PVerdieck

Probably himself, and failing.

jimlab

Just curious if anyone's taken Bi-State Customs up on their bargain pricing that Eric quoted. I figure it'd be an especially good deal for someone with an automatic car that wanted to switch to a manual transmission.

Forte's wants $1,975 for a TKO, and then you'll need a bellhousing adapter, flywheel and clutch, driveline modifications, a new slave cylinder, a transmission brace and/or PPF modification, and a speedometer adapter... $2,000 installed is one hell of a deal.

$2,500 installed for a Viper T56 is even better. Most places just list the price for the transmission alone as "Call".

No one has called Bi-State and asked about this conversion yet? Well, why the hell not??

Resource

Why don't you give us a call Jimbo.

Ask for me,
Ron

618-234-0069

jeff48

Y'Know, I seldom have so much fun as when I read the arrogant rantings of people like you.

You list your age as 18 and your job as a software consultant. You must having simply amazing intellect. In the short time that your age and preparation for your career must have alllowed for other things, you imply that you have done sufficient research on "boosted" rotaries to have the audacity to make "informed" comments about the strength of rotary engines in those applications.

Please continue to post your undereducated, misinformed, "in"credible, diatribes....You and your kind just make me laugh. Keep up the good work and by all means, never lose your unfounded sense of superiority!

jeff48

OK that explains your age, but your experience and conclusions are still flawed. Anectdotally, I have owned two FDs and an FC (all turbo) and have yet to experience a single turbo related failure, while I have friends whose N/As died from apex seal failures. Does that mean that turbos are better for rotaries-----


Now, in your defense, that's not to say that people overboost and undertune turbo engines don't have trouble---they do--- but your presumption that the rotary is inherantly less able to withstand excesses is incorrect.

If you are interested in the results of overboost in piston engines, spend some time at a "tuner" shop where pistons, rings, valves and heads are changed as often as I change oil. You can also visit the Mustang boards where the mantra is. . . "if you drive a turbocharged mustang without a J&S Knock System installed you will be buying a rebuild soon! "

Are turbo engines exposed to more stress than N/A engines, of course they are. Are rotaries inherantly more susceptible to damage from boost than are piston engines, NO! they are not.

Shinobi-X

Since when can't a well built rotary not tolerate boost? They don't take well to detonation, but a well tuned boosted rotary engine is fine, so long as you don't abuse it. The only difference is, it's apex seals take the brunt of the shock, and at 2mm, they are nothing. You lean out any engine, and it will die prematurely...nothing exclusive to the rotary.

SomeGuy_sg

There is a 6 spd conversion from Trust/GREX . it is called power system.

it is about 720,000yen about 6100USD as you can see the kit is really sweet. now only we can get a see-thourgh transmission housing , ahhah

SomeGuy_sg

another pic

Herblenny

iTrader: (13)

Now the topic is completely off the subject of the 6 speed..

To add my 2 cents.. RX-7 is unique because of its engine.. Without the damn rotary engine.. we'll all be on some piston engine forum.. If I wanted reliable, high power, high torque, super charged or turbo charged V8 or V12, i would of bought a American, Japanese, European sports car.. Not buy an FD and put LS1 in it.. why go thru all the trouble to put RX7 body on a covette.. Some say they look pretty much the same... My 2 cents..

Herblenny

iTrader: (13)

Sorry.. I see someone brought it back..

jeff48

Pure good luck with the DSM, pure bad luck with the rotary. The anecdotal evidence I provided earlier in reference to piston engines and tuner shops are ALL cases of DSMs that went boom. BTW, I love DSM cars, each of my 4 daughters had one of the TELs. Great cars and engines until they are turbo abused------Just like a rotary.

I have said my piece and retire from this discussion.

Herblenny

iTrader: (13)

Lets stick to the topic.. or I'm going to start talking about my Legend coupe V6 on this forum..

Shinobi-X

What? that rotaries can tolerate boost? Well, I do drive a car "over and over again", that does exactly that, and I see others that also do the same. Why exactly can't they take boost? or do you mean they can't tolerate prolonged lean engine conditions due to outside reasons...

The basic engine design is generally the same, but the main point of detonation still holds true for both an N/A engine, or a forced induction one- lean engine conditions...compressed air is still compressed air. Piston rings don't directly get the brunt of the shock caused by detonation that apex seals do, and that is why they can resist detonation better. The piston heads absorbs more of the detonation, and like the rotors themselves, are stronger than any 2mm apex seals, or in the case of a pistons, it's rings...however, you have seen burnt holes in pistons before, which is what eventually happens... I didn't say a rotary was 'stronger' which is why I explained the reason for the apex seals going (which has nothing to do with strength, but rather design and what occurs during detonation), but a well tuned car should not be leaning out and detonating anyway (assuming everything else is in proper mechanical and working order).

Improper tuning, and failure to pay attention to detail on the users part, is no excuse for saying the rotary is a "half ***" engine. Forced induction will kill any engine prematurely...simply because the rotaries apex seals are prone to take the brunt of that force because of location, more so than a piston engines piston rings are, does not mean anything is half assed. Half assed, is when you don't take care of your engine/car, and try to cut corners, thus blowing or damaging it. Switching to an engine that is easier to maintain may be great for you, but is a sorry excuse to be calling a rotary inferior by design, especially to those who take care of their engine, and see great amounts of lifespan from it. If anything, the rotary itself is not the cause of engine death (it's not a flawed design), but some other part(s), along with modification(s) by the user, failing to do it's/their job. It's all about attention to detail- and that is a small sacrifice to make IMO, when I get to drive a car with such a unique engine...hardly enough of an excuse to switch engines entirely, which is ultimately just your preference, and nothing more. Some of us are happy with what we have, which is why we own the cars we do.

It's been covered above, but are you assuming that those "3 I blew my motor" post, are from people who took the best care of their engine? or was part of it due to ignorance, or some other outside cause? I'd say 90% of engine death (just like driving ability) is due to the user, rather than mechanical failure of the engine (not including accomodating components). As proof, look at any N/A rotary engine, and ask yourself how flawed that design is...250-300K miles with regualr maintanence doesn't seem flawed to me.

You are on a rotary forum, complaining about those who choose to represent the engine? If we disgust you so much, then why not become a member of a board where you and your ideas are more tolerated? I'm not telling you to get off, but if your vehicle is V8 powered now, and you are disgusted with ideas that contrast your own, what purpose does this board serve? A large part of the technical portions of this board won't apply to you...so what is the purpose?

ZoomZoom

iTrader: (2)

Its kinda like the Space shuttle. Its very advanced and is a sweet *** ride but sometimes it blows up.

Shinobi-X

And that is the 13B-REW's strongest, and weakest point at the same time. Since there are more ways than not to build a proper, and healthy 13B-REW, Mazda, as well as the many rotary fans, have chosen to accept the engine for it's good and less favorable qualities.

Again, much of what you listed can be taken care of by the user, and if the same things happened in a high performance N/A engine, you would see similar effects. If your ECU fails, and causes you an engine, don't blame the engine, blame the company responsible for the defective ECU...etc. If you plan on racing your car, special attention should also be payed to the fuel system components you've listed especially if you know they can cause detonation-- otherwise the user has no business racing, or furthermore crying if something on their car breaks because of their negligence/ignorance.

Here again, you proved my point...now if that had been a rotary, and it had blown, where would the fault have been placed? ...no disrespect, but you would have fallen into that 90% category of people I was talking about. Granted, a margin of error is always better to have, as we do make mistakes, but to have a lack of respect for the rotary design, strictly because it requires greater attention to detail is absurd.

And that is fine, all of us are different. However, I give a great amount of respect to those who deal with the rotary, and recieve great performance in return. I personally like a challenge, and enjoy going that extra mile to embrace that sense of accomplishment in something most people would turn away from. If you are content with your engine, and car, then more power to you.

I beg to differ. The seq. turbo system was an excellent approach by Mazda to achieve more low end torque, and all around responsive performance. A stock, well maintained FD is an awesome car...especially with the minor reliability updates that 10yrs of aftermarket research/experience give you. However, I will say that the car is by no means perfect, and weak points obviously exist...nothing new, and it only leads to the advancement of an already great car. Complex is a relative term, and arguable when you put things in perspective, but I'll agree with you.

*LONG POST/DIGRESSION ALERT*
I see your point, but in all honesty, these two do have some differences. The main one being, you can make a well working rotary engine, that does what it's supposed to when you need it to- the knowledge, and capabilities are there. As far as American design, and Japanese being related to culture, I agree. I feel though, that American culture is obsessed with 'big', and 'powerful' qualities. However, in Japanese culture, 'big' is not always better, and other more efficient methods must be sought out. For example, look at how many American big displacement engines fail to meet the efficiency of a high Hp/L ratio that smaller Japanese engines do. To American tuners, that is unimportant because it is often not applied to engines capable of putting out the 'big' power (mostly due to torque figures as a result of large displacement engines), they want. Smaller Japanese engines really push for this type of efficiency, and have evolved at far greater rates than most of the pushrod powered engines have that we still use today. Granted, if the engine works, why fix it? Sheer size/power (American way) does win out in the end, but it does have it's drawbacks. If they adopted a greater portion of the Japanese approach to engine design (along with funding the money ), we would see 10x the better engine that we do today. Simply put though, America is hardly the group of risk takers, which is why Ford really didn't want to back the development of the rotary for the longest while...but now look at what Mazda has accomplished with the Renesis. In terms of ideas, and drive, the Americans have a lot of catching up to do. Might is not always right (or better).

--"The piston engine is an imperfect machine, built to 'perfection'. The rotary engine is an exotic machine, wich lavishes in obscurity."--

Shinobi-X

Yep, keeping the explantion simple. Nice list of mods BTW.

rotaryextreme

iTrader: (2)

Here you go



Chuck Huang

Shinobi-X

This is the point I was proving. American companies, like to go with what works, rather than really push for something new, and challenging (we are speaking in general terms). Like I said, they are not the group of risk takers to the degree that overseas companies are. That is why I also posted the quote. With advancements, there will also be problems, and set-backs. Sure, the LS6 works, it's built on old technology, that's been proven... While going with what works may be safer, easy and more comfortable, exploring something new is hardly a bad thing, and has many advantages. Again, look at the rapid advancement in rotary technology.

artguy

thank you chuck...that pic looks like christmas to me!!

artguy

this thread is the funniest damn thread in weeks!

there has been great info mixed in with pure horseshite for entertainment. I look forward to seeing someone with a six speed in their third gen. I WANT ONE.

tbie making a fool of himself as usual..YEE HAW good buddy!! hows life down at the boars nest?? say hello to uncle jessie for me ya hear!!

HERE is a thread from one of the guys who championed the idea of going with a v8 over a rotary. Some truth to the situation has finally come out. this isnt a knock on the quality of a well done v8 conversion which i actually think is cool..but it is a knock against the bullshitting shops that make it out to be so easy. as jimlab found out..its a huge undertaking if you want it done right. it aint just plug and play like the shops would have you believe. their claims of less headaches is exactly as I expected.

https://www.rx7club.com/forum/showth...hreadid=194200

here are some of his reasons for ditching his v8 project.



Im done with the off topic posting...sorry for the diversion from the thread at hand.

jimlab

Perhaps you should look up some of the past posts made by TwinT78. He was the same guy who was going to build an all aluminum 20B using Racing Beat aluminum side plates and blah blah blah...

The reason he doesn't like his swap is that, despite his claims of x RWHP, he used a bone-stock LT1 (275 horsepower when it was brand new) and an automatic transmission because that's all he could afford. No wonder he's not happy with it. Not much power and a 180+ lb. slushbox soaking up a considerable amount of it makes Jack a dull boy. When all was said and done, I'd be surprised if he had 220-230 to the wheels. It was a step backward, and obviously, he didn't have the money to upgrade the engine.

I won't go into depth about his problems with his conversion, but suffice it to say that based on the number and content of his posts on torquecentral.com, he had a lot of problems based on his lack of knowledge.

A conversion is not a walk in the park, but it's by no means something that's outside the skill level of someone handy with tools and who can read a wiring diagram properly. TwinT78 repeatedly claimed to have the wiring schematics (shop manual), but his questions proved over and over again that that was not the case. Of course he's going to have problems.

And for the last time... don't make the mistake of thinking my project is even remotely indicative of the difficulty of the average conversion. I'm totally rebuilding my car, short of the sheet metal, and that takes time. There's very little on the car that hasn't been touched, including the entire braking system, front and rear suspensions, all the wiring, engine, transmission, differential, you name it. And I had the entire car painted while I was at it. This was no small project, and isn't at all comparable to someone dropping a completely stock engine and transmission into their car and bolting and wiring it up.

twint78

well jim, your are half correct. i could care less what you say i have the whole shop manual.i spent well over a hundred bucks at mazda for it. another thing is i went with grants lt1 to mazda conversion chart which didnt come out so well.so i bypassed alot of crap.it worked.i got it up and running.then i took it to a shop and had them redo and go over everything.as far as aligning,eletrical,transmission,suspension,bolt torque specs,plumbing, securing.the transmission blew again. i took it to another shop ,they redid the tranmission and it then blew the front gasket by the torque converter.so ive spent alot more money along the way.i didnt spend *** loads up front though, thats all.

And who says i dont have money to upgrade it now?
i can now take and have the heads ported and polished, a cam, and little bits and pieces here and there.but its not what im lookin for jim.

my lack of knowledge was overturned to a shop.and guess what im still not happy with it.

i have never claimed this x-amount of hp.i have always said.i have a stock engine with 3 inch exhuast and open air intake and dogass tranmission behind it.and yes jim i was driving my car every day.and it was fun burning the ppl in it.but it is not what im looking for.

i rode in a 2nd gen t2 the other day.only about 260 hp and i missed every bit of that turbo rotary.

and i saying i cant afford **** is a little off. lets see im not a multi millionaire. but i spent 15k in upgrades in less than 4-5 months as soons as i bought the car. then the rotary blew.i spent 7k up front to get it running.then have spent another 3k in the past few months to get perfect.

my modlist for the roundabout 15k.
hks twin intakes i used for a week-350
turbo timer and harness-120
boost controller-110
power fc-1200
exhuast midpipe-120
catback-450
t78 turbo-1000
t78 turbo with kit- 3400
intercooler-1000
blow off valve 200
rims and tires-2300
stereo-400
fuel pump-what is it 250?cant remember
rail and injectors-350?not sure
tuning-250
fuel regulator-180
total is:13,300
this is not adding various labor costs at mazda and shipping charges.

im sorry jim i used to like you ,but it seems all you can do is badmouth ppl that are not named jimlab.

and the reason i didnt do the 20b project is cause i wanted my car right away and couldnt live with out it and i knew it would cost close to 50k for what i wanted to do. so i didnt want to lose it for a yr.but now ive grown out of that stage.and the car will start getting rebuilt here in awhile.it will take a few yrs.

but at least i can stick with the hardships of a project and know to expect these things. instead of being a crybaby about everytime a bolt comes loose and want to quit.waa waa i got to go drink.im finally realizing i wasted all this money on power i cant even use on the street.i built a drag motor that wont be used for that.and jim it was fun being able to drive my v8 3 months later.and then decide i dont like it and go back to a rotary engine 8 months later.oh and thanx for the worthless cradle you and grant designed.but it will work like a charm for lowering and pushing my two rotor back.

its pretty bad when you hafta fabricate mounts for a fabricated cradle,instead of just doing right the first time around. y'know like brian hinson did, just took that extra hour to get it right the first time.

EpitrochoidMan

It continues to digress.

As I read this thread it occured to me (back to the topic at hand) that if you did a heavier engine swap i.e. 20b or a v-8
it would throw off the weight balance of the car and maybe that difference could be off-set by installing a rear mount T-56, like in the C5's. It would be alot of work, but not that much more compared to an engine swap. Just an idea.

SomeGuy_sg

Sweeet ....

jimlab

I think we both know that your conversion wasn't **** compared to mine and that your junkyard drop-in required very little effort and had no resemblance whatsoever to a completely custom-built engine, custom rear end, and all the other work I've put into mine. Hell, you couldn't even be bothered to pull the automatic off and find a T56 to make the car worth driving, or get your heads ported or add a cam before dropping the engine in so you'd have some decent power. How "custom" is that?!? No wonder you're not happy with it.

It took 3 months to drop in a completely stock engine and transmission with no upgrades or tuning required?!? I think you should be more embarrassed by the time it took to finish your completely pedestrian swap than I should be about mine taking so long. Try having a custom crankshaft cut some time... it'll take longer than 3 months, guaranteed.

Talk to Grant about it if you have problems, and good luck getting any sort of response or resolution. I was relying on the fact that he knew what he was doing, like everyone else, and ended up scrapping his entire cradle and building my own. Maybe you missed the threads on both this forum and Torquecentral.com?

But if you're such an expert, then why didn't you build your own? "y'know like brian hinson did." (Lane Culver built Brian's engine cradle, and continues to build the "Hinson Supercars" LS1 cradles, BTW) It was my understanding that you bought your Granny's cradle from Brian after he found out that Grant's LS1 kit didn't work for ****. What part of that issue led you to believe that you were getting a 100% perfect cradle in the deal?!?

To be perfectly accurate, it's unfortunate that Bill Hagen didn't speak up about his problems with Grant's cradle two years ago which would have saved a lot of people issues, both of us included.