Howard Coleman

iTrader: (6)

"Mazda adopted his philosophy in the FD and it has become the ultimate expression of Chapman's philosophy even more so than his own Elite's, Elan's and Europa's... "

yes.

Mazda and Lotus (of old) cut from the same mold. i very much know the Elan because David Vegher's was the only car in front of me at the 83 Runoffs checkered flag. the following year SCCA moved the car to GT2. he still has the gold and i have the silver.


2011 NEW NEW NEW news flash. BMW announced today (current enough for you?) the motor that will drive the majority of their fleet...

the N20.

4cyl variable everything, direct injection (like Mazda finally), 317 pounds, twin scroll turbo.

2 liters... that's 122 cubic inches. 240 flywheel hp.

1.96 hp per cubic inch. pretty zippy. of course what would you expect from BMW, king of engines.

my point (again) is understand where they stopped. (you can make 600 hp out of 2 liters....easy)

1.96 X 159 is 312 FD flywheel hp or 264 rwhp.

in other words, with all the exhaustive R&D/F1 racing experience, hugely sophisticated knock controls circa 2011, not 1991, they chose to call a halt at the equivalent of 264 13B-REW hp.

so you have a slightly modded 340 hp FD w no AI because you are being so conservative?

no AI?

you need an engine builder on speed dial.

howard

MrNizzles

iTrader: (5)

Howard, you are a true inspiration and I wonder how you find some of this information about FD related things... like Mazda's two teams of weight reduction, and they couldn't talk to each other, etc.... was your Zen teacher some retired Mazda engineer?

To the comment about the long/heavy cat, if not for strict US emissions, the FD would not have been given that Im sure. I would imagine that US emission requirements "irritated" the hell out of Mazda engineers. Maybe thats another reason (in addition to low sales) why they stopped importing to the US.

However, if anyone can better the FD, the total package, and bring it back ala the "glory days", its Mazda.... or Howard!

$lacker

iTrader: (9)

For what it's worth, the JDM FDs also had the 40lb cat... I couldn't believe the size/weight of the thing when I first saw it

Bryan Jacobs

iTrader: (66)

but they don't have the 30 lb pre cat

Kiku

iTrader: (4)

Perhaps they limit their engine outputs for a more "manageable" power. IE perhaps in the case of the mclaren, they limited power output to provide stability of the car. I mean there is such a thing as too much power and by limiting the engines numbers they have a a more usable power-band. In the case of bmw, you say its for their fleet cars, meaning the daily 3/5/7 series etc. I dont know about you but if I needed a luxury car to drive the boss around in, I wouldnt want him thrown back in his seat ever time I hit the accelerator, haha. We should also consider fuel economy plays a major role in determining how auto manufacturer's dictate limits placed on engines.

I disagree to an extent of comparing the rotary to cylinders (whether its a $200k mclaren or bmw) Its comparing the proverbial apple to the orange. The rotary by design was supposed to produce more power per cu.in That's where its efficiency lies (which I'm sure you know very well). Saying we should limit the power (within reason) of a rotary based on numbers set by piston engines just doesn't make sense to me. There are too many factors outside of the fact that ours aren't reciprocating engines to say that the engines can't successfully handle 300whp without AI without det. Not saying we shouldn't have AI. I may have misread your original post Howard, if so feel free to correct.


There is a reason why Mazda won the Le Mans back in 91, why Amemiya was able to competitively run the fd for 18 years in Japan's super GT, why Revolution's TA-2 is closing in on the fastest lap at Tsukuba, and why the SpeedSource 20b rx8 is dominating the US gt circuits. Its cuz rotaries kick a$$

Narfle

iTrader: (16)

I refuse to let anyone who hasn't owned an FD drive my car. There's no safety net. When they go they're gone. At least they gave us ABS, unless you've removed it lol.

I hate driver's aids for the most part. They're like wearing a condom.

Montego

iTrader: (1)

No **** I let my best friend (of 20+ years) drive mine and the dumbass almost killed us. Basically we were hauling *** WOT up a hill. And since it was late at night the palm trees in center median were being watered by the automated sprinklers. Anyway half our lane had some water in it and not the other half. So my dumb *** friend goes right over the water still @ WOT. ANd since only one tire got wet it immedeatly sent us side ways... We were heading straight towards the palms trees luckily he isn't that dumb as he immideatly got off the gas corrected the wheel and *** soon as we hit a dry path the Fd strightened itself back out.

I yelled at him WTF are you doing??? he answered "sorry I'm used to my audi...." I'm all WTF??? you mean the quattro? the one with all wheel drive and traction control!!! you mean that one!!!


At the time I still had stock turbos and only boosting 12 psi... Now that I went single nobody drives my car. **** they will kill themselves.

swif

iTrader: (4)

The comparison is nice.

Also realize that the MP4 is the first car McLaren has released in the U.S. market. This is going to bring people in and be the entry level car. they plan on releasing to other models with more power and of course cost more money.

I love my FD, but there is nothing like driving an exotic that is well built. My project for my FD started out to beat the F355's out on the street and F360's.

Monkman33

iTrader: (28)

I can't remember who it was, but they made a convincing argument as to how the power stroke pulses of a rotary more closely matched a straight 6. 3 rotations of a 2 rotor e-shaft had an almost identical exhaust pulse as 2 rotations of a straight 6 crankshaft.

swif

iTrader: (4)

You have seen my avatar right? That is a drive I was at a few years back. I have driven my exotic cars over the years.

I understand what Howard was saying. I agree with the FD being way ahead of its time. I can remember when a news paper compared the FD to a porsche of that time.

The first picture was my 510. Not so exotic

swif

iTrader: (4)

Forgot this twin turbo beauty.

swif

iTrader: (4)

There is this one as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNWGzSzRq5A

This car was one of the first if not the first Lambo Heffner Performance Twin Turbo'd. CAr was driven from his shop and had a problem when it hit San Diego. Car was towed to the shop and I was the luck person remove the the engine ship it back to Heffner then get the engine back and reinstall the engine and the turbo system on the car. I was also lucky to drive this car and the black spider the owner bought after selling this.

I can say that I have driven some sweet cars as well as taken ides in a few as well.

RCCAZ 1

iTrader: (10)

Gordon,

Well said!!! While I TOTALLY agree with your post , a VAST majority of the Auto Enthusiast community who don't know our cars and have NOT driven an FD would look at the FD beside a Gallardo or Ferrari and make derrogatory comments about the FD being FAST, but having an unreliable engine and being a "stepping stone" to something better. Unfortunately our cars built a poor reputation in the early days of ownership from problems with reliability and a general public who understood only pushrod engines (hell, my Chevy has a V8 and hauls butt, so a V12 must REALLY haul ***, right?)

The last 10 years has seen great strides in FI rotary reliability through better aftermarket support, tuning improvements, and the advent of WI. These advances have made a huge difference in both straight line performance and reliability. Sadly, most of the "older" original owners had sold their cars and moved on by that time. If people understood TODAY that a properly modded FD putting down 375 to 400 RWHP could hang neck and neck with the some of the best supercars on the market, maybe we'd be seeing USED valuations a little closer to the Supra and NSX markets.

Vell

You are not fair there Howard :

1 - The N20 or any 2011 engine is made to be emission compliant. I know, we don't care in race cars, but you're talking about a standard engine here ...

2 - ... if you want to talk about sports cars engine, then talk about the "S" engines = BMW Motorsport ones. S54 for the M3 E46 straight 6 for example.

3 - You forget to mention two other important things, the heavy maintenance on a rotary engine VS almost anything on a BMW AND how much it costs to run a rotary VS a BMW (= heavy work + serious money).


I love the rotary engines, I love the FD for the track ... But nothing can beat the BMW reliability here in Europe (my turn to be unfair, as the Mercedes are very reliable too, and the same for Honda).

(Oh, and ... sorry for my english )

Howard Coleman

iTrader: (6)

"You are not fair there Howard"

i am scratching my head on this. i have mentioned 5 engines in this thread:

McLaren twin turbo'd V8
Corvette supercharged V8
Merc/AMG twin turbo'd V12
Nissan GTR twin turbo V6
BMW turbo'd 4 cy

all stunning examples of 21st century engineering.

that's a good thing

my point was that, while they were engineered to the max, being force fed they could easily have been offered at a higher state of output. just turn up the boost.

it is instructive to understand where they each drew the line:

McLaren........................................... ............. 2.55 hp per cubic inch
Corvette ZR1............................................... . 1.69
Nissan GTR .................................................. ..2.09
Merc/AMG............................................... ....... 1.81
BMW N20............................................... ....... 1.96
FD................................................ ................. 1.6

most on this board think a 375 rwhp (which is 431 flywheel hp) FD is a low tune level.

not true

FD 375 rwhp.............................................. ....2.71

all of the above engines feature closed loop knock technology. knock over X and the ignition, fuel are changed ON THE NEXT COMBUSTION STROKE. welcome to the 21st century.

we don't have that.

i do. i have the J&S Knock module that under boost (only) retards timing on the next rotor face. but most of us don't have this.

so at 375, considered "moderate" we are making 6% more than the newest, most sophisticated engine on the block. and alot more than others on the list.

and as previously mentioned:

we have no every other non combusted cooling stroke like a 4 cycle
we need 30% more air and fuel to make the same hp as a piston
we make 300 degrees more EGT than a piston

so the point is we need AI to add cooling.

the point is NOT that our engines are better than the above. i will let other who wish debate that point. but i am not making it.

howard

R3AL.CH1CK3N

iTrader: (9)

It seems like every time I read a post from Howard, it starts an out of control debate of very good information. I enjoyed reading this thread, alot of experienced guys willing to share their knowledge. Thanks.

swif

iTrader: (4)

You are correct with the FD being an exotic by way of engine the body on the car, balance the car has, suspension, the rims on the car, and so much more.

The two full pictures of the Gallardo's are twin turbo cars that are very fast. The youtube was the fast, but not as fast as some FD's. I have driving a 1000 rwhp Gallardo that handled very well. The Enzo in its own right as far as looks and development is exotic. Lamborghini LM a 8000 lbs truck at 115 mph is an experience.

This thread I believe was started to show how well the FD was developed and as you point out is looked at as a stepping stone. In my eye it is for me a great car that has a timeless look. If I were to get read of the car it would be due to room concerns and not being able to have room for the car.

As Howard posted other cars that have great engineering behind them I am say that a street car that is modified or not, as the typic exotic in the general publics eye these cars have the whole package as far as inside and out. The ride is great, if the interior is done correctly the car feels just right with the correct noise levels inside and out side of the car.

So after an explanation I see your point and and agree with you. Most FD owners that i have seen do look at the car as a stepping stone. Many are very young and end up getting burned with bad information and not building the car right.

Vell

Howard, let me explain a bit more

What I mean is that you can't really compare a 2011 car (=emissions compliant) to apply the torque/ci cooling issue.

They don't want the MAX torque/ci, they all want (except Mc Laren I suppose) to make the best "sauce" with emissions, fuel economy, torque, driveability, , etc...
If you throw out the emissions + fuel economy, I'm sure you can raise the torque/ci with the same good reliability. You can raise the max "torque/ci" this way.

There is the "not fair" story : you can't take those numbers as reference (for a stock FD maybe, but the regulations of emissions changed a lot ...)

I'm sure there is some examples a bit more close from our goals. Maybe the bikes ? Maybe the extreme sports cars ?


(you will not believe how many times I've deleted and rewrite my message to be sure that it will be understood the right way... Hopefully it will work !)

swif

iTrader: (4)

512 TR is a great car. The changes that Ferrari made to the TR to get to the 512 were great. To me the car shows the progression that Ferrari made with the TR model.

"Since the FD is tied as my favorite car, it will always have space. "

wthx100

Dont ever bring up CI/HP it makes us all sound like vtec ricers. HP is HP, Weight is Weight. If you read the book on the mclaren f1 you'd realize that they dont consider anything over 2500lbs a "sports car"

wthx100

While I admire alot of facts Howard brings to light, I dont admire anything he has to say about the powerplant or hp/ci, Let me know when your mythical 340hp fd is smog compliant. If your using AI to achieve those numbers you can't even pass smog. What do you think is going to happen when the mp4 uses AI and ups the boost?

KKMpunkrock2011

iTrader: (5)

while that may have been a fair (albeit generally regarded as inaccurate) statement back when the F1 was being designed, that clearly is not the case today.

DrunkenGimp

iTrader: (3)

Way to miss the point. The idea is that the fd, even at what we expect is a low or conservative boost/hp level "350hp", is putting out a ton more hp/ci than your average car. He's not arguing that their engines are inferior because ours are higher hp/ci (aka ricer argument). Most people think that supercars are all at the upper limits of engineering for horsepower, but we push our engines more than they do at much lower power levels; many without realizing it. We need to modify because we are putting so much more stress on our engines (AI). You don't take a 1000hp piston engined car out and expect it to be reliable without making some kind of provision for heat, pressure and fuel. That is precisely what we do if we put a turbo 2 rotor at 350rwhp and call it a day without adding AI (or some other provision).

The current movement towards larger and larger engines has everything to do with reliability and emissions. It's a lot easier to make more power with less ccp if you have more displacement. The same goes for emissions. Since power sells cars, and making say a 500hp 2rotor FD pass smog and not kill everyone who drives it would have much higher development costs. They don't really have a choice. (other than develop the 16x )

Howard points out that our cars are exotics in terms of handling and sports-car capability, and should be treated as such. The car has a fantastic chassis, and I doubt any of us will argue with that. With more power, they can contend with modern designs, or beat them.

Sorry for trying to summarize the great Howard Coleman .

Exactly. He's not comparing them in terms of superiority, only in terms of hp/ci. They aren't mutually inclusive

Vell

It's not about the superiority, just the numbers taken from these engines.

If you have such a goal in term of emissions, you can't make a lot of power. It's not fair to compare in terms of hp/ci as the 2011 engine will have a low power output BECAUSE of the "emissions compliant" thing.

Remember, for emissions you are looking for higher temps, higher AFR values.
Even if it was possible for a rotary to achieve it (without any air pump), the power output will be significantly reduced.

Which leads to the same point : you can't compare in terms of hp/ci a "race" engine with no emissions and a late engine built to be emissions compliant and mileage friendly.

(I still agree Howard's posts. It's just that I don't think the datas can be compared like this. The difference may be as low as 0.1 hp/ci, maybe not.)

swif

iTrader: (4)