Speaking of rotaries..... The motor in the 787B sounds absolutely demonic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iLyHV4ZwFk

Yup 4 rotor, only Japanese car to ever win Le Mans before being banned as rotaries were seen to be 'unfair' advantages.  Ironically the strength of the rotary was also reliability with fewer moving parts.  The pit crew obviously never missed an oil change.

Didn't they force Mazda to use restrictor plates that severely limited their power instead of banning rotaries outright? I think I heard something to that tune. In race trim the R26B was already limited in power compared to qualifying, I think it made 900+ hp naturally. Pretty crazy specific output for 2.6 liters NA.

Unfortunately, I just don't see a future for rotaries unless they really improve the mileage.

There are some street cars running 4-rotors too, though it's an uber-expensive build for not that much power. The noise, though, is epic.

Nope, outright ban.  All engines must be reciprocating, even in F1.  The rule is in the FIA somewhere.  All the engines were already restricted to 700hp down from 900hp when they wons Le Mans.

Quote from: catscratch on August 31, 2012, 03:12:55 AM

Didn't they force Mazda to use restrictor plates that severely limited their power instead of banning rotaries outright? I think I heard something to that tune. In race trim the R26B was already limited in power compared to qualifying, I think it made 900+ hp naturally. Pretty crazy specific output for 2.6 liters NA.

Unfortunately, I just don't see a future for rotaries unless they really improve the mileage.

There are some street cars running 4-rotors too, though it's an uber-expensive build for not that much power. The noise, though, is epic.

I guess I'm just missing the point. The free-revving, 9000rpm capability is nice, but it's not all that powerful, and there's no real torque to speak of. A modern, direct injected 2.0L turbo four just seems better in pretty much every way. Oil consumption should be zero, and with an 8-speed auto or DSG these engines can manage real world MPG in the low to mid 30s depending on the weight of the car. They can also match or exceed the RX-8's horsepower, and beat it in torque by 100ft.lbs.

Yup.  The 787B actually won on reliability and power to weight ratio/balance.  Inherent advantages include:

1-far fewer parts to fail
2-less weight and smaller package
3-near perfect harmonic balance in even configurations
4-free revs way beyond even 22,000 rpm+ only limited by engine breathing.

On the track HP > TQ unless there's many low speed corners and/or a hill climb.  It's a track engine sort of forced into road duty for consumers which it's not quite ready for.  The design has always been a bit ahead of it's time in performance, simplicity and elegance.  If analogous to the history of the moon landing, between Jules Verne and Neil Armstrong, the current rotary is still around 1940-1950.  The Wankel is inherently the superior design in efficiency and performance for motorsport.  The difference is that 99% of the automobile manufacturers and racing teams from F1 to NASCAR have been developing the reciprocating engine for more than 100 years now gaining insight and progress from each other.  The Rotary has been around for only 60 years and had only one consistent manufacturer working on development and refinement.  Mazda.  Tell me which one looks like the dumber idea...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BCgl2uumlI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aokV3uug4u8

They do use rotaries more in aircraft than in cars btw.  You can DI and boost a rotary too, with improved metallurgy for the apex seals and better computer modelling for the ports the rotary will come into it's own but not in an econobox that has to deal w/ stop lights and that's where car makers make their money.

so now am wondering about a Mercedes CLS500, CLS550 dependng on the year and price.

Any comments?