General Motors Rotary
05-16-2006, 09:39 PM
#26
Metatron
iTrader: (1)
Not just Corvette....
GM actually got as far as completing the assembly plant, and buying the big milling machines capable of turning a rotor housing.
After the rotary was scrapped, the machines were used to make auto tranny casings.
S
After the rotary was scrapped, the machines were used to make auto tranny casings.
S
05-16-2006, 09:42 PM
#27
lurking
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sapphonica
Yeah, yeah, I know we're all supposed to *love* rotaries, or else why would we own 8s? Well, I would swap my ****** engine for a hot turbo 4 in an instant if it were available.
My opinion is subject to change if anyone ever figures out how to make these engines reliable, efficient, and powerful.
My opinion is subject to change if anyone ever figures out how to make these engines reliable, efficient, and powerful.
Wow, what an idiot. You had 1 bad experience and you talk like you know everything.
05-16-2006, 10:05 PM
#28
Freedom Costs a Buck o' 5
Originally Posted by willhave8
Anyone have more information on a 4 rotor engine that 'the General' built on a Corvette chassis in ~1972? Reportedly had 450 horsepower but was killed due to fuel mileage and emissions issues.
05-16-2006, 10:12 PM
#29
Freedom Costs a Buck o' 5
Originally Posted by rotarygod
It's not hard to get the Renesis consistently over 20 mpg city and 30 mpg highway.
05-16-2006, 10:12 PM
#30
PingMobile
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by StrokerAce
If you want to see what GM did with their Wankel license just look under the hood of lots of GM (and some others) and look at the AC compressor. If the AC compressor looks like a stubby cylinder it's a wankel. The old GM AC compressors were about 4 inches round and 8-10 inches long and had 6 pistons and was very heavy and took a lot of power to turn. The rotary version is 8-10 inches around and only about 4 inches deep. Much lighter and more efficient. The Wankel makes a very good compressor.
05-16-2006, 10:15 PM
#31
Pining for the Fjords
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sapphonica
Let's just hope Mazda doesn't bugger up the Kabura by putting a rotary in it.
05-16-2006, 10:19 PM
#32
Void Where Prohibited
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Mineola, TX
Posts: 3,046
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rotarygod
It's not hard to get the Renesis consistently over 20 mpg city and 30 mpg highway.
(plus I only drive city). I'm not complaining, though.
05-16-2006, 10:21 PM
#33
Void Where Prohibited
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Mineola, TX
Posts: 3,046
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DrDiaboloco
Here's another, MUCH more complete article about the M-B C111 series:
http://www.worldcarfans.com/classics...ml/country/gcf
http://www.worldcarfans.com/classics...ml/country/gcf
05-16-2006, 10:24 PM
#34
PingMobile
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rotarygod
Sorry to bring this back to reality but I'm just going to be blunt about this one. Your opinion would change if you would get a clue and do a little bit more research. It has all 3 of those. You just don't apparently know it. The biggest flaw the rotary has it that it is intolerant of stupidity and shortcuts. How many impatient car owners do we see who want power now without doing everything necessary to do it properly because it costs too much? We see this far too often. People are impatient. How many times do we see car owners do quick mods that might be a little bit risky because they didn't take the time to learn about it first? Again, too often this takes place.
The Renesis is an engine that is quite impressive for it's size and it is extrememly smooth. It is easily an S2000 engine's equal in terms of peak power but the Renesis has far more average power. Don't even argue that one. No one anywhere can effectively. The RX-8's power is the fault of the ecu tuning, not the engine and that's easy to correct. How many people are too cheap to pay for this but would rather complain about it. See above. Naturally aspirated rotaries have gone well over 200,000 miles or more. It's not hard to get the Renesis consistently over 20 mpg city and 30 mpg highway. This isn't impressive for a small engine but easily on par with a huge majority of the other cars out there. There will always be those better and those that are worse.
I'm not sure what your issue is with the rotary. The most logical explanation is that you aren't educated enough about it. Again, see above. Maybe it's time to get schooled on it so your opinion can get inline with fact rather than opinion. It's a great engine. It's just different.
The Renesis is an engine that is quite impressive for it's size and it is extrememly smooth. It is easily an S2000 engine's equal in terms of peak power but the Renesis has far more average power. Don't even argue that one. No one anywhere can effectively. The RX-8's power is the fault of the ecu tuning, not the engine and that's easy to correct. How many people are too cheap to pay for this but would rather complain about it. See above. Naturally aspirated rotaries have gone well over 200,000 miles or more. It's not hard to get the Renesis consistently over 20 mpg city and 30 mpg highway. This isn't impressive for a small engine but easily on par with a huge majority of the other cars out there. There will always be those better and those that are worse.
I'm not sure what your issue is with the rotary. The most logical explanation is that you aren't educated enough about it. Again, see above. Maybe it's time to get schooled on it so your opinion can get inline with fact rather than opinion. It's a great engine. It's just different.
You can't successfully argue my point that this engine is glass compared with a piston engine...those 2 mm apex seals are so fragile you can snap them with your fingers. Some piston engines tolerate detonation better than the Renesis. This is something easily proven. Also easily proven is how much better use a lot of engines make out of a gallon of gasoline.
You can tune with exquisite finesse and maybe avoid detonation that cracks the seals & destroys the engine, but I don't think anyone will make big power (>350 WHP) for long with this engine unless they're running really high octane gas.
If I had a rotary that made good power (>300 WHP), got reasonable gas mileage (20 city/25 hwy), and lasted for the fabled 200k miles, then of course I would be uncategorically delighted to own a car with one.
However, as it stands, NA the Renesis puts ~170 HP & ~140 # torque to the wheels, has terrible fuel economy, and an increasing death toll of blown FI engines. Maybe it would work NA if it were in a 2000 lb car, but not in a 3000 lb car.
I know ya'll are in love with the Renesis, and that's fine, but what is the purpose of an engine? It is to propell the car. Therefore, it is a better design if the car produces more power & torque per unit fuel. Reliability is also indicative of a superior design. I seriously doubt that anyone is going to make big power with a Renesis and see 100k miles on the engine, much less 200k.
Last edited by Sapphonica; 05-16-2006 at 10:26 PM.
05-16-2006, 10:46 PM
#35
Pining for the Fjords
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not "in love" with the Renesis, and you repeating that point won't make it so.
I simply think that your assertion that it's "crap" because it won't withstand an AFTERMARKET forced induction system that increases its power by 75% is misguided, at best...
I can't help but stare agape at your assertion that what makes a "better" design in an engine is how much power and torque it produces per unit of fuel. What about responsiveness, smoothness, tractability, weight, size, etc.? All bunko? Oh, my apologies, reliability is also important. I am unaware of rampant tales of UNMOLESTED Renesis engines being particularly unreliable.
I don't think there's a car out there at the $30k point that comes close to offering what you want, so therefore I guess ALL competing cars are "crap", too. Sounds to me like you REALLY want a GTO... Either that or this is just sour grapes because you've dropped a lot of "coin" and things didn't work out the way you wanted. We all know non-crap engines can take huge boost and not self-destruct, right?
Hmmm, I wonder if a turbocharged GTO can go 100k miles if you pump it up to 700hp?
If you think you're "still slow", you bought the wrong car. This isn't and never was a drag racer, which appears to be your imperative. Sure, the '8 could use more power (what car couldn't?), but you seem to have zeroed in on the one thing the car can't offer, which is huge HP. If that was your priority, you should've gone for a different vehicle.
I simply think that your assertion that it's "crap" because it won't withstand an AFTERMARKET forced induction system that increases its power by 75% is misguided, at best...
I can't help but stare agape at your assertion that what makes a "better" design in an engine is how much power and torque it produces per unit of fuel. What about responsiveness, smoothness, tractability, weight, size, etc.? All bunko? Oh, my apologies, reliability is also important. I am unaware of rampant tales of UNMOLESTED Renesis engines being particularly unreliable.
I don't think there's a car out there at the $30k point that comes close to offering what you want, so therefore I guess ALL competing cars are "crap", too. Sounds to me like you REALLY want a GTO... Either that or this is just sour grapes because you've dropped a lot of "coin" and things didn't work out the way you wanted. We all know non-crap engines can take huge boost and not self-destruct, right?
Hmmm, I wonder if a turbocharged GTO can go 100k miles if you pump it up to 700hp?
If you think you're "still slow", you bought the wrong car. This isn't and never was a drag racer, which appears to be your imperative. Sure, the '8 could use more power (what car couldn't?), but you seem to have zeroed in on the one thing the car can't offer, which is huge HP. If that was your priority, you should've gone for a different vehicle.
Last edited by DrDiaboloco; 05-16-2006 at 10:49 PM.
05-17-2006, 07:28 AM
#36
lurking
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sapphonica
My issue with the Renesis is that I've dropped a lot of coin & am still slow.
You can't successfully argue my point that this engine is glass compared with a piston engine...those 2 mm apex seals are so fragile you can snap them with your fingers. Some piston engines tolerate detonation better than the Renesis. This is something easily proven. Also easily proven is how much better use a lot of engines make out of a gallon of gasoline.
You can tune with exquisite finesse and maybe avoid detonation that cracks the seals & destroys the engine, but I don't think anyone will make big power (>350 WHP) for long with this engine unless they're running really high octane gas.
If I had a rotary that made good power (>300 WHP), got reasonable gas mileage (20 city/25 hwy), and lasted for the fabled 200k miles, then of course I would be uncategorically delighted to own a car with one.
However, as it stands, NA the Renesis puts ~170 HP & ~140 # torque to the wheels, has terrible fuel economy, and an increasing death toll of blown FI engines. Maybe it would work NA if it were in a 2000 lb car, but not in a 3000 lb car.
I know ya'll are in love with the Renesis, and that's fine, but what is the purpose of an engine? It is to propell the car. Therefore, it is a better design if the car produces more power & torque per unit fuel. Reliability is also indicative of a superior design. I seriously doubt that anyone is going to make big power with a Renesis and see 100k miles on the engine, much less 200k.
You can't successfully argue my point that this engine is glass compared with a piston engine...those 2 mm apex seals are so fragile you can snap them with your fingers. Some piston engines tolerate detonation better than the Renesis. This is something easily proven. Also easily proven is how much better use a lot of engines make out of a gallon of gasoline.
You can tune with exquisite finesse and maybe avoid detonation that cracks the seals & destroys the engine, but I don't think anyone will make big power (>350 WHP) for long with this engine unless they're running really high octane gas.
If I had a rotary that made good power (>300 WHP), got reasonable gas mileage (20 city/25 hwy), and lasted for the fabled 200k miles, then of course I would be uncategorically delighted to own a car with one.
However, as it stands, NA the Renesis puts ~170 HP & ~140 # torque to the wheels, has terrible fuel economy, and an increasing death toll of blown FI engines. Maybe it would work NA if it were in a 2000 lb car, but not in a 3000 lb car.
I know ya'll are in love with the Renesis, and that's fine, but what is the purpose of an engine? It is to propell the car. Therefore, it is a better design if the car produces more power & torque per unit fuel. Reliability is also indicative of a superior design. I seriously doubt that anyone is going to make big power with a Renesis and see 100k miles on the engine, much less 200k.
Since you have already invested in the 8, just sit back and wait. Power options will come. You complaining about it won't make anything happen.
Corvette....
05-17-2006, 02:13 PM
#39
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
THe wankel rotary in all it's glory! Here are a couple other places you may (or may not) have seen a Wankel rotary. Oh yeah, I didn't post any of the experimental aircraft running Wankels.
And, yes, I would guess these have all been posted before, but since we're talking about the Corvette and Mercedes, why not?
Okay, howzabout an air-cooled rotary snowmobile engine?
http://cgi.ebay.com/1972-JOHNSON-PHA...QQcmdZViewItem
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naRJP...&search=Rotary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5SpU...&search=Rotary
http://www.webs1.uidaho.edu/niatt/re...ar4/klk304.htm
And, of course, a rotary powered Suzuki motorcycle:
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkPeB...&search=Rotary
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biYUq...&search=Rotary
For everyone that wants to know how a rotary works:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGrD7...&search=Rotary
And, yes, I would guess these have all been posted before, but since we're talking about the Corvette and Mercedes, why not?
Okay, howzabout an air-cooled rotary snowmobile engine?
http://cgi.ebay.com/1972-JOHNSON-PHA...QQcmdZViewItem
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naRJP...&search=Rotary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5SpU...&search=Rotary
http://www.webs1.uidaho.edu/niatt/re...ar4/klk304.htm
And, of course, a rotary powered Suzuki motorcycle:
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkPeB...&search=Rotary
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biYUq...&search=Rotary
For everyone that wants to know how a rotary works:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGrD7...&search=Rotary
05-17-2006, 11:18 PM
#40
Senor Carnegrande
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 871
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sapphonica
Let's just hope Mazda doesn't bugger up the Kabura by putting a rotary in it.
OH NO YOU DI'INT!
It needs to be an option, at least. A N/A rotary can certainly last a hell of a long time. In a lightweight car like the Kabura, you wouldn't need a turbo.
Also when you're comparing reliability, look at how long an engine lasts while making maximum power. Sure, a Honda 4-banger and a Renesis can both make around 240 HP, and both can last a good long while if you're driving normally. But run them both at high RPM's for extended durations, and you can bet that the piston motor will die first. Racing rotaries have been known to run for a whole racing season without maintenance, in classes where their piston competitors are rebuilding after every race. This is why a lot of airplane guys have such a hardon for rotaries, even though they aren't factory-designed for airplane use. They have to use maximum power for extended times, and reliability at a high % of maximum power is simply not an option.
Also, did you do the stock greddy kit, complete with unmodified e-manage? That would explain a lot. If so, I would blame greddy's halfassishness rather than the renesis.
Last edited by BaronVonBigmeat; 05-17-2006 at 11:20 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
gwailo
New Member Forum
30
06-07-2020 12:21 PM
projectr13b
New Member Forum
7
03-01-2019 09:00 AM
