Rotory Engines

[Beyote]

Why doesn't a current Motocycle Manufacturer produce a motorcycle with a Rotory engine today??

Disregarding Norton and Suzuki, it makes PERFECT sense.

A high revving engine, super compact, super light, high yield.

The formula is all there.   It may suck gas faster, but with the wieght savings and great horse power to cc and wieght, it seems to be a perfect fit.

What are we missing here?   If Mazda produced the donor engines, it would be a sweet thing indeed.

[Grampa]

http://www.rotabike.com/

[BWClark]

http://www.rotabike.com/

...and then put it in a cruiser frame...  sigh...

[jswledhed]

Three biggest reasons are emissions, reliability and handling.  Pretty much all of which are less than acceptable with a rotary.

Mazda has addressed the former pair, to a lesser extent the reliability from what I've heard, but the handling is a bike-only issue.  The fact is they don't handle for crap.  You've got one big honking gyroscope right in the middle of the bike.  Open or close the throttle mid-lean and that big gyroscope's influence will increase or decrease.  Chop it, gyroscope weakens, monumental oversteer.  Whack it open, gyroscope strengthens, monumental understeer.

I love the Norton F1. Twin chamber rotary engine beast. In full race trim it spat fire and oil at all its its would be contenders. Nothing in its time could reel this demon in on the straights. They ate flames in the corners and a fine oily dust everywhere else. Where the exhaust of a piped 1098 will make a man weak in the knees, the exhaust note of a race prepped F1 will cause him to piss himself and cower in fear of the evil that has managed to drag itself from the depths of the pit and now howls its supremecy over mere mortals. Truly an incredible motorcycle.

Yet one doomed to failure before its time because of something so frivilous as an inadequate radiator.

[the_Journeyman]

That Norton F1 sounds like fun!   

JM

[Beyote]

When the Norton F1 came out, I remember falling in love again.

The Rotabike,..   pathetic name, discusting.   But to each there own.

Both not unlike NASCAR.

[jswledhed]

That Norton F1 sounds like fun!   

JM

http://media.putfile.com/Norton-F1-b

http://media.putfile.com/Norton-F1-a

[Monsterlover]

^^
O. . .M. . .F. . .G

That is make the beast with two backsing sick!!

Why not just turn the engine 90*, so that the gyroscopic effect doesn't influence things as much.  The Rocket III has a longitudinal engine and that thing has ultra quick steering at low speeds (less than 40 mph)

A small rotary mounted longitudinally in a 125gp frame would be disgustingly fun.

[teddy037.2]

WANKEL!!! 

sorry... it's just so much fun to say.

and that norton... sweet zombie jesus! 

[jswledhed]

Fading hope for the future.







http://www.realclassic.co.uk/norton06120100.html

[NAKID]

Wow, that head is practically touching the radiator...

[Popeye the Sailor]

Why doesn't a current Motocycle Manufacturer produce a motorcycle with a Rotory engine today??

A high revving engine, super compact, super light, high yield.

As opposed to the current motors which are small, light, and high-revving?

[NuTTs]

It's been done before - washing machines are rotary power, right?

[Randimus Maximus]

Wow, that head is practically touching the radiator...

so?

[Speeddog]

Wow, that head is practically touching the radiator...

so?

I think he meant to say header.
Looks like there might be a relief or a slot in the lower radiator to clear it.
Wankel exhaust is *hot*, so it is an issue.

I've never cared for the sound at all, just nasty to my ears.

They do make serious power, but I haven't seen any comparison of engine weights lately.
And there's always argument over what the displacement actually is...