The official piston equivalent size is...
#1
13B N/A POWA!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Everywhere, WRLD
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The official piston equivalent size is...
2616cc's to be exact, also taken from the same book as the weight. So much for the argument now. So if you think about it that's also the size of the 4 rotor engine...so the 4 rotor would be 5232cc's...the 3 rotor 3924cc's, and can't forget the 6 rotor at a whopping 7848cc's!
#3
Rotary Freak
1.3l is the measure of the compression stroke volume. Same for a iston engine. The 2.6l you got is measuring the compression and the exhaust stroke seperatly.
Measure a normal engine like that and you've got a 10 liter mustang.
Measure a normal engine like that and you've got a 10 liter mustang.
#4
I'm a boost creep...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally posted by SaabGuy
1.3l is the measure of the compression stroke volume. Same for a iston engine. The 2.6l you got is measuring the compression and the exhaust stroke seperatly.
1.3l is the measure of the compression stroke volume. Same for a iston engine. The 2.6l you got is measuring the compression and the exhaust stroke seperatly.
In reality, the rotary's VE isn't quite as high as a piston engine, so is dosn't actually breath twice as much air. That's why most racing formulas use an equivalency factor of 1.8 instead of 2.0, to give 13B's a capcity of 2354cc and 20B's a capacity of 3532cc.
Just for interest, a factor of 1.4 is often used for turbocharged engine in racing, meaning a 13BT would be classed as 3296cc.
Last edited by NZConvertible; 10-25-02 at 07:01 PM.
#5
13B N/A POWA!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Everywhere, WRLD
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very true NZ...very true, but that's what Mazda officially says so that's what I felt like posting. Something "concrete" so people stop asking, instead of the many ways a rulebook can be read.
#6
SOLD THE RX-7!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 7,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but using your therory, a 1L 2 stroke would be classed as a 2L. but it's not. it's a 1L 2 strock... which is why a rotary is a 1.3L rotary.. and not classed with pistons...
Trending Topics
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Washington
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stroke is refering to the piston going up and down.. A rotor kinda spins it cant be described as a 2 stroke or a 4 stroke. Its a damn rotary mazda surely found that its 1.3L are you calling them liars...
How can you consider it a 2 stroke or a 4 stroke anyways? If it doesnt stroke?
How can you consider it a 2 stroke or a 4 stroke anyways? If it doesnt stroke?
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: louisville, KY
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A rotary engine has one power cycle for every one rotation of the e-shaft, per rotor. A piston engine has one power cycle for every *TWO* crankshaft rotations, per piston.
The rotary power cycle also has a duration of 270 degrees of e-shaft spin, while a piston engine's power cycle lasts for 90 degrees. This helps make it smoother, since the power is "on" more of the time. It's "on" all of the time, since the two 270-degree cycles (two rotors, remember) overlap.
Using this crazy information, you can call a rotary pretty much anything. observe:
A rotary is like a 2-cylinder! It has two rotors. Maybe a 2-cycle 2-cylinder.
A rotary is like a 4-cylinder! It has 4 spark plugs, and has two power pulses per revolution!
A rotary is like a 6-cylider! It has 6 combustion chambers! Maybe a v-6, since it's "split" into two "banks" of three chambers.....
A rotary is like a *12* cylinder! With 270 degrees of duration x 2 rotors, power is always on (2x270=540).. A 12-cylinder has 90 degrees of power, x 12 cylinders, x 1/2 being in the power cycle....=540... (ok, that's not exactly "math"... heheh)
How about, a rotary is it's own thing.
-Tesla
The rotary power cycle also has a duration of 270 degrees of e-shaft spin, while a piston engine's power cycle lasts for 90 degrees. This helps make it smoother, since the power is "on" more of the time. It's "on" all of the time, since the two 270-degree cycles (two rotors, remember) overlap.
Using this crazy information, you can call a rotary pretty much anything. observe:
A rotary is like a 2-cylinder! It has two rotors. Maybe a 2-cycle 2-cylinder.
A rotary is like a 4-cylinder! It has 4 spark plugs, and has two power pulses per revolution!
A rotary is like a 6-cylider! It has 6 combustion chambers! Maybe a v-6, since it's "split" into two "banks" of three chambers.....
A rotary is like a *12* cylinder! With 270 degrees of duration x 2 rotors, power is always on (2x270=540).. A 12-cylinder has 90 degrees of power, x 12 cylinders, x 1/2 being in the power cycle....=540... (ok, that's not exactly "math"... heheh)
How about, a rotary is it's own thing.
-Tesla
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Washington
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
heh... tesla good call.. key phrase being "a rotary is like..." but like you say it all comes down to a rotary is a rotary.. It doesnt have strokes it has cycles... lol
#12
SCCA Rookie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 1,936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
all's I know is this..
a piston engine goes:
1) Intake
2) Compression
3) Power
4) Exhaust
a rotary engine goes:
1) Power
2) Power
3) Power
4) Power
5) Power
6) Power
7) Power
8) Power
9) Power
get the point?
a piston engine goes:
1) Intake
2) Compression
3) Power
4) Exhaust
a rotary engine goes:
1) Power
2) Power
3) Power
4) Power
5) Power
6) Power
7) Power
8) Power
9) Power
get the point?
#13
I'm a boost creep...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally posted by Scott 89t2
but using your therory, a 1L 2 stroke would be classed as a 2L. but it's not. it's a 1L 2 strock...
but using your therory, a 1L 2 stroke would be classed as a 2L. but it's not. it's a 1L 2 strock...
...which is why a rotary is a 1.3L rotary.. and not classed with pistons...
#14
Rotary Enthusiast
Does it really matter anyway?
You know what is the best part about a rotarie?
All those DSM guys that go around beating mustangs going "its just a 4 banger and you got beat!"
Well now we can beat DSM owners and say "ahahah you got beat by a 1.3L"
You know what is the best part about a rotarie?
All those DSM guys that go around beating mustangs going "its just a 4 banger and you got beat!"
Well now we can beat DSM owners and say "ahahah you got beat by a 1.3L"
#15
13B N/A POWA!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Everywhere, WRLD
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's right, this IS NOT a theory that I made up. It's what Mazda themselves have said. No matter how you want to look at it, they made it so they're right.
#17
1.3 litres is 1.3 litres, no matter if you make power every stroke or every other stroke or every three strokes. It is very difficult to say what a rotary engine is equivilant to in the piston world. Although it has been tried in racing circles, but that formula has changed many times(so that a rotary won't win). A two-stroke 500cc engine makes less power than a 1000cc 4-stroke engine. The same would hold true for a 1.3l rotary vs. a 2.6l 4-stroker.
#20
13B N/A POWA!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Everywhere, WRLD
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also agree the rotary is it's own thing (and the greatest thing I might add ), but I'm just stating what Mazda publicly says. That's all...it's just here to end that stupid argument of what people THINK it is and what Mazda SAYS it is.
#21
I'm a boost creep...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally posted by swoop
1.3 litres is 1.3 litres...
It is very difficult to say what a rotary engine is equivilant to in the piston world.
1.3 litres is 1.3 litres...
It is very difficult to say what a rotary engine is equivilant to in the piston world.
A two-stroke 500cc engine makes less power than a 1000cc 4-stroke engine. The same would hold true for a 1.3l rotary vs. a 2.6l 4-stroker.
#22
Rotorhead
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
Posts: 9,136
Likes: 0
Received 39 Likes
on
33 Posts
Originally posted by KiyoKix
Re: The official piston equivalent size is...
Re: The official piston equivalent size is...
Originally posted by KiyoKix
Very true NZ...very true, but that's what Mazda officially says so that's what I felt like posting.
Very true NZ...very true, but that's what Mazda officially says so that's what I felt like posting.
#23
13B N/A POWA!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Everywhere, WRLD
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read the book "RX7" by Jack K. Yamaguchi it was made in late 1985 to accompany the '86 FC. On page 80 in the Engine section it says...
"Total cubic capacity equivalent to reciprocating piston engine, cc...2616"
It list basically every single stat for the car (including the weight of 2625,2695,and 2715)
The book also has information on every rotary engine up to that date, and all the cars that did and DIDN'T make it (like the 21A engine and a few cool projects like the first MX-03). You really should read it, if not just look at the UNBELIEVEABLE photography! I think a picture isn't worth a thousand words...because when I look at these I can't say a single word...
"Total cubic capacity equivalent to reciprocating piston engine, cc...2616"
It list basically every single stat for the car (including the weight of 2625,2695,and 2715)
The book also has information on every rotary engine up to that date, and all the cars that did and DIDN'T make it (like the 21A engine and a few cool projects like the first MX-03). You really should read it, if not just look at the UNBELIEVEABLE photography! I think a picture isn't worth a thousand words...because when I look at these I can't say a single word...
#24
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 1,402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by KiyoKix
Read the book "RX7" by Jack K. Yamaguchi it was made in late 1985 to accompany the '86 FC. On page 80 in the Engine section it says...
Read the book "RX7" by Jack K. Yamaguchi it was made in late 1985 to accompany the '86 FC. On page 80 in the Engine section it says...
SAE (the Society of Automotive Engineers) is the body to turn to - not some book you've found that "claims" a bunch of stats. Displacement is defined by the swept volume of one power-producing cylinder multiplied the number of cylinders. A Mazda rotary displaces 1308cc, and nothing more. How it uses that displacement is a different story.
Brandon
#25
Rotorhead
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
Posts: 9,136
Likes: 0
Received 39 Likes
on
33 Posts
I think he was referring to a 4-stroke Otto cycle piston engine to make it easier for the masses to understand. The comparison doesn't work with a 2-stroke Otto cycle, or 2 or 4-stroke Miller cycle, and it gets more confusing with the push-pull piston engines like the Lenoir and Dyna-cam, even though they are also "piston engines".
I think that you don't understand the context of the book. Like the previous post states, SAE is the international authority for such definitions.
I think that you don't understand the context of the book. Like the previous post states, SAE is the international authority for such definitions.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Shainiac
Single Turbo RX-7's
12
07-17-19 02:20 PM
[For Sale] Scratch & Dent, Used, and Open-Box Sale!
SakeBomb Garage
Vendor Classifieds
5
08-09-18 05:54 PM
rx8volks
Canadian Forum
0
09-16-15 09:07 PM
rx8volks
Canadian Forum
0
09-01-15 11:02 PM