FC renesis...I WANT IT!
11-30-06, 05:11 AM
#51
Lives on the Forum
http://p211.ezboard.com/fformulamazd...icID=227.topic
Another thread on engine building...
I think this is for the older 13B, and not the RX-8 motors, since the thread is dated back in 2001.
They are shooting for 180bhp (i.e. engine dyno).
There was another thread in there talking about bringing down the RX-8 motor into the 180's hp range, so it's all still restrictor plate racing.
I just wanted to point out that the "240" hp number given is not what the engines are actually running in the series.
I was just to advertise the "lineage" of where the motor comes from.
In fact, reading through a lot of the Formula Mazda posts, the new RX-8 engine package (~$11k) isn't being quickly being snapped up as Mazda anticipated.
A lot of the racers don't like the big price tag (uninstalled!) for very little gains.
Remember, this is spec racing, and if the new engines were that much of an advantage, I'm sure they would be selling like hotcakes.
-Ted
Another thread on engine building...
I think this is for the older 13B, and not the RX-8 motors, since the thread is dated back in 2001.
They are shooting for 180bhp (i.e. engine dyno).
There was another thread in there talking about bringing down the RX-8 motor into the 180's hp range, so it's all still restrictor plate racing.
I just wanted to point out that the "240" hp number given is not what the engines are actually running in the series.
I was just to advertise the "lineage" of where the motor comes from.
In fact, reading through a lot of the Formula Mazda posts, the new RX-8 engine package (~$11k) isn't being quickly being snapped up as Mazda anticipated.
A lot of the racers don't like the big price tag (uninstalled!) for very little gains.
Remember, this is spec racing, and if the new engines were that much of an advantage, I'm sure they would be selling like hotcakes.
-Ted
11-30-06, 06:37 AM
#52
The mystery of the prize.
Originally Posted by RETed
Sorry, the numbers I heard was 220 versus 230.
And rotarygod is right: I don't have direct experience with those things.
But here's some guys who do...
http://p211.ezboard.com/fformulamazd...icID=532.topic
Just as I thought, that "240" hp number was taken straight from the RX-8 advertisement.
These guys confirm the motor is from the sub-200hp auto trans RX-8.
Star Mazda is using restrictors to be able to keep the old 13B versus the RX-8 13B on the same race series.
This is really not a very good comparison on the capabilities of each motor - yuck, restrictor plate racing.
There is even one comment about the new RX-8 motor putting out less power - probably due to the restrictions than anything.
-Ted
And rotarygod is right: I don't have direct experience with those things.
But here's some guys who do...
http://p211.ezboard.com/fformulamazd...icID=532.topic
Just as I thought, that "240" hp number was taken straight from the RX-8 advertisement.
These guys confirm the motor is from the sub-200hp auto trans RX-8.
Star Mazda is using restrictors to be able to keep the old 13B versus the RX-8 13B on the same race series.
This is really not a very good comparison on the capabilities of each motor - yuck, restrictor plate racing.
There is even one comment about the new RX-8 motor putting out less power - probably due to the restrictions than anything.
-Ted
you are taking out of context the SCCA nonsense, I don't know for certain what the rules for the SCCA stuff are, but those guys in there say "its not the motor from the Pro car it is the automatic from the rx8" the "Pro car" is the star mazda pro formula race car running the 6 port MSPRE. The lower HP motor is the 4 port, like the rx8 w/automatic tranny has. Both are available through star mazda, and according to those guys posts only the 4 port was approved because the 6 port would have been unfair to them... which just goes on to prove that the renesis makes significantly more power than the older 6 port w/peripheral exhaust (among other handicaps like a carburetor).
who flippin' cares how little power the 4 port makes in the context of this retarded thread
they're not talking about the MSPRE in the pro car, and no that number was not lifted from mazdas marketing nonsense
The "pro car" mentioned in the thread you linked is the new star mazda car with the renesis 6 port and carbon chassis.
SCCA != star / formula mazda
The pro cars that compete in pro formula mazda are running 240hp 6 port renesis motors, theres no scandal, you're just confused.
In the series where they use the standard cars the power is down, which is intentional. Note they had to go out of their way to bring the power down to the previous 13b levels.
Note the seperation here:
http://starmazda.com/cars.htm
Last edited by pengarufoo; 11-30-06 at 06:49 AM.
11-30-06, 07:17 AM
#53
The mystery of the prize.
I just read through the SCCA formula car category rules... it's a whole different mess, they allow any star mazda car to compete, the standard 6 port motor w/dcoe is eligible, the 4 port and 6 port renesis also can run, they just have restrictor plates on the renesis that take the 70mm(iirc) throttle body down to 44mm, they also penalize the renesis based cars in the minimum weight.
it's all irrelevant though, SCCA land is pointless to bring up here. If the 6 port renesis motors didnt make the advertised power there would be a big problem. The sealed motors are dynod by the builder, part of the spec is that all motors in the same class are within a certain # of hp from one another, if you want to know the facts heres the only place in the world to get authorized sealed star mazda motors through, he can approve other builders but this is the one and only proxy:
Approved Engine Builders:
1. Daryl Drummond Enterprises, Inc.
3590 North River Rd
Gold Hill OR 97525
mailing address:
PO Box 678
Rogue River OR 97537
(541) 582-1786
if you want to scream conspiracy do it in his ears, otherwise provide some real factual proof, not hogwash on a ezboard forum where people are speculating what is happening to their SCCA class.
BTW, the monopoly over the star mazda motors also assists in making the prices unfriendly.
Note that's not a SCCA sticker on the wing, but IMSA:
it's all irrelevant though, SCCA land is pointless to bring up here. If the 6 port renesis motors didnt make the advertised power there would be a big problem. The sealed motors are dynod by the builder, part of the spec is that all motors in the same class are within a certain # of hp from one another, if you want to know the facts heres the only place in the world to get authorized sealed star mazda motors through, he can approve other builders but this is the one and only proxy:
Approved Engine Builders:
1. Daryl Drummond Enterprises, Inc.
3590 North River Rd
Gold Hill OR 97525
mailing address:
PO Box 678
Rogue River OR 97537
(541) 582-1786
if you want to scream conspiracy do it in his ears, otherwise provide some real factual proof, not hogwash on a ezboard forum where people are speculating what is happening to their SCCA class.
BTW, the monopoly over the star mazda motors also assists in making the prices unfriendly.
Note that's not a SCCA sticker on the wing, but IMSA:
Last edited by pengarufoo; 11-30-06 at 07:32 AM.
05-09-07, 10:53 AM
#54
sen2two: Have you made any progress on this? I want to drop a renesis into my 1989 convertible. These imbeciles talking about going turbo, etc., don't get it. I want a car I can enjoy. Getting 18 mpg on a good day with gas at $3.00 takes much of the fun out of owning the RX7. Mating the renesis to the higher gearing of the 1989 NA transmission could net gas mileage in the mid 20s.
Also, you could get some more power and a car that's not an ecological nightmare. and according to some sources, the Renesis is substantially lighter than the 13B. Comparable in weight to an aluminum 4 banger. This is important considering the heft of the convertible.
My thought is to get a wrecked RX-8 and start transplanting parts. Whatever is left I'll part out on ebay. Fuel pump, ECU, intake manifold. Everything that will fit. The exhaust will have to be fabricated and probably the cooling system.
Let me know how your coming and forget these adolescent jamokes who bought the FC because it was cheaper than a Supra and will never have the money to make the modifications they say would be so much cheaper. By pooling information, maybe we could save some money.
Also, you could get some more power and a car that's not an ecological nightmare. and according to some sources, the Renesis is substantially lighter than the 13B. Comparable in weight to an aluminum 4 banger. This is important considering the heft of the convertible.
My thought is to get a wrecked RX-8 and start transplanting parts. Whatever is left I'll part out on ebay. Fuel pump, ECU, intake manifold. Everything that will fit. The exhaust will have to be fabricated and probably the cooling system.
Let me know how your coming and forget these adolescent jamokes who bought the FC because it was cheaper than a Supra and will never have the money to make the modifications they say would be so much cheaper. By pooling information, maybe we could save some money.
05-10-07, 07:36 AM
#56
Lives on the Forum
sen2two: Have you made any progress on this? I want to drop a renesis into my 1989 convertible. These imbeciles talking about going turbo, etc., don't get it. I want a car I can enjoy. Getting 18 mpg on a good day with gas at $3.00 takes much of the fun out of owning the RX7. Mating the renesis to the higher gearing of the 1989 NA transmission could net gas mileage in the mid 20s.
This is not some ground-breaking, direct-injection engine you're talking about.
The RX-8 engine does not get substantially better gas mileage than the older 13B non-turbos...
Let me know how your coming and forget these adolescent jamokes who bought the FC because it was cheaper than a Supra and will never have the money to make the modifications they say would be so much cheaper. By pooling information, maybe we could save some money.
BTW, nice resurrecting a thread a half a year old...
-Ted
05-10-07, 12:28 PM
#57
Full Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: cold
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hahahaha says the guy with an overweight piece of crap vert hahhaha
05-10-07, 12:52 PM
#58
Saiga-12 Power!
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: N of Chicago
Posts: 4,384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sen2two: Have you made any progress on this? I want to drop a renesis into my 1989 convertible. These imbeciles talking about going turbo, etc., don't get it. I want a car I can enjoy. Getting 18 mpg on a good day with gas at $3.00 takes much of the fun out of owning the RX7. Mating the renesis to the higher gearing of the 1989 NA transmission could net gas mileage in the mid 20s.
You think a turbo car would not be enjoyable? Have you ever driven a turbo car? My vert used to be an NA automatic pig... Its now a 5 speed turbo car with a wicked turbo, and let me tell you, it is so much more fun than driving a boring NA automatic its just not even comparable. The NA auto > 5spd Turbo swap was the best thing to ever happen to my vert.
This coming from the guy bitching about gas prices is just funny. Come back and say this crap when you've actually put some money into your car.
Last edited by Juiceh; 05-10-07 at 01:04 PM.
05-10-07, 01:11 PM
#59
whats a Turbo V?
wow more people bashing someone because they wanted something other than a turbocharger on their 13B. you people are sad and pathetic. im (oops almost gave away Project V. sorry Masin not today) my 13B 6 port. why because i dont care about uber power. i just want to have a fun car to drive and get the happyness of the WTF! looks on peoples faces when i pop the hood. is it so bad to want to have somthing that not everyone and their freind has.
05-10-07, 01:13 PM
#60
Saiga-12 Power!
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: N of Chicago
Posts: 4,384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He said he wants something fun. Even a supercharger would deffinitley fall under that category for a fun DD.
Last edited by Juiceh; 05-10-07 at 01:41 PM.
05-10-07, 01:45 PM
#61
sen2two: Have you made any progress on this? I want to drop a renesis into my 1989 convertible. These imbeciles talking about going turbo, etc., don't get it. I want a car I can enjoy. Getting 18 mpg on a good day with gas at $3.00 takes much of the fun out of owning the RX7. Mating the renesis to the higher gearing of the 1989 NA transmission could net gas mileage in the mid 20s.
I never got anywhere nere that with either of the 2nd gen N/As i had on the freeway or otherwise.
Tuning, tuning, tuning.....
When im at the track or let the car boost a whole lot then it drinks fuel like a V8 *****, but, at least i have the option to save money....
05-10-07, 09:49 PM
#62
Wow! Interesting conversation. I have an '88 NA as a DD. It seems like the renesis would be a cheaper & easier alternative to a turbo swap & definetly cheaper than a 20B swap. Considering that I would need an ecu & some engine mounts that I would need anyway.
Why not keep the intake manifolds?
I think the lighter weight & not having a turbo or intercooler would be a bonus for a Daily Driver. I mean that I would be replacing the same basic components & gaining about 100 HP for less than the cost of a good rebuild - $2500-3500. What is wrong with that?
If I could find a good renesis out of a wrecked one or one rebuilt already? Why not stick it in an S4 with an aftermarket ECU? Seems alot simpler to me. I would have to do alot more for a turbo swap & 10 times more for a 20B. Is there some reason it wouldn't work? It just seems to be a supply & demand thing.
There are going to be alot more renesis engines & parts around than my old S4 stuff & also almost 20 years of R&D. I've been waiting for 7 years to do something but my old '88 still runs great. Why spend a ton of $$$$ for more than I need for a DD.
Ramses666
Why not keep the intake manifolds?
I think the lighter weight & not having a turbo or intercooler would be a bonus for a Daily Driver. I mean that I would be replacing the same basic components & gaining about 100 HP for less than the cost of a good rebuild - $2500-3500. What is wrong with that?
If I could find a good renesis out of a wrecked one or one rebuilt already? Why not stick it in an S4 with an aftermarket ECU? Seems alot simpler to me. I would have to do alot more for a turbo swap & 10 times more for a 20B. Is there some reason it wouldn't work? It just seems to be a supply & demand thing.
There are going to be alot more renesis engines & parts around than my old S4 stuff & also almost 20 years of R&D. I've been waiting for 7 years to do something but my old '88 still runs great. Why spend a ton of $$$$ for more than I need for a DD.
Ramses666
05-10-07, 10:42 PM
#64
Lives on the Forum
Actually, I highly doubt that.
If we're talking just about the install, I think the 20B would be cheaper.
Engine mount adapters are relatively cheap.
If we're talking stand-alone EMS, then it wouldn't matter what kinda engine you're going to use, cause it's all the same process.
Have you done a 20B swap?
If you haven't, then I don't think you're qualified to make such comments.
-Ted
If we're talking just about the install, I think the 20B would be cheaper.
Engine mount adapters are relatively cheap.
If we're talking stand-alone EMS, then it wouldn't matter what kinda engine you're going to use, cause it's all the same process.
Have you done a 20B swap?
If you haven't, then I don't think you're qualified to make such comments.
-Ted
05-10-07, 10:56 PM
#65
Actually, I highly doubt that.
If we're talking just about the install, I think the 20B would be cheaper.
Engine mount adapters are relatively cheap.
If we're talking stand-alone EMS, then it wouldn't matter what kinda engine you're going to use, cause it's all the same process.
Have you done a 20B swap?
If you haven't, then I don't think you're qualified to make such comments.
-Ted
If we're talking just about the install, I think the 20B would be cheaper.
Engine mount adapters are relatively cheap.
If we're talking stand-alone EMS, then it wouldn't matter what kinda engine you're going to use, cause it's all the same process.
Have you done a 20B swap?
If you haven't, then I don't think you're qualified to make such comments.
-Ted
Ramses666
05-10-07, 11:58 PM
#66
Lives on the Forum
Does the RX-8 engine drop into the FC?
No - this means custom mounts unless someone offers prefab ones?
This is where the 20B actually is easier (and cheaper), cause prefab mounts are available.
How about engine control (i.e. ECU)?
Are you going to grab the engine RX-8 engine wiring harness and stock ECU?
Then unless you know an expert that can give you advice on tech support, you're going to have to invest in an RX-8 FSM and study like there's no tomorrow.
If you're going to install a stand-alone on the RX-8 engine, then there's basically no difference between that engine versus a 20B, which was my point.
How about the exhaust?
It's not going to mate up to the stock FC exhaust, so there is some custom work to be done.
Same with the 20B...
Does the RX-8 clear all the auxiliaries?
I know the 20B does - I'm talking specifically of the steering rack.
What about the clutch?
20B usually comes with the auto counterweight, so slap on almost any lightened flywheel (and clutch), and you're done.
Our 20B NA put down 230 AT THE WHEELS with almost 200 lb-fit of torque.
It'll smoke any RX-8 conversion, as those numbers are what the RX-8 motor does at the flywheel @ BHP.
It took $6k to do this conversion, including the engine and all electronics.
You think the RX-8 motor is going to be any cheaper?
-Ted
No - this means custom mounts unless someone offers prefab ones?
This is where the 20B actually is easier (and cheaper), cause prefab mounts are available.
How about engine control (i.e. ECU)?
Are you going to grab the engine RX-8 engine wiring harness and stock ECU?
Then unless you know an expert that can give you advice on tech support, you're going to have to invest in an RX-8 FSM and study like there's no tomorrow.
If you're going to install a stand-alone on the RX-8 engine, then there's basically no difference between that engine versus a 20B, which was my point.
How about the exhaust?
It's not going to mate up to the stock FC exhaust, so there is some custom work to be done.
Same with the 20B...
Does the RX-8 clear all the auxiliaries?
I know the 20B does - I'm talking specifically of the steering rack.
What about the clutch?
20B usually comes with the auto counterweight, so slap on almost any lightened flywheel (and clutch), and you're done.
Our 20B NA put down 230 AT THE WHEELS with almost 200 lb-fit of torque.
It'll smoke any RX-8 conversion, as those numbers are what the RX-8 motor does at the flywheel @ BHP.
It took $6k to do this conversion, including the engine and all electronics.
You think the RX-8 motor is going to be any cheaper?
-Ted
05-11-07, 12:29 AM
#67
Does the RX-8 engine drop into the FC?
No - this means custom mounts unless someone offers prefab ones?
This is where the 20B actually is easier (and cheaper), cause prefab mounts are available.
How about engine control (i.e. ECU)?
Are you going to grab the engine RX-8 engine wiring harness and stock ECU?
Then unless you know an expert that can give you advice on tech support, you're going to have to invest in an RX-8 FSM and study like there's no tomorrow.
If you're going to install a stand-alone on the RX-8 engine, then there's basically no difference between that engine versus a 20B, which was my point.
How about the exhaust?
It's not going to mate up to the stock FC exhaust, so there is some custom work to be done.
Same with the 20B...
Does the RX-8 clear all the auxiliaries?
I know the 20B does - I'm talking specifically of the steering rack.
What about the clutch?
20B usually comes with the auto counterweight, so slap on almost any lightened flywheel (and clutch), and you're done.
Our 20B NA put down 230 AT THE WHEELS with almost 200 lb-fit of torque.
It'll smoke any RX-8 conversion, as those numbers are what the RX-8 motor does at the flywheel @ BHP.
It took $6k to do this conversion, including the engine and all electronics.
You think the RX-8 motor is going to be any cheaper?
-Ted
No - this means custom mounts unless someone offers prefab ones?
This is where the 20B actually is easier (and cheaper), cause prefab mounts are available.
How about engine control (i.e. ECU)?
Are you going to grab the engine RX-8 engine wiring harness and stock ECU?
Then unless you know an expert that can give you advice on tech support, you're going to have to invest in an RX-8 FSM and study like there's no tomorrow.
If you're going to install a stand-alone on the RX-8 engine, then there's basically no difference between that engine versus a 20B, which was my point.
How about the exhaust?
It's not going to mate up to the stock FC exhaust, so there is some custom work to be done.
Same with the 20B...
Does the RX-8 clear all the auxiliaries?
I know the 20B does - I'm talking specifically of the steering rack.
What about the clutch?
20B usually comes with the auto counterweight, so slap on almost any lightened flywheel (and clutch), and you're done.
Our 20B NA put down 230 AT THE WHEELS with almost 200 lb-fit of torque.
It'll smoke any RX-8 conversion, as those numbers are what the RX-8 motor does at the flywheel @ BHP.
It took $6k to do this conversion, including the engine and all electronics.
You think the RX-8 motor is going to be any cheaper?
-Ted
Well, As always... you are correct. I'm looking at the cost of a 20B & a rebuild to do it right plus throttle bodies & such vs. a renesis setup. I haven't seen a 20B less than 2.5K$
So... can U give me some numbers on cost? I mean.. the cost of a used & questionable 20B motor vs. a renesis that is relatively new? What's the cost of rebuilding a 20B to reasonable specs? I was talking about the relative cheapness of the renesis now that the RX-8 is now in mass production vs. the limited numbers of other options.
I'm not an engine builder or anything remotely resembling an expert. I don't have access to the required tools or knowledge so an existing component makes things more accessible to me. It just appears that there would be alot less involved to swap in a renesis than to have the whole 20B rebuilt and adapted with intakes & runners & exhaust & ecu & intercoolers & turbos or throttles bodies(turbo or NA) & fuel rail, pumps, regulators, lines ect.
Can You understand the "all things being equal" statement? I mean considering the costs involved? Don't get me wrong... I would rather have a turbo-charged 20B without a doubt, but I don't REALLY need that kind of power...400-600HP for my Daily Driver. I would be happy with 250 HP. That is more reasonable for me. If it was cheaper & easier to do a Renesis swap than it might be a reasonable path to consider. I'm not trying to rip on anyone. Just walking on the path of enlightenment & asking relevant questions of the people who know much more than I do. I appreciate your comments & advice. I have been thinking 20B for a few years now but had reconsidered as the renesis is more available & cheaper than a rebuild for my NA(at least for me.... apparently you can rebuild junk into jewels for nada). Please show me the error of my ways!!
Ramses666
05-11-07, 12:49 AM
#68
Originally Posted by ramses666
So... can U give me some numbers on cost? I mean.. the cost of a used & questionable 20B motor vs. a renesis that is relatively new? What's the cost of rebuilding a 20B to reasonable specs? I was talking about the relative cheapness of the renesis now that the RX-8 is now in mass production vs. the limited numbers of other options.
Originally Posted by RETed
It took $6k to do this conversion, including the engine and all electronics.
05-11-07, 01:20 AM
#69
$6k for a 20b swap? Can I ship my FC to Hawaii? Are U serious...'cause that would be excellent. The FAQ says 20 to 30k$ for a 20B swap & DIY was about 8K$. How can you offer a 20b swap for what a basic rebuild would be? Rotors, housings, seals, ecu? Come on now... be real with it. I would run out of $$$$ real fast, but You would be my BFF!!!!!!! I'll stop the silly conversation right now for a $6k 20B swap.
Ramses666
Ramses666
05-11-07, 07:27 AM
#70
Lives on the Forum
I got the motor for $3k.
It hasn't been rebuild, so it has never been opened up.
The project was an exercise to see how far we could go with the engine...without any turbos.
The electronics was another $2k, which includes a Haltech E6K and a pair of MSD DIS-4 (which have been throw away).
The last $1,000 went to engine mounts (K2RD), front sway bar (custom), radiator (custom), and exhaust (from the custom header all the way to the tailpipe).
Yes, we built the header (mild steel) from scratch - it's not pretty, but it was enough to make 230 at the wheels.
The $20k budget is for a 500+hp 20B with single turbo conversion using almost all prefab parts.
We're lucky that the owner owns a TIG welder and is able to fab almost anything we need.
-Ted
It hasn't been rebuild, so it has never been opened up.
The project was an exercise to see how far we could go with the engine...without any turbos.
The electronics was another $2k, which includes a Haltech E6K and a pair of MSD DIS-4 (which have been throw away).
The last $1,000 went to engine mounts (K2RD), front sway bar (custom), radiator (custom), and exhaust (from the custom header all the way to the tailpipe).
Yes, we built the header (mild steel) from scratch - it's not pretty, but it was enough to make 230 at the wheels.
The $20k budget is for a 500+hp 20B with single turbo conversion using almost all prefab parts.
We're lucky that the owner owns a TIG welder and is able to fab almost anything we need.
-Ted
05-11-07, 09:16 PM
#72
No rotary, no problems?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dubuque, IA
Posts: 1,567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I saw this thread and just wanted to toss in a couple of things.
To the guys talking about gas mileage. If you bought an RX-7 or RX-8 and are caring about gas mileage, you bought the wrong car. The RX-7 and 8 were not designed with gas mileage in mind. They are sports cars. Sports cars aren't made to get excellent gas mileage. Also, my NA 13B 87 RX-7 gets 27-30 MPG depending on how I drive it. To me, that is EXCELLENT gas mileage for a sports car, especially one using a motor that was designed basically to be a race engine.
Now about the RX-8's power. IIRC, Mazda rated those things way above what they actually put out. A lot of places I read dyno'd them at just under 200 HP, far below the 240 or so they were rated to. Also, trying to say that the Renesis is better than the 13B N/A is garbage. You give me the money you spent on your Renesis and I could build a streetable 13B putting out just as much if not more than the Renesis.
If you want to talk about cost, you're much better off going the 13BT route. I honestly researched this quite a bit at a few different places. If you really want to go the "different" route, go 20B if you've got the money to spend trying to put a Renesis in. Not only will you have a lot more power, but the car will be much more unique than have a Renesis, which is essentialy a 13B base.
I'm really going to have to agree with Ted on this one about trying to build up an N/A engine. If it's power you're seeking on a rotary, forced induction is the way to go. I can see where people may talk about wanting an N/A for auto-X etc., but if it's all around power you want, a boost snail is what you need. And what's this about having a car that you can't enjoy because it's turbo? If that's the case, I might as well just stick with my 146 HP N/A 13B. I can tell you right now that since the day I drove a 13BT, I've wanted to do the swap because it's "more enjoyable."
Buying an FC because it was cheaper than a Supra? LOL I bought the FC because I wanted a rotary, loved the body style, and wanting something a could beat on without worry. I can tell you from experience the inline 6's in those old Supras were ******' hand grenades. This is the reason I stayed away from the Supras. Also, the Supra's run about the same price as 7's do, so that's a moot point.
The thing about Wankel and Mazda's engineers putting the rotary in a car. In no way did they just ask random people about building the 7's. They actually kept their absolute best to hide the concepts from the public back when the 1st Gen was made. It was something revolutionary that they didn't want getting out. Mazda's engineers designed the car as they saw fit, using aircraft-like aerodynamics with a lightweight body. They built the cars specifically with the rotary in mind, which was the reasoning for making the car light and nimble.
I agree, don't try to argue "streetable." My girlfriend's brother drives a 9 second Mustang on the street with drag radials, half cage, and no back seat but considers the car "streetable" because it's still has full sound system, AC, and power steering. Some people consider PP and BP motors streetable, and some don't. There's no point in arguing it because it's all in your preference. Some don't care about gas mileage or how well the car drives, as long as it's got a lot of power. The end.
To the guys talking about gas mileage. If you bought an RX-7 or RX-8 and are caring about gas mileage, you bought the wrong car. The RX-7 and 8 were not designed with gas mileage in mind. They are sports cars. Sports cars aren't made to get excellent gas mileage. Also, my NA 13B 87 RX-7 gets 27-30 MPG depending on how I drive it. To me, that is EXCELLENT gas mileage for a sports car, especially one using a motor that was designed basically to be a race engine.
Now about the RX-8's power. IIRC, Mazda rated those things way above what they actually put out. A lot of places I read dyno'd them at just under 200 HP, far below the 240 or so they were rated to. Also, trying to say that the Renesis is better than the 13B N/A is garbage. You give me the money you spent on your Renesis and I could build a streetable 13B putting out just as much if not more than the Renesis.
If you want to talk about cost, you're much better off going the 13BT route. I honestly researched this quite a bit at a few different places. If you really want to go the "different" route, go 20B if you've got the money to spend trying to put a Renesis in. Not only will you have a lot more power, but the car will be much more unique than have a Renesis, which is essentialy a 13B base.
I'm really going to have to agree with Ted on this one about trying to build up an N/A engine. If it's power you're seeking on a rotary, forced induction is the way to go. I can see where people may talk about wanting an N/A for auto-X etc., but if it's all around power you want, a boost snail is what you need. And what's this about having a car that you can't enjoy because it's turbo? If that's the case, I might as well just stick with my 146 HP N/A 13B. I can tell you right now that since the day I drove a 13BT, I've wanted to do the swap because it's "more enjoyable."
Buying an FC because it was cheaper than a Supra? LOL I bought the FC because I wanted a rotary, loved the body style, and wanting something a could beat on without worry. I can tell you from experience the inline 6's in those old Supras were ******' hand grenades. This is the reason I stayed away from the Supras. Also, the Supra's run about the same price as 7's do, so that's a moot point.
The thing about Wankel and Mazda's engineers putting the rotary in a car. In no way did they just ask random people about building the 7's. They actually kept their absolute best to hide the concepts from the public back when the 1st Gen was made. It was something revolutionary that they didn't want getting out. Mazda's engineers designed the car as they saw fit, using aircraft-like aerodynamics with a lightweight body. They built the cars specifically with the rotary in mind, which was the reasoning for making the car light and nimble.
I agree, don't try to argue "streetable." My girlfriend's brother drives a 9 second Mustang on the street with drag radials, half cage, and no back seat but considers the car "streetable" because it's still has full sound system, AC, and power steering. Some people consider PP and BP motors streetable, and some don't. There's no point in arguing it because it's all in your preference. Some don't care about gas mileage or how well the car drives, as long as it's got a lot of power. The end.
05-11-07, 09:48 PM
#73
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Renesis is a nice peice of technology. Sure, you could build a motor with more power. But stock for stock. The Renesis is better in every aspect. And once you start talking about building there are going to compromises, right? Less MPG, it'll be louder, and it'll be sitting further out on that knife edge of stability/reliability/longevity that these motors live on.
The Renesis in an FC probably wouldn't be worth the trouble in the end compared to other options, but let's not start talking down on it and saying it's not as good as the previous 13B. Now, that would be garbage.
05-11-07, 09:50 PM
#74
i can attest that they alwase have a resnesis engine in stock. hell, they have a 26 b in stock with trumpeting carbs. they will only let it go for 100k though. i know, ive asked.
downing is a good place too.
rotary god is someone that knows what he is talkin about.
i raise my hand for the renesis swap.
downing is a good place too.
rotary god is someone that knows what he is talkin about.
i raise my hand for the renesis swap.
05-11-07, 10:28 PM
#75
Lives on the Forum
Revised 3-stage intake system...
10.0:1 compression rotors (which NZConvertible states have very little bearing on max power output)...
Less overlap...
Lighter rotors...
The intake system just "fattens" the power band, since you can tune specific RPM bands for best power.
The overlap only helps low end power.
Lighter internals just helps the engine rev faster.
Now, development is (literally) years ahead since the last non-turbo 13B, but I don't see that much of an improvement.
An FC 13B NA can get mighty close when appropriate mods are done - this all with the original motor and not having the headache of worrying about a motor swap.
The counterargument is that a boosted 13BT will make more power at the same cost or even cheaper...funny, most of you RX-8 engine advocates don't seem to acknowledge that fact.
All I hear is about how unique the RX-8 engine swap is...
...well, how many 20B NA swaps have you heard of?
Moot point.
-Ted