Maestro

about $2,000 NZ only $1000 US

Maestro

No 654cc x 4 (2616cc)

No it can't !

stinkfist

It will be built. I'm not actually using a Cobra Motor. Starting with a 93-98 Lincoln Mark 8 aluminum Block (same as 96-98 cobra). Adding some 99+ Lincoln navigator Tumble port DOHC heads (With some Port work). Using a Forged Crank, Forged Manley H-beam rods, and Forged pistons.

The motor will be Completely preped by me and i will do most of the blue printing. What I don't have the tools for i'm going to send out to a machine shop. I'll Run around 8.7:1 compression for saftey.

I'm Not sure what turbo's I'm going to use yet. Mounting all of this in a FD chassis is going to be tricky. I don't even Have an FD yet so I'm still not certin how all of this is going to work out.

But If it can fit, I will do it. It should be a sick driver.

Mike

Cobalt

The DOHC 4.6 is VERY wide. It's bigger than most big blocks in actual size. You may want to do some research on how many people have been able to drop in big blocks.

stinkfist

Yeah, I've been told that it won't fit by a few different people. But I havn't seen where anybody has actually tried anything other than LS1's.

When I think of possable ways to make it fit, the 69/70 Boss 429 comes to mind .
If it won't fit I may just build a 99+ mustang for the project. My problem with that is I want something light weight (less than 2900 lbs) and that handles very well. I Know I could get the mustang to handle well And I'm Sure I could get the weight out but I want this thing to be in full street trim as well.

I almost bought a 2000 Gt 3 days ago but it didn't work out. We'll see what happens. I really hope I can make the FD chassis Work.

Before I buy an FD chassis, I'm going to try to find some one with a FD that has no motor in it (shouldn't be too hard) and take a lot of measurements. I'll Build a mock up engine bay out of card board to see what I have to work with.

Mike

Mizeru

iTrader: (2)

I refer to the "rotary displacement" thread.

Cobalt

Honestly I'm a Ford guy but there is nothing wrong with a LS1. It is really the best choice for a RX7 implant. It's super light, and super super compact. I crack up when i look at LS1's because they look like a fat 4 cyl because they’re so compact and short. Amazing engine by GM. I have to give props where props are due.

Compared to my beloved 4.6 DOHC motor.

Maestro

What you smoking the 'true' displacement of a rotary is 1308cc

You can add what ever factors you like to it. like FIA Regs and power strokes etc etc.

Bottom line is it is 654cc x 4. You want a calculator ????

stinkfist

Would you happen to Know the weight of the LS1 and the Aluminum DOHC 4.6? I havn't seen any hard numbers.

I know the LS! is a great motor but Like You, I am a Ford guy at heart. Plus I like the DOHC. I also just want something a little different. It seems like almost every engine swap these days are LS1's Not to mention the 4.6 is so much better looking than the LS1 IMHO (I love those Huge Cam Covers!). Not that looks is what I'd choose a motor on but It doesn't hurt.

You may be right though. There is a significant difference in size. I just love that 4.6. That is my first choiice but I will keep an Open mind about the bow tie.

Mike

Mizeru

iTrader: (2)

http://rx7.com/techarticles_displacement.html

Saint

stinkfist, you will have a very hard time fitting the 4.6 DOHC motor into an FD without a lot of modification to the engine bay even without twin turbo's, but in an FC it could probably be possible to do, but still a lot of work to fit twin turbo's, might be easier just doing single turbo to save space for either

if you do happen to wedge one into an FD tho, definetly get lots of pictures cause it will be one badass machine!

usmcjsy

iTrader: (1)

LOL all those motors suck, stick with the rotary. I have said it before and I will say it again the fastest RX7s are still rotary powered. Show me a V8 RX7 that beats siguels 6 second or a street V8 RX7 thats faster than even Rotary Performances FD. Hell there is now 9 second NA RX7s. Plus people on here have done the V8 thing and ended up hating and trying to sell it and they could barely give em away. Go look in the FS section. If you dont want a rotary I suggest you think about a Mercury Outboard! LOL

stinkfist

All the fastest RX-7's maybe rotary powered but all the fastest cars, boats, motorcycles, sand rails, carts, trucks, lawnmowers, and go karts are piston powered.

Maestro

Actually the fastest Cars, boats, rails, bike and trucks etc are jet powered.

Jet engines spins in a rotary type function and are closer to Rotary engines than piston engines wouldn't you agree.

Also the fastest Go Karts are electric Go-Karts they do 0-100 faster than there piston powered friends. They use a rotary type electric motor.

However the fastest Go-Kart in the world is the 13B Turbo Powered Go-Kart with around 400+hp

Muhahahaha

And at the end of the Day. Why are rotaries banned or restricted in every form of motorsport. Because they are simply better at producing power than a piston. Bottom line !

jimlab

stinkfist

What jet powered car can Beat Michael Schumacher around any Road coarse?

What jet powered car can Do 0-100-0 in 4 seconds?

How many Jet powered Bikes winning AMA?

Which Jet powered truck was it that won the Baja?

What jet powered car can run the 1/4 mile in 4.4 seconds?

When was the last time you saw a Jet powered vehicle other than a plane turn a corner?

Yes Jet powered cars have tha fastest top speed records. Thats about it though.


I would not say they are closer than piston engines because the rotary, and turbine engine share almost nothing in common other than the fact that neither are reciprocating engines..


They are banned from most major racing sanctioning bodies because of politics. I don't agree with this myself. I love mazda and thier racing heritige. I belive the other cars should be made to catch up rather than restricting the rotary.


Better? Doubtful. Different? Yes.

usmcjsy

iTrader: (1)

I would agree per cube and per dollar the rotary is tough to beat in HP per CI. Also if he had another car other than the RX7 I would say slap a V8 in it. I feel the RX7 is the RX7 because of the rotary. As far as Jet vs Piston look at fighter planes. Show me a piston motor that can break mach 1 or 2. In top fuel yes SO FAR the pistons have the advantage, in street cars I beg to differ. In the air I beg to differ. So unless your running top fuel, run the rotary. After all thats what makes our cars so different.

Cobalt

They can’t break the sound barrier with a piston/prop engine because of the physics of it. From what I understand the physics of the prop prevent it to break the barrier. It’s not that they can’t make it powerful enough, it’s that they have to get around the physics of it. I laugh at the rotary guys trying to use jet engines as an example of a rotary. The jet engine only uses a fan in a circular motion. Has absolutely nothing that’s even CLOSE to the rotaries we all discuss on this board. Besides Scramjets are the future in flight.
As far as street cars,,,,sorry the top 100 fastest street cars are faster than the fastest street rotary. You start running that much hp in that small of CID and you run into huge heat problems etc. Look at the Biscayne by Rad Rides by Troy. Something like 1200 hp? And totally streetable, from what’s been written that’s not on a high boost level and that they could get another 300hp out of it and still run it on the street with no problem. Piston engines pollute less, are better on mileage, are in all honestly longer lasting, easier to tune, etc.
http://www.shineaward.com/2002/1962_Chevy_WhyItWon.html

usmcjsy

iTrader: (1)

Um my response was not trying to compare a Jet engine to a rotary it was in retaliation to the jackasses who were pitting piston engines against jet engines. I was just proving there is places like the air that the piston engine easily falls short. I was a Marine aviation mechanic I worked a lot with the F18 hornets I really do not need any correction from you.
Second you maybe right on your 100 street cars but non of those are RX7s with a piston motor. That was my whole point to start with. So go build a faster RX7 thats faster than the fastest street or pro RX7 with a piston motor. This is your chance to be a first cobalt. Oh ya is there any 1.3 liter N/A piston engines running 9s...? Also cobalt maybe you need to trade your 7 in for a Camaro. Since the rotary is so hard to tune for ya.

stinkfist

Me? Jackass? Well your a big jerk head!

See I can call names too

**** off.

Sincerely,
MIke

jimlab

A) The rotary's displacement has to be doubled before you can compare it to a 4-stroke piston engine.
B) Horsepower per cubic inch or liter doesn't win races. It's a meaningless statistic.

Mizeru

iTrader: (2)

First off... ENGINES don't run quarter miles, CARS run quarter miles. Those "9 second" rotary cars are clearly lightened...it's not the engine doing all the work.

Second... Take any of your amazingly fast street sevens and put a V8 of equal dollar worth in it (better include turbos, ECMs, intercoolers, etc) and IT WILL BE FASTER.

Third... what is the fastest "street 7" ET, I'm curious

usmcjsy

iTrader: (1)

Correction go check out the latest Car and Driver, there is twin turbo vettes and twin turbo vipers in there. The best was a viper running a 11 second 1/4 mile. The rotary performance FD is in full street trim running 9s. Plus I am sure the Rotary performance RX did not cost damn near $200,000. Also be sure and call Mazda and let em know they miscalculated the displacement of there motors. Also consider the time the piston engine has been around and had time to be developed my countless manufacturers. Sorry but everyone considers the rotary a 1.3 liter, not a 2.6 liter. If you want 2.6 liters you need a 4 rotor. In my FSM it say my motor is 80 CI or 1.3 liters. In all the magazines and it says the motor is 1.3 liters. So go get a stripped down metro and run a 9 second 1/4 mile. Also dont worry rotary performance has a new car in the making just go check out there website. I am gonna listen to Mazda and the FSM on what displacment my motor is instead of a rotary hater in the RX forums.
Honestly on the street RX7 the fastest "I" know of is rotary performances car. I believe they managed a best of like 9.45 but cannot be 100% sure if not it was a 9.6 Also if you could make the RX7 faster with a V8 for the same dollar amount why does'nt someone just do that? So far no one has so its still a theory as far as that argument goes. I look at the twin turbo vettes and twin turbo vipers and they cant seem to do it. I saw the car and driver episode last weeknd on spike tv.

jimlab

Do you consider slicks to be "full street trim"?

Most governing bodies in racing consider the 1.3 liter rotary to be 2.6 liters. Mazda calculates their displacement based on a single rotation of the eccentric shaft. 4-stroke piston engines on the other hand, are rated on two rotations of the crankshaft. Figure it out.

Blah blah blah. All you're telling me is that just in case you're wrong, you'd like to make a few excuses for the rotary while you're at it.

With a 2.6 liter engine and 25+ psi of boost? No problem.

No thanks.

Your choice to remain ignorant doesn't bother me. Suit yourself.

It's obvious you don't get out too often. Here's an MTI Z07 Corvette in "full street trim" without turbos...
http://www.z06vette.com/media/mtiz06.mpeg

usmcjsy

iTrader: (1)

Well that sounds like the piston motors problem that it has to make 2 revoulutions to come up with 1 power stroke. Well instead if doubling the rotarys displacment maybe you should cut the pistons displament in 1/2 since it is not as efficent. We can go all day back and fourth digging sh*t up to out do the other on oh ya well look at his car and that car. Besides I have not even dug into 3 or 4 rotor cars yet. Lets punish the rotary because of its design and say its a 2.6 liter. The displacment is what it is. Thats the motors strongest point and you wanna rob it of that. Also Rotary Performances RX7 did 10.1 on street tires. Also this car is still probabably cheaper than a Z06. Also nobody is telling these guys with the turbo charged vipers and vettes that they can't run 25+ psi of boost. If they can get away with it, they should do it. Also look at price tags of these cars. I have seen a lot of RX7s with the classic V8 swap haunting the pages of Auto Trader for months because no one wants em. So ya go ahead hack on the ol rotary. I will never put a piston engine in my RX7. So Jimlab can we set you up a date at the strip with the Rotary Performance street car? I dont know if any of you have know or not but Rotary Performance is building a car in Hiroshima and I am guessing this time we will be looking at more than 2 rotors. Remember there are N/A rotarys pushing 9s. At my local track I dont see to many V8s even doing that. The track I race at is Interstate Dragways. www.Interstatedragways.com. Well I am not gonna sit here and argue back and forth because its pointless. You can find a car and I will find one to beat it, then you will dig one up to beat mine and so on. Once again its not the rotary engines fault the piston motor needs to make 2 rotations to its 1. If the rotary can has a power stroke every revolution so be it, it is still 1.3 liters. Also I guess Lingenfelter was a complete idiot since this car you dug up was supposidly quicker than his twin turbo vette. Sounds to me like you are the ingnorant one. Here is ignorance the swept voulme is 1.3 liters but since it has the advantage of a power stroke every revolution lets say its a 2.6 liter. When the measurment of displacment is taken it is still 1.3 liters. You may be correct in saying that it is equal to 2.6 liter piston engine in output do to the deisgn but it is and always will be 1.3 liters unless you talking a 12A or 20B