Crackers

Accordingly to a ****** Supra owner who can't seem to agree there are other cars better then his as this was taken from the Skyline forums in a major debate where we started comparing the skylines 2.6ltr Highest HP ratings off stock engine vs the Supra's 3ltr Highest HP off stock engine

Well to compare the engines you have to break it into HP per litre at the crank as Wheel hp isn't good cause of driveline loss well any ways it went into the 7 because of its High *** HP per litre well this is his queer responce.


[quote]As far as RX7's, the rotary is classified as a 3.9 liter engine by racing sanctioning bodies. RX7's make power more like a 2 stroke than a 4 stroke, as far as in how many "strokes" it takes to make power. They also, drumroll please, ingest air like a 3.9 liter, and guess what? It's the amount of air that an engine can ingest that defines how much HP you can make as it's easy to supply the fuel.

The most amazing thing about the rotary engine of course is the power it can make for the physical size of the engine.

[/uote]

zyounker

Racing sanctions consider a 1.3 liter rotary to be == 2.6 liter 4 cycle piston motor... not 3.9....


-Zach

Crackers

Well, needed to add If the wankle injjest the same ammount of air as a 3.9ltr what would his queer engine injest then? that of a 9lt or bigger?

1FAST7

Supras are 3 liters i think. And that guy thinks an rx7 is 3.9 liters.... no way.

RX-7 is 1.3 liters of pure power.

1FAST7

Crackers

could you give me a link that would be able to prove this dumb *** wrong??


I did know it was considered something other then its size as it needs to be classified some how

Crackers

Yeah 2jzgte is a 3ltr yeah he thinks a wankle is considred a 3.9ltr and injusest the same ammount of air as a 3.9 witch makes it a 3.9ltr so it can't compare to his 3ltr supra.

Gearhead

iTrader: (1)

Lame a$$ excuses for getting beat at the strip sounds like... I don't think it matters.. What does matter is who gets to the finish line first.
Don.

rx7eaven

Yep!! Could not agree more!

Crackers

I personly don't care about going in a straight line. I love handling.

I have a MkIII supra the one before the Fast and furious supra model
well any ways I have roughly around 300hp right and on it and I allways get beet by miatas they just handle to damn good and what not. THen theres my FD witch hands everything thier *** =)

You know I wish I had my orrignal FD. Damn BEAMER Tboned me. Well I should say the stupid 16 year old girl that was speeding in daddys exspensive 525I.

NCsublime

Well, regardless of what any of you want to say about it's comparison to other cars, the RX-7 is a 1.3 liter engine. How do I know this? Because it says in the factory manual. Mazda made the engine. They say it's a 1.3 liter. The only reason people try and say it is a 2.6 liter, etc., is because these awesomely designed rotary engines kick the **** out of everything in their class (and even some that are not), and so they bumped it up a class, pretty much saying that when compared to a traditional piston engine, the rotary engine is too efficiently designed. Come up with all the numbers you want, and all the support to back them up, but you still won't convince me that Mazda doesn't know the size of an engine that they built.

PEACE,
Derek

Crackers

Hes trying to say I have a mental handicap.

He now says a supra out handles a 7 also

FastX7

You just can't win with some people... they have a never-ending stream of bullsh1t they pull from somewhere to backup their lies with mythological facts that are bullsh1t too...

Crackers

Hehe yeah tell me about it. He accused me once of registering Crackers on this forum then posting some funny crap about what he stated then logging in as two other members on this forum and replying just to make myself "crackers" look good =]

I wouldn't doubt it if I give him the link to this he will say every one who posted on this thread is me.

FastX7

Two things...
"Case in point"
and
"Sad but true..."

Donovan

Those numbers are correct. However the test was done with a base not a R1/R2 model. A R1 has slightly better handling. Stock for stock these cars are very close and would always come down to driver ability. When you start to modify the 7's suspension is when it will really make a difference as the car is simply lighter by several hundred pounds. Someone should post up the test where two HIGH HP Supras where spanked by a modded FD. (In one of the recent mags I think)
A 1.3 liter motor is a 1.3 liter motor. A turbo 1.3 liter motor is a 1.3 liter motor with a turbo. They are not "Considered" something else, However they are sometimes bumped up in displacement class due to the large HP per Liter numbers they produce. A rotary is a four stroke motor. It has intake1 compression2 expansion(fire)3 and exaust4. Very simple. It just doesn't have valves and does not reciprocate. It is a 1.3 liter motor because the amount of air/fuel mix it injests would displace 1.3 liters.of fluid.
Why don't you post the link to the forum so we can see the discussion for our self.

Crackers

Hehe, I told him I would take him on. I stated He is to buy a Mclaren F1 for me to drive and rent a camry to race against me in the Mclaren. If I win I get to keep the mclaren atwhich I said I would sell buy a MKIV supra blow it up infront of him and then sell the scrap metal as paper weights. I then would buy a 3roter for my 7 and buy a Skyline =]

hehehe What a ******* putz.

Crackers

Ohh yeah I have that Mag somewhere... let me find it scan all the articles and then show him off =]

Crackers

Here is the link the person who I am talking about is named
Ex240sxowner

http://forums.freshalloy.com/cgi-bin...c&f=4&t=000267

rx7eaven

I checked out that link you gave us and I feel dumber now for reading it. Where is the
"arguing on the internet" thing?

Jeez, everyone needs to grow up. There is always a better car, it just depends on who owns what.

Sorry, I am not flaming you this is just ridiculous.

FastX7

I'm reading the thread on the Supra forum and it's just sickening how this guy sounds. I can't put it into words, but he just seems so ignorant because he doesn't even pretend to see the point your making. He just makes fun of you and then goes on with his own babbling.

Crackers

I agree it's a stupid posting its just I keep it going as amusment. I have long past gave up on even caring about it. I just find it funny the accusations he makes.

Ohh and its on the Skyline forums.
He is a biggot [only thinks his opinions are right and no one else deserves another opinion]

KevinK2

confusing as it is, it can be said to be 3.9L displacement.

there is no SAE 'displacement' standard AFAIK, but most commonly used definition is "total swept volume per engine cycle" .... and a cycle is one rev for piston 2-stroke, 2 revs for piston 4-stroke, and 3 revs (crank) for rotary. The 'swept volume' is related to the amount of air pumped thru a NA engine in one engine cycle.

For a 1.3L 4-stroke, the 1.3L is 'air swept' in 2 revs. For 1.3L 2-stroke piston eng, that air is swept in one rev, so it injests about twice the air, per rev, of the 4-stroke with same bore, stroke, and number of cyl's.

The 1.3L rotary 'sweeps' 1.3L per rev, and will pass air thru all 6 chambers in 3 revs, displacing 3.9L in one engine cycle. So by confusing global convention, 3.9L displacement.

So for mr global supra, he can use a 2X correction for a 2-stroke, but must use a 2/3 correction for the rotary, based on his global rating (3.9L) for the 3 rev cycle.

Unlike global practice, Mazda rates it's rx engine's 'swept volume' displacement for just one CRANK rev ( vs engine total cycle). Thus the confusion of mr supra, who does seem to have huge hp by any standard.

Race equiv's are most clear when comparing swept volume per rev, which is the same as global 2-stoke, and Mazda rx, published displacements. Both are kicked up 2X when compared to 4-stroke piston displacement.

Alex

Many people realize the rotor in the rotary engine fires three times per rotor revolution. Thus they multiply the displacement by three to compare to piston engines. This isn't very appropriate, since the crankshaft in a rotary spins only once per three revolutions of the rotor. Thus the number of combustion cycles per rev is 1. A normal piston engine is .5. So in terms of combustion cycles per rev, the rotary is most similar to a 2.6L 2 cylinder. Check out http://www.howstuffworks.com/rotary-engine4.htm for a more detailed explanation.

CosmicButtHairs

you mean a 4 cylinder

Alex

Right, a 2-rotor fires twice per rev, just like a 4-cyl 4 stroke.