a revelation
#1
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: texas
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a revelation
ok ive never said i was a master mechanic, a decent paint and body man ok but not a master mechanic.
i hade a major discovery today.
asuming my rotary motor is 1.2 liters, and running correctly, it should make approx 100 hp right?
if you put this in perspective a normal production 5.0 v8 should produce about 416 hp, which it doesn't come close to making.
therefore the rotary is extremey efficient at making power in its stock form. Although it is cheaper to gain a high hp number in a v8, the power to weight ratio should be a lot less.
someone told me a rotary weighs approx 80lbs
if this is correct, and all my calculations are right, i have gained more respect for these motors in 3 months than i have for anything else in 18 years
this is another reason i love my rex
pls correct me if im wrong on anything.
i hade a major discovery today.
asuming my rotary motor is 1.2 liters, and running correctly, it should make approx 100 hp right?
if you put this in perspective a normal production 5.0 v8 should produce about 416 hp, which it doesn't come close to making.
therefore the rotary is extremey efficient at making power in its stock form. Although it is cheaper to gain a high hp number in a v8, the power to weight ratio should be a lot less.
someone told me a rotary weighs approx 80lbs
if this is correct, and all my calculations are right, i have gained more respect for these motors in 3 months than i have for anything else in 18 years
this is another reason i love my rex
pls correct me if im wrong on anything.
#6
roadkill hats rock
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 1,396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: a revelation
Originally posted by rmayton
if you put this in perspective a normal production 5.0 v8 should produce about 416 hp, which it doesn't come close to making.
if you put this in perspective a normal production 5.0 v8 should produce about 416 hp, which it doesn't come close to making.
waitin for cloud to chime in, maybe youre talkin about the stock bottom end heads/can/intake in mm&ff or whatever magazine did somethin like 400hp. not cheap though, heads are like $1500 alone
Trending Topics
#8
Administrator
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: So. Arlington, TX!!!
Posts: 12,974
Likes: 0
Received 59 Likes
on
36 Posts
Displacement is displacement...there are engineering standards the OEMs has to go by to determine engine statistics that get reported to various gov't agencies, and Mazda called it at 1.1/1.2 L, so that's what it is. And I wouldn't say it's more efficient (look at the gas mileage as a true indicator of efficiency...) but it doesn't have any "down" time like a boinger, so it gets more power per pulley rotation. Each time the "chamber" passes by, it pulls an intake charge whereas in a 4 stroke, that only happens every 3rd time the intake valve sees the piston visit...
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: KANSAS
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The method of determinding the displacement of a rotary is not so cut and dry, many consider it 2 stroke and therefore should be measured out to be a 1.3L, some don't consider it to be a 2 stroke but a 4 stroke, don't ask me how they came to this conclusion, so the displacement should be 2.6, or somewhere in that area. I tend to agree with the people who measure it as a 4 stroke of sorts. anyway, just my 2 cent
#10
Hunting Skylines
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Posts: 3,431
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
It's pretty simple. Mazda says the 12A is 1.2l. But, because rotaries work on a two-stroke principal of one combustion event per rotor per revolution it actually displaces the same amount as a 2.4litre four-stroke piston engine. That's the figure you need to use when doing calculations of any sort. It's also the figure most racing organisations use to achieve parity with other cars.
#11
The renisis makes 250hp so that is still more efficient than a reciprocating engine, and gets way better gas mileage. I think it has a 4.44 rear axle so if it had a 4.10 like other 7's the mileage would be even better
#12
'Last Minute' Rallying
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Lincoln, England
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the displacement of a 12a is 1146cc's but because its rotary (its not a 4 stroke or a 2 stroke ... how can it be a stroke is piston engine term ) running on the otto cycle this means that it is for comparisons sake similar to a 4 stroke piston engine of twice the size.
This is due to the 4 stroke cycle "wasting" one crank rev inducting and exhausting the charge
Its a complicated one as its not easy to compare the rotary to a piston engine and the "double" capacity rule does not account for the fact that the power stroke has a different duration to that of a piston engine too
This is due to the 4 stroke cycle "wasting" one crank rev inducting and exhausting the charge
Its a complicated one as its not easy to compare the rotary to a piston engine and the "double" capacity rule does not account for the fact that the power stroke has a different duration to that of a piston engine too