This thread DID deliver, but it's gone off its course in the last page or so, which is a real shame cause it was one of THE most informative pages I've ever read on SAU!
If some of you are done backing up the racing history of the rotary engine, which has nothing to do with the original question, then I would just like to say that with my extremely limited knowledge on the subject (rotors have always been a black magic to me, even though they peak my interest and the Series 7 RX7 gives every man wood) that I would have to agree with Gary. In my mind, I compare the face of each side of the rotor to that of the head of the piston.
In one rotation of that rotars side, it's done intake, compression, ignition, exhaust. While it's done in a different way, that is still a 2 stroke, although perhaps a better terminology for this instance would be '2 cycle'. Which again is an amalgamation in trying to convey it to an piston engine, REALLY, it would be called a '1 cycle', but then, what rotary wouldn't be a 1 cycle? So while I do agree with Gary that it can technically be looked at as a 2 stroke, how would a rotary engine be anything but?
On the capacity though, I do agree, and find myself again, comparing the faces of the rotor to the head of a piston. It's sort of like a 3 piston engine, in that by the time the first ignition is done and over with, another 2 have happened in the time it takes the first face of the rotor to get back to the ignition 'chamber'.
I'm far and beyond someone you should be listening to about rotary engines though, I don't hide the fact that I know pretty much nothing about them... All I can do is put up my view on what's being said and hope that I'm not too wrong
Oh yeah, and RPM, I dunno, it's a bit beyond what my brain can tackle just yet...