Paul,
 I am surprised you weren't on this one like white
on rice already. P-Port engines have always been
competitive at higher RPMs. The naysayers have
ALWAYS ignored the output per Cu/in or like Vance
have always wanted to factor the rotary as a
larger engine. Pound for pound and HP/LB we know
rotary is highly competitive.
Bill Jepson

There never was a doubt in my mind the power was there.
It is the P-port BSFC that I was concerned with. 
I made a mistake a few years ago when I originally converted
the Lemans engine BSFC numbers from Kg/KwHr to lbs/HP Hr on the pessimistic
side. The number was something like .6 or .7 which I thought
(like Vance thought) was not that far out of line for an out and out racing
engine. I was under a  misapprehension about it for a few years.
I took another look today and had other people check my
calculations. Sure enough I was wrong.

Here is Vance's recent message on the subject. I wasn't going to publish it as
like many other messages on the subject of units conversion it was somewhat redundant.
So here it is anyway.

Vance W Jaqua wrote:
OOPS - I had the last term upside down

    grams                pounds(1)           kwhr(.7547)
------------    X    ---------------  X ---------------  =  0.00166   or
divide by  796
  kwhr               grams(453.59)          hphr (1)

at which time 286 g/kwhr becomes  .475 lb/hphr  and 300 would be .498
Seems pretty good for a racing engine - even at efficiency setting - tho I
did not see a solid line set of values
Vance

Like Vance I was pleasantly surprised to find it as good as it is.
Vance is alluding to the fact there is no BSFC curve for max power
condition but the efficiency mode is not that far off max power.

Paul Lamar

 
The Rotary Engine NewsLetter.  Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            
Copyright 1998-2004 All world wide rights reserved.