Rotary Engine wrote:

The Speed channel commentators are now complaining that the RX8 frontal area is less
than the Porsche and that is why the RX8 is ten MPH faster on the
straight away.

But you don't get it.

Rotary engines DON'T WIN RACES -- that's GOSPEL to the reciprosaur
crowd.  Therefore, when the RX-8 is faster than the Porsche, it's
because of the shape of the CAR, and has nothing to do with the engine.

I want to see someone build a 6-rotor engine and take it to Bonneville.
 Then, after the first set of runs, pull the engine, ADD 4 MORE
ROTORS, reinstall then get back on the salt the next day.

Then do it again the NEXT day, then the day after that if necessary,
until you have a new speed record for non-turbine cars.

But the real thing that we would see is where the power/weight curves
go.  Is there a point where adding rotors becomes less effective?  Or
MORE effective?

The perfect car for this would probably look like a Tootsie Roll on
wheels!  I wonder if you could get them to sponsor . . ?

Keith


The problem is the e-shaft gets torque overloaded near the back end.
Two four rotors back to back with the power taken out of the center
would work.