Stop The Wankel Engine

kernals12

Banned
wankel-rotary-engine.jpg

This contraption is the Wankel Rotary Engine. It works very differently from a normal piston engine as shown below


wankel-rotary-engine-diagram-motor-rotary-vs-piston-engine-diagram-of-motor-mazda-rx8-12a.jpg


First, some history. The engine was developed by German engineer Felix Wankel in 1957. It was first used in 1964 in the NSU Spider then in the Ro80 luxury sedan. There were many touted advantages. Compared to a piston engine, it was lighter, more compact, and had fewer moving parts.

B97512576Z.120151016153853000GVVB9UG0.11.jpg


1200px-NSU_Ro_80_-_2009-10-11_%28Foto_Sp%29.jpg

By 1972, the Wankel was touted as the engine of the future. GM Vice President John DeLorean said that by 1985, 80% of GM cars would use it. The company was planning on putting this engine first in the subcompact Chevrolet Monza. AMC wanted to buy the engine to put in the Pacer. NSU partnered with Citroen on a "Comotor" project. Mercedes Benz developed a 3 rotor engine and put it in a mid engined concept car, the C111
1200px-Mercedes-Benz_Museum_C111_200901241511.jpg


Then there's the company most famous for rotary power, Mazda. By 1972, the company was selling one in every single one of their models, even pickup trucks! For 40 years afterwards, the company continued selling rotary engines in select models, most notably the RX-7 and RX-8 sports cars.

Then problems began to pile up. It turned out that the rotary engine was not very fuel efficient due to its inherent design lowering the compression ratio. With the 1974 oil crisis, this was a big problem. It also belched out smog. As the 1975 US emissions standards loomed, this was another big problem. The problem of apex seal wear was the final nail in the coffin.

It soon became apparant that the rotary engine was useless. And the fallout from this was enormous. When GM pulled the plug on their rotary engine, AMC found itself without a motor for their new subcompact. They had to shoehorn in a giant 3.8 Liter 6 cylinder engine, which made the car 200 pounds heavier. GM could easily afford mistakes like this, but smaller companies that tried their hand were in deep trouble.
-At NSU, the Ro80, which was an amazing car with front wheel drive and a very aerodynamic body that should've been a hit, turned into a flop and the company had to sell to VW in 1972.
-Citroen, hamstrung by the Comotor cancellation as well as other problems, was forced into bankruptcy in 1974 and had to be bought by Peugeot.
-Mazda also was forced on the brink. The company ran a huge loss in 1975 and had to be bailed out by Sumitomo bank.

Perhaps the worst fallout of this are the super annoying group of people who claim that the rotary is the greatest thing since sliced bread and go crazy when Mazda teased that they'll launch a new rotary model.

So that's the rotary engine, a useless doorstop that ruined at least 4 different automakers. The world would be a better place if the Wankel engine had never seen the light of day.

BTW Felix Wankel was a fervent Nazi, not that it matters, just saying.
 
WI Liquid Piston engine was invented earlier?
LP is essentially a reverse-Wankel with an oval piston rotating inside a 3-lobe combustion chamber. LP seals easier and can operate at higher compression ratios.
 

kernals12

Banned
WI Liquid Piston engine was invented earlier?
LP is essentially a reverse-Wankel with an oval piston rotating inside a 3-lobe combustion chamber. LP seals easier and can operate at higher compression ratios.
There have been many many inventors who have claimed to create a better internal combustion engine (the Wankel being one of them, just getting a lot further along than the others), and all of them turn out to be vaporware. I'm assuming Liquid Piston is just the same.
 

kernals12

Banned
The NSU Ro80 really predicted the future of car design. When VW bought NSU, they merged it with their Auto Union division to create Audi. The resemblance with the 1982 Audi 100 is clear
upload_2018-7-21_11-8-43.jpeg

If only they had put in a reliable engine, it could've been a huge success and brought car design ahead by 10 years.
 
Last edited:

Md139115

Banned
So that's the rotary engine, a useless doorstop that ruined at least 4 different automakers. The world would be a better place if the Wankel engine had never seen the light of day.

I’m sorry, but I completely disagree. Just because the rotary engine is problematic at present does not mean that in a few years time some of the issues with seals may be solved. If I recall, Mazda is now taking a second look at it just because theoretically it is a more efficient engine design. And this does not even get into the whole issue of the value of a failed invention. You seem to assume that the value is insignificant, in this case negative because of those car companies supposedly killed by it. Nothing could be further from the truth. For all we know, the experimentation with rotary engines could create or have created a group of mechanical engineers unafraid to think outside the box. Research into better ways to seal it might wind up improving all engines. And perhaps most importantly, all those companies dared to dream of a cleaner future because of the promised benefits of a rotary engine (and I’m speculating here, but what if NSU only made their car so aerodynamic just to squeeze as much benefit out of advertising the lower fuel costs as possible? In that case, the rotary engine has played a huge positive role).

There have been many many inventors who have claimed to create a better internal combustion engine (the Wankel being one of them, just getting a lot further along than the others), and all of them turn out to be vaporware. I'm assuming Liquid Piston is just the same.

“We have invented an engine that has a maximum potential efficiency of 45%. Though well over half the energy turns to heat and goes right out the hood [or bonnet, as the Brits call it] and tailpipe, it is still the best design possible and we shouldn’t try to build a better one.”

Please let me know if I’m not summarizing your argument properly.
 

kernals12

Banned
I’m sorry, but I completely disagree. Just because the rotary engine is problematic at present does not mean that in a few years time some of the issues with seals may be solved. If I recall, Mazda is now taking a second look at it just because theoretically it is a more efficient engine design. And this does not even get into the whole issue of the value of a failed invention. You seem to assume that the value is insignificant, in this case negative because of those car companies supposedly killed by it. Nothing could be further from the truth. For all we know, the experimentation with rotary engines could create or have created a group of mechanical engineers unafraid to think outside the box. Research into better ways to seal it might wind up improving all engines. And perhaps most importantly, all those companies dared to dream of a cleaner future because of the promised benefits of a rotary engine (and I’m speculating here, but what if NSU only made their car so aerodynamic just to squeeze as much benefit out of advertising the lower fuel costs as possible? In that case, the rotary engine has played a huge positive role).



“We have invented an engine that has a maximum potential efficiency of 45%. Though well over half the energy turns to heat and goes right out the hood [or bonnet, as the Brits call it] and tailpipe, it is still the best design possible and we shouldn’t try to build a better one.”

Please let me know if I’m not summarizing your argument properly.
Just because Lucy didn't let Charlie Brown kick the football once doesn't mean she won't let him kick it again.

And we do have a better engine, it's called the electric motor.
 

Md139115

Banned
Just because Lucy didn't let Charlie Brown kick the football once doesn't mean she won't let him kick it again.

Why on God’s green earth should people not do research into an alternative design for the internal combustion engine? The present form only does so much, but a more advanced version would be able to use all the existing infrastructure and take over immediately, helping the whole world immensely. So we can’t look at it again since it failed once? Why?

And for that matter, what authority do you possess on this issue? Are you an engineer? Are you a research scientist? A prophet? What gives you the ability to say “this is a dead end” and sound credible?
 

kernals12

Banned
I think it was more the Cocaine, that his predictions.

Oh, and choosing a gutless Peugeot engine for a sportscar
The cocaine was the result, not the cause of his problems. The DeLorean had a lot more problems than just the engine. It was a dated design. The build quality was atrocious. The stainless steel body left fingerprints. The constant failure of the electrical systems left passengers trapped inside.
 

kernals12

Banned
Why on God’s green earth should people not do research into an alternative design for the internal combustion engine? The present form only does so much, but a more advanced version would be able to use all the existing infrastructure and take over immediately, helping the whole world immensely. So we can’t look at it again since it failed once? Why?

And for that matter, what authority do you possess on this issue? Are you an engineer? Are you a research scientist? A prophet? What gives you the ability to say “this is a dead end” and sound credible?
The fact that the auto industry abandoned it 45 years ago.
 
wankel-rotary-engine.jpg

This contraption is the Wankel Rotary Engine. It works very differently from a normal piston engine as shown below


wankel-rotary-engine-diagram-motor-rotary-vs-piston-engine-diagram-of-motor-mazda-rx8-12a.jpg


First, some history. The engine was developed by German engineer Felix Wankel in 1957. It was first used in 1964 in the NSU Spider then in the Ro80 luxury sedan. There were many touted advantages. Compared to a piston engine, it was lighter, more compact, and had fewer moving parts.

B97512576Z.120151016153853000GVVB9UG0.11.jpg


1200px-NSU_Ro_80_-_2009-10-11_%28Foto_Sp%29.jpg

By 1972, the Wankel was touted as the engine of the future. GM Vice President John DeLorean said that by 1985, 80% of GM cars would use it. The company was planning on putting this engine first in the subcompact Chevrolet Monza. AMC wanted to buy the engine to put in the Pacer. NSU partnered with Citroen on a "Comotor" project. Mercedes Benz developed a 3 rotor engine and put it in a mid engined concept car, the C111
1200px-Mercedes-Benz_Museum_C111_200901241511.jpg


Then there's the company most famous for rotary power, Mazda. By 1972, the company was selling one in every single one of their models, even pickup trucks! For 40 years afterwards, the company continued selling rotary engines in select models, most notably the RX-7 and RX-8 sports cars.

Then problems began to pile up. It turned out that the rotary engine was not very fuel efficient due to its inherent design lowering the compression ratio. With the 1974 oil crisis, this was a big problem. It also belched out smog. As the 1975 US emissions standards loomed, this was another big problem. The problem of apex seal wear was the final nail in the coffin.

It soon became apparant that the rotary engine was useless. And the fallout from this was enormous. When GM pulled the plug on their rotary engine, AMC found itself without a motor for their new subcompact. They had to shoehorn in a giant 3.8 Liter 6 cylinder engine, which made the car 200 pounds heavier. GM could easily afford mistakes like this, but smaller companies that tried their hand were in deep trouble.
-At NSU, the Ro80, which was an amazing car with front wheel drive and a very aerodynamic body that should've been a hit, turned into a flop and the company had to sell to VW in 1972.
-Citroen, hamstrung by the Comotor cancellation as well as other problems, was forced into bankruptcy in 1974 and had to be bought by Peugeot.
-Mazda also was forced on the brink. The company ran a huge loss in 1975 and had to be bailed out by Sumitomo bank.

Perhaps the worst fallout of this are the super annoying group of people who claim that the rotary is the greatest thing since sliced bread and go crazy when Mazda teased that they'll launch a new rotary model.

So that's the rotary engine, a useless doorstop that ruined at least 4 different automakers. The world would be a better place if the Wankel engine had never seen the light of day.

BTW Felix Wankel was a fervent Nazi, not that it matters, just saying.
I agree with you with most parts of your post but 75 Mazda was not putting it in there little pickup truck or the Ford Courier that they made for Ford same truck and Maine small car was the RX 7 or 6 but they also offered a piston conversion of the same car the 808. Used unleaded gas but used air pumps instead of catalytic converters it had great pick up and when you parked it next to a Chevy Vega or a pinto and looked at the interior the difference was a stallion. On the highway and I didn't have cruise control I was getting 30 to 35 miles to the gallon with look for speed manual transmission. While looking at the 808 I did drive several of the Wankel engines. Gas mileage was not that good but the performance aspect of it was great and it was strange driving a car with the faster you go the engine noise does not if they have been established before the energy crisis he would be in production today.
 

kernals12

Banned
I agree with you with most parts of your post but 75 Mazda was not putting it in there little pickup truck or the Ford Courier that they made for Ford same truck and Maine small car was the RX 7 or 6 but they also offered a piston conversion of the same car the 808. Used unleaded gas but used air pumps instead of catalytic converters it had great pick up and when you parked it next to a Chevy Vega or a pinto and looked at the interior the difference was a stallion. On the highway and I didn't have cruise control I was getting 30 to 35 miles to the gallon with look for speed manual transmission. While looking at the 808 I did drive several of the Wankel engines. Gas mileage was not that good but the performance aspect of it was great and it was strange driving a car with the faster you go the engine noise does not if they have been established before the energy crisis he would be in production today.
Even without the energy crisis, the Apex seal problem would've been bad for sales. And why would Americans buy wankels when a normal V8 offered more power for the same gas mileage? And the fuel economy problem would've made it a nonstarter in Europe
 
Misadventures with Wankel also led Norton motorcycles to an early demise.

Instead of this dead end....

MyPicClassic.jpg


Maybe the P800 gets built?

p%231.jpg
 
Last edited:
US economy cars like the pinto the Vega the Dodge Omni couldn't hold a candle to the Wankel engine from Mazda. Going back to the fifties and sixties almost every car burnt oil it may or may not have been fixable but if you put it in a real word Society it's better than on the test track. Even putting a V8 in the Monza which of course is just a Vega with a few more options the Wankel of could beat them easily in both mileage performance and that plastic Kenny interior which on the Vegas when it first came out caught on fire above the ashtray. Plus unlike the Vega V8 in the Monza V8 rotary engine didn't need to have the engine mounts loosen so they could lift the engine up to tune it up
 
Even without the energy crisis, the Apex seal problem would've been bad for sales. And why would Americans buy wankels when a normal V8 offered more power for the same gas mileage? And the fuel economy problem would've made it a nonstarter in Europe
See 2 posts down
 
Even without the energy crisis, the Apex seal problem would've been bad for sales. And why would Americans buy wankels when a normal V8 offered more power for the same gas mileage?

Because (in the case of the Mazda 13B) they had the same HP as a Malaise era small block V8, while half the weight and more compact
 
Top