|
All Mazda parts have the 3 step process, visibility isnt always there. I have used 2 newest production run plates from Mazda, for an s5 and they were 3 stepped, also they continue on with it on 16x, some irons look darker in the ring area than others, but its always there. Mazda learned that from Curtis-wright, the others that did that as well were,Suzuki Mercedes, and Nsu. One of the few that didnt was GM, its also why their motor was plagued with problems, they figured they knew how to build a rotary better than everyone else, even though they had little experience in it and ignored what others published.
Don't take it personally, I am not trying to pick a personal fight or anything, it just seems to me that rotary engine engineering goes in circles and never goes anywhere past what mazda does because we fail to look back at what has been learned about the motor. If its not engine surfacing its, its apex seal material choice, or the reality of trailing timing in knock prevention. All this stuff has been learned before, perhaps you could alter your process to mimick Mazda's and then offer it as a mazda alternative. To me it makes little sense to assemble an engine with parts, tolerances or finishes that go against the grain of proven knowledge, unless its purely short term and you accept that area as a failure point and live with the consequences. When I say proven knowledge, I am not saying the usual forum Banter that goes on between all the self anointed rotary experts,much of it is just pure opinion, but the hard knowledge discovered and proven by the manafactures that poured hundreds of millions into rotary research and development, testing of thousands upon thousands of motors. I did some resurfacing some years back, I could not get anyone with nitriding experience to tackle the 3 step process and still be financially viable as an alternative to a new part, even though a few could tell what areas were different and almost by how much.the break point was around 350.00 after that it just didnt make sense. I could see trying this for parts that are hard to get, but the question arises whether the existing wear is any more detrimental to the engine life versus the results of a one step process. |
Originally Posted by Maxt' post='905161' date='Jul 21 2008, 07:01 PM
All Mazda parts have the 3 step process, visibility isnt always there. I have used 2 newest production run plates from Mazda, for an s5 and they were 3 stepped, also they continue on with it on 16x, some irons look darker in the ring area than others, but its always there. Mazda learned that from Curtis-wright, the others that did that as well were,Suzuki Mercedes, and Nsu. One of the few that didnt was GM, its also why their motor was plagued with problems, they figured they knew how to build a rotary better than everyone else, even though they had little experience in it and ignored what others published.
Don't take it personally, I am not trying to pick a personal fight or anything, it just seems to me that rotary engine engineering goes in circles and never goes anywhere past what mazda does because we fail to look back at what has been learned about the motor. If its not engine surfacing its, its apex seal material choice, or the reality of trailing timing in knock prevention. All this stuff has been learned before, perhaps you could alter your process to mimick Mazda's and then offer it as a mazda alternative. To me it makes little sense to assemble an engine with parts, tolerances or finishes that go against the grain of proven knowledge, unless its purely short term and you accept that area as a failure point and live with the consequences. When I say proven knowledge, I am not saying the usual forum Banter that goes on between all the self anointed rotary experts,much of it is just pure opinion, but the hard knowledge discovered and proven by the manafactures that poured hundreds of millions into rotary research and development, testing of thousands upon thousands of motors. I did some resurfacing some years back, I could not get anyone with nitriding experience to tackle the 3 step process and still be financially viable as an alternative to a new part, even though a few could tell what areas were different and almost by how much.the break point was around 350.00 after that it just didnt make sense. I could see trying this for parts that are hard to get, but the question arises whether the existing wear is any more detrimental to the engine life versus the results of a one step process. Thank you for the masterful info. Great read for my self and many to follow. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:18 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands