http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShMjGXQlOv0&feature=related

Well, at the description is at least half marketing (translation = completely wrong bull*****). But the rest looks interesting.

Using same manufacturing specs this engine probably has materially more friction than a conventional design. It's main advantage appears to be higher compression than a conventional Wankel. No mention of whether it maintains the Wankel's reputation of self-destructing far earlier than conventional designs.

Hardly a "disruptive" technology change. At least they appear to be marketing to an appropriate market - military useage where weight/power ratios are critical but they need higher efficient and longevity is not an issue.

Interesting design. Kind of a triple-Wankel...

Since all 3 "cylinders" are firing at once, can you IMAGINE the vibration?!? Like having a big single cylinder engine. Of course if you put two of those assemblies together on a common shaft and rotate them 60 degrees out of "phase" or put 3 of them together and rotate each of them 40 degrees out of "phase" with each other it would make them fire at equally-spaced points around the rotation, I'm sure you could smooth it out a lot. It would make for one heck of a compact and powerful package too...

__________________
1984 300 Coupe TurboDiesel
Silver blue paint over navy blue interior
2nd owner & 2nd engine in an otherwise
99% original unmolested car
~210k miles on the clock

1986 Ford F250 4x4 Supercab
Charcoal & blue two tone paint over burgundy interior
Banks turbo, DRW, ZF-5 & SMF conversion
152k on the clock - actual mileage unknown

Geez, the rotaries have trouble with apex seals...I can't imagine the trouble it would be to try to seal three rotors in a single plane, all spinning in a big carrier.
Neat idea, hope someone can do something with it.

__________________
1985 300TD-euro 352,000 mi
1974 240D (1?)52,000 mi - has a new home now