Leon,
Using your figures, that's 1.875 gall/hr or better consumption than
the Onan for 22.5hp output. I don't believe it. Typically Wankel
engines are much thirstier than the equivalent size of reciprocating
engine. I'm not attempting to single out this implementation, just
pointing out that this technology isn't capable of good fuel economy.
Rob
--- In
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
, 'Leon - Allure' <leon@a...> wrote:
> From: 'HAIQU_OZ' <judd@o...>
> > Subject: Re: Digest Number 94
>
>
> > I read 'clock suction engine' as something entirely different.
> >
> > These suckers use wa-a-ay too much gas, forget it.
>
> Can you point me to a source of information that has the specific fuel
> consumption of these motors? It is my understanding, not backed up
by any
> numbers that I can find, that these little things are well under .50
> lbs/hp/hr fuel consumption. While not great this is still comprable
to, or
> better than most Rotax 2 strokes. The only other thing that bothers
me is
> the recomended TBO on the web site of 40 hours - if I'm reading the
German
> correctly. I do know that this same motor is used in a military
application
> with a recomended TBO of 2000 hours.
> >
> > Rob
> > Quickie #432