rx7 engine swap for rx8
02-27-04, 10:28 PM
#26
Originally posted by ZeroBanger
there are things I love about the FD's engine and things I love about the Rx-8's engine. save for the turbos on the FD when you compare the actual engine, there is no comparision.
This could give you a basic idea if you compare a stock FD with a FD with a renesis engine. The FD weighs about 2800 lbs. If you put the renesis in it you will lose about 90 lbs since the renesis is smaller and lighter and you will lose the IC, turbos and hoses, etc. You will need the rx-8's transmission also, which is lighter than the FD's (how much lighter I dont know). That would probably put you in the 2700 lb ball park. Now you can look at exhaust. You would likely lose 50-60 lbs cause you would have to have some custom exhaust fabricated. So figure 2650 lbs, 238 HP 4.44 gears is going to be seriously fun.
I would not think twice about putting the renesis in the FD, the problem will be the ECU and other electronics. But damn that would be nice.
there are things I love about the FD's engine and things I love about the Rx-8's engine. save for the turbos on the FD when you compare the actual engine, there is no comparision.
This could give you a basic idea if you compare a stock FD with a FD with a renesis engine. The FD weighs about 2800 lbs. If you put the renesis in it you will lose about 90 lbs since the renesis is smaller and lighter and you will lose the IC, turbos and hoses, etc. You will need the rx-8's transmission also, which is lighter than the FD's (how much lighter I dont know). That would probably put you in the 2700 lb ball park. Now you can look at exhaust. You would likely lose 50-60 lbs cause you would have to have some custom exhaust fabricated. So figure 2650 lbs, 238 HP 4.44 gears is going to be seriously fun.
I would not think twice about putting the renesis in the FD, the problem will be the ECU and other electronics. But damn that would be nice.
Sorry, had to... since everyone feeds me that B.S. about my car...
02-27-04, 10:57 PM
#27
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Buckhead
Posts: 3,323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by digitalsolo
That'd mess up your weight balance and polar moment of intertia...
Sorry, had to... since everyone feeds me that B.S. about my car...
That'd mess up your weight balance and polar moment of intertia...
Sorry, had to... since everyone feeds me that B.S. about my car...
07-05-04, 10:30 PM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: San Ramon CA 94583
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]Originally posted by t-von
[QUOTE]Originally posted by XLR8
IMOP the renesis does not impress me. What kind of power do you consider insane
A vehicle doesn't have to be "insanely" powerfull to be fast. 220rwhp in a 2300lb car could easily pull hi 12's in the 1/4 and be street legal w/ emissions.
...
Nope, not easily. A 150-lb driver is part of the math. 2450 pounds, and you're at 13.
Insanely powerful is needed to be 2.9 times as fast as "really fast", but is a different class of speed than "monster horsepower."
Polar moment? Ditch the intercooler, and "Everything goes South in a heartbeat."
[QUOTE]Originally posted by XLR8
IMOP the renesis does not impress me. What kind of power do you consider insane
A vehicle doesn't have to be "insanely" powerfull to be fast. 220rwhp in a 2300lb car could easily pull hi 12's in the 1/4 and be street legal w/ emissions.
...
Insanely powerful is needed to be 2.9 times as fast as "really fast", but is a different class of speed than "monster horsepower."
Polar moment? Ditch the intercooler, and "Everything goes South in a heartbeat."
Last edited by jhillyer; 07-05-04 at 10:33 PM.
07-06-04, 01:32 AM
#29
Originally posted by jhillyer
Nope, not easily. A 150-lb driver is part of the math. 2450 pounds, and you're at 13.
Insanely powerful is needed to be 2.9 times as fast as "really fast", but is a different class of speed than "monster horsepower."
Polar moment? Ditch the intercooler, and "Everything goes South in a heartbeat."
Nope, not easily. A 150-lb driver is part of the math. 2450 pounds, and you're at 13.
Insanely powerful is needed to be 2.9 times as fast as "really fast", but is a different class of speed than "monster horsepower."
Polar moment? Ditch the intercooler, and "Everything goes South in a heartbeat."
Yes driver is part of the math however; I still believe the car would be in the 12sec range. Look at this example:
Stock Fd averages 2750-2850 lbs with 255hp. Thats 2800lbs/255=11.2 lbs per hp . Fd's average 13.7-14.00 in the 1/4 mile.
First gen w/Renesis and stage 2 mod would weigh 2300-2400 lbs and have maybe 278 hp. Thats 2350lbs/278=8.4 lbs per hp.
2005 Lotus Elise weighs 2000lbs and has 190hp. Thats 10.5 lbs per hp. The Lotus has run in the12's.
Also even if the Renesis only has stock hp, thats 2350lbs/238=9.8 lbs per hp. Thats still better than the Lotus.
Last edited by t-von; 07-06-04 at 01:49 AM.
07-26-04, 01:10 AM
#30
Kutabare
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
20b Rx-8
Apparently, someone grew a pair and shoved a 20B engine into an SE3P. Nice, but I think it's a step backwards.
http://acostamotorsports.com/
What is everyone's deal with bashing the RX-8? I wish people would realize this is not an RX-7 replacement. The RENESIS makes almost as much power as the original 13B-REW. That's pretty good to me, not to mention the 13B-MSP (high-power) is N/A. Unfortunately, there aren't a lot of tuning options as of yet. I blame the complicated PCM, the difficulty of getting around the S-DAIS, and the extra power ports.
IMO, forced induction as of right now is difficult for the RX-8; it's not like pressurizing previous 6-port engines. The tertiary ports close much later ABDC. Since turbo rotaries prefer to have the intake ports close as soon as possible, high-rpm boost is out of the question, for now. Perhaps the use of an electric-assisted turbocharger such as the one used in the hydrogen RENESIS will help extract more power from the bottom end, not to mention fatten the power band overall.
http://acostamotorsports.com/
What is everyone's deal with bashing the RX-8? I wish people would realize this is not an RX-7 replacement. The RENESIS makes almost as much power as the original 13B-REW. That's pretty good to me, not to mention the 13B-MSP (high-power) is N/A. Unfortunately, there aren't a lot of tuning options as of yet. I blame the complicated PCM, the difficulty of getting around the S-DAIS, and the extra power ports.
IMO, forced induction as of right now is difficult for the RX-8; it's not like pressurizing previous 6-port engines. The tertiary ports close much later ABDC. Since turbo rotaries prefer to have the intake ports close as soon as possible, high-rpm boost is out of the question, for now. Perhaps the use of an electric-assisted turbocharger such as the one used in the hydrogen RENESIS will help extract more power from the bottom end, not to mention fatten the power band overall.
08-19-13, 09:08 PM
#34
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was actually thinking about whether this was possible or not either. I don't think there should be THAT many problems.... and why would it not be worth swapping? The engine and tranny are lighter, not to mention lesser miles... just because these older engines are 'better' doesn't mean you can neglect reliability I don't think
08-20-13, 03:39 PM
#35
I was actually thinking about whether this was possible or not either. I don't think there should be THAT many problems.... and why would it not be worth swapping? The engine and tranny are lighter, not to mention lesser miles... just because these older engines are 'better' doesn't mean you can neglect reliability I don't think
You can add bolt ons to an FD engine and break 300 whp ,
Bolt ons and ECU and all sorts of crap to the renesis and you are lucky to see 190 whp ,
the lack of torque is frustrating , the transmission is a miata transmission again does not hold power .
the swapping of the electronics is suicidal .
people swap FD / FC TII engines into the rx8 as an upgrade. Sometimes the old engines are just better .
08-20-13, 11:09 PM
#36
The renesis isnt reliable , it does NOT take well to boost . so you are stuck with an unreliable engine that isnt designed for a turbo , that does NOT work well with a turbo . and is far from impressive on power .
You can add bolt ons to an FD engine and break 300 whp ,
Bolt ons and ECU and all sorts of crap to the renesis and you are lucky to see 190 whp ,
the lack of torque is frustrating , the transmission is a miata transmission again does not hold power .
the swapping of the electronics is suicidal .
people swap FD / FC TII engines into the rx8 as an upgrade. Sometimes the old engines are just better .
You can add bolt ons to an FD engine and break 300 whp ,
Bolt ons and ECU and all sorts of crap to the renesis and you are lucky to see 190 whp ,
the lack of torque is frustrating , the transmission is a miata transmission again does not hold power .
the swapping of the electronics is suicidal .
people swap FD / FC TII engines into the rx8 as an upgrade. Sometimes the old engines are just better .
the lack of torque is no secret and a turbo engine will ALWAYS win that fight. the MSP is not a torque monster? big deal ... Mazda did the right thing. they got torque through gearing. if one goes through the trouble of an MSP swap into anything, then they should do the same.
the argument that the Renesis can't be/shouldn't be turbocharged is akin to arguing that the FD can't seat a family of 4 in comfort ... and can't tow a horse trailer.
i think 190 is a bit misrepresented. the Rx-8 is a car that has 3rd Reich-styled management system. it didn't seem to allow accurate dyno testing early on. i think people have found ways to get around that now and have them somewhere in the 220 range. i may be mistaken though (i don't spend as much time on Rx8Club as i do here).
the engine itself (i'm speaking of the Series 1 engines) has a few physical shortcomings, but it's environment (the Rx-8) also contributed to some of the failures. i think the owners did A LOT of the rest. most, if not all, the physical issues can be overcome. my point is i think the engine itself could be reliable. would it be MORE reliable than the REW? i don't know because one thing to consider is that a stock REW is a stock ported engine with the potential to extract more from it. an MSP, while it is "stock ported", you need to realize that it's basically a big streetport ... AND it has been to tuned to run pretty close to it's limits. a more appropriate comparison would be maybe an REW with the twins making maybe something close to 380 (???).
a lot of what you said is subjective and i definitely respect (and even partially agree with) it. it's a no-brainer that i would put a Renesis in SA/FB, but would i swap a Renesis into an FD - meh ... probably not, but considering i would put one in an FC, i guess ... why not?
08-29-13, 05:42 PM
#37
i'm not posting to change your mind, but rather to give a little perspective. i think Mazda did both a supremely awesome, and simultaneously ****-poor job with the Renesis (and Rx-8 as a whole). that the engine performs as it does is pretty phenomenal. however, they "cheaped out" with too many things for any rotary die-hard to turn a blind eye. i love driving my Rx-8. it's a blast! however, simple problems have a habit of turning unbelievably ugly with this car and while it may not be fair, i can't think of any Rx-7 I've owned (out of 5) in the last 22 years that have had any of these things happen. anyway, I've digressed a bit.
the lack of torque is no secret and a turbo engine will ALWAYS win that fight. the MSP is not a torque monster? big deal ... Mazda did the right thing. they got torque through gearing. if one goes through the trouble of an MSP swap into anything, then they should do the same.
the argument that the Renesis can't be/shouldn't be turbocharged is akin to arguing that the FD can't seat a family of 4 in comfort ... and can't tow a horse trailer.
i think 190 is a bit misrepresented. the Rx-8 is a car that has 3rd Reich-styled management system. it didn't seem to allow accurate dyno testing early on. i think people have found ways to get around that now and have them somewhere in the 220 range. i may be mistaken though (i don't spend as much time on Rx8Club as i do here).
the engine itself (i'm speaking of the Series 1 engines) has a few physical shortcomings, but it's environment (the Rx-8) also contributed to some of the failures. i think the owners did A LOT of the rest. most, if not all, the physical issues can be overcome. my point is i think the engine itself could be reliable. would it be MORE reliable than the REW? i don't know because one thing to consider is that a stock REW is a stock ported engine with the potential to extract more from it. an MSP, while it is "stock ported", you need to realize that it's basically a big streetport ... AND it has been to tuned to run pretty close to it's limits. a more appropriate comparison would be maybe an REW with the twins making maybe something close to 380 (???).
a lot of what you said is subjective and i definitely respect (and even partially agree with) it. it's a no-brainer that i would put a Renesis in SA/FB, but would i swap a Renesis into an FD - meh ... probably not, but considering i would put one in an FC, i guess ... why not?
the lack of torque is no secret and a turbo engine will ALWAYS win that fight. the MSP is not a torque monster? big deal ... Mazda did the right thing. they got torque through gearing. if one goes through the trouble of an MSP swap into anything, then they should do the same.
the argument that the Renesis can't be/shouldn't be turbocharged is akin to arguing that the FD can't seat a family of 4 in comfort ... and can't tow a horse trailer.
i think 190 is a bit misrepresented. the Rx-8 is a car that has 3rd Reich-styled management system. it didn't seem to allow accurate dyno testing early on. i think people have found ways to get around that now and have them somewhere in the 220 range. i may be mistaken though (i don't spend as much time on Rx8Club as i do here).
the engine itself (i'm speaking of the Series 1 engines) has a few physical shortcomings, but it's environment (the Rx-8) also contributed to some of the failures. i think the owners did A LOT of the rest. most, if not all, the physical issues can be overcome. my point is i think the engine itself could be reliable. would it be MORE reliable than the REW? i don't know because one thing to consider is that a stock REW is a stock ported engine with the potential to extract more from it. an MSP, while it is "stock ported", you need to realize that it's basically a big streetport ... AND it has been to tuned to run pretty close to it's limits. a more appropriate comparison would be maybe an REW with the twins making maybe something close to 380 (???).
a lot of what you said is subjective and i definitely respect (and even partially agree with) it. it's a no-brainer that i would put a Renesis in SA/FB, but would i swap a Renesis into an FD - meh ... probably not, but considering i would put one in an FC, i guess ... why not?
none of what I said I formulated from driving the renesis , hah 2 of my cousins drive rx8's one has a series 2 , the other a series 1
my cousin with the series one is on engine # 2 .
My cousin with the series 2 the car has been very reliable to him . but I get better mpg's in my FD then he does in his 100% stock car .
I have a friend with a series 1 who auto-x's with me and his car has had all sorts of issues from the secondary ports being stuck closed to the car only putting out 160 whp , after full bolt ons and honestly the whole lack of torque thing I dont even mind . but apparently drag racers do mind .
after being around 3 renesis. I dont find myself wanting for one .. at all ... the RX8 as a chasis on the other hand is SUCH AN EASY CAR TO DRIVE .
i just dont see the renesis as an upgrade to a turbo'd REW . or even an RE .
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
trickster
2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992)
25
07-01-23 04:40 PM
