you cannot with ANY ENGINE TYPE only count part of it Thus I call a 13B a 3.924lt engine which is what it is, but its a Wankel and if you don't understand how to compare it on an equivalence basis to other inferior engine types then you need to learn 1.3lt 2 stroke (is it "similar" YES!) 2.6lt 4 stroke (is it "similar" YES!) what is it really? its a 654cc chamber 2 rotor Wankel that actually displaces 3924cc in 1080 degree Wankel Cycle

Edited September 20, 2009 by RICE RACING

[RICE RACING]

Mazda calling it a 654cc two rotor Wankel is 100% honest and correct they simply did not realize people would become so stupid with the advent of the internets and car forums

The onus is on Datsun drivers and other PISTON enthusiasts to see how this superior engine operates and understand it, maybe if they took some time too they too could have had a rotary engine and a superior car like the FD3S and beaten everyone else in the world for 4 years straight or won LeMans 24hr with a car from Japan

I guess you can only dream and talk trash on your fav forum about how rotaries suck to make you feel better about being inferior and ultimately losers

[GT-R32]

Mazda calling it a 654cc two rotor Wankel is 100% honest and correct they simply did not realize people would become so stupid with the advent of the internets and car forums

The onus is on Datsun drivers and other PISTON enthusiasts to see how this superior engine operates and understand it, maybe if they took some time too they too could have had a rotary engine and a superior car like the FD3S and beaten everyone else in the world for 4 years straight or won LeMans 24hr with a car from Japan

I guess you can only dream and talk trash on your fav forum about how rotaries suck to make you feel better about being inferior and ultimately losers

Mate, with all due respect, go back to AusRotary. I go there when I want to read that kind of superiority-complex attitude. It grates on everyone, even people who might have otherwised agreed. Right now back on AR, they are lapping up your attitude as this time it isn't against them. Enjoy it for what it is.

Hell, you might have even had people agree with your valid points with regard to the Wankel cycle if they were posted in a different manner.

If the RX7 SP is so brilliant, why modify it so extensively? If you are honest with yourself, you will recognise that all my previous points with regard to the Wankel's successes and issues, that are yet to be addressed, have come from you. Quit the disrespect and quit the bashing, for your own sake. It looks weak.

[rotorhead15]

Have to agree here, whilst we have plenty of dumbasses on board, some of these Ausrotary guys haven't shown much in the way of diplomacy. Leave the personal feelings at the doors boys...we don't want an RB vs rotary thread here, just facts.

Does it make you feel somewhat superior that there are people posting in this thread who have never had anything to do with a rotary engine before? This thread, however uninformed some comments in it may be, has done alot of positive for your favourite engine...by way of better informing those who don't know what they are all about. You sound like the kind of person who would laugh at someone for wanting to learn? Bunch of retards? Come on guys...the representation of your forum thus far has been pretty lack-lustre and unfriendly. Sure makes me want to stay clear of Ausrotary.

Yes I now feel like President Bush at the height of the invasion of Iraq...superior

[GT-R32]

Yes I now feel like President Bush at the height of the invasion of Iraq...superior

And we all know that Bush was the worst American President ever, but could any one tell him that?