superdan50

iTrader: (3)

i dont mean to start a war, but in my initial statement i said "i am sure there are rules in place." often times the races would be a 4 cyl shoot out, same with v8 (or however many cylinders pertain to a particular race).

and what exotics on youtube have a 2.4L V8 (only thing i can think of is the aerial atom (sp?))? all the other low displacement, high rev, mutli cyl engines are are in f1 cars.

and i have not been to a track in an actual important race so i am not overly familiar with the specific rules, but i would have to guess that the K24 vs. 2.4L V8 is a highly unlikely situation.

i do very much agree with "it's a massive up yours to high society..."

gio64

iTrader: (1)

There is no flaming to start. You have stated that the displacement of each engine is 2.4. There is no difference in either engine.
One is capable of producing more work (HP) than the other because of many factors, however the most generic and clearest one being that it can produce more firing strokes in a minute than the other.

What you (at least in my eyes) don't seem to understand is that power production at higher rpms in an engine does not generate a displacement increase. This would be simply imply that when I am driving my Mazda 3 and the engine is spinning at 2K, the displacement is x litres, but if I stomp on the throttle and reach 4K, the displacement of my engine has magically become 2x.

I believe that there is some confusion here between the fact that one engine can, within a certain amount of time, displace more volume than another, while they both have the same nominal displacement.
You have to keep clear that displacement is not, in any engine, measured over time, but it is a volumetric measurement of a part (a hollow) of the engine itself (or several hollows, when the combustion chambers are many). The order, speed, sequence and what have ya in which all those hollows get filled with air/gas does not take part in measuring the said engine's displacement.

gio64

iTrader: (1)

Regarding to the "up yours", I would have to disagree.
Given the technology available today, anybody can get anything to run quicker than anything else.
Like we said, it's about how much money you are able/willing to spend doing that.
If you drive a Civic, you drive a civic. If you drive a Ferrari, you drive a Ferrari. You can put 15 turbos in the Civic and be going faster than the Ferrari. By the time you're done, you'll be out of 100K anyway, but the guy with the Ferrari will enjoy reliability and the pleasure that comes from driving something so exclusive that whenever one goes by, everybody still turns around.
You'll still be fixing this and that, all the time, just like you hear in this forum all the time: "I make 600 HP and I just blew an apex seal. time to go v8"... Then it'll be the v8 powered car to start having problems because of this screw or that nut.
If it were possible to build an amazing car in your garage, there would be many more shady tree companies making a killing out there.

Always remember: you get what you pay for. Everyone here agrees with this when it comes to buying parts. Let it also apply to buying cars.
Cheers

superdan50

iTrader: (3)

@gio64

my statement was based on a K24 vs a 2.4L V8 like had posted. not a K24 vs. a higher revving K24. (go back and check i didnt alter his post for my quote.) That being said there is absolutely a difference. there is too much mass in each piston and rod for the strength of the connecting parts to be able to spin at 18000 rpm without failure. the reason a 2.4L V8 can spin that fast is reducing the mass of the piston creates a substantial amount less strain on the rods, bolts, etc.

and i never said the increased engine speed increases displacement. im not sure what you misread but if you could quote it so i can clarify if necessary, i would be more than happy to.

superdan50

iTrader: (3)

i think a lot of the "up yours" notion is a lot less monetarily based and lot more ur a ricer blah, blah, blah. i have a 7L V8 so im better, kind of idea. it will always be a car war, different people like different things and everyone is always trying to prove something.

Chuck Norris FB

I knew you were gonna chime in again about what i said. V8 or I4 i clearly stated that they where both 2.4L the only difference is h.p at max rpm. hence the reason i restated the same example but both are K24 engine's. Keep in mind that the K24 with 380+ h.p @ 9,500 is NOT STOCK.....With that said,Weather or not you believe it. it is possible to make a 2.4L four cylinder engine generate the same amount of horse power and rpm as an F1 engine with the mods as you stated. but you completely forgot that F1 engine's generate that high H.P and high RPM's is because of there big Bore and very short stroke.



"and i never said the increased engine speed increases displacement. im not sure what you misread but if you could quote it so i can clarify if necessary, i would be more than happy to."

Ummm??? GIO64 is referring to me, Not you superdan50.

Chuck Norris FB

I some what agree with that statement. I think the car war's has to do with N/A or Force induction?


Here's a quick example of a up yours to high society...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Orje0u-lDc

Chuck Norris FB

With a sarcastic Voice,of course ferraris turns head's but i'm more of an Rx-7 Guy....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eIIKKwjV0A&feature=fvw


"the Ferrari will enjoy reliability and the pleasure that comes from driving something so exclusive"

Exclusive? Agreed.. Reliable? Nonsense it's deal's with the same issues as any engine does no matter how expensive and Exclusive it may seem.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgkCT...eature=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4S3rF...eature=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUn0Vp5UVhE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9v94T7OHhQ0

gio64

iTrader: (1)

Once again, you have clearly stated what the displacement of each of those two engines is: 2.4.

Like I said, there is no flaming to start, each of those engines' displacement is 2.4 L.

If there is some subtlety about your question that I cannot grasp, please illuminate me.

Just to get back to my statement, I was using my Mazda 3 rpms example because (like I stated -in my opinion-) you seem to imply that since the F1 style (or F1) engine that can perform 18K revs per minute is supposedly a higher displacement than the one that can only perform 9.5K because it can crank out twice as much power as the "miserable" I4.
From there, I proceeded to repeat that displacement is a static measurement that does not involve any considerations of time/distance.
In terms of attempting to establish an equivalency, such other elements might be taken in consideration in different racing disciplines. However, this does not have anything to do with engine displacement, but rather with the attempt to establish some comparison with the intent of allowing each and everyone to compete on a common and fair ground.

Even in the N/A vs Turbo comparison, when it comes to racing regulations, while there are several ways of evaluating and limiting turbo engines with the purpose of putting them on a levelled playing field with N/A engines, there is no reference to displacement. However, in this specific case, you could say that the concept of displacement is question more than in any other.

As a matter of fact, a 2.4 L turbo (just for an example) will displace more than 2.4 L of mix and the higher the boost, the higher will the displaced amount of air be, even though, the actual "technical" displacement will remain the same.

Awaiting for clarifications

PS, I was referring to Chuck Norris when I talked about my Mazda 3

gio64

iTrader: (1)

Look, I won't go down the path of "hey, look, a broken Ferrari" which ends up on youtube as opposed to a video of a blown RX7 or a Civic, for obvious reasons.

I have a very close friend who works in Maranello and of all the engineering and quality control that goes in those cars you'll find about 30% in any much cheaper car, which is cheaper for that very reason.

There seems to be a current of thought according to which it doesn't matter what you buy, they're all the same, they all break and so forth.
Like I said before, you get what you pay for.

And just like that Del Sol with 100K invested can take a Ferrari, my student's Neon can pulverize a Corvette. But at the end of the day, the Del Sol is still a Del Sol and will still break 100 times more frequently and disastrously than the Ferrari, just as well as the Neon will as opposed to the Corvette. I just met a guy who used to own a 400 HP civic hatchback. He said that it was either breaking or sitting broken more often than cruising. He also told me what it cost to take it there and how much he cared for it and loved it. But that's the way those things go.
Deep inside, each one of us has this certainty that we can do as good a job as they do in Stuttgart spending billions in research and development and drawing from 50 years of racing experience, by buying some parts on the internet and getting the RX7 guru nearby to look after it.
I wish it were true.

That aside, I love my RX7 so much that I wouldn't change it with any other car. But between loving it, appreciating it, being able to see its greatness and incredible beauty (which, BTW, no Ferraris, Lamborghinis or Bugattis have matched in the last 15 years) and not being able to see why it cost me 16K instead of 160K, there is quite a bit of an ocean

But she's still the hottest girl in town, hands down

shm21284

You don't want to know what they say, the math will make you sick. I have a book written by Mr. Yamamoto; the math comes from the great Felix Wankel.

The question was originally, "how is displacement measured"

Its simple, really. You measure it by filling the working chamber up with water when its at BDC, then spin it to TDC, capture the water through the spark plug holes, and measure the volume of water captured either by measuring weight and dividing by density or using a graduated cylinder to directly measure volume.

I think a more appropriate question is "how is rotary displacement calculated?"

Without going through the mathematic proof, its not too bad:

Total engine displacement = (# of rotors)*3*sqrt(3)*R*e*b

where

R = Generating Radius = 105.0 mm
e = Eccentricity = 15.0 mm
b = Rotor Width = 80.0 mm for 13B/20B and 70.0 mm for 12A

note sqrt(3) = square root of 3

13B engine displacement = 2*3*sqrt(3)*105*15*80 = 1309430 mm^3 = 1309.43 cm^3 also known as cc

69trgt6

This whole thing kind of makes me laugh because my brother and I were just talking about it yesterday, then he finds this and sends it to me... very coincidental...

I come from a piston backround, mostly '60 vintage cars, thanks to my father... I got the turbo bug with the Buick Grand Nationals, and started learning about rotary engine to help my brother with his car... I used to think that rotary engines were not properly rated because I always forgot to take into consideration the internal gearing between the eccentric shaft and the rotor. I mistakenly thought that each rotor had 3 power strokes per revolution of the engine, when infact each rotor only has 1 power stroke per revolution... So, it really is ~1300cc engine, although, a 2.4L 4 cylinder engine has 2 power strokes per revolution... I kinda think that the piston engines are kinda wrong in specifying their displacement... It would be more comparable to rate displacement on a per revolution basis... but who am I to challenge the industry...

I also read the threads that were linked to in this thread and really started realizing the simple truth about displacement... Who really cares? It doesn't really matter... The only people that challenge displacement are the sore losers in a race or a "My car has X hp" battles...

Liborek

Not exactly when some people argue that, for example renesis has 177 HP/L(miracle isn´t it....must be super efficient) yet, BMEP and BSFC doesn´t quite matching...
It would be shame to admit they have only 88 HP/L...
Every positive displacement engine is airpump, nothing more, nothing less. And fact is that 13B is breathing same as 1,3 2-stroke and 2,6 4-stroke(same Revs, VE%). When it comes to converting air and fuel to usable power, its a bit different(simple say, rotary from same amount of air/fuel will never put as much BMEP/torque/power as 4-stroke, even 2-stroke).

superdan50

iTrader: (3)

of coarse im going to "chime in" its my thread.

that being said you need to clarify what youre saying.

a K24 is not a 2.4L V8, K is a (Honda) block and as you know 24=2.4L so it is a K series block with 2.4L displacement.

so as a have said 2 times now the reason an f1 car would not race a K24 (generally a civic) is obvious, they are completely different worlds. just like i will never be in a foot race against a Olympic runner.
each race has a group of vehicles that can race. a V8 (of any displacement) could not be allowed in a 4 cyl shoot out, just like a turboed K24 wouldnt be allowed in a V8 race. if you have a turboed 4 cyl that makes the same power as a n/a V8 still wouldnt race. its all based on classes.

in the highly unlikely chance that a civic did race a F1 car it would no doubt be a time trial against yourself.

superdan50

iTrader: (3)

gio, i dont think that a Ferrari owner buys one solely for the performance. you could buy a much lesser car and swap a larger engine and run low level boost and beat a Ferrari and it would still be reliable. meaning spending $50K more doesnt necessarily buy more reliability, it buys a name.

you can buy a Z06 for $100K less than a ferrari 360 and will be just as reliable an run all over the ferrari.

RTRx7

iTrader: (2)

How is this even an argument?

Engine displacement is found by a complex formula involving the bore, stroke, and the number of cylinders. If you have a 2.4l engine, the displacement is 2.4l. If I have a dodge 2500 with a 6.0l six cylinder diesel, it has the same displacement as the 6.0l chevrolet v8s.

The problem is that you are using the measure of displacement in your figuring of the engines displacement.

If you take the 2.4l v8 and the 2.4l I4 they will both have the same volume displaced after the pistons move from top to bottom dead center. The difference is the size of the cylinders. In most cases these 4.0l v12s or 2.4l v8s are the high revving engines you speak of but they have the same displacement as the common k24 or ka24de.

ronbros3

I might as well chime in, seein how this thing is gettin stupid.

scenario; we take a 2.4L V8, F1,, and a 2.4L I4 turbo diesel, put in two separate trucks, dually 6000lbs.
which one would most usable, thats as silly as putin a 2.4L I4 diesel in a F1 car.

i guess its gives you guys somthing to do!

RTRx7

iTrader: (2)

I guess if your purpose with this post was to add to the stupidity and show what a grammatically retarded post looks like, you did a great job.

rotory26

iTrader: (2)

Ok the rota chamber displacement is 654cc or 0.65. I think is measurement is at 9.0/1 comp at a gess. Now we have the Rotas machined down to 7.9/1 comp. What would the sweped volume be now.