Norton unveils three new Commandos

^ I love that video. Here's a longer one, where they say it is eventually planned for a road model...
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seSUqyoAi8M[/video]

grandpaul said:

Well, you certainly don't calculate a 2-stroke engine's displacement using any formula that includes the number of revolutions/strokes per combusion cycle, JUST the actual displacement of the combustion chamber's volume per stroke. So, calculating a rotary engine's displacement (in my opinion) should only be based on a formula determining the displacment of each combustion chamber's volume, multiplied by the number of combustion sections.

(do I have that right?)

Click to expand...

Paul,
PER STROKE! i.e. per revolution of the crankshaft. But we can argue till the cows come home. Others, supposedly more competent people, have discussed this since Felix Wankel invented the principle.

Swooshdave is only right if he counts the revolutions of the rotor- there are 3 sparks per revolution; but there is one spark per revolution of the excentric shaft. And that revs 10 grand, whilst the rotor only revs 3.333 1/3rpm. A Diesel racing engine?

Whoever believes in an ongoing development of the rotary under the new Norton roof loves fairy tales. The drawing in Motor Cycle News this spring showed that whoever made that colourfull picture of the supposedly new "Norton Rotary" engine did not even understand the working principles of the Wankel engine. Inlet and exhaust 180° apart? I ask you! Not a single journalist, let alone reader, noticed, though- goes to show how much they know about their subject.