Forget LS1 and 13B Why not Renesis?
12-25-03, 01:49 PM
#1
They say I'm evil?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Alabama
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forget LS1 and 13B Why not Renesis?
Tell me why someone could just forget the 13brew and even the LS1. Stay within the family and upgrade. Go Renesis . Anyone know if it's been done or if it's even a good idea?
N/A!!
Horseys: 238 @ 8500 rpm
Torque : 159 @ 5500 rpm
Redline: 9000
Displacement (cubic inches) 1.3L
Think of the possibilities! I've read about a Turbo Charged Renesis engine getting 1,400 HP!!! So why not? If you can put a LS1 Engine in a Rx7, you should be able to put a Renesis in too! Eh..eh..eh?
On top of the engine, I would take the neat leather bucket seats with the Rotary Emblem thingie in the headrest. Start modernizing one of the best looking model of cars ever built
You know those specs that say an engine has so much torque at a particular horsepower? Forget that. The Mazda RX-8's RENESIS rotary engine provides near-constant torque all the way through the RPM band, all the way up to the 9,000 RPM redline (6-speed manual transmission; 7,500 rpm redline with automatic). Access a maximum amount of power whether you're starting from a full stop or looking for a little extra juice to accelerate around slow traffic. This flat torque curve is just another special characteristic of the RENESIS' unique rotary design.
The RENESIS engine’s considerably lighter weight and smaller size also enables optimal positioning of the drivetrain without infringing on space that can be designated to driver and passenger comfort.
But don't just take our word for it. the experts have named the RENESIS the 2003 International Engine of the Year.
But don't just take our word for it. the experts have named the RENESIS the 2003 International Engine of the Year.
Horseys: 238 @ 8500 rpm
Torque : 159 @ 5500 rpm
Redline: 9000
Displacement (cubic inches) 1.3L
Think of the possibilities! I've read about a Turbo Charged Renesis engine getting 1,400 HP!!! So why not? If you can put a LS1 Engine in a Rx7, you should be able to put a Renesis in too! Eh..eh..eh?
On top of the engine, I would take the neat leather bucket seats with the Rotary Emblem thingie in the headrest. Start modernizing one of the best looking model of cars ever built
12-25-03, 02:04 PM
#3
Uber Newb.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: LSU - Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
Ad nausium.
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
Ad nausium.
12-25-03, 02:20 PM
#4
Glug Glug Glug Burp
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Scott AFB, IL
Posts: 3,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by DaedelGT
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
Ad nausium.
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...hlight=renesis
Ad nausium.
12-25-03, 04:45 PM
#6
Yes it is for sale.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: The Houston Club's Resident Lush.
Posts: 1,905
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally posted by GsrSol
The problem still remains the same. A turbo rotary has a great chance of detonation when modified. That's why people are going LS1.
The problem still remains the same. A turbo rotary has a great chance of detonation when modified. That's why people are going LS1.
Trending Topics
12-25-03, 07:32 PM
#8
I'm a CF and poop smith
Horseys: 238 @ 8500 rpm
Torque : 159 @ 5500 rpm
Redline: 9000
woohoo now what??? you still only got 238 hp and sh*t for torque as well as still no reliblity while a still costing quite a bit. LS1 puts out 300+rwhp+torque and thats in n/a stock trim. when will you little boys realise performance is more improtant then being different???
as for the argument "a Turbo Charged Renesis engine getting 1,400 HP" you will still have less torque and if you spend hte same money on a LS1, you would be closer to 2000-3000+hp
as for the argument "lighter weight and smaller size", its really not that much lighter and over 2X the amount if torque from a LS1 will more then make up for any weight difference.
as for the 9,000 RPM redline, ummm, up shift hahahaha honestly, who the hell cares if you can rev to 9krpm when gearing /torque is all which matters? why do you think a Z06 can do 180 while max rev is about 6krpm
Torque : 159 @ 5500 rpm
Redline: 9000
woohoo now what??? you still only got 238 hp and sh*t for torque as well as still no reliblity while a still costing quite a bit. LS1 puts out 300+rwhp+torque and thats in n/a stock trim. when will you little boys realise performance is more improtant then being different???
as for the argument "a Turbo Charged Renesis engine getting 1,400 HP" you will still have less torque and if you spend hte same money on a LS1, you would be closer to 2000-3000+hp
as for the argument "lighter weight and smaller size", its really not that much lighter and over 2X the amount if torque from a LS1 will more then make up for any weight difference.
as for the 9,000 RPM redline, ummm, up shift hahahaha
honestly, who the hell cares if you can rev to 9krpm when gearing /torque is all which matters? why do you think a Z06 can do 180 while max rev is about 6krpm
12-25-03, 08:11 PM
#9
built my own engine
or from an engine builder's perspective, why not get the renesis rotors (which raise your compression to 10:1) and utilize the increased mid/low end power on top of some rotary aviation seals and some solid corner seals, and goto town with the boost
just my $.02
just my $.02
12-25-03, 08:32 PM
#10
I'm a CF and poop smith
Originally posted by 93BlackFD
or from an engine builder's perspective, why not get the renesis rotors (which raise your compression to 10:1) and utilize the increased mid/low end power on top of some rotary aviation seals and some solid corner seals, and goto town with the boost
just my $.02
or from an engine builder's perspective, why not get the renesis rotors (which raise your compression to 10:1) and utilize the increased mid/low end power on top of some rotary aviation seals and some solid corner seals, and goto town with the boost
just my $.02
well that and reliblity and cost
12-25-03, 09:09 PM
#12
Originally posted by 93BlackFD
or from an engine builder's perspective, why not get the renesis rotors (which raise your compression to 10:1) and utilize the increased mid/low end power on top of some rotary aviation seals and some solid corner seals, and goto town with the boost
just my $.02
or from an engine builder's perspective, why not get the renesis rotors (which raise your compression to 10:1) and utilize the increased mid/low end power on top of some rotary aviation seals and some solid corner seals, and goto town with the boost
just my $.02
12-25-03, 09:18 PM
#14
Originally posted by 93BlackFD
so learn how to tune your car, and that problem is no longer an issue
so learn how to tune your car, and that problem is no longer an issue
12-25-03, 10:29 PM
#15
The Power of 1.3
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Shrewsbury, Massachusetts
Posts: 2,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by dclin
An increase in compression coupled with an increase in boost increases your likelyhood of detonation. When people turbo-charge a NA car, they typically lower the compression to to be able to run higher levels of boost.
An increase in compression coupled with an increase in boost increases your likelyhood of detonation. When people turbo-charge a NA car, they typically lower the compression to to be able to run higher levels of boost.
12-25-03, 11:06 PM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To answer the original question:
1. Engine mounting options are questionable. They are completely different.
2. ECU uncompatible and you will not be able to use the RX-8 ECU in an RX-7 (unless you make the RX-7 an RX-8, steering, brakes, etc.). In an RX-8 almost everything is controlled or monitored by the ECU. That has been our problem when trying to disable some systems for dynoing. The ECU controls the variable intake valving, and I doubt you can do that with any current aftermarket ECU.
3. You'd have to change the diff. gearing quite a bit - not sure if parts are available.
On the pro side, you would have a "cutting edge" engine for a change in an RX-7, not one designed over 10 years ago.
I don't see any reason low torque is a problem. You just gear it higher. As an extreme example note that a turbine engine runs with very low torque but at very high RPM - and I don't see any "gutless" turbine powered military jets or even helecopters.
1. Engine mounting options are questionable. They are completely different.
2. ECU uncompatible and you will not be able to use the RX-8 ECU in an RX-7 (unless you make the RX-7 an RX-8, steering, brakes, etc.). In an RX-8 almost everything is controlled or monitored by the ECU. That has been our problem when trying to disable some systems for dynoing. The ECU controls the variable intake valving, and I doubt you can do that with any current aftermarket ECU.
3. You'd have to change the diff. gearing quite a bit - not sure if parts are available.
On the pro side, you would have a "cutting edge" engine for a change in an RX-7, not one designed over 10 years ago.
I don't see any reason low torque is a problem. You just gear it higher. As an extreme example note that a turbine engine runs with very low torque but at very high RPM - and I don't see any "gutless" turbine powered military jets or even helecopters.
12-25-03, 11:30 PM
#17
I'm a CF and poop smith
Originally posted by 93BlackFD
sure you would, with the right port setup, you would have the same amount as a renesis, and you'd be driving a turbocharged car...
sure you would, with the right port setup, you would have the same amount as a renesis, and you'd be driving a turbocharged car...
In anycase, no you cant get the same torque line as a V8 with a rotary, its jsut not possible, there is no replacement for displacement, but you knew that
Last edited by skunks; 12-25-03 at 11:37 PM.
12-25-03, 11:37 PM
#18
I'm a CF and poop smith
Originally posted by dclin
An increase in compression coupled with an increase in boost increases your likelyhood of detonation. When people turbo-charge a NA car, they typically lower the compression to to be able to run higher levels of boost.
An increase in compression coupled with an increase in boost increases your likelyhood of detonation. When people turbo-charge a NA car, they typically lower the compression to to be able to run higher levels of boost.
nah its all good dude, just run the magical KDR anti detonation thingy (thingy because nobody even knows wtf is really is haha) and you can easily run 25+psi boost on 87 octane with absolutly no chance of detonation on a stock ecu+stock fuel injectors+stock fuel pump hahahahahaha
God I love the KDR device, its so magical yet only cost 500 bucks
. Everyone should buy one! Just say NO to tuning and tunable ecu's as well as widebands and all logic and say yes to the magical device which has no description much less a photo or any real test other then the 1 or 2 other guys on this forum which claim that they actually got a hold of one and that it works like a charm.
12-25-03, 11:41 PM
#19
I'm a CF and poop smith
"I don't see any reason low torque is a problem. You just gear it higher. As an extreme example note that a turbine engine runs with very low torque but at very high RPM - and I don't see any "gutless" turbine powered military jets or even helecopters. "
oh baby, i would not wanna top out in 1st gear at like 15mph, 2nd at 30, 3rd at 50, ect. to get the same torque as a LS1 would have.
btw: turbine is a totally different subject, check out the turbo bike (one of the bikes jay leno has) for more info i guess.
oh baby, i would not wanna top out in 1st gear at like 15mph, 2nd at 30, 3rd at 50, ect. to get the same torque as a LS1 would have.
btw: turbine is a totally different subject, check out the turbo bike (one of the bikes jay leno has) for more info i guess.
12-26-03, 04:08 AM
#20
DRIVE THE ROTARY SPORTS
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: CA (Bay Area)
Posts: 4,150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by skunks
oh I'd still make it a turbo charged car In anycase, no you cant get the same torque line as a V8 with a rotary, its jsut not possible, there is no replacement for displacement, but you knew that
oh I'd still make it a turbo charged car
In anycase, no you cant get the same torque line as a V8 with a rotary, its jsut not possible, there is no replacement for displacement, but you knew that
12-26-03, 04:28 AM
#21
I'm a CF and poop smith
Originally posted by RotorMotor
3ROTOR baby!!!
3ROTOR baby!!!
12-26-03, 08:11 AM
#22
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbochargers belong on big trucks and bulldozers not on sports cars.
Turbos make throttle response dull and never produce a nice smooth torque curve. Throttle response and flat torque curve make driving a car more fun.
Turbos make throttle response dull and never produce a nice smooth torque curve. Throttle response and flat torque curve make driving a car more fun.
Originally posted by 93BlackFD
sure you would, with the right port setup, you would have the same amount as a renesis, and you'd be driving a turbocharged car...
sure you would, with the right port setup, you would have the same amount as a renesis, and you'd be driving a turbocharged car...
12-26-03, 08:14 AM
#23
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No matter how you tune it a larger displacement normally asperated engine will have a wider torque band, better throttle response and more reliability.
No amount of tuning lets you break the laws of physics.
No amount of tuning lets you break the laws of physics.
Originally posted by 93BlackFD
so learn how to tune your car, and that problem is no longer an issue
so learn how to tune your car, and that problem is no longer an issue
12-26-03, 08:17 AM
#24
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't see many military jets inching along in rush hour traffic.
Turbines are great for steady state operation but miserable when the application requires rapid changes in RPM.
Same reason turbos suck on sports cars.
Turbines are great for steady state operation but miserable when the application requires rapid changes in RPM.
Same reason turbos suck on sports cars.
Originally posted by David Beale
To answer the original question:
I don't see any reason low torque is a problem. You just gear it higher. As an extreme example note that a turbine engine runs with very low torque but at very high RPM - and I don't see any "gutless" turbine powered military jets or even helecopters.
To answer the original question:
I don't see any reason low torque is a problem. You just gear it higher. As an extreme example note that a turbine engine runs with very low torque but at very high RPM - and I don't see any "gutless" turbine powered military jets or even helecopters.