Tricks that old racers get up to after retirement

Jackie: To answer your question earleir. The rotary offered a significan HP to Wt to Size advantage over a typical 4 or 2- stroke. In addition, they could be dynamically balanced eliminating linear vibration. If these characteristics were important to your application the rotary makes sense. The down side is much higher surface to displaced volume, resulting in higher hydrocarbon emissions and fuel economy than a 4-stroke but less than a 2 stroke. NOx emissions were lower for the rotary compared to a 4-stroke but similar to a 2-stroke. CO is a function of air/fuel ratio and can be reduced by leaning the fuel. Direct fuel injection (high pressure) may reduce emissions slightly. Several companies are using low pressure injection but its primarily to allow multi fuel.
Early rotaries (back in your day) had durability problems. The OMC race engine suffered from main (rotor) bearings failures and the infamous thru bolt breakage. The thru bot was eliminated with the 4 piece crank and direct oil injection into the bearing has solved the bearing problem.
GM dropped the rotary in 1973 when the Iranian oil crises hit the country. The Mazda rotary and the GM were getting 10/12 MPG while other non performance cars were getting 20/25. Another issue was the enormous capital investment required to machine the non-round trochoid shape. CNC equipment didn't exist at the time. I believe if GM had stayed the course rotaries would be commonplace today.
As Strang said, the V-6 could keep Merc at bay and the rotary had been essentially ban in Europe. With what we know about rotaries today, 450HP from the same 4-rotor engine would be reliably feasible.

The rotary was actually very successful in racing Jackie..

https://www.carthrottle.com/post/wyq7lmz/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rotary John

Jackie: To answer your question earleir. The rotary offered a significan HP to Wt to Size advantage over a typical 4 or 2- stroke. In addition, they could be dynamically balanced eliminating linear vibration. If these characteristics were important to your application the rotary makes sense. The down side is much higher surface to displaced volume, resulting in higher hydrocarbon emissions and fuel economy than a 4-stroke but less than a 2 stroke. NOx emissions were lower for the rotary compared to a 4-stroke but similar to a 2-stroke. CO is a function of air/fuel ratio and can be reduced by leaning the fuel. Direct fuel injection (high pressure) may reduce emissions slightly. Several companies are using low pressure injection but its primarily to allow multi fuel.
Early rotaries (back in your day) had durability problems. The OMC race engine suffered from main (rotor) bearings failures and the infamous thru bolt breakage. The thru bot was eliminated with the 4 piece crank and direct oil injection into the bearing has solved the bearing problem.
GM dropped the rotary in 1973 when the Iranian oil crises hit the country. The Mazda rotary and the GM were getting 10/12 MPG while other non performance cars were getting 20/25. Another issue was the enormous capital investment required to machine the non-round trochoid shape. CNC equipment didn't exist at the time. I believe if GM had stayed the course rotaries would be commonplace today.
As Strang said, the V-6 could keep Merc at bay and the rotary had been essentially ban in Europe. With what we know about rotaries today, 450HP from the same 4-rotor engine would be reliably feasible.

---

Johnno——- Just had that feeling ——- knew I was going to get spanked.

Just five years after “The Cosworth”, which had a Le Mans spec of 400 hp———- the F1 version was pulling over 800 hp.

Not that that has anything to do with anything——— just making conversation—— I know——- I belong in my shed, making concepts nobody gives a flying fart about. But, it keeps me alive and ticking, out from under the feet of the kitchen goddess.

Doing one last trip to the OFF meeting in Tavares———- you coming Johnno ? —— Tryink to get Willabee to meet me there. Seebold and the Squirt will be there also.
How ‘bout we meet outside the gates of Lake X at 13:00 hrs on Friday the 16th November????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AZMIDLYF

The rotary was actually very successful in racing Jackie..

https://www.carthrottle.com/post/wyq7lmz/

---

I have a Swedish friend who races one in vintage events around Europe!

Attachment 420327

Thats the one my Swedish friend Michael races—— his mechanic Tommy, tells me it’s a really hot piece of kit !
Had a long day in the shop yesterday——- no interruptions——-
have you ever noticed, the one thing in common, all hydros have—— it’s that driftwood pallet they all sit on in the Pitt area———— so I put Mert on a De luxe custom built one.
Started on the next “Concept”——— Another billet project——- this time its the number six racing mercruiser stern drive.
Done the basic cut out from some 4x2 and half inch plate for The gearcase——- that killed off a new carbon blade on the bandsaw———— they don’t come cheap either, around thirty dollars a pop.
Blades do not like, two inch thick aluminium.
Ah well —— haircut and beard trim by my personal barber today——- she’s bloody good—— but then again she should be, having spent forty years in the trade ! Did I tell you, I’m married to her—— yes that’s her, the kitchen goddess——- her who shall be obeyed at all times—- HRH the Duchess .

Cosworth have made lots of different v8 engines, the DFV last race 88 and 89 had the all new HB v8 and then the designs only lasted a few years each.
It certaily had the longest run of any F1 engine and a huge number of wins

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerabout

Cosworth have made lots of different v8 engines, the DFV last race 88 and 89 had the all new HB v8 and then the designs only lasted a few years each.
It certaily had the longest run of any F1 engine and a huge number of wins

---

Indeed it did Pilgrim! The DFX was pulling way over a thousand hp——— Indy cars used them———Cart series used them.
Even passed Ferrari’s grand total at around the 150 F1 victories.
Not bad for a bunch of college kids with ambition ?
If you ever need a rundown on just how bloody good that engine really was———- Malcolm TYRRELL or Ian Hawkins could tell you all about each and every one of the number of variations of the DFV.
PAUL WAY ——worked alongside them both before he moved to the USA and started ILMOR !

They werent versions of the dfv they were totally different engines.
They were v8 with 4 valves, that was the only common feature

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerabout

They werent versions of the dfv they were totally different engines.
They were v8 with 4 valves, that was the only common feature

---

Well, there you go then Pilgrim ———- there was me, thinking they all were derived from the pair of fours that Duckworth and Costain cobbled together to make a DFV?
You learn something new every day if you listen long enough!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackiewilson

Well, there you go then Pilgrim ———- there was me, thinking they all were derived from the pair of fours that Duckworth and Costain cobbled together to make a DFV?
You learn something new every day if you listen long enough!

---

yes different vee angles, different valve angles etc etc
They did also pioneer the 20,000 rpm engines as well with lots of clever simple engineering
https://www.f1technical.net/features/18858

Duckworth was pontificating over a pint in his local pub one evening with me included —— ( he loved his jar of ale and a ciggy)——- he said something I’ll always remember“ It’s all about Friction, Balance and tolerance——get that right, and you’ve done away with vibration “

Malcolm TYRRELL said “ If it don’t go—-chrome it” to a gorilla at Parker whilst perusing a very hot KT,
We managed to avoid a fracas.
He also said air line pressure in a workshop should never exceed 30 psi ?
Weird the odd things you remember as you do through life
Ian “Hawkeye” Hawkins only ever talks about food these days ?
Wednesday already and the goose is getting fat—— really should make a move and get my arse in gear!

30psi...air tools wont like that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerabout

30psi...air tools wont like that

---

Pretty sure the pressure at Cosworth’s was turned up sky high———- be surprised if they used air tools—- torque wrenches were used for everything!
Malcolm used to hate the high pressure at his bench when he was building engines—— he preferred low pressure.
I have a Tecalamit compressor that chucks out 30psi the minute I turn it on, and stops immediately it’s switched off————- no holding cylinder. Best thing I ever did !

Attachment 420419

That represents one one hundred hours worktime———- twenty five hours a week for the last month !

Attachment 420432

Dont have a half decent picture of the number 6——— Only finished it this morning——- it’s a hell of a lot better than it looks in the picture—- yes, you could shave in it too..

Anyway, it’s on its way to florida, along with the last six concepts, including the two V8 Jonrude rigs.