tigers
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Yawn ??

To: tigers@autox.team.net, Rick Fedorchak <richard.fedorchak@gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: Yawn ??
From: LeBrun@hii.hitachi.com
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 96 12:00:43 PST
     All;
     
     -Wasn't there a 6-rotor Wankel in a Mercedes? in the '30's or '40's 
     that held some "massive" land-speed & closed course records?
     
     Hey, the design of a reciprocating piston engine is pretty inefficient
     seeing that each piston/rod assembly has to start/stop in it's cyclce 
     from TDC to BDC & back.
     
     Why not just put in a ram-jet? What about solid propellants? They have 
     great power-to-weight characteristics. They'll keep tailgating to a 
     minimum in every automotive event you compete in after the swap.
     
     
                              Phil


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Yawn ??
Author:  Rick Fedorchak <richard.fedorchak@gsfc.nasa.gov> at ~INTERNET
Date:    6/26/96 11:53 AM


Re:
>>>>>>>>>
fascinat ion with what has basically evolved into a Rover engine is 
dumbfounding. The Brits have been fooling w/them for years, but TR-8s and 
the like still can't touch small-block Ford power
.Pardon me for yawning. 
>>>>>>
     
You're not excused. 
     
I guess a motor with about 75 to 90 cubic inches more of displacemet WOULD 
make more power.  Did you expect otherwise ?? As I said before it's possible 
to expand a 215 to about 305 cubic inches using essentially stock parts.
I'm sure THAT combination would equal the smallblock Ford power output.  And 
it would do it while contributing 140 to 150 lbs. less wieght to the vehicle.
     
Nothing  "yawnable" about that !
     


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>