On 09/13/2010 09:55 PM, Guerner Remi wrote:
> Looks like an interesting modification. But I am wondering if there is
> any inconvenience with this system. If not, why did Rotax design the
> engine manifolds with a small balance tube?
Looks like a question that fits into the same category as some other
questions:
1) Why is the carb attached to a flange that often ruptures and we have
to inspect regularly? Why don't they fix it? On how many cars do the
carbs once in a while just fall off?
2) Why did Rotax not install a carb heater on the 912?
3) Why does Rotax still sell a voltage regulator which is not up to its
task?
4) Why is the TCU data cable a RS232 and not an USB, and do I have to
find a DOS computer to read out the engine parameters? Why can't they
write a decent program for their clients who pay a lot of money for this
engine?
5) Why did Rotax not install a billet pump on the 914, and forces us to
rely on two electrical fuel pumps instead?
6) Why do I need to manually disconnect the wastegate servo in case the
system starts surging, and is the TCU unable to recognize and solve the
problem on its own? How many cars exhibit this behaviour?
Etc.
Of course, Rotax may have had a reason for this one. But then again,
they might have not.
The whole balance tube looks as an afterthought, something they came up
with after the design was ready and the molds for the intake manifold
where already done. So there we have it, way too small, floating in the
air, and it gave them a good opportunity to attach two springs to it to
prevent the carb from falling off when the famous flange ruptures.
Who knows?
Frans
|