Desolation Row

Pierre Beauregard on a ludicrous Alfa Romeo

From CAR Magazine, April 1978



EVERY MOTOR SHOW HAS ONE: that far-corner lineup of stillborn idiocies from hapless hopefuls who think that their efforts are going to attract fame, fortune and the unstinting admiration of nubile maidens, seasoned styling suprernos and awe-struck chief engineers, not to mention an adoring public which is, at long, long last, going to see the future of the car as it really ought to be.

At most motor shows these horrors are, thank goodness, put in the darkest corner with the rally jackets and the rust-removers. But for some perverse reason - it can‘t be humour; the Swiss have none - Desolation Row at Geneva is right there in the high-roofed, airy portion of the hall where Bertone and Pininfarina line-up face-to- face to let the world see that good design is not just a flash of brilliance but consistent year-in, year-out excellence based on taste, experience and hard work.

And the saddest, most awful of all the cars at Geneva this year - quite apart from the production Oldsmobiles and Buicks - was the tufted, padded four-seater Alfa Romeo bearing one of the proudest names in the history of the car as art: Zagato of Milano. Worse still, this abomination was perpetrated on the innocent young body of Signorina Giulietta, who'd scarcely time to appear in society before she was so cruelly raped.

Fiorucci is the name to remember, fashion stylists who do this sort of thing to us all every once in a while. Fiorucci's have chosen the visual image of four fuzzy chenille-covered toilet seats for the interior of the poor Alfa Romeo, have put a bathroom shaving mirror on the outside for rear vision and have given the body of the car that speckled- vomit finish one so often sees on the inside of an overflowing race-track toilet.

The instrument panel has been (sloppily) covered with an old bathmat, and the toilet seat theme further developed by putting a wooden toilet lid in the middle of the steering wheel. Rubber trim like that around the windscreen is all white vinyl, held more or less in place with white silicone. To complete the effect, the windscreen wiper arms have been twisted to lie horizontally, like a pair of spindly towel racks. I don't know what Fiorucci hoped to achieve when they told Zagato to so bespoil the Giulietta.

They say it was 'to demonstrate a new direction for the automobile which, by its perfection, would draw the industry after it.' One can but conclude that if it draws anything after it, it will be a swarm of small, annoying flying insects. What more is there to say? That the execution is execrable? That is self-evident. That the level of taste is possibly the lowest ever seen on an Italian car? That, too, is beyond remark.

But look at it this way: other aspiring stylists have suddenly been positioned very much higher than their miserable work warrants, if only because they are so much closer in spirit and execution to the real cars, and so very far away from this absolute nadir.

A ‘gimmick’ dies

From CAR Magazine, July 1975

THERE WAS, CLAIMS BL, ‘SOME engineering agreement and rationale` behind the quartic wheel which has been withdrawn from the Allegro range. Its removal (a few may be left on cars in the showrooms) marks the official end of a quiet disaster for Austin workers.

Allegro buyers kept demanding the removal of the quartic steering before clinching their deals, and the Austin Morris Division must at least be thankful for making the Marina wheel interchangeable. Three months` supply of quartics had to be used up after the decision to drop the design — a decision taken after dealers and distributors raised the matter at virtually every meeting with management since the Allegro was launched, let`s see, two years ago.

‘The Press killed it.` remarked one BL man sourly. ‘If it had been put on the Citroen CX everyone would have said how bloody marvellous it was. Instead, because it was ours, everybody said it was a gimmick.’

MegaGamma: Rallying call to reality

Fighting their way clear of the modern-car quagmire, ItalDesign have shown that the alternative need not be a bitter pill. Ian Fraser reports after sampling this sweet new medicine

From CAR Magazine, August 1978



THE CAR, AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, is rather like a sci-fi film in which a large family of space travellers is trapped inside a capsule that has landed on an unknown planet. Although the travellers are in-breeding and amplifying their own genetic shortcomings as well as feeding on each other's flesh, no one is game to open the hatch to find out if there is an inhabitable environment outside - just in case there isn't. They all know that they should - and eventually must - open up because their position is untenable. At this point the plot should throw up the hero who, against all opposition and indecision, releases the locks and steps outside. The other voyagers, unconvinced and unprepared, simply slam shut the hatch and get on with their own private downfall, unable to cope with the newness that they keep telling themselves they always wanted.

The real-life automotive script is no different. Everyone knows that, despite the oddities and novelties that each generation produces, nothing fundamental is really changing. Sometimes it's drummed up as the brave new world but is generally just a regurgitation of the same old theme of painful mistakes being doomed to perpetuity. That's why the plot needs - and, indeed, has - heroes. The heroes keep emerging, some more ignored than others because their 'come on out and join me' prattle is not impressive.

Now, though, there is a new hero with a thoroughly impressive and convincing argument. We still don’t know whether it's strong enough to shake the others fully but it is the best case so far presented. Typically, the way out comes from a design organisation that has seen through the car and is not totally committed to it in the abstract sense. ItalDesign, though better known for cars than anything else, also design furniture, flying machine interiors and work in various other areas. From this perch they are apparently able to see the car in its truer purpose, and free from the awkward symbolism in which it is emeshed. Thus, the MegaGamma, which made its debut at Turin this spring, is a plea for rationality based on the civilised transportation requirements of convenience and comfort. It is part of the argument that there is room for only two types of vehicle: the low, fast sports car and the convenient, comfortable saloon, epitomised by the MegaGamma concept. Anything in between would essentially be a compromise serving neither master satisfactorily.

Ideal worlds don’t come as easily as that, though. The marketing men, who are the real prisoners in the capsule, the ones who argue against the change which would diminish their authority, are unlikely to relinquish their hold or be flexible enough to visualise the potential of uncompromised concepts. In a commercially orientated and inspired environment, the MegaGamma is an unsuppressed statement that had to be made. It is a strong statement, too strong to be ignored by anyone with a modicum of commonsense, an impassioned cry in the metallic wilderness.

At the Turin Show, the MegaGamma was politely received but obviously not clearly understood. ItalDesign report 'some interest' but no indication of any manufacturer proposing to take up the design for a production vehicle. Which is an enormous shame, for the MegaGamma is not only a profound statement but also a mobile reality, as we have since discovered. Based entirely on Lancia Gamma saloon mechanical components, the MegaGamma is a going concern, albeit a costly, hand—built one, heavier and more elaborate than it would be as a productionised vehicle. As with all ItalDesign vehicles, the MegaGamma would be relatively easy to put into production utilising the firm's expertise in manufacturing techniques (quite an amount of their energies are now devoted to designing production facilities for a variety of industries).

Although it looks relatively large, the MegaGamma is really quite small. Sitting on the production Gamma’s standard 8ft 9in wheelbase, the ItalDesign car is a foot shorter overall, the reduction occuring at the rear end, where there is almost no overhang. The height, however, is increased by a shade under 10in. A two-box structure, rather like the VW Golf, to which it bears a striking resemblance from some angles, particularly three—quarter rear, the MegaGamma is far from being a square—rigger. The bonnet slopes steeply and, in fact, just clears the tops of the engine ancillaries, while the deep windscreen is steeply raked. There are oblong headlamps and a vaguely Lancia grille, while the almost circumferential bumper-bar houses fog lamps just above the chin spoiler. It’s a hatchback, of course, although the high strengthening lip means that luggage must be heaved high before it finds a resting place.

The rear window has a wash/wipe system, while the deep windscreen is swept by a single wiper. Electrically adjustable external mirrors supplement the quite normal interior rear-view arrangements. ItalDesign alloy wheels help relieve the weight of matt—black below bumper bar height, itself a necessary adjunct to break up what would otherwise be an excessively deep—sided appearance. The side windows are themselves deep, their sills being about a third the way down a normal occupant's torso, thus giving the interior an essential light, airy appearance.

The irony of the MegaGamma is that the interior is exactly what the vehicle is all about, but the exterior appearance disproportionately influences the acceptability of the whole. So, while the exterior of the MegaGamma could almost be described as definitive, the cabin tends to be an exaggeration, at least as far as equipment is concerned. It's deliberate, of course, intended to separate the MegaGamma from the comparative austerity of the not dissimilar Alfa Romeo—based taxi programme (Volvo did one, too) executed in conjunction with the New York Museum of Modern Art some two
years ago. In retrospect, the taxi project was probably a mistake, putting the shadow of a commercial vehicle application ahead of the more challenging goal of advanced private transportation.

Compensation comes in the form of a thoroughly exotic interior harmoniously combining traditionalism with the electronics of the age. All four doors open wide and present the occupants with both illusion and realism. The illusion is that the cabin floor is incredibly high, which it is not; it simply rests on the tops of the side members — over which you must step in a normal Gamma, anyway — and the central tunnel. You step onto a floor rather than down into one. Conversely, you step directly down onto the road and not up, over the sill, then down to terra firma. The high roof line gives ample head clearance, the top of the vehicle being just about at eye-level for a 5ft 10in person, minimising the postural change from sitting to fully erect. The advantages of the configuration becomes fully apparent when you are actually installed in the MegaGamma and ready to roll. There is little restriction of the seat dimensions because there is less need to compromise them, so everyone gets the chance to sit comfortably with good vision. Rear compartment legroom is to limousine standards and there is electrical adjustment for reach as well as inclination, the controls being incorporated in the full cabin length elbow-height, gutter cum—armrest.

Electrical adjustment is also used for the multiplicity of positions available for the front seats, and the driver, additionally, has powered control over the two exterior mirrors. A la Citroen CX, all the minor-function driving controls are available within finger tip reach from the single—spoke steering wheel. The various adjustment buttons, incidently, are direct from the Fiat Ritmo. The instrument panel is a little like Times Square at night, with its digital read-outs and banks of warning lights, while the Japanese Emix Corporation have built in an electronic memorizer that reveals, on request, various items of information relating to service intervals, etc. It's just a reminder system, but could be programmed easily enough to provide other time/distance data. It also works as an ordinary standard—keyboard calculator, useful for working out average speeds and fuel consumption. The centre console incorporates the air—conditioning as well as the American radio/cassette. Trimmed in cloth with leather stripes that match the beige fascia and door coverings, the interior of the MegaGamma is nothing if not luxurious, the burr walnut cappings adding a touch of the old world.

In view of the wide range of rear—seat adjustment, it comes as a surprise to realise that the MegaGamma is able to take full advantage of its hatchback configuration. The Seat upholstery is attached to the tubular frame and suspension with Velcro strips and can be quickly removed (what you do with the cushion and backrest is another story), the frame folded and the interior converted to a load-carrying role. With the back seat in the passenger position, there is still ample luggage space, the rear shelf hinging up with the fifth door to improve access.

Although the driving position is high, in the same way a Range Rover's is high, the MegaGamma doesn’t actually feel tall. Because it is based on an inherently good chassis anyway, the vehicle handles in a perfectly acceptable way and, judging from the drive we had, lacks the vices that would enable even the severest critics to point the finger of scorn. However, it cannot be overlooked that the Gamma is one of the most roll-resistant vehicles on the market, making it the perfect base for this application. It would be something less than successful on, for example, one of the very compliant suspension French cars, however well suited the mechanical layout may be. Visibility from the MegaGamma is excellent with a good all round view of the road, and the short bonnet offers real advantages when working in close company with either mobile or stationary objects, as do the flat, protected sides. Of course, the pedals and steering wheel have been re—angled to suit the higher, more forward driving position but the ergonomics have not suffered. Although there is a risk of a bus-like feel about the pedals and wheel, the atmosphere of the MegaGamma overcomes any doubts in this area. However, the use of the five—speed manual gearbox seems to be something of an anachronism in this context; an automatic such as the AP four—speed unit would be ideal, since it is destined for the Gamma next year anyway.

Ease of access and the very comfortable rear seats once you are aboard are very convincing factors in the design of the MegaGamma. It is an incredibly good way to travel with no obvious disadvantages: the seats themselves are extremely well proportioned while the legroom is exceptional. If anything, there is a surplus of headroom, which ItalDesign themselves admit. When and if they take the MegaGamma a stage further, it will probably also be a shade lower.

In the long term, the designers see the MegaGamma concept as being a base on which manufacturers could build alternative vehicles. One is a taxi, with a sliding passenger door and fold-down occasional seats like a London taxi; another adaption could be a minibus; or, with a higher roofline, a commercial vehicle. Meanwhile, though, the tangled problem of convincing the Mark One Motorist that he really would be better off with something like this remains. The ocean nibbles at the bottom of the established cliffs, but the landslide can be an awfully long time coming.

VolkswagenAG

Extract from "Oracle - Germany", CAR Magazine, August 1978.

IN THE SEARCH FOR A NEW NAME and image for their dealer network, Volkswagen/Audi have just passed a £40m two year plan. The aim is not only to find a better slogan for dealers than the clumsy Your Volkswagen and Audi Partner, but also to update and standardise showrooms and service facilities. Or, in the words of a 40 page colour brochure issued to convince 8000 European appointed dealers: ‘The two makes have to be offered under a single, easily perceptible trademark'. All good stuff so far.

The name intended to cover all these changes and integrate the upmarket Audi and downmarket Audi is: VAG. Looks pretty hopeless at a glance, but the official translation for this Very Awkward Gag is VolkswagenwerkAG. And that has nothing to do with Audi that l can see. I don’t know how the VW dealer in Sicily will like the big blue VAG signs he will soon receive, but the reception in the Vaterland was less than enthusiastic. Dealers and big distributors as well as privately-owned import firms will dislike VAG even more once they learn that they are supposed to pay two-thirds of the £40m the campaign is to cost. On the other hand, all VW/Audi dealers will reflect uniformity and thoroughness by 1980: VAG mechanics in stylish medium-blue overalls will flock to VAG outlets painted in the same colour and even the bills will soon feature blue VAG initials. Into the bargain come restyled VW and Audi emblems. Volkswagen went back to grassroots for their blue and white VW circle, but Audi get an all-new sign in a brownish oval, not unlike the Fordplum. To me so far it looks like too much money for too little effect. Remember how many times BLMC tried before they arrived at plain old BL Cars?

Vauxhall Viva GT road test

From CAR Magazine, April 1968



IN ESSENCE THE VIVA GT IS A big engine in a little body. This is a formula which Vauxhall are coming increasingly to accept, having kicked off with the introduction of the very good Ventora. The big engine they have put in the Viva body is that of the Victor 2000, which has not been left entirely in standard form but has been endowed with a new twin-Stromberg CD induction system and a better exhaust manifold. This gives a useful extra 10bhp at only slightly higher rpm and after what we said about the Victor in February could obviously do with going into the basic car too. Compression ratio is still a modest 8.5 to one which means that the car is not too fussy about the sort of petrol it drinks.

There are plenty of other specification changes to match. The brakes are bigger all round, with a substantial servo unit to make them light as ever to operate. The coil springs have been stiffened, the dampers rerated, the wheels are up from 12 to 13in, and radial tyres are standard with, as an option, new ultra-low profile radials (70percent height/width ratio) such as were fitted to our preview car.

External touches consist of a somewhat boy-racer paint job - shiny acrylic body, matt black bonnet and tail panel, coachwork lines down the sides, GT badges - together with a new grille, two real exhaust pipes and two dummy ones. All a bit overdone, especially after the restraint of the Ventora, even though we were spared the racing-type wheels which are to become an optional extra.

More to the point is what they have done to the transmission. You can do lots of sums if you have a sliderule and the inclination, based on the use of the Victor 2000's 3.9 to one final drive and the presence of a Victor gearbox with first and second gears closed up but third left as it is. All this means that with the red line at 6250rpm the maximum speeds in the gears are 42, 60, 78, 106mph. The last speed is fairly easily obtained downhill and maintained on the level despite being well past the power peak, which leads one to the instant conclusion that the car is undergeared. At the same time we can take the speeds at peak power (5000rpm) as representing sensible change-up points for fairly sporting driving and arrive at 36, 52, 67, 92mph. Observe the jump of 16mph from first to second, only 15mph from second to third, but 25mph from third to top, giving us the further instant conclusion that as in the Ventora, third gear is too low and the car is a Barbara Castle special, God help us all.

Given a free choice of ratios we would first up the final drive to 3.6 (giving 45/65/85/115 at the red line) and secondly up third gear from 1.35 to 1.25 which would make that 85 into 92. We would have thought the least Luton could do in the meantime is offer an overdrive. Apart from all else this might help to keep down the oil and water temperatures which seemed to run high on most of the preview cars when driven hard on a fairly cold day. Inside, the car is very pretty with all necessary dials -including the rarely seen oil temperature gauge - and a leather covered steering wheel. The finish is matt black throughout, and it is all very nice except that the seats are apparently standard Viva SL (small, bouncy, with non-adjustable squab) and the front ones don't go far enough back for a tall driver. For this reason it is possibly a good thing that the little steering wheel is too high, for such a driver would otherwise have to splay his legs on either side of it to get at the pedals. Headroom is minimal as always, but the seat belts are now better placed and there are new, easily-reached safety catches for the front seats, showing that at least the Vauxhall people are capable of appreciating the need for change.

From Luton we ran down the M1 for a bit, and one or two faults began to manifest themselves. The tachometer and speedometer were clearly not to be trusted to any extent in our car. and there was occasional fluffing at high speed in top gear which felt for all the world like fuel starvation caused by insufficient pump capacity. The noise level was very high. Pat Kenning, our compatriot from Motor Trader, had a portable noise meter which clocked 82dbA at an indicated 60mph, and no less than 94dbA at an indicated 90, which is really way beyond a joke. With people acting all gormless on the bit of the motorway reduced to two lanes by road works, we soon found that the horn was the feeble, polite little one out of the ordinary Viva.

Things got better once we were flicking our way down our favourite twisty B road, grateful for the crushing overtaking performance when overtaking the odd mimser but still wishing for a higher third gear to eliminate the need for a certain amount of rowing between third and top. The car was very stable- it was arrow-straight when hands-off on the motorway - and felt like a classic understeer, very nice on fast, open bends but a bit unhappy at the back end when cornering over broken surfaces. A few attempted standing starts were un-impressive, because the massive grip of the squat radial tyres on the dry road killed the engine rather than permit wheelspin. The brakes felt a bit rough when used hard (most likely due to a disc imperfection peculiar to our car, we thought) and ended up by smelling quite a lot but never showed any other sign of fade or physical distress.

Then we came to one of our most favourite tight corners, taken left-handed. Feeling confident by now, we threw the car at a point inside the apex of the bend, let the understeer take charge, and then crammed on the power at the apex and waited for the tail to tuck downwards and the handling change to neutral to let us pick the best line out, just as it does in the Ventora with its impeccable balance. But no; the tail stayed right where it was, and the front wheels ran wider and wider. Most of the way round and about to hit the right-hand verge we eased off the accelerator. As if it suddenly realised why we had all that lock on, the car whipped back across the full width of the road and we only just held it before hitting the left-hand verge.

Recover. Deep breath. Go back and look. There on the road are three black lines, one of them a wide smear starting at the apex. Oh dear. One of us tries again, a little more trepidly; the other watches. As the power goes on the inside front wheel rises into the air, the outside front tyre runs more on its sidewall than its tread, and there we have clear, dramatic understeer. The real trouble is obviously that the back end is just too damned well located, an excellent thing with 50bhp 4 under the bonnet but less so with 100. The sort of thing which should not be beyond a cure: what it is like in the wet we shall have to wait and see.

Meanwhile we go to a garage and push up the tyre pressures. Trying again, and with the benefit of experience, we can follow the understeer turning to oversteer and pin it down with reapplication of power at the neutral steer stage. But the beast still runs wide and it is not a trick we would recommend most people to try... and we are sorry about all that rubber on the road citizens.

So there is the Viva GT. Nothing like a true GT car, unlike the Ventora which with a bit of work could become one, it is nevertheless a pretty little fun car which could become even better with assiduous development. At the moment £1022 is a bit much to be asking for a car which is excessively noisy, wrongly geared, has a poor driving position if you are at all big and displays some tricky handling in tight situations. But then Vauxhall seem to have this ability to learn and put right...

Inevitably comparisons will be drawn with the Escort Twin Cam, and the main features of both have been outlined at the bottom of this page as a sort of aide-memoire. The Viva GT is clearly slightly different in concept in that it relies on an engine which, while much bigger than standard, is still not far from being a stock unit, while the big-bore Escort uses the specialised and inevitably more expensive engine from the Lotus Elan/Cortina Twin Cam. Thus it will probably be easier to get the Vauxhall engine properly looked after, although in terms of outright reliability the Ford engine is unlikely to be any the worse off, having largely recovered from its early maladies, real and imaginary.

The comparison suggests that the two cars will be different enough to sell to slightly different market sectors, but there is bound to be a considerable degree of overlap. lt would probably not be unfair to say that the Escort is more likely to be bought by those who are serious about their motoring, if only because they cannot but help being impressed by the whole-hearted way that Ford are putting their car through its competitions programme. lt may well be that GM can sell performance-image cars in the US without having to actually go racing or rallying, but it is difficult to see the same thing happening here to the extent that Vauxhall would like. Apart from all else Fords competition work will mean that any snags are liable to be more quickly found and the solutions more thoroughly developed. This competition thing, you know; it jolly well works...

Europe's New Wankel

From Autocar Magazine, Week ending 8th November 1973

A look at Wankel engine history and the latest unit to appear, the Comotor Bi-rotor announced for the Citroen GS





ROTARY ENGINES go back in history a long way before Dr Felix Wankel's obsession with them before and after the last war. If you admit to the basic similarity between engines and pumps (the action of many engines can be reversed to form pumps), then an Italian engineer called Ramelli was the first in 1588, with his invention of the vane-type pump. Pappenheim, a German, followed this 48 years later with the gear-type pump, which did away with Ramelli’s slide valves but suffered from leaky seals, water or gas tightness being the weak point of all rotary designs.

In 1799 a colleague of James Watt adapted Pappenheim's gear pump into a rotary steam engine. Despite wooden scrapers in the tips of the teeth, there was a lot of leakage and a poor efficiency. Sixty years later an Englishman called Jones simplified the gear pump down to two double-lobed intermeshing rotors, this configuration later being adopted in the famous Rootes supercharger.

One of the first rotary engine patents was filed by an American called Cooley in 1901. His invention featured an epicycloid with internal meshing- gears and an enveloping casing with three fixed seals. In 1908 Umpleby, an Englishman, converted Cooley’s rotary steam engine into an internal combustion engine, but the gas sealing problems prevented the design from being successful.

Inventors throughout modern history have repeatedly been fired by enthusiasm for rotary engines, the attraction generally being smoothness of operation from the elimination of reciprocating parts and a high specific output for the weight and bulk, cylinders being arranged in a much more compact layout than the conventional side-by-side cylinder configuration of a reciprocating engine. Apart from the often impossibility of actually making some of the parts, in the main it has been gas sealing that has caused the designs to fail. Even when combustion was sustained, power outputs were very low due to poor combustion chamber shapes and the thermal problems of putting the cylinders so close together.

Born in the Black Forest in 1903, Felix Wankel acquired a keen interest in rotary engines during the five years he spent working for a scientific publishing house in Heidelberg. At the age of 21 he set up his own workshops and made models of rotary piston engines. Very soon he established that the weakness of all designs was the gas sealing and he set about beating this problem with a programme of intensive development. With the co-operation of BMW, he designed a practical unit in 1934 and in 1936 he received support from the German Air Ministry to set up a research organization. In 1942 the laboratories were expanded to undertake work on rotary-valve aircraft engines, but in 1945 the Allied Forces occupying Germany destroyed Wankel's whole operation.

Nothing daunted, Wankel immediately started work again in his Black Forest home and in 1951 his first contract with NSU was signed. In 1954 the discovery was made that a four-stroke cycle could be performed by the rotation of a three-lobed rotor in an epitrochoidal casing and suddenly the door to success was open. Two years later, an NSU motorcycle with a rotary-piston supercharger wiped the board in competition and took several world speed records on the Great Salt Lake.

In 1957 the first Wankel engine ran. This early type DKM was extremely complicated with both rotor and housing rotating. From a capacity equivalent to only 250 cc, 29 bhp was developed at 17,000 rpm. The next step was to make the rotor trace an orbital path and keep the casing stationary and the engine in this form (known as the KKM) successfully ran in 1958. Endurance trials the following year proved the reliability and in January 1960 at a German engineering convention in Munich, Wankel told the world about his revolutionary new engine.

Already the Curtiss—Wright Corporation in the USA had a licence to develop the Wankel engine, and enquiries poured in from all over the world. By the beginning of 1961, Toyo Kogyo and Yanmar Diesel in Japan had taken out licensing agreements, to be followed by Daimler-Benz, Alfa Romeo, Rolls-Royce, Porsche, Nissan, General Motors, Toyota, Ford of Cologne, BSA, Yamaha, Kawasaki and American Motors, to name only the automotive companies in the total list of 25 licensees. In 1967 Citroen set up a joint company with NSU, named Comotor, to manufacture and market rotary-piston engines, and in 1971 the Anglo-Rhodesian mining company, Lonrho Ltd, acquired Wankel's interest in the original design and thus became the recipient of a share of all licence fees.

European Development

The first Wankel engine to go into series production was a 300 cc unit developing 18 bhp at 6,000 rpm. lt was used as the power unit for a small water scooter controlled by a ski-mounted driver. From October 1962 onwards a total of 3,000 were manufactured.

ln 1959 the Wankel engine made history by powering a car for the first time. Two NSU Prinz minicars were fitted with a 500 cc unit developing 44 bhp at 9,000 rpm and sent out on long-term endurance testing. These cars helped convince the NSU management that the engine had potential, but it was still greeted with a lot of scepticism, all previous rotary engines having been considerable white elephants.

A year later and an engine specifically designed for fitting to a car was ready, six Prinz Sport coupés being built as prototypes. There followed a long period of development and an increasing undercurrent of unrest amongst NSU shareholders about the considerable financial commitment. This precipitated the premature launch of a production car, the NSU Spider in September 1964, powered by a single—rotor Wankel engine of 996 cc developing 50 bhp at 6,000 rpm. Like the early experimental engines, this power unit suffered from very poor bottom-end torque and a useful range of only 4,000 to 6,000 rpm, top end performance being limited by the seal life at that time. For this reason and the fact that there had to be a premium price on a low volume output, the installation chosen was a convertible version of the Sport Prinz, the idea being that sports car drivers expected engines with these characteristics. No more than 15 per day were produced, the total built until production ceased in 1968 being only 3,200.

A lot of valuable experience was gained in service, however, often at the expense and inconvenience of the customer, although NSU have always been very quick to replace Wankel engines free of charge. We ran one of these Spiders as a staff car and suffered excessive seal wear and a cracked rotor casing.

From single rotor engines work progressed to double rotors and more, Toyo Kogyo and Mercedes eventually getting as far as four rotors experimentally. NSU's great landmark was the launch of the twin—rotor Ro80 in 1967. For the first time in Europe there was a new car designed around the Wankel engine, the compact size of the power unit allowing a low aerodynamic nose and front-wheel drive. To compensate for the still-evident deficiency in bottom—end torque, a semi—automatic transmission was employed, with manual shifting and a torque convertor. The Ro80 engine had exactly the same internal dimensions as the Spider unit, two rotors being ganged together in series.

As early as 1964, Citroen, who have never been afraid of complication or advanced engineering, established an association with NSU, the aims being to develop a joint rotary-engined car. There can be little doubt that some of the Citroen thoughts on passenger car layout went into the Ro80.

In 1967 Comotor was established in Luxembourg as the Compagnie Europeenne de Construction Automobile, with objectives more specifically towards the manufacturing and marketing of rotary engines. Two years later a large factory site was acquired in the Saar and in June this year the first phase was opened with an initial work force of 200 and an output of 30 engines per day. Eventually the plant will be four times its present size and capable of producing between 5,000 and 6,000 engines per day.

Since the original formation of Comotor, NSU have been taken over by Volkswagen, so there is now a potential of Wankel—powered cars from NSU, Citroen, Audi and Volkswagen. Of these companies, Citroen are most in need of a new engine range, especially for their big D—range of saloons. To gain experience of the Wankel engine in production, they first embarked on a massive proving trial with single rotor units using components from the Ro80 engine. Originally it was planned that 500 experimental cars based on the Ami 8 and called the M.35 would be placed in the hands of typical high—mileage French drivers for endurance testing. Later the number was reduced to 350 and in fact between 1971 and 1972 only 260 were delivered. The M.35 was a fastback coupe using mainly Ami 8 body panels but also fitted with prototype hydropneumatic suspension which was later introduced with the GS saloon.

Logically speaking the M.35 should have led directly to a twin—rotor saloon, but Citroen were nervous about the Wankel and wanted more time to prove its reliability. Consequently the GS was launched with a flat—four reciprocating piston engine while the M.35 prototypes continued to build up a total mileage of more than 18 million miles between them.

At Last, the Bi-rotor

Development wheels turn slowly when new factories and new designs are involved, but at this year's Paris Salon the twin—rotor Citroen saloon was launched officially, even though the model will not go on sale until next March. As expected, the engine is a double version of the M.35 unit, which brings it back to being very like the one in the Ro80. Equivalent swept volume is 1,990 c.c. and from a compression ratio of 9 to 1 107 bhp (DIN) at 6,500 rpm is produced. This is 8 bhp less than the Ro80 (115 at 5,500) but the shape of the torque curve has been improved dramatically. As the graph shows, the Citroen engine's torque rises rapidly to reach 90 |b.ft. by about 1,600 rpm and is then flat (apart from a slight peak of 100 lb.ft. at just over 3,000 rpm) all the way to 5,000 before it tails slowly off. On the Ro80 engine the torque rises slowly to a peak of 117 lb.ft. at 4,500 rpm and then falls off sharply.

To increase the life of the vital rotor tip seals, Citroen use sintered iron rubbing against a nickel—silicon liner to the alloy trochoid casing. Both the rotor and its side seals are made from cast steel. To minimize the danger of over revving (rubbing speed is the critical factor for seal life), a warning buzzer is fitted which is triggered at 6,800 rpm.

The installation of the Comotor engine in the GS saloon is so neat that it must have been envisaged before the reciprocating piston engined version was conceived. Mounted transversely, the engine drives a torque converter and manual three-speed transmission in line with the rotor shafts, before the final drive which is ahead of and slightly below the gearbox. A unique arrangement is a cross-shaft with bearing on the opposite side to permit equal length drive shafts. To make the installation even more compact, the air injection pump for the anti—pol|ution equipment is mounted in front of the gearbox and driven by a thin shaft connected to the back of a jockey pulley at the other end of the engine. This jockey is driven by twin vee-belts off the rotor shaft nose, as is the water pump. A single vee-belt drives the alternator off a pulley on the air pump.

As well as air injection into a reactor, emissions are controlled by electronic ignition timing which is varied according to gear lever position, oil temperature, engine speed, air intake temperature and induction vacuum.

According to the terms of their licence, Comotor can develop Wankel engines with power outputs between 40 and 200 bhp for land vehicles. This more than covers all the Citroen needs, even the Maserati engine in the SM developing only 178 bhp. In its present stage of development, the Comotor engine would be eminently suitable for most of the D-range of cars, with the exception of the DS 23. By the time Citroen are ready with a replacement large car (1975 is my calculated guess), Comotor could easily have developed a three—rotor unit with around 150 bhp. The attraction of Wankel engineering, apart from the simplicity and small size, is that the ganging up of modules is feasible and relatively easy. For this reason I think Comotor will stick to the 67mm rotor width that has been a feature of NSU Wankels since the Spider unit designed in 1962. All the combustion development has been based on this rotor width with the radial dimension to its tip of 100mm and an eccentricity of 14mm.— However, the terms of Wankel licences stipulate an exchange of technical information with licencees and that other producer of Wankel car engines, Toyo Kogyo, have wider and bigger rotors in their Mazda RX range, so Comotor could get to 130 bhp another way.

Whatever turns up in 1975, Citroen seem to have committed themselves to a big stake in the Wankel engine and l doubt if we shall see them design another four, or even a six cylinder reciprocating engine. From what we know, the GS Bi—rotor will sell for a premium price in France next year, partly to throttle the demand and partly to allow for the possibility of trouble in service. Despite the complicated manufacturing process, however, Comotor have the advantage of starting manufacture from scratch in a new factory, so eventually the unit cost per engine must come down to the level of conventional engines. By then, Citroen believe, the few remaining snags will have been eliminated.

Austin Kimberley

Southern east-west six for north?



From Motor Magazine, September 11 1971

Former deputy editor Rob Cook is now working in Australia where he’s been trying the Austin Kimberley for us

The Austin 3 litre wasn’t the only production car with an 1800 centre section, revised extremities and a six-cylinder engine. Oh no! The Austin X6 in its Kimberley and Tasman versions is in full production in the British Leyland factory at Sydney, Australia. And it’s rather a pleasant motor car.

In fact, if you want a saloon that is really different from all the others, then the economics of importing a Kimberley aren’t all that frightening, and the majority of the spares are available in Britain unless you happen to crumple the nose or the boot.

The engine, for example, is a six with overhead camshaft which has, with the exception of the seven-bearing crankshaft, all the moving parts of the four-cylinder E series unit. Its capacity is 2,227 cc and in the two carburetter Kimberley version, it produces 115bhp at 5500 rpm with a torque of 118 lb.ft. at 3500 rpm (the Tasman, with single su, has 102 bhp and 116 lb.ft. torque at the same revs).

This engine, at 346lb, is 14lb lighter than the 1800 unit and the whole car is 34lb lighter than an 1800, giving a Kimberley power/weight ratio of 99 bhp/ton. The 1800 had 75 bhp/ton so the increase is 32 per cent.

The gearbox is the 1800 one and the unit is mounted east-west, driving the front wheels. However, the radiator is at the front and cooling is assisted when necessary by a thermostatically controlled electric fan which ems in at a water temperature of 205°F.

Other changes from 1800 specification include, 1.5in greater ground clearance and, since this increases the drive line angularity, constant velocity joints have been fitted to the inboard ends of the drive shafts as well as the outers.

The Australian engineers have played around with the valving in the Hydrolastic suspension and fitted rubber helper springs at the rear to reduce attitude changes under full load and pitching. They have succeeded in full measure.

On the manual gearbox version, the gearing gives 16.9 mph per 1000 revs and on the automatic, 17.9. Almost needless to say, the automatic box is the Borg-Warner Model 35.

The boot is almost big enough for a country dancing class— 5 cu.ft. bigger than that of the 1800, but for some reason which escapes my limited intelligence, the fuel tank remains at 10 gallons, giving a range of 230 miles if you keep a quart in reserve, but that’s cutting it a bit fine and the gauge is of the usual "rough estimate" type, but very fail-safe - zero equals l.5 gal.

I went rushing off in a Kimberley to the next city—some 600 miles—and despite thinking that various things could be improved, ended up liking it rather a lot. The weather was pretty foul with a raging gale at right angles most of the time (blowing straight from the south pole), and I have never been in a car less affected by such gusty conditions. Only if the accelerator were suddenly raised did the wind have any effect on the steering, and that was fairly minimal.

The suspension I found firm but jolt free and roll something that doesn’t happen. Plenty of feel in the steering with very little front wheel drive reaction, and what there was only became apparent at low speeds during my "getting to know you" initial few miles.

The gearbox was rather noisy—a deep whine in the intermediates—with very good synchromesh, and the cable-operated change absolutely horrible. It felt as though the cables were in dire need of greasing and I’m told that as the miles build up the situation improves but if you can imagine stirring a crowbar through a drum filled with cobblestones, you’ll have a fair idea of the feel of the thing.

Oddly enough, this doesn’t matter a great deal because the engine has so much torque that you hardly ever change down once on the move. The non snatch speed in top, is 5 mph, and a normal pull away from a stand-still can be made in third.

The engine will certainly never be wrecked by over revving because the camshaft/valve spring set up is such that when you get to a given speed in each gear, the power curve just goes horizontal and the only way to go faster is to change up. The unit hustles up the range with a gradually increasing sound of cams thrashing on valves, reminiscent of a Rover 2000 unit getting frenzied, but once you reach 32 in first, 55 second, 82 third and 98 in top, that’s it. Full point. With a long downhill grade you might just top 100 but it’s rather an academic thing and doesn’t matter a great deal, because the comfortable cruising speed is between 85 and 90 and it will do that all day long.

In fact, I averaged 84 for half an hour on one stretch without topping 90 which is as much a tribute to the car as it is to the road because the gale was really wild. Yet it was a one hand steering job, completely relaxed. On this run, by the way, we did 23 mpg and that seems to be the figure that most folks get with Kimberleys, whether in town or on flat out inter-city belts.

The acceleration figures aren’t all that startling with 0 to 30 in 4.6sec.; 40, 6.7; 50, 9.1; 60, 14.9; 70, 19.2; and 80, 30.0. The standing quarter needs 19 seconds. But there are two points to bear in mind: 1) this is better performance than that of the larger engined Austin 3 litre; and 2) it isn’t an easy car to take acceleration figures with from a standing start. The driver has a choice of wheel scrabbling, clutch slipping, a combination of the two, or neither.

I found it hard to decide which gave the best results and one early attempt at 0 to 40 gave 7.8 seconds against the final 6.7. It doesn’t matter a lot—what does matter is that when you press your foot down at 30 mph, the Kimberley slides smoothly up the scale to its cruising speed and only the wind roar really indicates that you are going rapidly.

Road noise is acceptably low, even on coarse granite chips, and the good through flow ventilation means that you can keep the windows firmly shut, and the seals were fairly noiseless. But one of the eyeball air inlets whistled in its closed position and stuffing Mr Kleenex into it seemed to be only cure.

I reckon that a competent mechanic could improve the gear change cables and, with that done, there would seem to be little or no need for the automatic version because top gear is very nearly in the steam-engine category. The seats aren’t all that clever because the cushions are too short and the backs non-adjustable, so when you import your Kimberley, get it without
seats and then fit 1800 or Wolseley ones. Forget the Tasman—it is the cooking version.

In Adelaide I drove a three carburetter version with stronger valve springs and modified seats and it gave me a pretty good idea of the car’s hidden potential, but, even as it stands, it’s a very pleasant piece of mechanism, very safe, very comfortable, and easy on the eye.

The economics of the deal might be a little frightening, though. The shipping costs aren’t too bad at about £150 and there might even still be some sort of Commonmarketwealth preferential treatment when it comes to import duty (note the tinge of bitterness creeping in) but when the whole deal was over you mightn’t have a lot of change out of £3,000. And you’d have to make the arrangements direct with British Leyland in Sydney because, of course, the X6 isn’t listed in the UK.

However, the model is being exported to a few countries around this segment of the globe and there would be no harm in having a word with your friendly Austin dealer. When he says "A what?", show him this article. Tell him I said it’s a fair dinkum beaut motorcar.

I’m sure he’ll understand.

Driving the new Volkswagen K70

From Motor Magazine, Week Ending October 3, 1970



To place the K70 we have to look briefly back into NSU history. When NSU marketed the R080 they were aware that its public acceptance might be a bit of a gamble, that they still had a great deal of piston engine manufacturing machinery to use and that there was a vast price gulf fixed between the inexpensive rear-engined models and the costly rotary-engined car. All this pointed to an intermediate model with a piston engine and this is how the K70 was born. It was announced very early in 1969 for the Geneva Show and then withdrawn again when VW took over NSU and formed the new subsidiary called Audi NSU Auto Union AG in April 1969.

Withdrawn but not suppressed. On the contrary, VW thought it was such a good car that they decided to give it their own name and produce it in very much larger numbers than NSU could possibly have afforded. In the meantime they have built a new factory at Salzgitter, not far from Wolfsburg, with a potential capacity of 500 K70s a day. And, of course, development has been continued by both NSU and VW.

We described and illustrated the K70 early this year (Motor, w/e March 7). To recapitulate briefly, it is designed very much after the lines of the Ro80 with front-wheel drive, a very long wheelbase and wide track, a short overhang body with rather similar lines, MacPherson Strut front suspension and irs by semi-trailing rear wishbones and coil spring /damper units. It has anti-roll bars at both ends, inboard disc brakes at the front and outboard drums at the rear with a pressure limiting valve and dual circuit operation. Steering is by rack and pinion but unlike the R080 (and contrary to earlier reports) it does not have power assistance.

The big difference, of course, is in the power unit which has a strong family resemblance to that of the Prinz 1000 series (but water-cooled) with a single chain-driven overhead camshaft operating V inclined valves in hemi-spherical heads through rocking fingers. The engine axis is longitudinal, the four-speed, all-synchromesh, all-indirect gearbox is behind the engine and the final drive is underneath it. Because of this the Ro80’s low bonnet line is not possible, even though the engine is canted 32° to the right to keep it low.

Two versions of the 82 X 76 mm. short stroke 1605 cc engine are available, both with five main bearings and a twin-choke side—draught Solex carburetter; one version has a compression ratio of 8:1 and gives 75 bhp (net) at 5200 rpm on 90 octane fuel, the other with 9.5 ratio needs 98 octane but gives 90 bhp at the same engine speed.

So much for the broad outline. Of course the last 18 months’ extra development has brought some further changes to the original design but most of these are of a very minor nature. The wheel size, however, has gone up from 13 to 14 in. and the 4.5j rims have 165SR radial tyres. Many of the engineering modifications have been inspired by VW’s production expertise and of these the most conspicuous is the change from a light alloy to a cast iron cylinder block.

The first public appearance of the K70 will be at the Paris Show but we recently had the chance to drive it for 150 miles in France. The question which obviously arises is, how does it compare with the Ro80, a car which has had rave test reports all over the world? In some ways it compares very well—it is a roomy five-seater car with an enormous boot of 24.5 cu.ft. capacity. It isn’t, of course, as fast. VW claim a maximum speed of 98 mph for the higher·powered version as against our test figure of 113 mph for the rotary car although the 0-60 mph figures are very similar. Road noise is very low and the K70 has that rigid, rattle-free feeling which adds so much to driving enjoyment on rough roads. The ride is generally good although it is characteristic of stiffly damped cars—a bit jerky at low speeds, but smoothing out at higher speeds.

Wind noise is also low and the ventilation system, a high flow, low velocity system, gives a draught-free air movement which is all you need up to quite high ambient temperatures. The engine is not as smooth as a Wankel but for a piston engine it is very smooth at high rpm, even if you take it right up into the red sector at 7000 rpm.

Probably the most disappointing feature relative to the Ro80 is the handling; the car is unusually stable, predictable and vice-free but the Michelin ZX tyres squeal at quite low cornering speeds and understeer builds up as you go faster until you can find yourself practically on full lock on sharp bends. We would want to try higher tyre pressures than the recommended 21 lb. all round—certainly much higher at the front on a car with 60 per cent of its unladen weight at this end.

Right hand drive K70s will not reach the UK until October 1971. In Germany, where the first batch will all be sold, its chief competitors will ironically be two other products of the VW group—the VW 411E and the Audi 100. No British price is yet available, of course, but the best possible estimate would put the current price at about £1600; in a year’s time it will probably be higher. Excellent though it is in many ways, it isn’t sufficiently distinguished we feel to command large British sales in this highly competitive price category. CHB

University Motors MGC

From Autocar Magazine, Week ending 17th December 1970



It is hard to say exactly what killed the MGC, but the most likely cause was the bad press the car received, together with its failure to sell in the USA. Our own road test, published in 16 November 1967, was far from enthusiastic about the engine, gearbox, handling and fuel consumption. Exactly when production ceased is hard to determine, but it was sometime last year. University Motors bought the last batch of cars and have been selling them successfully since. Their theory was that, with only a little attention, the model could be improved significantly and as they still have some 20 or so cars in stock, we decided to test one to find out for ourselves.

Basically they are offering an MGC GT in standard paint, with wire wheels, delivered with number plates, seat belts and four months tax for £1,370. At the Motor Show in 1968, the listed price was £1,337 without any of these extras, or even a heater. By today's standards this is about £130 less than a Triumph TR6 coupe and not very much more than a GT6 delivered to the same specification.

To improve the appeal though, they are also offering a long list of extras, most of these being fitted to the test car. Added together these came to another £460, making the test car £1,830, or about as much as an Alfa Romeo 1300 GT or a little more than a BMW 2002. Some of these make so much difference as to be near essentials, while others like the stereo tape player and radio (£92) are pretty obvious luxuries.

Items like the Downton engine conversion make such a difference as to qualify as essential extras and the overall effect on the car leaves one wondering why it could not have been made like this in the first place, and if it had, would the fate of the model have been more successful? It would certainly have been much more enthusiastically received by our staff.

As a single item the Downton kit costs £l75 fitted. It comprises the usual kind of head improvement, coupled with special manifolds and a complete transformation of the induction system. In standard form the MGC is a real pig when cold, developing hardly any power until warm and never idling reliably. The Downton—converted car suffers from none of these troubles, pulling eagerly straight after a cold start. More than just this, the conversion gives the engine the "right" kind of sporty response, which it never displayed in standard form, climbing "on to the cam" at about 3,000 rpm with a real bark to its straight—through exhaust. In many ways it reminds one of the works rally Healey 3000, both in overall response and the noise it makes.

Actual improvements in acceleration time are not spectacular, but very worthwhile none the less. In top, for example, about 2sec is knocked off each 20-mph increment. Standing start times show similar slight improvements, and we could probably have made the differences greater if we had not been fooled by the rev counter, which over—read by almost 500 rpm at the top end.

As well as improving the performance, the conversion works wonders for the overall fuel consumption. Driving the car hard we got very nearly 20 mpg, which compares with only 17.5 mpg for the standard product.

The standard gearbox, with its enigmatic choice of ratios, remains unchanged, as does the final drive ratio with its long-legged 26.95 mph per 1,000 rpm in overdrive top. The test car was fitted with Cosmic light alloy wheels (£60 for five) which did little for the roadholding, but improved the appearance no end. They were fitted with the standard Dunlop radial-ply tyres.

Another worthwhile improvement came from the substitution of Koni dampers (£16 the pair, fitted) at the front and a 15in. dia. Motolita laather-trimmed steering wheel (£12 12s). Standard wheel size was 16.5in., so the steering becomes that much more responsive and the view out ahead that much better. Wooden packing strips under the seat runners also improved the driving position, which on the standard car was far too low for anyone much under 6ft tall.

Giving less leverage, the smaller wheel increases the already heavy steering effort, making fast cornering quite a muscular struggle. Excessive understeer from the extra nose weight of the six-cylinder engine makes the MGC a much less lithesome car than the MGB, but it is impressively stable in a straight line as compensation. Poor turning circles (almost 36ft between kerbs) hamper one when manoeuvring.

It would be wrong for a true sports car enthusiast to look at the MGC and expect it to be one better than the MGB. In the vital qualities of handling and engine response, it is no match for the four-cylinder car. But as a long—distance touring car, where a lot of the distance covered will be on motorways, it definitely has a place and in University Motors' guise begins to look much more attractive. At £1,545 (£1,370 plus the essential Downton conversion) it has few direct competitors, and anyone worried about spending this much on an obsolete model can take comfort in the fact that its rarity alone may one day make it a sought-after classic. According to factory records, only 2,199 MGC GTs have been delivered in the UK.

Wilson's Bedouin Executive GT

From Autocar Magazine, Week ending 17th December 1970



Rather disappointing engine conversion offers small gains in performance and mpg, and requires premium fuel. Tinted windows for a black world. Tape stereo and radio, and a television option, in an £1,892 10s 6d package deal

PROMPTED BY increasing demand for the more expensive motor caravans, Wilsons introduced earlier this year a number of modifications for the Bedford Bedouin coachbuilt design. All the items are available separately, or the whole caravan may be ordered with an even fuller list of options at a total price of £1,892 10s 6d. In this form it is called the Executive and has a distinctive matt radiator grille. There is also, at £100 extra, a conversion for the 2-litre engine. The Bedouin with the Executive specification in full, and with the GT engine, has been submitted by Wilsons Motor Caravan Centre for a brief test.

To deal first with the engine conversion, we must confess to being a little disappointed. The modifications include a twin-choke Weber carburettor, higher compression ratio and revised induction. For the third time in our experience of the Bedford van, the bonnet release catch was not working, so we were only able to see the engine conversion by removing the cowling in the cab. This is enough to show the difficulty which lack of space makes in any attempt to modify the power unit, and the right angle junction in the air inlet cannot do much for efficient breathing. The table shows the small improvement in performance which resulted, and the gain in fuel consumption was offset by the need to use premium fuel instead of regular.

Not apparent from the figures alone is the fact that the vehicle felt much crisper and more responsive, and it was not until performance figures were taken that it was found that the improvements were more marginal than had been expected.

Air silencing was less effective on the modified engine, and a lot of induction hiss could be heard on light throttle openings, changing to a throaty roar under full power. The power brakes are a useful improvement on the Bedouin.

It is surprising how greatly the tinted windows alter the external appearance, but inside the effect is a little funereal, and the interior is very dark. Whatever the weather, you take your own dull day along with you. However, many people will no doubt value the privacy, especially when eating meals in the caravan, when one feels much less like a goldfish in a bowl. We were informed that the suppliers of the tinted glass have been requested to make it less dark on future production.

This is not the first time that a motor caravan has been offered with a tape stereo unit, but one would have thought that one of the combined tape and radio units would have been preferable to the two separate items listed at a total price of £86. Further, the stereo was not working, and both units were out of reach of the driver. Wilson's now offer Sony portable television as an alternative to the tape stereo and the tinted glass which seems a much more sensible option for a motor caravan. When this option is specified the Executive costs £1,869, showing a reduction of £23 10s 6d. There are difficulties of thief—proofing a television in a motor caravan, but half the battle is for the set always to be stored out of sight when not in use.

In the full specification of the Executive there are a number of lesser items, such as a fire extinguisher, gas refrigerator and tax for four months, in the attempt to offer a really comprehensive specification without extras; and the price has been maintained in spite of an increase in the basic cost of the Bedouin.

The idea of tailor—made modifications for a motor caravan is attractive, and there is considerable scope. This is quite a good start, but we would like to see some more practical refinements, such as the pressurized hot and cold water system of the Landliner, a conversion to servo-assisted disc brakes, and a more effective increase in power in future modifications. No doubt Wilson's will be looking again at the luxury market to see what further developments can be made for even greater comfort and refinement.

Rolls Royce make a Wankel

From Autocar Magazine, Week ending 17th December 1970.



Rolls-Royce Make A Wankel

Original two-stage diesel design

By J. R. Daniels, BSc

Alone among British firms, Rolls-Royce have shown an abiding interest in the Wankel principle. After six years of research. details are revealed which shows the originality of their work and its promise for the future

WE have long deplored the fact that Britain's motor industry has chosen, by and large, to ignore the Wankel engine. By following a policy of masterly inactivity they may be saving development effort and leaving themselves the option of taking up the rotary engine if it becomes really attractive; but this sort of approach is at present tightly controlled by the licensing arrangements centred on NSU. The only two British licence-holders to date are Perkins and Rolls-Royce, and only Rolls have done any serious development work. For a long time their approach was shrouded in secrecy, except for whispers that their thinking was highly original and intended primarily for application to military vehicles.

Details of their six—year development programme, however, have recently been given in a paper delivered to the Institution of Mechanical Engineers by F. Feller, C Eng, MIMechE. The story is something of a classic, starting with basic research on modified NSU engines and culminating in the design of a 350 bhp engine for military vehicle use. Even at this stage, Rolls-Royce regard the story as only half-written; much more development will be needed before the projected engine becomes a full production unit, even for the Army, while commercial prospects are even farther off.

The basic Rolls requirement was for an engine of small size and low fuel consumption. Existing standards were set by the opposed—piston two—stroke, and it was decided in 1964 by the Military Vehicles Engineering Establishment that it would be worth trying the Wankel engine as a diesel, for the sake of economy and the ability to operate on a wide range of fuels.

In fact, the Wankel in its familiar form makes a poor diesel. Its geometry makes it difficult to obtain a high enough compression ratio, and the long, thin combustion chamber has a poor surface—to—volume ratio (which results in high heat losses and poor combustion). Changing the geometry to push up the compression ratio results in a much bigger engine and an even worse surface-to-volume ratio, and so another solution was sought. The obvious answer was to pre—compress the ingoing air, by means of a Roots blower, a turbocharger, or a positive-displacement unit. Since the Wankel is itself a positive-displacement machine, the most elegant solution was to run two Wankels in series, as it were, with the first merely serving as a compressor for the second, in which combustion would take place. The first unit would then complete the thermodynamic cycle by acting also as the expansion stage for the exhaust gases.

The compressor stage must actually be larger than the combustion stage, since the initial compression depends directly on the relative size of the two units. In effect, one chamber of the compressor feeds air into the much smaller chamber of the engine proper. The basic compression ratio of the combustion stage is thus multiplied by the ratio of the displacements of the two units.

Physically, the compressor does not have to be very much bigger than the engine to give a multiplication of two or three. Together, the two-stage engine turns out to be little bigger than the equivalent single—stage one (since, as already explained, the latter must be made much bigger to obtain the same compression ratio). At the same time, the two-stage engine has a much better——i.e. lower surface—to-volume ratio.

Work was thus concentrated on the two-stage layout, with a three-rotor design as a back-up. This had separate rotors of simpler design to serve as the inlet compression and exhaust expansion stages. In the event, this alternative was not needed, but after a period in engineering limbo it is now being studied as an advanced exercise by the Royal Military College of Science.

Basic studies

Aside from the design of the two-stage engine, a great deal of basic research has been done on both combustion and on apex seal design. The combustion research resulted from the decision to use direct fuel injection rather than to` have a pre-combustion chamber in the wall of the rotor housing; there were. several design disadvantages, including leakage past the tip seals and difficult starting, which overruled the possible advantages of pre—combustion.

Combustion conditions in a Wankel are very different from those in a conventional reciprocating engine. Instead of the nice, stable column of air in the centre of the combustion chamber, and the very low piston speed around top dead centre when the fuel injection takes place, the chamber and its charge of air are travelling past the injector very fast indeed. These conditions are not necessarily worse for combustion; it was just that the engineers were working in a field where very little was known, compared with the extensive work which had been done on the reciprocating engine. Such work as had been done on the Wankel related to the petrol-burning, spark—ignition engine.

Using a small NSU Wankel engine as a test bed, 30 different combustion chamber shapes were tried, along with six different fuel injector positions. Some of the combinations were incompatible, but even so, over 100 different arrangements were tried before the best chamber shape was arrived at. In this design, the fuel is injected into a relatively wide recess carefully shaped to induce air swirl. Air for the combustion process comes from above the trailing half of the rotor, and squirts into the area through a narrow delivery channel.

It must be emphasized that this research applies to the Wankel in its diesel form, and it remains to be seen how much of it may be applied to the four-stroke petrol engine.

Seal research

While the combustion test work was going on, the little Wankel engine had to be modified to withstand diesel operating conditions. An early change was made from carbon to steel tip or seals, and it was found necessary to make new seal springs out of Nimonic 90 nickel alloy.

Early studies showed signs of misfiring which were soon traced to seal misbehaviour. Since the seals cannot be a perfect fit in their rotor-tip slots, they were tilting and jamming. The solution here (also adopted by NSU before the appearance of the Ro80) was to machine slots in the leading face of the seal to admit high—pressure gas underneath it and force it upwards into contact with the rotor housing. Later, a tendency of the seals to lose contact with the rotor housing as they passed into a lower-pressure area was overcome by recessing the trailing edge of the slots. This resulted in a 30 per cent improvement in low-speed fuel consumption. A further development was the use of a stepped apex seal, retaining the advantages of the recessed slot while also reducing the seal mass.

Again, these studies were carried out with the diesel engine in mind; but it would be surprising if designers of passenger-car Wankels did not take them into account in future.

Engine developments

The first Rolls—Royce development engine was the R1 which was conceived purely as a research tool. With a compressor stage of 1,126 c.c., and a combustion stage of 500 c.c., it produced over 50 bhp and achieved specific fuel consumptions of better than O.5lb/bhp/hour. Among other things, it was used to develop the best inter—porting arrangement between the two stages.

The R2 engine was the alternative three-stage layout, built but not investigated in detail. R3 refers to a combustion stage only, which is being used as a basic unit to build up a range of engines; it has a displacement of 1,216 c.c., and has produced 180 bhp at 4,500 rpm under test conditions.

The remaining engine of which details may be given is the 2—R6. This is a military engine formed of two banks of a two—stage engine. Each high pressure (combustion) stage has a displacement of 1,265 c.c., and is fed by a low-pressure stage of 3,250 c.c. The design power is 350 bhp at 4,500 rpm, for a weight of 939lb-a spectacular power-to-weight ratio for a diesel.

Rolls—Royce emphasize that this engine is not even running as yet, and that it will be some years before it sees even military service. But it is encouraging to see at least one British firm indulging in advanced and original Wankel research.