This same argument has been going on for the 40 odd years the rotor has been in production. laymen such as myself could be swayed by either argument. However Neither argument addresses the original question. "why do rotors suck"
The question wasnt "are rotors good for any particular application in the world of internal combustion".
The same question could be asked of any particular design of motor. They all have their strengths and weakness's. Trouble is, it wasnt. So why do rotors suck?
A. They do sound like arse, Depending on cofiguration they emit either the "wank wank" sound or they make a noise akin to a model airplane on rhoids.
B. They are not fuel efficient. If as claimed by the pro rotor team they are 1.3 or 2.6 litres or whatever the fuel efficiency is even worse than I was led to believe.
C. there is a question mark over their reliability
D. Pound for pound they do appear to lack torque to any degree. Even a briggs and Stratton can be made to look good if its propelling something light enough.
E. The rotor Fanboiz Are the rudest bunch of chuntz to ever grace these boards. Plain and steadfast arguments have been proffered by the piston brigade only to be met by personal attacks from the egg beater crowd. Some of them have offerred damn fine arguments in favor of the rotor but let their credibility fly out the window With their personal remarks.
Bring it on rotor heads but dont sully a damn good debate by attacking the man rather than the argument.