|
|
Posted for "Ed Anderson" <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>:
Your right of course, Leon.
A per revolution comparison is a valid comparison, but there is just
something that bothers me about getting to count the volume of all the
cylinders in a reciprocating engine toward its displacement - yet, we dont'
with the rotary. I certainly agree and have no issue with the equivalence
comparison with a 2 or 4 stroke - but with them we do count all the volume
displace in an engine cycle toward the total displacement. We simple don't
with the rotary.
But, as you said - does it make a difference? And of course it does not.
You get what you get out of the engine.
Hadn't heard or see you on the list in such a while I was a bit concerned.
I had just forward JJ Johnson's interest in a 20B your way when you came on
the list.
I've been busy getting my Dynamic Effect Intake Presentation ready for a
flyin in late October. It turns out there is a lot more to it than manifold
length, RPM and the speed of sound {:>) Its going to open some eyes and
prove some folks dead wrong - fortunately it has nothing to do with
displacement {:>).
Best Regards
Ed Anderson
RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
eanderson@carolina.rr.com
I sorta KNEW this would create contovesy. As I alluded to last
time, this whole capacity question is a can of worms, and it tends
to just keep going around and aound and back and forth }:>) .
I can appreciate the point you make that all three rotor faces each
going though a Wankel Cycle, and needing 3 revs of the eccentric
shaft to do so..
|
|