motor

gtx28 · 08-15-2005, 01:13 AM

This thing looks like fun, i want one in a little open wheel cart like an ariel

http://www.quasiturbine.com/

Me likey

saadie · 08-15-2005, 01:56 AM

its a bit different .. but the concept is same .....
this has more moving parts .... thus theres more probablity of breaking down
simply awsome 8)

Evo · 08-15-2005, 06:52 AM

Originally Posted by goodduck

am i wrong or is this kinda how the wankel rotary engine works?

I think a rotary has a triangle shape object circulating in the middle instead of that square object..

TransAm · 08-15-2005, 08:03 AM

^ thats right, and the mazda RX8 doesnt let you forget it!

gtx28 · 08-15-2005, 09:04 AM

The rotary is a solid three sides, this is a deformable 4 sides and has no eccentric shaft.

thus theres more probablity of breaking down
simply awsome

Im not so sure about that the most problematic things in a rotory are the apex seals, the actual combustion or lack of combustion efficiency and the complex items like the main eccentric shaft. This design gets rid of the need for an eccentric shaft, and the combustion principles are much better i think they claim like 70 something percent efficient. On top of that it is engineered to produce some good torque something the rotary lacks compairative to its combustion siblings. As for the apex seals im not sure if there is a way to engineer them out, they seem to do there job ok but still have that limited lifetime.

Astonfan · 08-15-2005, 11:12 AM

nice concept. i wanna see them put one in a car then compare gas mileage against a rotary and a piston engine along with horsepower, torque, etc.

gtx28 · 08-15-2005, 12:31 PM

Dude all thats laid out in that webby, it makes ten times the torque of a piston engine. And is 70 or 80percent fuel efficient if i remember right. Most engines are round 40.

Astonfan · 08-15-2005, 03:29 PM

i know its on that site but what im mean is numbers that actually show it, like if a piston engine gets 20mpg then this engine with 80% fuel efficiency getting 36mpg. but i guess percentages can show that, so nvm. anyway, still a cool concept and i cant wait for someone to put it into a car.

gucom · 08-15-2005, 04:24 PM

wow this thing really deserves ALOT more attention and money to develop it, it looks SOOO promising, it might solve alot of our problems

RC45 · 08-15-2005, 04:55 PM

More trouble than it's worth

Vansquish · 08-15-2005, 09:28 PM

Originally Posted by gtx28

Dude all thats laid out in that webby, it makes ten times the torque of a piston engine. And is 70 or 80percent fuel efficient if i remember right. Most engines are round 40.

I don't know where you're getting your information, but the last time I heard, even diesels are only somewhere in the mid 30% efficiency range for converting fuel into energy and no gasoline engine is even close to that.

This "quasiturbine" engine is interesting, but I have my doubts about its feasibility and reliability as well as its actual outputs. I'll be more inclined to believe in it if an independent firm gets their hands on one to do some testing.

gtx28 · 08-15-2005, 10:29 PM

I have my doubts about its feasibility and reliability as well as its actual outputs. I'll be more inclined to believe in it if an independent firm gets their hands on one to do some testing.

Sure im sceptical too but I like the theory behind this so I shall withhold my pessimism for a while.