REFLECTOR:Considering alternate engines

[John Overman]

--- "Dale W. Thomas" <dthomas@web2e.com> wrote:
> Chris,
>   Just curious....
>   My thinking is that one of the biggest benefits of
> the Mazda rotary was
> the reliability inherent in a design with only 3 or
> 4 moving parts. 
> Adding a turbo would seem to be adding complexity
> into the package that
> could offset the benefits inherent in the design.
>   Then when you look at the fact that there is (or
> soon will be) available
> a NA version which will give you pretty much the
> same power as the more
> complex smaller version, it makes me wonder why one
> would choose the
> small turbo over the larger NA.
>   What am I missing?

How many moving parts are there in a turbo? One. One
of the main drawbacks to a rotary is the exhaust
noise. Installing a turbo eliminates that drawback. a
turbo allows you to attain more power at a much higher
altitude, therefore density altitude is less of a
problem. Imagine being able to get 100% power at 7000
feet. It keeps the engine package shorter than the
20b.
Just one man's opinion.
                      John


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com