Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: flyrotary
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 22:21:57 -0500
Message-ID: <redirect-1853869@logan.com>
From: Lehanover@aol.com
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: 12A vs. 13B
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 11/5/2002 7:11:20 PM US Eastern Standard Time, 
marv@lancaironline.net writes:

> Posted for "Martin" <wankel@telia.com>:
>  
>  Time 4 mister Hanover to think things trough.......;-)
>  
>  The 12A rotor housing is 10 mm narrower in whit than the 13B.
>  70 mm for the 12A and 80 mm for the 13B.
>  (60 mm for 10A )
>  
>  The 12A is 1146 cc AND noting else....
>  The 13B is 1308 cc .......
>  
>  Don't mix things up whit insurance policy on cars....or the 1.8 times you
>  have to multiply the engine cc for racing, just so the UN-normal 4-bangers
>  can keep up.
>  We do have a 1.8 x cc rule here in Europe.
>  
>  Aren't automatic gearboxes only for disabled people ??
>  
>  And yes, the only substitute for cubic centimeters is a Rotary engine....!!
>  
>  Happy rotation !!
>  
>  /Martin
>  MS 880B...ready 4 a 13B
>  

   Gee whiz Martin,
   Read it again. I would rather see any Mazda carry on life, even with a 
different 
   engine than go to the shredder, because I love Mazdas. So unless you build 
your 
   engine from all new parts, (very expensive) that means that a Mazda of 
some kind 
   bit the dust. In some cases just because the engine was removed. What 
better 
   fate for these hulks than to be reengined with a 32 Valve Cadillac V-8 or 
a small 
   block Chevy? Conversion kits are available for this. More Mazdas on the 
road for 
   longer is better for us, yes? 

    Most sanctioning organizations (including the Sports Car Club of America) 
refer to 
    the 12A displacement as 2292 CCs and the 13B as 2600 CCs. The rational is 
that 
    to compare the rotary engine to a conventional 4 stroke you must rotate 
the crank 
    through 720 degrees of rotation. This is to allow all of the cylinders of 
a 4 stroke to 
    cycle. If you do that to a rotary, what do you get? The data plate on the 
12A 
    powered cars says that the engine displaces 1147 CCs I suspect that this 
is 
    rounded off a bit to get a whole number. Otherwise the answer is 2294 
CCs. So 
    for the sake of determining what cars the Mazda has to compete against, 
the 
    engine is 2292 CCs. Or 2600 CCs for the 13B powered cars.
   
    In comparing the 12A and 13B the comment "there is no substitute for 
cubic 
    inches, or CCs" refers to the larger displacement 13B having the 
potential for 
    making more power. This is a general truism and is not really true. The 
heavier 
    rotors and longer crank of the 13B limit maximum RPM to less than 9,500.
    The 12A can go to 10,000 RPM. This with unlightened rotors in both cases.
    If you add the super lite rotors maybe 9,700 for the 13B and 10,700 for 
the 12A.
    You have to turn it faster but you can equal the power of a 13B. 
         This data is of no value for the aircraft installation. But just for 
Oshkosh a turbo 
    13B with lite rotors could put on one heck of an airshow. For the long 
haul, the 
    engines will be turning between 5,000 and 6,500 RPM. In this RPM range, 
the 
    13B is king. 
    
     The 13B rotor housing is about 1/2 inch wider than the 12A.     And so 
it is, 
     Just About.

     Being old and wise (I think) the automatic trans is such a cool idea 
that young 
    guys miss it every time. The rear end gears in a Mazda look like toys. 
The rotary 
    has little torque just off idle (notice the 45 pound flywheels) and can 
barely get the 
    car rolling. With a big V-8 up front, you would need a spare diff in the 
trunk to get 
    anywhere. The less obvious problem is your wife will not stand for this 
new toy 
    unless she can drive it too. Years ago a stranger rang my doorbell. He 
had a new 
    Fiat Brava with under 100 miles on it sitting in my driveway. He also had 
a trunk 
    full of racing parts he wanted installed on his new car. His wife waited 
in another 
    fiat (white 72 Sport Coupe). I did the whole 9 yards (an aircraft term). 
Wild cams,
    dual 42 DCNFs headers, lite flywheel, MSD ignition, adjustable cam 
pulleys etc. It 
    was on hell of a fun car to drive fast. Well, in a straight line anyway. 
It was not at 
    all fun for his wife to drive, and she was stuck away from home a couple 
of times 
    with fouled plugs (even with the MSD). So we backed off on the cam choice 
and 
    the car became a delight to drive. He is now the CEO of Collier-Seeley 
corp. in 
    Los Angeles, and still has a Fiat sport.
          So with a V-8 and an automatic trans you could have one real nice 
car. You 
    could eat BMWs with it. Your wife would love it, and the original rear 
end would 
    last forever. And you could used the rotary engine in your airplane.

    My friend Tom Pomeroy has no right arm and no feet. He is also two time 
national 
    champion in formula continental, using the same manual trans as everybody 
else 
    in the class. He drove my Lola Can Am car one time and I had to weld a 
washer
    to a nut and jam nut that onto the top of the shift lever. He would stick 
his hook 
    through the washer and wrap a heavy rubber band around it to keep his 
hook from   
    jumping out. He can out drive me and everybody else he competes against. 
He is 
    also the most incredible mechanic you ever saw. He is a computer whiz and 
    does 3D cad for a living. He and his wife as a team won the Chrysler 
national 
    trouble shooting competition while in high school. (best mechanics in the 
USA).
    So relatively speaking, it is I who is disabled.

     Lynn E. Hanover