> > Paul,
> > Can you send me the last RX8 Dyno test please - in all the
excitement, I
> > seem to have misplaced it.
> > George (down under)
> >
> > Here it is plotted with the stock engine HP and torque.
> >
> > The second one is probably what you would get with fuel injection.
> > I.E. No venturi to screw up the results.
> >
> > Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.
>
>
> Paul
>
>
> Do you think you can do a run up to 8200rpm and see what power is
> available? With a shorter manifold it should be about 300Hp unless
the side
> exhaust ports don't breath as well as the P-Port exhaust.
>
> Doug
>
> The torque is already falling off at 7500 RPM.
> We can't shorten the present runners as we would get into the tube bends.
> All we have right at the moment is the downdraft Weber.
>
> Maybe when I get the new slide carb working.
>
> I am pleasantly surprised about the side exhaust. It does not seem to
> hurt. Of course total exhaust port area is now 17% more than the old
> peripheral port exhaust. We are getting more power with the RX8 P-port
> than we got with a 2nd gen P-port. Here are charts from both of them.
>
> The RX8 p-port has everything. More power, idles better, lower EGT,
> quieter and recycles unburned fuel. What is not to like? :)
>
> Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.

Fantastic, Paul!  The RX-8 intake P-port is a success!

Soooo,

What about go the whole hog and P-port both the intake AND the exhaust
sides of the RX-8 engine?

I can hear your fingers tapping the keys now: " . . . even MORE power,
idles better, lower EGT . . . what's not to like?"

Les Nordman :-)

I am speechless. Perhaps somebody else can explain it to Les :)

Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.

The Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://www.rotaryeng.net
Copyright 1998-2007 All world wide rights reserved.