A question

**F5 Dave** · 24th April 2009, 09:23

I'm sure it would be very loud.

Making a complete engine would be seriously cool, but hardly based on a road going bike. There has been a uniflow made, but it wasn't legal.

Have you looked at a 13b, or even a 12a? Or more importantly, tried to move one? They weight like a million kilos! They really aren't as clever as people make out.

Beside you can't even build a bucket,- how would you be able to build a complete non conventional engine in a smaller scale to existing rotarys?

c'mon, even that goes beyond Ivan dreaming

**nudemetalz** · 24th April 2009, 09:38

Point of interest, why would that Sachs lawn mower engine not be legal (capacity notwithstanding) ?
It's not a race engine (I don't think).

**F5 Dave** · 24th April 2009, 09:41

To quote both the rulebook & myself. . .

Originally Posted by F5 Dave

[sigh] from the rules; "Engines must be derived from non-competition motorcycles. . ."
.

Again using common sense we'd probably let it run until is became over competitive. The rules are fairly clear, but there are already classes for racing lawnmowers over in the states if you are that desperate to. What is wrong that people can't just go out & buy a bike? What next? Racing appliances? Food-processors vs breadknives?

**nudemetalz** · 24th April 2009, 10:16

ha ha ha...

Racing food processor.....hmmm.....possibility....

**Patch** · 24th April 2009, 10:39

ohhh bucket racing - not for the faint hearted

**Yow Ling** · 24th April 2009, 11:25

Originally Posted by F5 Dave

What next? Racing appliances?

Some less kind peeps have said that about FXR150's in the past

**Ivan** · 24th April 2009, 12:20

Originally Posted by F5 Dave

I'm sure it would be very loud.

Making a complete engine would be seriously cool, but hardly based on a road going bike. There has been a uniflow made, but it wasn't legal.

Have you looked at a 13b, or even a 12a? Or more importantly, tried to move one? They weight like a million kilos! They really aren't as clever as people make out.

Beside you can't even build a bucket,- how would you be able to build a complete non conventional engine in a smaller scale to existing rotarys?

c'mon, even that goes beyond Ivan dreaming

12a pfffft 13B all the way PP Brap Brap Braping down the road in a low as RX3 chassis

I wasnt saying Im going to make one I was just asking

**F5 Dave** · 24th April 2009, 12:54

It's sad what amuses children these days. So you think so crapbox from the 70s with running gear designed in the 60s, is cool once the crude suspension is disabled?

Buy a car & stop troubling us. You're on the wrong forum.

**nudemetalz** · 24th April 2009, 14:24

I remember going out to the Slipway and the car guys were still there. That bloody Beemer 320i with a rotary doing a huge burnout....what some people like ay...though, I think I did a burnout on Lady P there once......

Back on topic,...rotaries just aren't in the same game as even 2 strokes for development in this day and age. If they were you would see them even on small (bucket) bikes, wouldn't you.
Look at all of the major hassle Norton had with the F1 roadbike, Suzuki with their RE-5, need I go on.

So, personally, as cool as it would be to have a rotary-powered commuter- based bucket, it ain't going to happen.

Develop the 2 strokes 100cc like these YZF-R125's and CBR-150s are. That's what we need.

**Skunk** · 24th April 2009, 14:32

How do you measure displacement of a turbine? I have an idea....

**F5 Dave** · 24th April 2009, 14:34

Oh please God let this thread die. . .

**Sully60** · 24th April 2009, 14:38

Originally Posted by F5 Dave

Oh please God let this thread die. . .

Not before you elucidate this term:

Originally Posted by F5 Dave

over competitive

**Fooman** · 24th April 2009, 15:03

Originally Posted by Skunk

How do you measure displacement of a turbine? I have an idea....

Turbines are generally rated on power output. Having said that, power output is pretty much a function of the mass flow rate of the turbine/fuel type/efficiency. E.g. a 120 MW simple cycle "E" class gas turbine (35% efficiency) has a mass flow rate of ~150 kg/s of combustion gases.

Well, you did ask...

Cheers,
FM

**Skunk** · 24th April 2009, 15:08

Originally Posted by Fooman

Turbines are generally rated on power output. Having said that, power output is pretty much a function of the mass flow rate of the turbine/fuel type/efficiency. E.g. a 120 MW simple cycle "E" class gas turbine (35% efficiency) has a mass flow rate of ~150 kg/s of combustion gases.

Well, you did ask...

Cheers,
FM

Yeah, I know. Though you could argue they have a combustion chamber but where it starts and finishes would be open to dispute.