When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Very nice how you can't stand behind your post and have deleted it.
Having a big turbo big power streetcar is perfectly doable. If it isn't possible for you, it isn't the the fault of the platform but owner error. If you spec your motor and supporting hardware to efficiently work together and balance everything at a system level, then the performance level of the rotary greatly exceeds the common perception (things like a bit turbo spools slow...).
This is Aaron Copeland's 700+ hp streetcar that gets driven more than most people's daily driver. 43 lbs of boost by 4600 with a 10k rpm power band isn't exactly waiting around for something to spool. I'm expecting similar from my S476 SX-E and will prove it shortly. Like I said in my last post, one of the biggest factors here is knowing WTF you are doing.
I just don't feel like getting in a pissing match with you and your self righteous bullshit. ErnieT made almost 850 on a 13b years and years ago. You're not doing anything revolutionary or impressive. You're just driving a drag car on the street and it's obnoxious AF.
I just don't feel like getting in a pissing match with you and your self righteous bullshit. ErnieT made almost 850 on a 13b years and years ago. You're not doing anything revolutionary or impressive. You're just driving a drag car on the street and it's obnoxious AF.
Self righteous? No I'm just right, and I know it. You're the one deleting your post responses...
Sure 850 was drag car only 15 years ago, back in the days when an E6K was the high end ECU that you tuned using a chisel and a hammer. Modern weed whacker carb tuning is more advanced. Again, back to what I said originally, if you know WTF you are doing the limits change. Don't be such a pawn.
I just don't feel like getting in a pissing match with you and your self righteous bullshit. ErnieT made almost 850 on a 13b years and years ago. You're not doing anything revolutionary or impressive. You're just driving a drag car on the street and it's obnoxious AF.
Can you please get your liberal head out of your *** and stop acting like a fool? You've been on this forum for 5000 posts of garbage and nitpicking with nothing to show but a stock FD and an attitude. Go out and drive your car in the mountains since you're so close to me and show the world you can put your money where your mouth is.
Aaron does it big. Seth does it big. These guys should be respected within the community for continuing to push the RELIABILITY factor of their builds. We live in a modern era full of great technology and you're comparing it to a drag racing (likely methanol) 850hp car. 700whp is doable on e85 with reliability for the street, but as Seth clearly showed you, it's best to do so in a progressive power output as to not always run the motor that hard. Makes perfect sense. It's why roots supercharged cars are so easy to drive... Progressive boost curve.
So let's help the young guy and continue showing him how $15k isn't adequate...
Save yourself the heartache and go LS swap your Rx7 (if you own one) for $15k.
Holley Dominator + LS3 E-Rod + T56 Magnum = $25k build though.
Building a proper turbo LS setup is going to be closer to $35k.
Last edited by RGHTBrainDesign; 12-21-18 at 12:37 AM.
ErnieT made almost 850 on a 13b years and years ago. You're not doing anything revolutionary or impressive.
He was also blowing motors left and right, he just paid Ray to keep rebuilding them with a quickness. At least, that's what Ray told me when PFS was still in business and I was a customer.
Any swinging dick can make power if they pour enough money into a car. I'd have FAR more respect for a person that can make and sustain 450whp than a person who makes 650whp on a dyno, then blows their engine 2 months later.
He was also blowing motors left and right, he just paid Ray to keep rebuilding them with a quickness. At least, that's what Ray told me when PFS was still in business and I was a customer.
Any swinging dick can make power if they pour enough money into a car. I'd have FAR more respect for a person that can make and sustain 450whp than a person who makes 650whp on a dyno, then blows their engine 2 months later.
I'm sure he was blowing motors. Back then, there wasn't any real adequate engine protection like what we have with modern ECUs today. Save structural mechanical failure, you can pretty well set up every failsafe needed to prevent detonation/pre-ignition related failures. Fuel pressure, wideband leanout, air intake temp, coolant temp, oil temp, oil pressure, voltage drop under load, overboost, etc...are all controlled factors. Running high hp with no engine protection is a recipe for disaster...if anything in the system goes wrong, I mean anything, then kaboom. There is NO longevity to this motor without engine protection.
The kicker here is that if you aren't a moron and you built and tuned the car properly then you can sustain 650, or more. Most of the people who hate on that idea either haven't made that kind of power before to actually know, or can't afford to.
STUPID was a very poor choice of words. Perhaps very passionate about rotary engines would have been a better choice.
As to the advancements in the rotary. I'd say there small in comparison to what piston engines are doing today. Even the Mazda LMP car runs a 600 HP 4 banger(she runs all day and all night). Between the head designs, variable cam timing, fuels, ignition systems....even variable compression now..... a 4 banger pulls off the line like a v6 at a minimum.
who doesn't love 10k rpm's and flames out of the exhaust? who wouldn't want a 787B?
those #'s 15k, 25k, 35k w/turbo do not encompass an entire build IMO. not to make it like a new car anyway. IMO you could go out and buy one of several BRAND NEW street cars from the factory, with a warranty, making that power for the money you'd spend to try and make a rotary that would compare. I think those advancements mentioned have bridged the gap rotary engines had over their piston counterparts.
Last edited by ATC529R; 12-21-18 at 09:16 AM.
Reason: felt like it
I can tell you from the standpoint of an owner of a 700rwhp street driven FD (683rwhp low boost on my Mustang dyno, you do the Dynojet math) that it is a handful to drive. My FD has been a 20B for nearly a decade, I have never blown it up (knock wood). There is none of the modern driving technology that is incorporated in the new Hellcat, Corvette etc, so basically every time I get behind the wheel the car tries to kill me. I have 35 years of driving experience and would never hand the keys over to some teenager, chances are they would not make it a mile down the road. Just one moment of distraction and it is all over.
We build and tune 400-500hp cars every week, it is safe to say that if you go into a project like this with a meager budget (read $15K) you are going to very unhappy with the car's performance and reliability.
STUPID was a very poor choice of words. Perhaps very passionate about rotary engines would have been a better choice.
As to the advancements in the rotary. I'd say there small in comparison to what piston engines are doing today. Even the Mazda LMP car runs a 600 HP 4 banger(she runs all day and all night). Between the head designs, variable cam timing, fuels, ignition systems....even variable compression now..... a 4 banger pulls off the line like a v6 at a minimum.
who doesn't love 10k rpm's and flames out of the exhaust? who wouldn't want a 787B?
those #'s 15k, 25k, 35k w/turbo do not encompass an entire build IMO. not to make it like a new car anyway. IMO you could go out and buy one of several BRAND NEW street cars from the factory, with a warranty, making that power for the money you'd spend to try and make a rotary that would compare. I think those advancements mentioned have bridged the gap rotary engines had over their piston counterparts.
I completely agree. There is a solid reason that no OEM currently has a rotary engine in production. I never said that building a 700+ rwhp turbo rotary street-car was smart, only that it is doable with money and some mechanical intuition. To me, pushing the limits of the platform are what make it fun and challenging. If it was really about the power and having it in a FD I would have put a supercharged LS3 in it a long long long time ago and been set.
When building a 700hp turbo rotary you have to design, plan, spec and tune it as a system level approaching it like OEMs do. At this power level, we are so far beyond the capabilities of the system that Mazda designed so you must account for EVERYTHING where as on a 450hp build you can bolt a hodge podge of parts together without much forethought and then go beat on it. At big power your margin for error is much smaller than at 450, which just means you need to know what you're doing.
I can tell you from the standpoint of an owner of a 700rwhp street driven FD (683rwhp low boost on my Mustang dyno, you do the Dynojet math) that it is a handful to drive. My FD has been a 20B for nearly a decade, I have never blown it up (knock wood). There is none of the modern driving technology that is incorporated in the new Hellcat, Corvette etc, so basically every time I get behind the wheel the car tries to kill me. I have 35 years of driving experience and would never hand the keys over to some teenager, chances are they would not make it a mile down the road. Just one moment of distraction and it is all over.
We build and tune 400-500hp cars every week, it is safe to say that if you go into a project like this with a meager budget (read $15K) you are going to very unhappy with the car's performance and reliability.
Merry Christmas
This is all very true. With my last setup that was somewhere just north of 600 wheel, I could blow 26x10.5 mickey thompson drag radials loose at 90+ mph on the freeway. Feeling the back end start skating sideways at those speeds is pretty scary no doubt. I get alot of people who want to go for a ride, but not alot who come back for a second time. It definitely isn't for everyone.
Self righteous? No I'm just right, and I know it. You're the one deleting your post responses...
Sure 850 was drag car only 15 years ago, back in the days when an E6K was the high end ECU that you tuned using a chisel and a hammer. Modern weed whacker carb tuning is more advanced. Again, back to what I said originally, if you know WTF you are doing the limits change. Don't be such a pawn.
Skeese
You talk a big game, but at the end of the day you're an amateur with limited experience. You bought that motor (or maybe you're building a new one?) from socks, who was using it for....DRAG RACING. A 700hp 13b is half grenade and half turbo lag. The people who make that much power (or more) rebuild often. Technology hasn't really changed the limits of the stock block and materials. It doesn't matter how deep you bury your head in the sand or how hard you beat your head against the wall. You're up against metallurgy and physics, not tuning and electronics.
But, please bring back some track and autoX videos of your totally streetable car with a hood dump exhaust. And, let us know how many pulls/miles you get between tear-downs. Seriously, you're building it for drags and roll racing, which is all it will be good for. And, engine longevity, reliability, and driveability won't be in the same zip code as lesser powered engines.
Originally Posted by RGHTBrainDesign
Can you please get your liberal head out of your *** and stop acting like a fool? You've been on this forum for 5000 posts of garbage and nitpicking with nothing to show but a stock FD and an attitude. Go out and drive your car in the mountains since you're so close to me and show the world you can put your money where your mouth is.
LOL. U mad I upset your BFF? This is you right now:
Originally Posted by RGHTBrainDesign
Aaron does it big. Seth does it big. These guys should be respected within the community for continuing to push the RELIABILITY factor of their builds. We live in a modern era full of great technology and you're comparing it to a drag racing (likely methanol) 850hp car. 700whp is doable on e85 with reliability for the street, but as Seth clearly showed you, it's best to do so in a progressive power output as to not always run the motor that hard. Makes perfect sense. It's why roots supercharged cars are so easy to drive... Progressive boost curve.
Roots superchargers are the least-progressive form of forced induction. See picture above. The reason a huge turbo doesn't make more boost/power sooner is purely lag. And I'm pretty sure ErnieT was running C16.
Originally Posted by RGHTBrainDesign
So let's help the young guy and continue showing him how $15k isn't adequate...
Save yourself the heartache and go LS swap your Rx7 (if you own one) for $15k.
Holley Dominator + LS3 E-Rod + T56 Magnum = $25k build though.
Building a proper turbo LS setup is going to be closer to $35k.
True as the financials are, the real takeaway is that a 700hp 13b is not particularly desirable or achievable for anyone who finds this line of questioning informative.
Originally Posted by Banzai-Racing
I can tell you from the standpoint of an owner of a 700rwhp street driven FD (683rwhp low boost on my Mustang dyno, you do the Dynojet math) that it is a handful to drive. My FD has been a 20B for nearly a decade, I have never blown it up (knock wood). There is none of the modern driving technology that is incorporated in the new Hellcat, Corvette etc, so basically every time I get behind the wheel the car tries to kill me. I have 35 years of driving experience and would never hand the keys over to some teenager, chances are they would not make it a mile down the road. Just one moment of distraction and it is all over.
We build and tune 400-500hp cars every week, it is safe to say that if you go into a project like this with a meager budget (read $15K) you are going to very unhappy with the car's performance and reliability.
Merry Christmas
Oh look, a professional with a running car and a **** ton of experience. Merry Christmas indeed. Seems like the extra displacement of the 20b makes those numbers much more realistic and reliable. And, 400-500hp is a much more reasonable goal for 99.9% of single turbo 13b builds.
Best of luck with everyone's respective automobiles and builds, whatever the power level or intention.
What is interesting is that an FDs engine is more or less the same as a 100hp Cosmo 10A engine. There are some minor detail differences, but it's the same engine. Arguably, the FD engine is worse for high power output, since Mazda has demonstrably compromised the cooling system in the FD engine in order to get the spark plugs in a better position for emissions reasons.
Really, a 700WHP engine is 8-9x the stock output. Mazda burned the candle at three ends when they made the FD engine to begin with. That is why they had such a hilariously short lifespan.
What is interesting is that an FDs engine is more or less the same as a 100hp Cosmo 10A engine. There are some minor detail differences, but it's the same engine. Arguably, the FD engine is worse for high power output, since Mazda has demonstrably compromised the cooling system in the FD engine in order to get the spark plugs in a better position for emissions reasons.
Really, a 700WHP engine is 8-9x the stock output. Mazda burned the candle at three ends when they made the FD engine to begin with. That is why they had such a hilariously short lifespan.
Originally Posted by peejay
My car made maybe 2.5x what a stock 13B made.
What is interesting is that an FDs engine is more or less the same as a 100hp Cosmo 10A engine. There are some minor detail differences, but it's the same engine. Arguably, the FD engine is worse for high power output, since Mazda has demonstrably compromised the cooling system in the FD engine in order to get the spark plugs in a better position for emissions reasons.
Really, a 700WHP engine is 8-9x the stock output. Mazda burned the candle at three ends when they made the FD engine to begin with. That is why they had such a hilariously short lifespan.
Tuibos are for trucks, mkay?
dguy
Quote:
Are you high or something?
Why would you ask that?
Peejay is right, the 13B-REW is essentially the same technology as a 1960s 10A.
Refined in a couple areas and further compromised in others.
The 13B-REW is essentially to the 10A what a 1980 Pontiac 301 turbo V8 is to a 1955 "small block" V8.
13B-REW Refinements over Cosmo Sport 10A
Larger thrust bearing
Thinner 2mm steel apex seals VS 6mm sintered Carbon/Aluminum (note NSU was already selling Carbide tipped apex seals and Mercedes tested with ceramics in the '60s)
Rotors with more roll pins holding rotor gears
Chrome over sheetmetal insert lined rotor housings instead of Chrome on Aluminum (more durable)
Higher oil pressure
Reduced friction (missing a set of side seals and rotor oil seal)
Improved accessories (ignition, fuel injection)
Removed oil pump chain tensioner
Turbos for POWAAAA (280hp instead of 120hp)
13B-REW Compromises compared to Cosmo Sport 10A
Rotor width added to bump displacement twice (12A, 13B) which compromised efficiency/design from original parameters (cost saving measure instead of "stroking" for displacement).
Cast Iron instead of Steel flame sprayed Aluminum side housings (cost saving measure)
Heavier rotors (because wider)
Chrome over sheet metal insert rotor housings (worse cooling)
Missing 2nd set of side seals (fine until rotor oil seals start to leak)
Missing 3rd set of oil control rings (fine until they start to leak)
Not hand ported from factory
Later opening intake ports (see above)
Smaller coolant passages in rotor housing (worse cooling, but better cold start emissions)
Smaller capacity oil filter (save the planet)
Much heavier (407Lbs versus 225Lbs)
Mazda took the wrong path for their production rotaries.
They should have stuck to the 10A and started adding rotors instead of adding turbos and/or wider rotors.
They started down the wrong path in racing (turbo bridgeport 2 rotors) and corrected (3 rotor then 4 rotor NA)
The weight shows all.
A 4 rotor 10A based engine would have weighed the same, made the same power, similar fuel economy, similar cost (New Hitachi twins cost same as brand new 13B-REW...) and would have much more reliable...
Roots superchargers are the least-progressive form of forced induction. See picture above. The reason a huge turbo doesn't make more boost/power sooner is purely lag. And I'm pretty sure ErnieT was running C16.
So you're telling me an RPM dependent boost curve isn't progressive... ROFL.
Here's the rundown for you since you need to be spoon fed still:
A supercharged car makes less power at idle and lower RPMs than an NA variant due to parasitic losses
As RPMs raise, so does the actual boost figure generated by the blower = a progressive boost curve
Above cruising loads, you'll generate boost proportional to your RPM in which it's now surpassing the parasitic losses vs. just having an NA engine
With a "12psi pulley" for instance, you might generate 5psi at 3000RPM, 8psi at 5000RPM, and 12psi at 7000RPM. Again, progressive boost curve.
A progressive boost curve aids towards durability due to the duration at which you're loading the engine with higher and higher forces
Smart engine tuners taper in boost on ANY application because making a fuckload of torque at low RPMs is what destroys engines
So yes, you can make your 700whp, but I sure as **** wouldn't run 30+psi under 3500RPM on a rotary engine. At 5000+RPM, sure! Build a progressive boost curve...
Your other **** isn't helpful, funny, or even worth reading, so I'll leave it at that. Thanks for proving my point.
Mazda burned the candle at three ends when they made the FD engine to begin with. That is why they had such a hilariously short lifespan.
oh i dont know, if you compare Mr Rink's 1971 Rx2 and and my old FD, the FD engine makes 3x the power, and gets better gas mileage. engine life is about the same.
you can have fast, cheap or reliable, pick two... or pick one! or pick none! loud, slow and broken is easy
So you're telling me an RPM dependent boost curve isn't progressive... ROFL.
Here's the rundown for you since you need to be spoon fed still:
A supercharged car makes less power at idle and lower RPMs than an NA variant due to parasitic losses
As RPMs raise, so does the actual boost figure generated by the blower = a progressive boost curve
Above cruising loads, you'll generate boost proportional to your RPM in which it's now surpassing the parasitic losses vs. just having an NA engine
With a "12psi pulley" for instance, you might generate 5psi at 3000RPM, 8psi at 5000RPM, and 12psi at 7000RPM. Again, progressive boost curve.
A progressive boost curve aids towards durability due to the duration at which you're loading the engine with higher and higher forces
Smart engine tuners taper in boost on ANY application because making a fuckload of torque at low RPMs is what destroys engines
So yes, you can make your 700whp, but I sure as **** wouldn't run 30+psi under 3500RPM on a rotary engine. At 5000+RPM, sure! Build a progressive boost curve...
Your other **** isn't helpful, funny, or even worth reading, so I'll leave it at that. Thanks for proving my point.
Every day is a classroom...
Roots
Style
Superchargers
Are
The
Least
Progressive
Form
Of
Forced
Induction
I cannot understand you when you speak directly out of your *******. Why should I take anything you say seriously when you're so confidently incorrect?
Last edited by Narfle; 12-22-18 at 03:27 PM.
Reason: needless vitriol
The mod staff has received complaints on this thread. We have a could options here. We can stay on point and drop the name calling and insults and get back to the focus of the thread or I can close the thread and we can all be done with this discussion. I'll let you guys choose. If the mod staff receives another complaint I will close this thread. If the original poster would like this thread closed he can chime in and I'll close it.
So you're telling me an RPM dependent boost curve isn't progressive... ROFL.
Here's the rundown for you since you need to be spoon fed still:
A supercharged car makes less power at idle and lower RPMs than an NA variant due to parasitic losses
As RPMs raise, so does the actual boost figure generated by the blower = a progressive boost curve
Above cruising loads, you'll generate boost proportional to your RPM in which it's now surpassing the parasitic losses vs. just having an NA engine
With a "12psi pulley" for instance, you might generate 5psi at 3000RPM, 8psi at 5000RPM, and 12psi at 7000RPM. Again, progressive boost curve.
A progressive boost curve aids towards durability due to the duration at which you're loading the engine with higher and higher forces
Smart engine tuners taper in boost on ANY application because making a fuckload of torque at low RPMs is what destroys engines
So yes, you can make your 700whp, but I sure as **** wouldn't run 30+psi under 3500RPM on a rotary engine. At 5000+RPM, sure! Build a progressive boost curve...
Your other **** isn't helpful, funny, or even worth reading, so I'll leave it at that. Thanks for proving my point.
Every day is a classroom...
You keep using the word "blower" but keep describing the characteristics of a centrifugal supercharger. They are as different as wings and spoilers.
Blowers generally make the same boost at all RPM. That is to say, none at all. Boost with a blower is created by backpressure between the blower and the engine, since the blower is not an air compressor like a centrifugal supercharger (belt or exhaust turbine driven) is. Boost with a blower therefore is a complex relationship between the engine's VE (higher VE, less boost) and the blower's VE at that given blower speed and manifold pressure (more pressure, lower VE). The end result is that boost tapers off towards redline as the blower gets less volumetrically efficient at higher RPM.
You talk a big game, but at the end of the day you're an amateur with limited experience. You bought that motor (or maybe you're building a new one?) from socks, who was using it for....DRAG RACING. A 700hp 13b is half grenade and half turbo lag. The people who make that much power (or more) rebuild often. Technology hasn't really changed the limits of the stock block and materials. It doesn't matter how deep you bury your head in the sand or how hard you beat your head against the wall. You're up against metallurgy and physics, not tuning and electronics.
But, please bring back some track and autoX videos of your totally streetable car with a hood dump exhaust. And, let us know how many pulls/miles you get between tear-downs. Seriously, you're building it for drags and roll racing, which is all it will be good for. And, engine longevity, reliability, and driveability won't be in the same zip code as lesser powered engines.
Roots superchargers are the least-progressive form of forced induction. See picture above. The reason a huge turbo doesn't make more boost/power sooner is purely lag. And I'm pretty sure ErnieT was running C16.
True as the financials are, the real takeaway is that a 700hp 13b is not particularly desirable or achievable for anyone who finds this line of questioning informative.
Oh look, a professional with a running car and a **** ton of experience. Merry Christmas indeed. Seems like the extra displacement of the 20b makes those numbers much more realistic and reliable. And, 400-500hp is a much more reasonable goal for 99.9% of single turbo 13b builds.
Best of luck with everyone's respective automobiles and builds, whatever the power level or intention.
Yes, I bought this motor from Sean/Socks who did on occasion take the car to the 1/8th mile. When he did so, he drove it there on street tires, and his slicks in the hatch. He'd swap tires at the track, drag race, then swap tires put the slicks back in the hatch and then drive the car 45 minutes home. Drove it to work, drag strip, cars and coffee, or wherever...because its a STREET CAR.
Car doesn't run a full time hood dump. I have a full 4" that I welded myself with two mufflers. The hood dump is something I can just slap on whenever I want to offend people like you. I built it, drive it, pay for it, and tune it myself so your opinion on what it is or isn't is irrelevant.
We can stay on point and drop the name calling and insults and get back to the focus of the thread or I can close the thread and we can all be done with this discussion.
Well, let me show you another turbo vs. ROOTS compressor boost curve:
There's a difference between a ROOTS and a SCREW style supercharger. You're entirely correct that a CENTRIFUGAL supercharger also has a PROGRESSIVE BOOST CURVE, which is the entire reasoning behind my portion of this discussion. We're not talking about supercharging, we're talking about building in a progressive boost curve to make your engine LAST LONGER ON THE STREET AT HIGHER POWER LEVELS.
You understand 'progressive', so understand that you can make 700whp safely on a motor if it's above a certain RPM threshold and you sure as **** aren't running some garbage ECU.
It's not like you'll ever get there, Narfle. You won't even modify your car, so what experience do you have?
Oh, this thread is absolutely over with, just close it. The OP asked a dumb question pointing to CHEAP + FAST, and our answers are all either spend more money to make it reliable or your goals are unreasonable for the usage of the vehicle.
It's not like you'll ever get there, Narfle. You won't even modify your car, so what experience do you have?
You gotta stop making blind assertions. It belies your youth and maturity. And, it damages your credibility. You haven't been right about me yet.
When you two are busy being enthusiasts and sharing your experience, you're great. When you're pretending to be experts and disrespecting the rotary community and establishment that made you possible, you're both awful and unwelcome. And, trust me when I say I speak for the people who matter. The racers and vendors that are actually advancing the technology and community blow you two out of the water. It's not close. It's not even a valid comparison.
I'm just a bored-assed engineer on his 3rd FD with 15+ years of (mostly vicarious) experience, who's been obsessing over all things rotary and reading every page of this and other rotary communities. Think of me as Quality Assurance. I've seen enough bullshit to pick it off the assembly line.
Your Resident ******* in Chief,
Narfle
P.S. I've grown to appreciate the stock car, Mazda engineering, and not having to evade CARB. Molesting my previously-one-owner car would be borderline sac-religious. It would be like looking at the Mona Lisa and thinking "Da Vinci, what a hack!" If I wasn't busy spending what is apparently a reasonable 700hp build budget on my child's education every year, maybe I'd buy a beater FD to screw around with. One day you'll understand.
This is the olive branch. If you can't take it, I'm coming back with the hammer.
12-20-18, 06:51 PM
