OS wankel

Rotary engine installed on my Diablo 3d. A great sound. Please keep in mind that the engine only is installed for me to be able to start it up.

I know that it seems as the plane could move, but it can't. No more than it does.

Whats not seen is a friend that stands put buy the wing unabling the plane to move further.


Просмотров: 238727
Длительность: 1:17
Комментарии: 163

Тэги для этого Видео:

Найти больше видео в категории: "2"
Видео загрузил:
Показать больше видео, загруженных


Автор bruce chapman ( назад)
Nice- I have the same (mk 2?) in a GP Fun Fighter Corsair- it is absolutely
mental! Hand launches vertically, followed by a blistering performance- the
power is instantly on tap from the distinctivly burbling idle to screaming
banshee WOT. I get about 5 mins from 12oz's of fuel- I think my fs 70 would
give more like half an hour! but hey- its fun!. I blend model technics
Contest 10 with GN 16- 50/50 to give me a mix of synthetic/ castor oil. It
likes it! Best result has come from 10 x 6 prop.

Автор Rotaswagga ( назад)
Very informative reply, thanks.

Автор Imothep ( назад)
seems to have endless power :)

Автор pawelebay ( назад)
I don't really know if there is a difference from the fullsize counterpart.
The rotor housing is made out cast iron and not aluminium as on Mazda's
engines so maybe it helps a bit. However all rotary engines have a very
uneven heat distribution due to the fact that all four strokes take place
in different areas of the engine. So I belive that warming the engine up
before putting a lot of load on it is preferred anyway.

Автор Rotaswagga ( назад)
Would you have to warm these engines up as you would a Regular size rotor

Автор Juan Luque Lucena ( назад)
It has a truly unique idle sound!

Автор pawelebay ( назад)
@Turbulence654321 That's a beauty you're selling! That's the first model
with a side intake port instead of the later periphery-ported ones. You
ought to get well payed for one with it original packaging. If you would
offer it for me for $175 I would buy it from you in a heartbeat ;) Good
luck with your sale!

Автор pawelebay ( назад)
@sebaskarenjay Thank you for your recognition. I have to ask though. Just
checked your channel.Saw a V12 model engine. Is that something you are
working on?

Автор pawelebay ( назад)
@sebaskarenjay Noone likes to be called stupid, especially what you know
what you do. But thanks for the retract and hoped you enjoied the low
quality film ;)

Автор pizzashint ( назад)
Lol it actually sounds like someone saying vrooom vrooom vroom.

Автор CmdrTobs ( назад)
@JBofBrisbane That actual depends on what power level. Take a comparable
effective displacement piston engine and tune it to the same sort of power
and it will have similar fuel use to the rotary. Now account for the
superior weight of the rotary and rev them hard (racing/flying) and the
rotary will be more fuel efficient. This was one of the boons of the much
talked about Rx787 race car I believe.

Автор JBofBrisbane ( назад)
@braddeicide - check out the other videos in pawelebay's collection.

Автор JBofBrisbane ( назад)
@balls2yourface - I think everyone who ever bought a Mazda with the letters
"RX" in its name would disagree with you. The main advantage of a Wankel is
its strong power output from a relatively compact, lightweight engine. The
downside is much less torque than a comparibly-powerful piston engine,
leading to greater fuel consumption overall. There's no such thing as a
free lunch with a Wankel rotary.

Автор Christopher Stevenson ( назад)
@pawelebay yeah every engine that I've seen built for castor oil that
wasn't run off it usually prematurely gets damaged.

Автор gdanceo ( назад)
Go to 0:56, close your eyes and imagine someone imitating a motor with his
voice :)

Автор 79chab ( назад)
bonjour, je souhaiterais recevoir les coordonnées d'un fabricant de moteur
vankel pour une cylindrée comprise entre 20 cc et 50 cc merci de votre
attention bien cordialement Michel hello ! I LOOKING FOR THE MANUFACTURER
OF ENGINE VANKEL to 20 cc at 50 cc thank you very munch best regards michel

Автор braddeicide ( назад)
This the third video in a row i've watched where the plain stayed on the
ground, does no-one fly these things anymore?

Автор Eggynatey ( назад)
@mustangified Smaller companies like Chevrolet and Mercedes Benz... There
was even a rotary-powered Corvette show car.

Автор Quenton Wall ( назад)
@2007dalin actually rotorys are actually more like a 2 stroke but there
actually a one stroke since it does everything in one stroke

Автор Herpin Mcderpin ( назад)
braap braap braap braap

Автор monsterink101 ( назад)
how much dose it cost to get one of those motors

Автор 2007dalin ( назад)
that is one sweet motor!! small fourstroke power and sounds super cool.. i
need one bad

Автор Cordt Hanson ( назад)
yeah i haven owned a 12A and 13B both non turbo and they both have quite
alot of mileage on them. rotaries are good engines if taken care of, its
the rest of the car thats the problem haha. the engine is just about the
only thing i havent had problems with in both my rx7's they just have a bad
reputation because they are NOT like piston engines, they require special
treatment and can be very picky especially in cold temps or if you do not
understand how they work.

Автор FasterLouder ( назад)
Only Mazda use them because they OWN THE RIGHTS TO MANUFACTURE THEM!!! DUH!
I've had several 12a rotaries,both turbo and non turbo,last well over
300,00km's. Using good,mineral oil,like Mazdas own rotary engine oil and
regular services are the key. Engines that can rev to 9000rpm are much more
fun than one that only revs to 5000rpm. Grow a brain...

Автор TestECull ( назад)
Then explain why noone but Mazda uses them. Main three reasons: They don't
last as well as a piston engine, they get shit emissions, and they get shit
fuel economy. Also, I wouldn't say everything turbo'd blows up. Dodge
Cummins last great. Dodge 2.2L turbo fours last fine. 2300 Ford I4's last
great when turbocharged. Real mature, by the way, with the thumbs down
ratings. Bravo.

Автор g14novak ( назад)
@TestECull Please don't open your mouth if you don't know what your talking
about. The rotaries can last plenty long as well as their upkept correctly.
12a's are notorious for lasting 200-300k+. The only reason 13b's blow up so
fast is because everything they come in is turbocharged. It's turbo'd. Of
course its going to blow up, just like Nissan SR's, KA's, CA's, Honda B
series, D series, etc. Everything turbo'd blows up.

Автор Makeittoxic John ( назад)
O.S Wanker

Автор TestECull ( назад)
You'd rebuild it anyways, just like you would a piston engine, for peak
power if it were a track car. Unless you want to lose on the straights,
that is. They rebuild the engines in NASCAR after every race, even tho the
engines still run fine, and F1 teams would do the same if the FIA would let
them. Let's see that 800HP 13b outlast an 800HP 460ci V8 on the street.

Автор shel bot ( назад)
older apex seals had an hardened leading edge that was 60C Brinnell. the
back side facing the rotor of the apex seal was 40C Brinnell. like you said
through the heat exchange, and direction change the OLD seals weakened.
scince you cannot tell me the stock seals fail 99.9% of the time between
the hardened and soft edge where the corner seal invites its way into the
party. 13bs are now pushing 800+ hp and no they are not rebuilt every
4828.03kms (3000mi) unless a failure in tuning. suck it.

Автор shel bot ( назад)
if you read it properly i was talking to the kids on here who are drama
kings that need to grow up. that is awesome your dad had a rx3! they are
the rx2s big brother ahha.

Автор TestECull ( назад)
Rotaries are great for track day cars because engine longevity isn't as
much a concern. They only have to last the length of a race, which is
rarely over 3,000 miles, usually much much less. Wanna know something else
that causes Apex seals to fail? The job they have to do. They take the
brunt of the direction changes the rotors have to do as well as sealing
against combustion heat and pressure. They're going to fail faster than
piston rings will, even if they're perfectly maintained.

Автор TestECull ( назад)
lol, 283,000 KM. IF you want to use Metric, let's convert the mileage on my
Ford pickup to KM. According to Google: 260 000 miles = 418 429.44
kilometers When your RX7 hits 418,000 kilometers, you can say it can last
as well as a piston engine. O, and I happen to know of a guy who knows of a
guy who had a Ford 300ci six that lasted half a million miles without a
rebuild, and was only rebuilt because it was smoking like a twostroke. It
still ran smooth as day one and pulled like an ox.

Автор shel bot ( назад)
my 1985 G 12a rx7 was great on fuel had 283,xxx kms when i sold it summer
2008. i can prove you wrong by experience. do you know why apex seals fail
and what part of the seal causes it to fail? ill give you a start. apex
seal failure is due to a bad tune or a old engine that has not been
maintained properly as comes with any engine you do not take care of. when
have you ever had a apex seal "offend" you? my last bridge port lasted me
just under 200,000 kms untill a coolant seal shit the bed.

Автор TestECull ( назад)
They suck as a DD because they don't last. 150,000 miles is a very long
lived rotary, whereas a piston engine is capable of 250K+. Mine is at 260K
and still purrs like a kitten. A typical rotary lifespan is 100,000 miles,
roughly half that of a typical piston engine at 200,000. Blame those stupid
apex seals, they're the offenders.

Автор shel bot ( назад)
what is it with all these retards who live for drama on youtube? if you
dont like rotary then watch some ftlb/hp v8s. any engine that produces
power makes me happy. then again i have matured unlike most of you drama
kings that forgot they have graduated over 5+ years ago. get a life

Автор shel bot ( назад)
explain how they suck as a dd? if you mantain a rotary it will last longer
than you think. i know alot of people who dd mild and full bridgeports with
no problem. now lets hear your story on why they suck for daily drivers.

Автор TestECull ( назад)
Rotaries are great on track day vehicles. They suck for daily drivers.

Автор TestECull ( назад)
Cool story, brah. I'll make sure to charge by the mile when your apex seals
go right out the exhaust ports. Someone's gotta tow your now dead RX7 home,
and a wankle just ain't got the lowend for that shit. :) O, and don't pull
the V8 lover card. I have an inline six.

Автор JBofBrisbane ( назад)
The way I understand it, the main advantage of a Wankel rotary is a fair
slab of power in a small, light package. The downside is there's no such
thing as a free lunch; that extra power comes at the expense of extra fuel
consumed. Rotaries are also down on torque compared to similarly-powerful
piston engines. Lots of car companies once had licences to develop their
own Wankels, but the NSU Ro80 debacle and the 1973 fuel crisis put an end
to all of them except Mazda.

Автор shel bot ( назад)
thanks :)

Автор o0oReFLexo0o ( назад)
Well said.

Автор shel bot ( назад)
not everyone has one because of people like you. hate hate hate! i don't
care what you like or don't like.

Автор Drinutdi ( назад)
Why doesn't everyone have one then, i bet u the power to weight ratio of a
wankel would even win it the league in fuel efficiency?

Автор shel bot (1831 год назад)
you obviously don't know anything about rotary. the produce max torque at
3,500 rpm. the only time a rotary will see the torque at 6,000 would be a
peripheral port where they usually see torque at 5,800rpm and max hp
upwards of 11,000rpm. great for you that you don't like the sound of
rotary. i wish i lived close to you so that i could wake you up every
morning and every night. i also like piston engines but guys like you just
make asses of yourself. its easy dont watch rotary videos........

Автор Gfok3 ( назад)
yeah they do produce torque, but only above 6k rpm where its fn useless...
not to mention the godawful noise they make, it reminds me of sounds
someone would make in the bathroom after bad mexican food.

Автор shel bot ( назад)
for the size yes. most compare a wankel to a v8. if the v8 boys were smart
they would actually be comparing a wankel 13b(1.3L) to lets say a chevy
sprint 3 cyl also 1.3L. which one would win....... obviously the wankel
engine now how they bash on us is mind blowing. a stock 13b turbo second
gen rx7 vs a 5.0L mustang . the stang is going to lose against the rx7. ive
been there and won so dont reply v8 lovers i already know which has more

Автор shel bot ( назад)
your another 1/2 tard that thinks rotary doesn't produce torque. if that
mkes you happy to think that then keep on with it. only a rotary driver
knows they do produce both hp and torque especially for their size. read
some stats before you blab stupid shit.

Автор F3Aflyer ( назад)
Saw one of those engines in a pusher speed model once, it was very fast !

Автор chabbalato ( назад)
try 1% acetone in the mix for better atomization and significantly reduced
fuel adhesion (more complete combustion)

Автор chabbalato ( назад)
the rotary engine is so genius!

Автор xTheUnderscorex ( назад)
not quite, the crank spins at 1/3 the rate of the rotor, so its really 1:2
rather than 1:6

Автор JimmyJames2131 ( назад)
nope, that 30 wankel makes "40 sized power" but w/ 60 sized fuel
consumption aka they are not knows for their efficency, but they are known
for their h.p.

Автор emidgley ( назад)
How fuel efficient is the engine? Do you get a longer flight time with that
versus a regular piston engine?

Автор pawelebay (692 года назад)
The plane is an ARF-model manufactured by Back Horse Models named DIABLO
3d. The motor runs on 70% methanol, 10% nitromethane and 20% Aerosynth3
(synthetic oil) However the manufacture recommendes Castor Oil, but I never
used that.

Автор Krusti600 ( назад)
what fuel does it need? methanol? how much oil? and what oil? thanks for an

Автор michael9515 ( назад)
forgot to mention... regular 4 stroke OTTO makes BOOM at every second
revolution.. WANKEL makes three BOOMS in one rovolution ;)

Автор michael9515 ( назад)
wankel is way more powerful then otto engine.. compare both, wankel with
1.3L in RX8 and Otto 1.3L in one old car.. 250HP of wankel vs. under 90HP
from Otto.. On video the part from 1:00 makes sound like in cartoones :D

Автор neXib ( назад)
Who needs torque and low end power when you can have 9000rpm into turns?
Torque is an expression for diesel and V8 people who don't know roads
progress beyond straight lines and that you don't need to pull a wagon

Автор Gfok3 ( назад)
they also have no torque or low end power... keep that in consideration

Автор neXib ( назад)
Less compression? The RX-8 engine has 11:1. And 235 horsepower on 1,3
litre, what are you talking about :P

Автор SEGnosis ( назад)
Sounds like someone going REEUUNN REUUN as a voice

Автор BrainStirmKZ ( назад)
Well the wankel engines are a bit more reliable than normal piston engines,
because they have generally 4 or 5 moving parts only. No valves, pistons,
cylinders, anything to get worn out. Their weight is a lot less than normal
engines. But they have less compression, which means less power per cubical
centimeter. For example Mazda RX-8s are with factory wankel engines. Now
you decide which is better.

Автор micheal vaniderstine ( назад)

Автор sheik480 ( назад)
Not quite...too high pitched.

Автор Drinutdi (1005 лет назад)
dumd engine test but not dumb engine, right?

Автор anthacdc ( назад)
how relible is that engine is the engine

Автор didrik nergård ( назад)
insane RPM, nice

Автор 30GB ( назад)
too bad they cost f**king $500 or $300 for one

Автор wicho661 ( назад)
Thats the dumbest engine test I've ever seen performed. Nobody is holding
the aircraft. Theres a fuel line hanging inches away from the prop. The
airplane MOVES and he still revs it up and doesn't stop the engine. OP,
please kill yourself before you kill someone at the flying field.

Автор thesecretfox1 ( назад)
guy 1:hey look its a diablo. guy2:where!! guy 3:see in the sky. guy 2:i
thought it was a lamborghini. guy 1:well then you a dumbass.

Автор joe bama ( назад)
a wankle , fuel efficient..lol...

Автор Kaledius ( назад)

Автор kens97sto171 (430 лет назад)
I heard the same numbers we get 70% domestically, the rest from over seas.
It may be that when they use that 70% number they are talking about all
sources in North America, I know we get a lot from Mexico, so the
differences may be in the definitions used to describe "Domestic" oil.
Either way we should be doing more, drill in ANWR, off the coast, and
reduce consumption, work on bio fuels, nuclear, clean coal. ALL OF IT

Автор Pedro DashT ( назад)
Nice Engine dont like the pipe

Автор Quokka57 ( назад)
Kudos to the Pawelebay dude for the video. What a sweet engine it is. I
agree with 2tonne - if you wankers want to argue about gas prices, buy a
friggen Wankel - way more fuel efficient than those bloody Dinosaurs you're
driving today. Or turn your bloody heaters/aircond/house lights off for one
lousy hour - you'll save more than this thing uses in ten years. Get a grip
on yourselves. Tossers....

Автор ccoraxfan ( назад)
krankiev: LOL! Whatever you say man, you obviously know me better than I
know myself... :)

Автор Sonny Brown ( назад)
holy shit guys, i just finished a awesome ass video of a very small wankel
engine in an rc plane and thought, holy shit!!thats sweet!!! than i scroll
down to the page expecting comments like "awesome!!or "holy shit thats
small for a rotary motor" but all i see is this bullshit about us gas
prices being a conspiracy, thats bullshit! this is a video of a fuckin
engine in a rc plane and you assholes with no life turn it into an
arguement,watch the fuckin video pricks,comment on it!not gas prices!!

Автор krankiev ( назад)
it wasn't wrong, and people who I've talked to who have seen your comments
all say you are indeed a faggot.

Автор ccoraxfan ( назад)
So your info was wrong, I told you so, and your juvenile response is to
cuss at me? Is your opinion so much more important than the truth?

Автор krankiev ( назад)
Well that's the info that I found last year so..... yeah go get fucked

Автор ccoraxfan ( назад)
As for electricity, I was talking about its flexibility and potential, not
how it's currently underutilized. We can quite easily increase the number
of clean sources of electricity. Electricity is a good source, and can be
better than it is. And as for your statement about geothermal, I suggest
you google "geothermal power" and educate yourself.

Автор ccoraxfan ( назад)
krankiev... where did you get the idea that the US supplies 70% of its own
oil? According to information anyone can read on the DOE's website, on
April 25 this year we produced 5,098,000 barrels of crude, and the same day
we imported 10,215,000 barrels, or a little more than twice as much as we
produced, so we supply about 33% of our own oil. Our largest importer is
Canada (good, our friends and neighbors), our second largest is Saudi
Arabia (bad, they fund terrorist activities).

Автор krankiev ( назад)
Well the US supplies 70% of its own oil so it's not all going to
terrorists. Also about 60% of electricity is made by use of fossil fuels,
so those "So many" ways of producing don't do that much really. And
Geothermal is a heat source, not electricity.

Автор koch ( назад)
Plans..Os owns them,,, THey are in Japan and lock and key only!...

Автор Carlos Rodriguez ( назад)
that is too cool

Автор DG121480 (535 лет назад)
It's not as much a polution concern, as it is an efficiency. 40-50 mpg is a
good thing even if it smokes like a chimney.

Автор cheaphardwarez ( назад)
Are there plans for this small rotary engine?

Автор ccoraxfan ( назад)
Because electricity can be generated from so many diverse sources,
including wind, solar, hydro, geothermal and other non-polluting sources,
as well as low-pollution sources like nuclear and natural gas, this makes
electricity among the best sources of energy. The only problem it has is
lack of portability. Hey, it would even be worth it, as I see it, to string
lines over major highways and use automated pantographs to supply power for
long-distance travelers.

Автор ccoraxfan ( назад)
I really wish there was an affordable EV option available for people such
as myself. I have to drive long distances every day and spend the vast
majority of my money on gas for my vehicle, and the price just keeps going
up. I also despise the fact that my money is going to support my enemies,
and that petroleum is being essentially wasted in inefficient vehicles when
it could be put to much better use, such as material for useful things like
plastics and even pavement rather than fuel.

Автор billdale1 ( назад)
ccoraxfan(cont.) ... who financed the 9/11 terrorists, yet we R so addicted
2 their oil that we still do business with them. The billions we send them
2day pay 4 the IEDs that are killing our troops 2day in Iraq. The Bush
administration wants to ignore that. We MUST stop giving our enemies the
money they need to finance Al Qaeda. Fuel cars pollute @ the refineries
where their gas is made, when tanker trux deliver their fuel 2 gas
stations, & when they drive on the street. Not so with EVs.

Автор billdale1 ( назад)
ccoraxfan(cont.): Drivers are willing to work around small inconveniences
with EVs since it means much cheaper operating expenses-- about 1/10th
overall-- no long stops @ gas stations, no oil changes, tune-ups, air
filters, oil filters, less brake maintenance due to "regen", etc. All that
maintenance takes lots of time, so EVs save you on that. And EVs use no
foreign oil-- they can be recharged from many cleaan renewable sources such
as solar, wind, hydro-- so no money to Saudi Arabia who...

Автор billdale1 ( назад)
There has been much progress in rechargeables. The Altair NanoSafe and the
A123 Systems batteries both can be recharged in less than 10 minutes...
there are others as well. I am not a huge fan of hybrids-- I want to see
full EVs-- but hybrids can still reduce pollution dramatically since their
engines run at a constant speed, which allows optimization rather than
having to work well @ a wide range of speeds and loads. Long charging is
still rarely a prob, since most drivers can recharge @ nyt.

Автор videomaxwell ( назад)
yes, so forget the toys..

Автор thiago497150 ( назад)
I think the best is single application cars. A small, light, electric,
emission free( acoustic and toxic gases) for the cities and a big, fast,
safe, gas car for travel. Is almost impossible get a vehicle good this two
different situations.

Автор ccoraxfan ( назад)
I fail to see how inserting an electric drive train can make that much of a
difference in the pollution output of an internal combustion engine. The
power still comes from the engine, which pollutes as it runs. The only
thing changed is the duty cycle, and I understand that hybrids only get
better mileage in stop-and-go city driving, but actually get worse mileage
on the highway.

Автор thiago497150 ( назад)
a light weight wankel engine with an efficient electric drive system could
make a good hybrid.

Автор 30GB ( назад)
this engine will last longer for sure because it uses rings

Автор 10eleven ( назад)
thats scary jus how similar it sounds...

Автор BarracksSi ( назад)
That's wild -- it sounds like a micro-sized Mazda 787B! I had no idea that
the Wankel had made it to R/C vehicles (which just shows how out of the
loop I am).

Автор john bon ( назад)
hi how long is the life span in that engine last thinking to buy one , dose
a piston one last longer

Вставка видео:


Поиск Видео

Top Видео

Top 100 >>>


Seo анализ сайта