What frustrates me is all the comparisons to weight, power, mileage or just about anything except what really matters to me and that's the personality of the engine and the ROTARY engine is what makes an rx7 the experiment that it is.

I bought the FD because of it's looks and performance and didn't know the 1st thing about the 13b but in the end I fell in love with the engine and how it makes the car behave. I understand perfectly why people switch to the V8 and it doesn't bother me at all and I see WAY more positives from the practical side of things such as; reliability/power and mileage etc... BUT I love the rotary for all the intangibles or things that can't really be measured like the endless array of sounds, the long linear power band, engineering, being different, being competitive with anything else including LSXs for MUCH MUCH less money etc...etc...

I pray daily that mazda creates another FD that's a 3 rotor w/ the same purpose build as the FD and it will sell big time because I'm not the only one who loves the ROTARY. GO rotary GO hehe Oh and it be very competitive with todays elite cars for much less money.

Now to really get this thread off track........ The best car for the money right now is the 997 GT2 it passed me like I was standing still last week at VIR. SICK SICK frikken car. That said I think I just changed my dream car form the GT3 to the GT2

 

Very well said.

Your first line says it all, and most of the purists posting here should shutup and just admit what you just said. It's that despite the comparisons, *their* motivation towards the rotary is it's character. It's a personal opinion, not an absolute.

Which is all fine and dandy, but at the end of the day, when we're conversating which engine is "better", outside of opinions, we have to stick to facts.

The facts state that while the Ls1 weighs similiar to a 13b+turbo's, it makes more torque sooner at a more reliable rate and can promise twice the engine life (or more..). while also getting better gas mileage (more efficient).

You can't argue that. The only "fact" the Rotary holds over the Ls1 is the Hp per litre but I *personally* could care less about that when I'm forced to spend $5k on a rebuild at 60k miles... that just doesn't justify it for me.

The rest is all based on personal taste. The sound, the power delivery style, the "nature" of the motor, etc. Which is really hard to debate because everyones entitled to their own...

 

Wrong. The problem is, you're looking for "facts" to make a declaration about two things that isn't declarable. You simply can't say the LSX is "better". Nor can you say the 13B is "better".

There is no better, and virtually any "fact" you can think of is only relative to how much any individual person values it. No matter what set of metrics you use, it's still based on *YOUR* motivation and appreciation for them.

You can take the LSX and compare it to a whole slew of other motors, from Toyota, to BMW, to Ferrari, and will be able to point to fuel mileage, horsepwer to weight, dollars to horsepower, and god knows what else, and it will compare favorably... yet folks with Ferrari's and BMWs and Toyotas aren't going to start pulling theirs and replacing them because you "proved" anything to them.

It's ALL, not partly, based on taste.

 

Chuck, you wanted to discuss the merits of the engines, not LSx swaps. Okay, I'll bite.

First up, I agree 100% that 13B-REWs benefit tremendously from a few simple upgrades - in both power and reliability. I love that about our cars.

But to compare the REW with the LSx, we need to examine the overall packages, not simply the longblocks. A few careful mods may help my Wankel live a long, strong life, but the system remains less reliable than an LSx IMO. Why? Because the Mazda needs $2000 turbos every 50-100k miles. That kind of cash will buy a lot of valve springs...

 

I view this as a cop out on your part. Feels like a, it's my car and I don't care what you say type of argument. And Ido know people with BMWs doing LS1 swaps and I didn't have to do any convincing. It must be a spreading virus.

Every decision we make is based on motivation and cost, but that is irrespective of fact...or inspite of the facts. It doesn't change them... my opinion doesn't change the facts. And in this particular case if we did a true scientific comparison the facts would be irrefutable. It would be hard mathematical data.

Your opinion that the engine doesn't belong in the car, doesn't change the fact that the engine is more efficient. You are the one skewing the facts with your opinion.

I like the rotary, I do, for all the reasons Fritz described which are mostly emotional... Smoothness, uniqueness, sound (in some instances), the way it feels going up and coming down in revs... and don't like it for all the mathematical reasons, inefficiency, cost per mile driven, reliability per power output - in comparison to other engines, etc. But the mathematical reasons are quantifiable and comparable to other engines. The emotional reasons are not, and most everyone here is defending the rotary with emotional reasons.

That is perfectly ok and I understand completely. However, I dont agree with you in your assessment of all factual data being skewed by taste. If we pick mathematically quatifiable metrics it should make for a reasonable comparison. This is assuming our comparison subjects were being used for the same task...which in this case is true...propelling the FD chassis.




PS... This argument is starting to feel like Porsche vs Ferrari... where the Porsche does the same thing, arguably more efficiently at less cost. But the Ferrari has this emotional component that can't be understated. Like on the show 5th Gear where they compared the 996RS-R to the 360 Challenge Stradalle (if anyone has seen that episode...)

 

Dude, did you READ? What motor is "best" is not quantifiable.

Deciding which motor is "better" based on horsepower to weight, dollars to horsepower, rebuild intervals, etc., etc., is nothing but car forum nonsense. "scientific comparisons" and "hard mathematical data" are good for quoting on the internet, just like skidpad numbers and power to weight ratios.

Dismissing smoothness, uniqueness, power deliver characteristics, packaging, technology, sound, etc. as "emotional" and therefore worthless (or even less valid than "scientific data") as means for comparison is silly. Sportscars aren't toasters.

American V8's provide cheaper, simpler, horsepower than virtually anything else on the planet, including rotaries, turbo flat sixes, and overhead cam V12's. SO WHAT?

 

That last sentance really says it. Cheap, simple, horsepower... to most that is a good thing. Might add in Efficient, cheap, reliable, and simple horsepower...I guess I desire those qualities in my engines.

I am not dismissing those emotional things, they drew me into the car as well...I am saying those things can only be evaluated based on opinion or taste. Those things that can be calculated can be compared without bias, and in this thread of an argument that is all that really matters.

 

Good things? Sure. The only things? No.

Dude, cheap reliable horsepower, and it's relative value, is just opinion and taste too. Not necessarily any more important, valid, valuable, or "better" than other characteristics.

If cheap and reliable were your first goals, per my original statements, I've got to wonder why the hell you bought this car. It's neither of those things, and that isn't necessarily anything to apologize for, just as it isn't in other non-LSX equipped high performance sports cars.

 

It's a bonus. The thread is about perspective, not argument. Once you swap in a cobra rear end you've got just about the best aftermarket support you can have without actually owning an Fbody or Mustang.

Turbo rotaries are cool, and neat, and can be made to have crazy amounts of horsepower but are more prone to failure.

I've been on both sides, my T2 was a beast as a rotary but it's a far stronger running beast for less money as an LS1. I've got less stress worrying about the tuner ******* up my car on the dyno, not having to worry about aftermarket engine management (LS1 ecu's can be tuned with HP tuners EFI Live, etc). Choice in engine seals...etc. I make more reliable horsepower without a power adder.

In a way, I view the LS1 as taking the easy way out. It's simple to install and no more complicated to wire in then installing a haltech on your rotary.

But in the end, when I had a rotary and it came down to replacing the turbo with a 3500 dollar A-Spec dual ball bearing kit, having a tuner tune the car etc... I was already tired of dicking with the car. I had the car running as my DD as a rotary for 2 years with a fully built street ported motor, Apexi PowerFC, tons of mods, but I just really wasn't ready to drop another 5 grand into the car to make it less reliable and gamble on a tuner.

Once you step away from the idea that the rotary makes an Rx7 an Rx7 (which is simply ignorance) and you step into the idea of torque, torque and more torque reliably, without a power adder.

 

Lets all agree that better is not quatifiable and drop that word out of the debate as I think we are talking in circles. To once again do the wife comparison, we might as well be arguing about who's wife is better in bed. There is no law or hard fact that say what the difinition of "better" is and thus it is a matter of opinion.

Is an apple better than an orange?

 

Dammit Mike. I had this long drawn out bs reply to f1blueRx7 involving more of the same bs thats been tossed around, but you're logical post kicked me off of my high horse.

Apples or oranges? Hell I like watermelon, so I guess I'm an oddball...

 

Mikeric is correct.

Better is related to what everyone's tastes considers better. If better to me means it has to sound deep and throaty, then the LS1 wins before we discuss anything else. Period.

But, since "better" is up to preference, and can't be "declared" by any group of persons, then why bother have car & driver, top gear, etc.? They all take a collective of all data both from numbers like HP, Weight, and also steering feel, uniqueness, etc. to come up with a valued opinion.

It's still apples to oranges as well so yea...

 

You may notice that they don't usually use the term better, usually they say the winner of a certain comparison. Now that may be a better term to use.

I would also point out that multiple car magazines can compare the same cars and come up with different "winners". Actually, it happens quite often. Thust no one can declare that one is better than the other, but rather that one wins a comparison based on specific set parimeters such as braking, acceleration, price, skiddpad, and general feel.

I have seen the term "better buy" or something along those lines, but I can't recall an outright decleration of "the best car" although these claime may exist.

 

Yeah but when perspective is asked for "better" is quantifiable since it's part of an opinion.

"In my perspective of owning the same car with a rotary in it for 7 years, then swapping the LS1 into it, it is now better." Is a perspective/opinionated statement. It contains no fact, just personal reflection.

Wheres the debate going on up in here?

 

Better to me though would be an RX-8. I know less power, a lot less engine potential without the turbo, but it handles better than the FD ever will. More G's on the skid pad and better latteral cornering force. Or if the sky was the limit, a Lotus Elise. a Super lightweight 4 cyl that handles better and in some cases out accelerates an LSx car and gets 36+ mpg with Toyota reliablity.

 

Give me some of those drugs! Maybe Stock for stock but even then, its probably because of 18/17 inch stock rims on the 8 with a stiffer side wall vs the 16 inch with a 55 series tire of the FD.

True, but you're starting to talk about a car that starts at 50k. If the skys the limit, how about a Veyron, GTR, CCX, Carrera GT, ZR1 Vette, etc.

 

From road and track magazine:
Rx-8 results
0-60 - 5.9s
1/4mile- 14.5@95.6
Skidpad- .88g
Slalom -65.4mph

From Motor Trend 1993
Rx-7 Results
0-60 - 5.3s
1/4 - 13.9@99.7
Skidpad -- .97g
Slalom - 68mph

Also take into consideration this was on 10 year older tire technology, with smaller 16" tires.

OH, and EPA rating of 2005 Elise is 23mpg city, 27mpg highway.

 

Doesn't the rx8 also weigh 100-200lb more? And doesn't it look like *****...? j/k

 

I've put like 40 miles on my swap so far and love it!

 

The RX8 doesn't have greater handling/cornering potential than the FD RX7. I don't know where anyone got that. I believe it does have a torsionally stiffer chassis, but that's not really the end all be all of anything. The FD chassis is plenty stiff.

The only cars I've observed on track that really meet or exceed the FD in this department are the Elise/Exige and the GT3 (street version). You put modern wheels and tires on the FD, and you're in the game with most anything.

 

One of the most important lessons that I've learned in life is that there is more than one way to do something right.

 

Come on out to Cali brother. I have no problem sharing
50K??? I said Elise not Exige! The GTR is a bit over the top, a Veyron needs a tanker truck to follow you, and I'd put an LS motor in my car before I bought another Porsche.

Hmmm. Thats not what I remember, but I've been known to be wrong. EPA rating however is all fine and dandy on the sticker, but you'd have to ask people who drive them. The 36+ I stated came from one of two customers who has one.

Back to the Rx-8 thing, I could have sworn the 8 had the benefit of 10 years of tire tech and chassis tech. I guess it goes to show that newer isn't always better.

 

Clearly, I need to be less facetious in the future.

 

That's true.

Another wise trinket I've learned from someone I hold in high regard says this: "If you have to force something to work, you may be doing it wrong."

I've noticed that that mantra holds true to a bolt that you may not be threading correctly. Possibly marriage. It also holds true to conceptual engineering.

 

They call that rape where I come from.

How about we all agree that we have different tastes and and let this thousnadth thread about the same subject without resolution just die...