Rotary valve ford V8

[Luke]

The dad of the Bloke who runs LW Kustoms has hand built this rotary valve engine its based on a 347 Windsor and is going to run to 14000rpm. Interesting engine would be cool to see inside the heads and rocker boxes. not a new concept but I love it when blokes tinker.

[/img]

[/img]

[/img]

 

[DK73]

Holy cow that's a beast \m/ Regards Lars DK73

 

[sicndhed]

Gotta love different.

 

[Kit Sullivan]

Coates rotary valve technology is awesome....been around for many years, always wondered why it hasn't been adopted by any msjor manufacturer.

 

[Luke]

Coates rotary valve technology is awesome....been around for many years, always wondered why it hasn't been adopted by any msjor manufacturer.

True, Kit do you think its a manufacturing cost issue or a public perception thing maybe

 

[cudak888]

Coates rotary valve technology is awesome....been around for many years, always wondered why it hasn't been adopted by any msjor manufacturer.

True, Kit do you think its a manufacturing cost issue or a public perception thing maybe

Room under the hood?

-Kurt

 

[Luke]

.

Coates rotary valve technology is awesome....been around for many years, always wondered why it hasn't been adopted by any msjor manufacturer.

True, Kit do you think its a manufacturing cost issue or a public perception thing maybe

Room under the hood?

-Kurt

Maybe but if you could fit a boss 9 or a 426 in a car than a rotary valve set up would fit. If you ran it on a straight 6 than no issue room wise. Is it perhaps an engine wear or service life issue. I guess I could google it but then wheres the fun in that

 

[Kit Sullivan]

Engine wear is my guess. They spin at incredible RPMs (8000+) with ease.

 

[Don C]

Engine wear is my guess. They spin at incredible RPMs (8000+) with ease.

I agree, wear and sealing the pressures is very difficult. Remember the Wankel rotary engine? Interesting design, no reciprocating mass, efficient, they just couldn't control the wear and sealing.

 

[Kit Sullivan]

The "Wankel" has been developed to the point that it is nearly as long-wearing and efficient as modern gas motors.

Maybe you are referring to the earlier versions?

A little trivia about the "Wankel", for those interested. It was a design originally co-produced with GM, and it was intended to debut in the Vega as an example of GM's tech capability.

There was also in place a deal to sell rotary engines to AMC to be used in thier new, upcoming and "revolutuonary" Pacer...which was designed to accept that engine in a front-drive configuration.

GM quickly decided the rotary engine was not ready for "prime time" due to sealing and wear issues with the apex seals, among other issues. They then shifted sales tactics, and put the aluminum 4-cyl on the front burner so they could still hopefully have bragging rights for a modern "hi-tech" engine. ( we all know how well that worked out)

They kept AMC in the dark for a while, then eventually cancelled the whole rotary project. AMC then had to scramble to modify engineering for the Pacer to fit a conventional front engine/ rear drive...major floor pan mods.

GM leased/ licensed the rights to manufacture the engine to Mazda for a long-term deal ,( I think 99 years).

The engine is pretty good today...but there is really no advantage over a conventional engine.

 

[coreysvt]

I've got and old magazine with an article about GM planning on putting a wankel in the Corvette. I'm glad they didn't, it makes Mazdas RX series more special.

 

[Don C]

Yes, I was referring to the early versions. A coworker, back in the late '90s, inherited a ten year old RX-7, it ran pretty well , had decent power, and was very smooth running.

 

[Jeff73Mach1]

one of my college roommates put 300,000 miles on an Rx7 on the original engine-and he had it turbocharged at 15,000 miles!

 

[rpmcarter]

Engine wear is my guess. They spin at incredible RPMs (8000+) with ease.

"with ease" translates to less wear and tear. Less wear translates to lower support requirements infecting their parts revenues.

 

[Paul of MO]

Very Cool.

Rotory valves like these are very good but very hard to make meet emission standards as it is difficult to machine in the equivalent of lift duration and overlap into a overhead valve style 4 cycle engine at low RPMs.

As you can see they also take a lot of room on top of the block and each rotatory valve set has 4 seals per cylinder. Lots of points to fail.

Wankles can make huge power - I have seen 200 pound, 4 rotor, bi-turbo, N2O fed, Mazda engines make 2500 hp at 14000 rpm. What I found interesting is that when they go boom, many times one can just replace the inexpensive apex seals and are then once again good to go. Did I mention that these wankles idle nicely and if you keep the RPM's down you can still get 20 miles to the gallon? DAMN! They are "dirty" and can not be made to pass emissions - that is why they never took off.

The latest tech I have been following is direct fuel charge injection which eliminates the traditional intake valve.

I also saw a overhead valve fully ceramic 4 cylinder engine that needed no coolant and no oil. With no need for water jackets or cooling passages and with no need for an oil pan the engine was bezerkly tiny.

Sadly - what is soon to replace engines is motors - before I die I fully expect to fly on a electric powered airliner. My kids will be the old geezesr explaining how a "filling station" worked to their grand children. Hot rodders will talk capacitors not carbs and they will have more power than we ever thought a street car could have.

Going to be fascinating!

- Paul of MO

 

[Carolina_Mountain_Mustangs]

I seem to recall that the Grand Prix guys worked on this back in the 60's to get the high rpm. I think the rule book was changed to keep them out.

Speaking of size of engines isn't the current ohc ford engines wider than a Boss 9. I bought one for a street rod and think I saw that when trying to figure out how to get it into a 1950 business coupe.

On the ceramic engine we have a Kyocea Ceramic mfg. plant here and they made most of the prototypes back in the 80's for that. I had heard nothing about them for years. I worked with them trying to develop a ceramic cylinder and piston for use in zinc die casting injection but the company I worked for closed before we got to try it, hostile take over. Ceramic does not like sudden temp. changes. If I dropped a piece in the 720 deg. molten zinc tank it would shatter. You had to take up to temp slowly and then it could be in the zinc for months and not deteriorate like the steel components did and it floated in zinc.

David