paw140

What if you want the looks and feel of an RX7, with the power and reliability of a vette? What kind of a car should I get then?

yzf-r1

iTrader: (1)

if you want an LS1, then go and buy a Vette. If you want the reliability of a Vette, then go buy a Vette. It's hard for me to comprehend why people do things like this.

simple, people like to have fun with their cars, and everyone is different....who really cares if someone wants to put a jet engine in their FD and try to break the sound barrier? it's their car, they can do what they want with it, it's a form of personal expression

what is far more tragic is a riced out FD with a big *** wing and some gaudy wheels, and the owner who thinks it looks good

cdk 4219

Horsepower is a function of torque. Simply put simply said, it is a law of physics. One of the down sides to the conversion is that the cars have either 3.90 or 4.10 gearsets, which either is not conducive to higher torque ratings with light cars. With a T56 first and second gear are relatively useless for traction. Hell I have even started in fourth gear from a dead stop without any problems. As for the rotary compared to v8 driveability, the v8 is much easier to drive around town.

spoolage

iTrader: (2)

Just curious, this thread was made to discuss v8lovers conversion of an ls1 into a 7. If you want to debate about what burns out better or what causes cars to burn out or where the force that causes cars to burn out or what ever it is.... Take it somwhere else, I want to read things that educate me more on this whole
"ls-7" concept, if you wana eliminate burn outs get wider rear tires or learn how you use your clutch properly to harness all those extra horses...

SPOautos

Actually traction come more from tire compound than width.

Sorry to get a little off topic with that BUT, it was in reguards to the need for low end tq which is why some people will be dong this conversion. So it does kinda go along with the thread. But I'll drop it so you can read more about the swap instead of going over to the single turbo, rotary performance, or ecu section and acutally learning how to tune the engine you already have. So that it can be just as fast and reliable.

STEPHEN

TomsRX7

Well that's a good question. I can guarantee you one thing: the Japanese are very smart people. Every aspect of the 3rd gen is inter-connected: the front/rear weight ratio, center of gravity of the car, weight of the engine on the front suspension, brake size and front/rear brake pressure proportioning, gear ratios, etc, etc. Ask any professional race car driver. I bet the "LS7" handles like crap. It HAS to feel front heavy.

Therefore, the "looks" part is valid, but the "feel" of an RX7 is out the window.

Also, I have nothing against V8's. I've owned a 5.0 Mustang before and my girl currently has a Vette!! But I would never dream of messing with my FD. This is America though; to each his own.

V8 Lover

The turn key car pricing information will be available by the weekend.

To those of you who have nothing but criticism for the car, I can appreciate your right to have an opinion. This is the internet and a free board of expression. However, all of you are speculating over something where you have ZERO experience. None of you have driven a LS1 powered FD. You have no way of knowing the handling characteristics of the vehicle or even how it reacts under acceleration. Please refrain from making ignorant comments.

The car was built to be an all around performer with much of its duties on the street and occasional track use both on road courses and at the drag strip. This car is not a straight-line only car!

As mentioned once before, the weight of the car has not been altered significantly. The final weight of the car will be known to the exact pound at the end of next week. The car handles excellent now, and I welcome any challenge from you doubters at an autoX or road course.

Even with the Sumitomo All Season Z-rated tires (Available at your local Sears) on the rear, I do not experience wheel spin. The car simply plants the power and takes off just as all other RX7s I've driven behaved. Without sticky tires, all RX7s hop for a second and then shoot down the road like a rocket. This vehicle is no different and sticky tires alone cure any and all launching problems.

The car rides very comfortably around town maintaining over 25mpg even while rowing through the gears John Force style on occasion. If one decided to cruise through an entire tank, 30mpg on the hwy would very easily done.

Running a N/A 11sec 1/4 mile isn't a big deal, but it is a way of judging the performance of the vehicle for those who haven't had the opportunity for a ride. The above 11sec 1/4 mile pass is being done with a very mild V8. I eagerly await you to show me a mid 11sec RX7 on the stock motor and stock turbos with only bolt-ons and no nitrous. Please, no down hill tracks.

Spoolage, I thank you and others for all of your support throughout this thread.

AC isn't a problem The project car doesn't have AC right now, but it will have it installed long before the weather warms back up. AC just didn't make it to high up the priority list when there is snow falling nearby. ļ

For all that I know of V8 powered 3rd Gen RX7s, Jim is the man when it comes to the being the first to take the plunge. We all know just how great his car is going to be when he finishes it.

Jim is correct in the reason I took on creating my own subframe. The Granny's stuff simply didn't work. He asks hundreds more for something that doesn't work. With all the horror stories of the lack of customer service from Grant, I decided it was time for someone to do it right.

Please try to keep this thread on topic.

TomsRX7

yzf-r1, I actually agree with you 100%. My buddy has a turbo MR2 and he has the right to do anything he wants to it. But that doesn't mean I don't think he's dumb. And as for the big wing and gaudy wheels, I agree that that's a trajedy too. All these vented hoods, funky front bumpers and all that is nasty IMO. Look at my pic: nice, clean, simple wing, simple front half spoiler: it looks nice, not all "riced out".

-Tom

SPOautos

Well actually there are a quite a few people, I believe the record is 11.1 @ 122 (there was one in the 10's but he has some weight reduction I've heard). Just the other day someone ran another 122 trap, and still has about 2psi more of boost to turn it up. He et was mid 11's due to traction probs.

You can squeeze around 380 with boltons and the stock turbos which is good for extreme low 11's.

Well, also I guess it depends on your definition of bolt ons, I count larger injectors as bolt on.

Also, I ran a 12.3 @ 113 with nothing but intake, exhaust, and a untuned Power FC at 12-13psi of boost. I've added a ton of mods since then but havent been to the track to test it out.

I'll let you know when I go to the track...maybe we can meet up and make some passes together. I'd like to see your creation. Dont get me wrong, just like I said earlier, the conversion isnt for me....but I respect peoples right to do what they want with thier car.

BTW - in case you didnt notice, I'm in Birmingham. I ran my 12.3 in Montgomery last year.

STEPHEN

yy4u

very important point - because of the rotaries LACK of torque mazda gave it a 4.1 rear end. I think Jim is considering a 2.73 or someting of the sort so that he can get from 0-60 without shifting. I think a longer final drive ratio is almost a necessity, especially with a heads and cam ls1/lt1, and then there is the monster than jim has created which i'm not really sure how he's gonna get traction. Thats not to say single turbo seven's don't have traction issues as well, i can't keep traction in top of first or second with DR's and my t-78, and absolutely no traction with street tires in first or second, and the top of third.

Traction is a huge issue many fail to consider when builidng these cars. Sure you can run 10's or 11's on slicks and it'll be a nice track car, but if its a daily driven sometimes street raced car, or primarily street driven car then traction has to be a huge concern and the torque of a v8 in a lightweight car like a 7 with street tires isn't gonna go anywhere cuz the tires are just gonna spin.

Benjaminaco

ugghhhhh , I need to change my shorts....brb



-Ben

LT1-7

I can't believe what I'm hearing here. Just because you have no torque on your rotary, you're going to talk yourself into believing that less torque is better? Maybe I shouldn't have said off throttle. More like controlling throttle. Just look at top fuel dragsters. Would you agree that they have more torque than you? And would you also agree that they run 1/4 faster than you? It's all about controlling the throttle. If top fuel dragsters just go WOT from a stop, they'd make a hell of a burnout. They have to control there throttle just like anyone with an 11 sec V8 or even an 11 sec rotary.

A rotary and a V8 both running 11 secs will run pretty even in the 1/4. But on the street, 5mph roll lets say, the rotary will go down. Believe me, I've been beaten many times from my friend's Trans Ams and Camaros on the street. Yet I ran better times than they did in the 1/4

cdk 4219

I PMed snook about the 46000 mile 94 rotary that I was taking out as a complete package to install an LS1 T56 this winter. Asking price for the whole package is $2100 and this includes everyhting I wont be using for the swap, radiator intercooler all hoses etc. This engine is a very good running engine and good trans. Snook replied that with "ALL" those miles it scares me.
I think that one may be able to coax more reliable miles out of a *** 049 model engine. A "Chevy" engine with this many miles is just starting to break in. The LS1 in my TII has 90000 miles on it and I am not afraid to abuse it one bit. This is not to be said about the 13Brew as it seems even the loyal fans are leery of the engineering. You can **** in a box and put a guarantee stamp on it, but you know what you got? A guaranteed piece of ****.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

This is really great work, wether you *love* the idea of a piston motor in an RX7 or not. Besides weight, one always asumed that an advantage to the rotary is its compact size for packaging. Looks like its not much of an advantage at all, and in a non-sanctioned racing environment like the street where theres no limitation or regulation on displacement, why not a V8?

On the weight issue:
Jesus Millhouse Christ, how many times are JimLab or V8 lover going to have to explain that the precious weight distribution and handling don't seem to have been affected much!!? The next guy who posts "your weight distribution is gonna be all screwed up" should be forced to type up all 80-gazilion pages of jims thread in triplicate to keep their membership.

On the torque issue:
I'm not quallified to say wether higher torque per the same horsepower will make your car faster, but i'm guesing it would make it easier for you to go the same speed.

BUT, is anyone really finding their rotary-powered 7 difficult to drive? Even w/ light flywheel and ported motor, mine is very drivable.

yellowbird

This conversion is pretty damn amazing. I know all the haters are coming out of the wood work, it's not an RX-7, etc. I have seen in every thread that " it's a ROTARY EXPERMENTAL 7, well, unlike most of the haters here, I bought mine new and shelled out some 35+ large including taxes in interest. I thought I was buying a completely engineered, RELIABLE car, not someone's failed "Experment". So, if you think it's an experment, great, I think it largly failed, especially in stock form. People are incessantly bitching about weight and what a v-8 conversion does to the car's balance, how about some that have twins, a FMIC, a Fluidyne, efini Ypipe, etc get your RX on a corner scale and we'll see what effect those mode did to your weight distribution. If you are that concerned about a 50 lb front to rear difference, I expect you are filling the fuel tank after getting to no less than half a tank, otherwise you are runinig the handling of the RX. Never mind the fuel economy difference, I know I drive my RX some 400 miles a week, and the thing NEVER, EVER gets more then 20.5 mpg, and thats babying it, without boosting for an entire tank of fuel. And before you ask, I have tweaked all the cruise maps as lean as I dare. I doubt many are getting over 300 miles on a tank. Not that you can go lower then 1/3 or so for fear of a lean condition and the resulting POP of the motor. Which brings up another point. Sure the Rotary can be made to make 400 RWHP. It that reliably?? Hmmmm, good question. Better make sure you NEVER EVER get a bad tank of fuel, other wise BOOM. Can a piston motor get hurt by the same bad gas, maybe but the saftey margin is way better. I have a Chevy Monza powered by a buick 3.8 turbo motor. Have I heard it detonanate?? Yep, sure have. Had a waste gate hose pop off years ago, the thing sounded like a pop corn poper. Lifted off the throttle, tried it again, same result, but watched the boost gauge go to 26 psi on 93 octane. Oops, pulled over found the offending hose, put it back on, and the car is still running now. I am seriously doubting a rotary would have lived through that episode. The conversion does cost some, but lets realisticly cover the costs to mod the wankel. No special deals from a friend, honest costs.
DP, MP combo SS 385
I/C between 900-1500
Have to have a computer or POP goes the motor
Power FC 960
need software for PFC 300 or commander
Injectors + rail 1600cc 410
Fuel pump 300- 600 unless walbro
Ignition ?
Dyno Tuning or wideband to tune with ????
Radiator 350
Intake, depends on IC and what will fit. 200-500
we need gauges to monitor the beast. you figure.
Did the motor pop during tuning, oops, add $$$
Might need a turbo kit $$ouch.
To make costs fair, either you do the conversion your self, or look at the turnkey cost to have the conversion done, and the costs to have all these toys installed and tuned. I am guessing the costs are nearly a wash.

The point is that either path gets you where you want to be performance wise. I doubt handling is much different. Actually the linear power delivery of the V-8 might make it easier to drive than the 350-400 RWHP Rotary. Any roadracers wish to chime in here?? And I'll bet the costs of a say 12 flat RX powered either way are not all that different. Operating costs will be lower with the v-8. I will seriously consider it if/when my rotary goes kaboom. And it will some day.
I'm open to discussion.
Jay

ArchangelX

I love topics like this...

I learn so much reading all of your bickering and discussion.

SPOautos

HeHe, well that might be that you get beat all the time by your V8 friends but its probably because they have more HP than you not because of thier tq. I race V8's all the time, as a matter of fact thats about all I race. I live in Birmingham, Al what else is there here to race lol. It doesnt suprise me that the LS1 conversion is coming from AL, there are a ton of people here that are educated in the ways of the LS1, as a matter of fact the fastest street N/A LS1 is here in Al and running 9's in the 1/4 N/A of course he has a 427 stroker kit.

But anyway, thats all besides the point, tq alone does not make you fast, its a little hard to compare street cars to top fuel dragsters haha. Id say thats like comparing apples to oranges....what about the 16000rpm F1 cars, or motorcycles.....I guess they are fast cause they have 2000lbs of tire crushing tq...right??? HaHa, wrong they are fast because the tq they have is at high rpms which means its hitting the ground 16000 times a minute instead of 2000 times a minute.

HaHa, tq alone does not make you fast, the frequency of tq makes you fast.....you dont need gobs of tq if the tq you have is coming out at a high frequency.

STEPHEN

ETraylor3

V8 Lover,

Great response to all the naysayers! They will learn!

Folks, you simply cannot believe the acceleration of this car. With the custom torque arm this thing HOOKS UP and GOES GOES GOES!!!

This car will readily smoke a Z06 in the straights, and probably sit right next to one through a good road course!!!

V8 Lover, congrats again on completing a truly spectacular redesign!

All The Best,
Ed

rx7tt95

Jim,
I remember reading about a V8 conversion in a third gen probably four to five years ago in, if I can remember off the top of my head, Hot Rod Magazine. Obviously wasn' t an LS1, but it has been done before. Twas a red third gen. Very fast in a straight line, owner commented that the handling wasn't as good. I'm sure things have come a long ways since then and it was probably an iron block (I actually think it was a Ford but I could be wrong) which didn't help things any.

I could see having one of these in a "stable" of RX7's. Not sure if I could have it as my one and only RX however. I can't tell you how many times I've wanted to transplant "worthy" engines into a worthy chassis. I guess it's just the nature of those who like to modify things. We're never satisfied with what the manufacturer gives us :-)
Michel

GsrSol

That 427 stroker kit for the LS1 is like in the $20k range so don't think he got there cheap. It could be done cheaper, but still not cheap.

Yes, it's all about controlling the power you have which is in the drivers skill.

Felix Wankel

F1 cars are fast because they are geared to stay in their powerband, which is about as wide as a pencil. Bikes are fast because they weigh next to nothing.

ETraylor3

GSrsol,

Unless you are paying Lingenfelter for a 427, then it's no where NEAR $20K.

I'm not sure to whom your post was in reference to, but let me be clear when I say that V8 lover does NOT [yet] have a stroker LS1!!! In fact, his is all stock with exception to the MILD cam (we're talking comparable to an '02 Z06 cam...).

Not to let this thread get hijacked, I want to put it back on track, but I first want to say that an 427 CI LS1 can be had for about $8,800 if you do the majority of the work yourself (of course you can't do the machining yourself..). And who here wouldn't want to do the work themselves???

$20K, LOL!

(Please, don't argue with me.. I've done the above more than once!)

jimlab

Are you sure it wasn't a 3rd gen. Camaro?

I've been getting Hot Rod for years, and don't ever remember seeing a 3rd gen. in that magazine, V8 or otherwise. I also subscribe to Popular Hot Rodding, Super Chevy, Chevy High Performance, Car Craft, GM High Tech, and Vette, and they've never featured an FD either. I've also been on the Camaro forum for several years and none of those people had ever heard of a V8 FD prior to my arrival.

In addition, I've also subscribed to Super Street, Sport Compact Car, and Turbo & High Performance over the years and bought Import Tuner occasionally, and have never seen a red FD with a V8 swap in them either. I'd be very interested to know where you saw it, since even Grant Robbins, who previously handled most of the 1st and 2nd gen. V8 swap kits had never heard of a V8 FD before.

To the best of my knowledge, the first non-rotary engine swap into an FD was featured in Turbo & High Performance in '97 and was a Buick GN 3.8 liter with an automatic transmission. The car was a MBM PEP (don't remember the year) and had been a previous fire victim, and the owner was Jose (I'd have to dig up that issue to find his last name), the owner of a rotary shop. I talked with him about his engine swap before working on an LT1 conversion, and although he's well known for his rotary cars as well as converted 1st and 2nd gen. cars, he had never heard of someone else with a V8 FD either.

That's not to say that it doesn't exist, but if it does, it's a secret so well kept that I've never come across it, and my research is usually pretty thorough.

jimlab

You've built more than one 422-427 CID LS1? So what were the results?

MTI's "Z07" conversion includes a 422 CID LS1 making 550-586 horsepower depending on the package you select. At ~$21k + exchange into a manual transmission Corvette, that also includes exhaust and transmission upgrades, as well as a new McLeod clutch (~$1,400), so the cost of the 422 is probably around $15,000 in the package. Certainly it could be done for somewhat less if the machine work could be done "in-house".

Most people don't have the facilities to do their own machining, so even without exotic parts, I believe that it's highly unlikely that anyone could duplicate your $8,800 "427". The head porting alone could cost over $2,000 for someone unwilling to risk ruining a set of LS6 heads with a Dremel in their garage.

So how exactly did you get 427 cubic inches without starting with a C5-R block? What kind of power did these 427s make? Solid roller cam or hydraulic? Which crankshaft did you use and what was the stroke? Piston size and manufacturer? Rod length?

V8 Lover

Stephen - Please try to keep this thread on topic. "Torque spins, HP wins." Right...

If you still feel like you're correct, I'll give you the opportunity to teach me wrong... This afternoon I'll meet you on street tires(Sumitomo All season tires) on the street half way between Tuscaloosa and B'ham. From a stop, no rolling starts, and video taped for the world to see. It is time for the doubters to put up or shut up. Oh, and please no "let's reschedule."

If you want to take me up on my offer, we'll set it up via PM. This thread wasn't started to be a chat room.