Rotary Engines: Would it work in a boat?
#1
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bell Canyon, CA
Posts: 12,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rotary Engines: Would it work in a boat?
The R26B engine that won the 1991 LeMans was normally aspirated and had four rotors and three sequential spark plugs per rotor. The capacity is 2622 cc actual, rated by FIA formula at 4708 cc. It produced 700 bhp at 9000 rpm and 62 mkg torque at 6500 rpm (448 lb-ft). Fuel was electronically injected and consumption was 51.881 liters per 100 km at an average speed of 213.58 kph (excluding pit stops). The air intakes had continuously variable geometry controlled by the engine electronics. The transmission had 5 speeds (full synchromesh) from a Porsche design gearbox and a limited slip differential.
Well?
Well?
#2
Registered
Re: Rotary Engines: Would it work in a boat?
Originally posted by PhantomChaos
The R26B engine that won the 1991 LeMans was normally aspirated and had four rotors and three sequential spark plugs per rotor. The capacity is 2622 cc actual, rated by FIA formula at 4708 cc. It produced 700 bhp at 9000 rpm and 62 mkg torque at 6500 rpm (448 lb-ft). Fuel was electronically injected and consumption was 51.881 liters per 100 km at an average speed of 213.58 kph (excluding pit stops). The air intakes had continuously variable geometry controlled by the engine electronics. The transmission had 5 speeds (full synchromesh) from a Porsche design gearbox and a limited slip differential.
Well?
The R26B engine that won the 1991 LeMans was normally aspirated and had four rotors and three sequential spark plugs per rotor. The capacity is 2622 cc actual, rated by FIA formula at 4708 cc. It produced 700 bhp at 9000 rpm and 62 mkg torque at 6500 rpm (448 lb-ft). Fuel was electronically injected and consumption was 51.881 liters per 100 km at an average speed of 213.58 kph (excluding pit stops). The air intakes had continuously variable geometry controlled by the engine electronics. The transmission had 5 speeds (full synchromesh) from a Porsche design gearbox and a limited slip differential.
Well?
Who cares? It ain't no big block.
#3
Registered
I don't think the imput shaft of the drive would like 9000 rpm very much. Besides,the torque curve on a rotory is very tight, not really condusive to a one speed transmission.
#4
Official OSO boat whore
Charter Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Mequon, WI
Posts: 6,157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let see here...my bigblock makes 600hp @ 5500 and 650lbft @ 4000. So will it work? Yes. Will it live? No. Will it be fast? Depends on how heavy the boat is. That engine has to be 1/3 the weight of my big motor. It also costs 10 times as much.
#6
speel chekk this fokker!
Charter Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Locust Valley, New York
Posts: 5,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tehre is a company here on LI (in glencove) called rotary marine. And guess what???? they make rotary engines for boats.
__________________
Pardon me, while I whip this out!
Pardon me, while I whip this out!
#7
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Lewis Center, Ohio
Posts: 3,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They make 260hp supercharged 13b's puder. In a small boat, say 18 or less, it would be fun, where the torque isnt needed as much. I would be up to try it sometime.
#8
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
I had three Rx 7's in the 80's and you cannot kill those engines. I think the concept for continuous propulsion is better than a reciprocating engine unfortunately good old cylinders are so prevalent that apart from Mazda there is no major companies doing serious R&D on those engines, and the cylinder culture is entrenched and here to stay.
Like airpacker said though they are very high reving engines. they take A TON of gas if you compare same cubic inches and run VERY VERY hot.
So on paper I would think they are better but no market no manufacturer.
Like airpacker said though they are very high reving engines. they take A TON of gas if you compare same cubic inches and run VERY VERY hot.
So on paper I would think they are better but no market no manufacturer.
#9
Gone Fishin'
Charter Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Grand Rapids/Holland/Grand Haven
Posts: 7,408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to me that one of the small jet boat manufacturers used a Wankle in their boat for a while. Used a TON of gas even when compared to a comparable two stroke motor. Jet pumps are not as susseptable to rpm's as an outdrive is, therefore the best application for a rotary engine might be a jet boat????
__________________
[b]M Go Blue.......Gator boots, gator luggage, gator purses... all at cut rate deals!!!!
[b]M Go Blue.......Gator boots, gator luggage, gator purses... all at cut rate deals!!!!
#10
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Rotary's are, in effect, a lot like a 2-stroke in that they are "port timed". This means that they can't be "cammed" for different desirable torque curves, they must be ported like a 2-stroke and this is somethng that can't be reversed.
They can, however, be ported for a broad torque curve and supercharged for massive amounts of power from a lightweight package.
Durability? Reliability? It all comes down to two things:
1) "oversize" rotors are EXPENSIVE and oversizing the double-trochoidal "cylinder walls" can only be done with specialized equipment.
2) Seals, Seals, Seals. Seals are used instead of rings. Seal wear is accelerated in a pressure-fed motor, and seal life is not as long as we would like to see it.
There have been one or two wankel aircraft motors certified, but I am think I remember hearing that they are no longer produced. Seal dependability was one of the issues.
Aircraft motors run at constant load. Boat motors run at constant load. Cars run at very light load except under acceleration.
I like rotaries. There's a guy putting them in jetskis and having pretty good results (close to 300hp).
As far as input shaft speed, hook em to a surface drive on a light boat. That'd be cool.
For a marine application, the variable timing and such would be a nightmare. Bolt a blower on it, fuel inject it, and rip.
They can, however, be ported for a broad torque curve and supercharged for massive amounts of power from a lightweight package.
Durability? Reliability? It all comes down to two things:
1) "oversize" rotors are EXPENSIVE and oversizing the double-trochoidal "cylinder walls" can only be done with specialized equipment.
2) Seals, Seals, Seals. Seals are used instead of rings. Seal wear is accelerated in a pressure-fed motor, and seal life is not as long as we would like to see it.
There have been one or two wankel aircraft motors certified, but I am think I remember hearing that they are no longer produced. Seal dependability was one of the issues.
Aircraft motors run at constant load. Boat motors run at constant load. Cars run at very light load except under acceleration.
I like rotaries. There's a guy putting them in jetskis and having pretty good results (close to 300hp).
As far as input shaft speed, hook em to a surface drive on a light boat. That'd be cool.
For a marine application, the variable timing and such would be a nightmare. Bolt a blower on it, fuel inject it, and rip.