Dear Paul.

Love your Feb Kitplane article.

Ever since I discovered Wankel engines some years back,  I
have been reading anything and everything  about it.  And one
of the negatives going against it is its  so-called poor
fuel economy.  Yet I have not come across anyone offering a
solution to it. So here is what I have to say.  As
far as using a Wankel in air crafts are concerned,  I WOULD
RATHER SPENT 3% OR EVEN 10% MORE IN FUEL COST FOR
1,000,000%  THE RELIABILITY OF A WANKEL.  (In addition to its
smoothness).I hope more aviation people realize this and
make Wankels the standard  engine for general aviation.

Regards to all
Benjamin

Hang in there. Help is on the way.

Dear Mr. Lamar:

 Autoblog.com just came out with an article about Mazda's commitment
 to the rotary engine:  http://tinyurl.com/237psl3

 Here is a quote from it:  "'We will never give up,' says Mitsuo Hitomi,
 general manager of Mazda's power train division, referring to the
 automakers long-running investment into the rotary engine."

 If only those idiotic emissions rules could get turned around,
 and people could understand that rotaries need to use oil,
 like 2-stroke piston engines!

 I'm still rooting for you and for the Wankel rotary engine!

 Yours,

 Les Nordman

 Good news indeed. Perseverance is one of the noblest
 of human traits.

 Here is the full text.

Paul Lamar

 "We will never give up," says Mitsuo Hitomi, general manager of
 Mazda's powertrain division, referring to the automaker's
 long-running investment into the rotary engine. This vote of
 confidence in Felix Wankel's replacement for displacement will
 surely come as welcome news to rotor-heads the world over, but
 that doesn't mean there aren't problems in World of Wankel.

 Apparently, the so-called 16X engine, which is the latest take
 on the pony-keg-sized engine that spins into the stratosphere,
 is failing to meet emissions requirements set by the engineering
 team at Mazda, despite the fact that it is 30 percent more fuel
 efficient than the previous Renesis rotary. Impressively, Hitomi
 stated that the 1.6-liter 16X is slightly more fuel efficient
 than the automaker's standard 2.0-liter gas engine.

 It would seem that the rotary's well-known thirst for fuel has
 at least partly been quenched, but until the 16X is tuned to hit
 its emissions targets we can expect it to stay in the
 engineering department and off the showroom floor. So, when
 might we see a new rotary-powered machine from Mazda? "Maybe
 within two years we can tell you when we will introduce it to
 the market," responds Hitomi.

 Now, let the debate continue as to what kind of body and
 platform that engine will be featured in..."

---------------------------------------------------

The aircraft industry has long recognized that turbine engines are more
reliable and more weight efficient while not being so fuel efficient,
but they are VERY expensive to purchase and maintain over time. I hold
the opinion that those of us with aircraft are or at least should be
looking at the "overall" cost to own and operate whatever engine. We
should take into consideration how many actual hours per year we fly.
Then we should ask, "Is is worth it?"

I think the Wankel makes sense from a standpoint of initial cost and
operating cost. When reliability (safety) and maintenance costs are
factored in the Wankel climbs to the top of what we really want in an
aircraft engine. When I purchase an auto I consider a lot of things,
fuel efficiency is one of them but the MPG sticker is not what makes the
sale. If I spend $2,000 per year on fuel for flying and it costs me an
extra few dollars to be putting it through an engine that I trust and
enjoy I have no problem with that. If Allison/R-R 250 turbines were
the "cost" of Lycomings it would be an easy choice, but they aren't and
never will be, not even close. The Wankel is an option that most of us
can afford and it offers many of the benefits of the turbine. We often
here the Wankel called "the poor man's turbine". I'm not too fond of
that label, but it makes a point. Be honest, none of us that fly are
really poor, but we may not be rich. We still want and need the best
overall performance and reliability that we can afford. The Wankel can
be that engine. I know of nothing else so promising for aircraft... and
they are great in autos too!

Paul, the Kitplanes ariticle is excellent. Thanks.

John McEverett