zoom44

no i didnt- whats weird tho is you learning how to bold something in your post after all of this time

MazdaManiac

iTrader: (3)

Its a conspiracy! C. O. N.....spiracy.

zoom44

darn missed that- saw it was on but started watching something else. ill have to catch it next time

rotorocks

I saw that show a few months ago. Interesting.

MazdaManiac

iTrader: (3)

Anyone play "Assassin's Creed"?

morkusyambo

Not yet. I want to check it out, but i've been too busy getting my *** kicked by 6 year old kids on COD4.

MazdaManiac

iTrader: (3)

Its badass. Its "Splinter Cell" in the 13th century.

Rub20b

After all this talk about torque and hp, burn rate and knock restency.. does anyone have an update what happened with this engine? is it tested at higher revs and shorter intake runners to see the full potential? were there stock rx8 style seals used, or were the rotors machiened for higher seals (like the earilier engines) to prevent excessive flexing when passing the peripheral intake port?

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

don't waste your time, it was done sppecifically for an airplane engine application that only focuses on a very narrow operating range (lower rpms to keep from throwing the prop off), completely useless in a car application, unported stock block Renesis engines have turned considerably higher output numbers

Rub20b

Please tell me more.. 260-270hp below 8000rpm seems quite optimistic for an unopened engine, also if I look to the racingbeat results from there ported engine they are just shy of 250hp around 9000rpm..

my engine is producing it's rated power (177kW), with a stock exh (.3bar exh backpressure), but adjusting the afr or timing doesn't bring anything extra..

longpath

iTrader: (1)

Sorry to dredge this up from cobwebbed ancient history; but if a normal Peripheral intake and exhaust engine turns out 245hp from a 13B sized two rotor engine, and the 26J turns out 700hp out of a 4 rotor, what is different between half of a 26J and a normal 13B racing rotary with peripheral intakes and exhausts that results in a 105hp difference?

Are any of those differences applicable to a hybrid peripheral intake/side-port exhaust rotary?

While the horsepower numbers of the test engine aren't a huge difference from a well tuned OEM Renesis, the peak torque is high enough to intrigue me. It seems that the runners feeding the peripheral intake would have to be very short to really get the most out of the engine.

I am also curious if it would be feasible to use slide throttles very close to the ports (actually within the ports, very close to the arc of the apex seals) and let the engine idle off of the side intake primaries.

I was also intrigued that the testing was apparently done with 87 octane fuel, suggesting that there is a good deal of tuning that was intentionally left off the table.

jasonrxeight

I would say the race engine probably is tune for high rpm power and higher redline rpm with individual intake and injection.
heck my 600cc motorcycle engine makes 133hp. if I can make it into a 5.2L (2.6L rotary equivalent) it will be making 1000hp.

longpath

iTrader: (1)

But Peripheral Port (both intake and exhaust) 13Bs are already race engines. What I was asking is what's different from a pair of 13B PP race engines and a 26J. Half of a 26J would produce 350hp, based on the 700hp LeMans trim figures Mazda quoted. A 13B Peripheral Port racing engine (remember, both are racing engines) produces, 245hp according to the dyno plot that RotaryGod posted at the beginning of this thread. I know the 26J has 10:1 compression and 3 spark plugs per rotor; but I don't know what else was done (I've heard rumour of thermal coatings on the rotors; but don't know if that is true or not).

Is the 26J simply tuned for an even higher horsepower peak than a normal PP 13B race engine or is it actually making more torque for given RPM? What is different between these two Mazda race engines?

I'm still interested in the combination of side port exhaust and peripheral intake, at least as an auxiliary intake path since even that crude test engine had so much more torque (194 vs 159) than the standard Renesis at torque peak. Even if the horsepower peaks were identical, that fattening of the torque curve would be enough to get my attention.

Of course, it may be that a good porting job on a Renesis can achieve the same thing; but I've not heard anyone make such a claim so far.

reddozen

iTrader: (1)

longpath,
It has been done in several application.

it's typically called a "semi-peripheral port", as the setup generally uses a smaller peripheral port. None the less, it utilizes the side intake and the peripheral intake.

MazdaTrix was / is experimenting with side and peripheral exhaust ports working in tandem.

diabolical1

13B PPs have been eclipsing 300 hp (on engine dynos) since the late 80s (that I am aware of). they are making that, and more, at the wheels now. that 245 is not representative of what they are currently capable of doing.

for the record, yes the R26B had other features that made it capable of producing more power than one would expect to be proportionate to a 13B PP.

j9fd3s

the R26B Lemans engine has a number of small differences to make it the top of the heap. there are actually a series of SAE papers, and manuals that document the evolution of the racing engines, which diverges from the street engine in the early 70's.

there is the actual R26B paper, which documents the variable intake, 3rd spark plug, the ceramic coatings i think as well.

there is SAE 922375 which documents the oils that were developed for the engine, along with the different seal clearances

there is the SAE 900032 which is a study of port timings and intake lengths on the peripheral port engines. the engine in this paper is a 3 rotor still, but they net a 15% gain in hp.

when you add this stuff up it makes a big difference.