Quote from: RoadstergalWankel.  I make fun of my friend's little Wankel.

And then he showed you what he could do with it...

It's not the displacement; it's how much you put down at the rear.

I love wankels. I'd want and RX-8 if I didn't own a GS500... little engines are a massive 1.3L and put out 238HP for the RX-8. The RX-7's were less fuel/power efficient, but could have massive turbos put on (35-40PSI of boost from a stock turbo) and had something like 280HP, but the new engines are almost drop-in replacements for the rx-7s.... and could likely be boosted just as much. There's tri-rotor modified RX-7s that put out over 800HP. And thats still less than a 2.5L engine.

My wife (before she was) drove an RX-7. Man could it move. Though, it did suck gas (15mpg on the highway). Her parents sold it for a couple grand after she moved out, the kid that bought turned around and sold it for over $4k.

A wise man once said, "Either you have three rotors and two turbos or you don't."

He could say that because his car was much faster.

Suzuki TL1000s and SV series are all 90 degree V-twins.
Every Ducati twin is a 90 degree V-twin
Guzzis are transversely mounted (cross frame) 90 degree V-Twins

MotoGP Bikes:
Suzuki: Inline 4
Honda: V-5 (or something. It's a 5 cyl, though)
Ducati: V-4
Blata: 6cyl (don't know the configuration)
Kawasaki: Inline 4

And it seems that, as someone stated previously, V-twins have more low-end umph, even if they are 4cyl engines. It is most likely due to the different timing requirements than an inline 4. Inline 4s fire as such: outter two cylinders, inner two cylinders. Outside, inside. V-4s fire some other way (I forget).

Rotary engines are awesome things. The reason they produce so much power is due to their shape. The triangle shaped rotary things have arcs in them, sloping inwards. When the rotor revolves around and it is time for a firing sequence, there are essentially THREE combustion chambers per rotor, as opposed to ONE for a piston.

So would a V-Twin get up on one wheel easier than an I-4? I am just trying to break this down for us idiots.

If the v-twin has more low-end power, wouldn't an SV650 hit a wheelie as easy as, if not easier than, a GSX-R600?

Not to bring stunting up, but I'm just trying to get this straight.

Dave  

It depends on where you are revving it from, as well as the wheelbase. The Gixxer6 has a shorter wheelbase than the SV, and if you are using the upper powerband of the Gixxer, there is more power there than the SV, thus allowing it to wheelie easier.

Oh oh oh...I was confusing "powerband (engine speed)" and "bike speed"

I was thinking in terms of at low speeds, how the SV would be more apt at popping it up.

But it's not relevant; the RPMs is what we're talking about. OK, I got it.

Dave  

Quote from: 2005-GS500-PDXIf the v-twin has more low-end power, wouldn't an SV650 hit a wheelie as easy as, if not easier than, a GSX-R600?

Not that I do wheelies, but from what I understand, they have more to do with the chassis and the delivery of power than the torque.
A good rider can wheelie anything.  A friend of mine went to the GP at Laguna Seca two years ago, and saw a guy on a Goldwing with his wife on the back wheelie it from one light to the next.  The sportbike guys' jaws were dropping - I would have loved to have seen that.   :lol:
Edit - OK, I type slowly.

Quote from: AlphaFire X5V-twins have more low-end umph, even if they are 4cyl engines.

Twins are 2cyl.  You mean V-4s?

Quote from: RoadstergalTwins are 2cyl.  You mean V-4s?

Yes. Yes I did. Thank you.

And...

The exhaust pipes are like wheelie bars.

You have got to be kidding me.

Bwahahaaaaa!    

That Goldwing that is knee dragging, uh, I think it is stopped and actually just fell over.

Needs a medical alert braclet.

Those wheelies are nuts!  8 )

Quote from: Jake DThat Goldwing that is knee dragging, uh, I think it is stopped and actually just fell over.

Look at the sparks.

Look at my sweet picture! That guy's face is all I can stare at in the shot. His expression is probably the best shaZam! I have ever seen.

"Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"

I was just about to post "love the new avatar!"    :lol:

Quote from: BadgerRadial engines are also different...they have cylinders arranged in a circle around the crankshaft, and can really only be found on classic aircraft...the engines are typically huge and thus only work well in taildraggers (they have a higher nose posture on the ground that provides better prop/ground clearance). I'm pretty sure there are no current production radials.

An Aussie company called Rotec has just started producing radial engines again.



They have two versions, this one that's 110HP and 7 Cylinders, the other is 150HP and 9 Cylinders.  Pretty cool engines...

Can you even imagine trying to synch 9 carbs?