Dave, Whats not to like?
BTW If you stop drooling long enough you will notice in the text that they
have changed the STROKE (e-shaft offset) AND widened the rotor housings. This
will be an all new engine. That doesn't mean that the 13B can't be improved
using these technologies though. I have been promoting DI for the rotary for
some time. Of course with the desire to go back to carbs on the other list it
has mainly fallen on deaf ears. To some extent using the old style mechanical
injection I can understand the reluctance. The new common-rail piezo injector
systems are another matter though. You should be able to improve the efficiency
and power. I'm glad that Mazda thinks so too! No longer a voice in the
wilderness. OH yea, the fact that the fuel is being injected far from the
exhaust manifold isn't a bad thing either! At least in our aircraft
applications.
Bill Jepson
In a message dated 10/9/2007 9:37:37 PM Pacific Standard Time,
Dastaten@earthlink.net writes:
I LIKE
it... I like it a LOT.
I wonder if the increased displacement is from
thicker rotors, or
increased lateral dimensions...
Thicker means
easier adaptation in my mind for existing PSRU's.. if the
bolt pattern
remains the same. The mounting plates would need to be
remachined...
I'm all about lighter, and I LOVE the idea of direct
injection - no
throttle lag, minimal wasted fuel - however single injector
per rotor
looks like the name of the game here.
So.. have an engine
that makes MORE power than a 13B yet weighs less and
is in theory more
efficient.
Looks like a nice upgrade in the
future..
Dave
Andrew Martin wrote:
>
> More info on the
16X and pictures
>
>
http://www.mazda.com/motorshow/technology/power/renesis/index.html
>
>
Regards
>
> **Andrew Martin**
>