7to6

I truly love my car enough to "waste" all this money on it so its worth it to me. Anyways when I am done it will beat most cars that people payed two to three times more money than I will have. Rotaries are the best.

RX-Ben

I'm not one to speak about dropping money into cars, but comparing the cost I pay to get a reliable 475 whp, and your price to get 475 whp...hmm...makes me wonder what inspires such blind devotion to Mr. Wankel.

Ben

owen is fat

I dunno either, plus I cannot stress enough how BLIND your devotion is nowadays... LS1 swaps are SO simple, I cant believe anyone ponders a 20b swap anymore, its fine if you get a 20b for free I guess, but otherwise there's no sense in it at all. Yes I do understand picking a path and following it, but like all great things there is a realization along the way that there is a better or cheaper or faster way to make it come to fruition.

lol, I dont believe the "ultimate FC" could have anything other than an LS1 motor in it.... well, maybe the new 7.0 liter corvette c6 z06 motor would be ok.

Black91n/a

owen is fat: Alot of us here on the RX-7 forum would think that your devotion is blind. Simply put, pushrods are an outdated technology from the stone age that has no business being in a modern high performance engine. They drastically increase valvetrain inertia, limiting the redline. Any modern high performance engine really should have overhead cams. Also 2 valves per cylinder?! Come on, that's old technology too, 4 valves are the way to ge to get decesnt power. The big american V-8's just aren't as good as you think they are. They have lousy volumetric efficiency. If you gave a Japanese or European engineer 5.7 litres to play with they'd have come up with a damn sight more than 400hp (Corvette). And the Viper V-10 makes what 500hp, out of 8.3 litres in the SRT-10. There are several Japanese and European engines that make more than 100hp per litre on pump gas, it's not impossible. Now if the 5.7 made 500 or more, and the 8.3 made 700 or more, that'd be repectable. "There 'ain't no replacement for displacement", well that's only partially true, you can get 240 hp out of a 2.0 (S2000), or you can get the same from a huge (7+litre) V-8 from the 70's.

One of the most addicting things about the rotory is it's ability to rev and their smoothness. I love reving mine to 8000rpm. Can you do that with your V-8? Didn't think so. Also there's no way it'll be as smooth as a rotory at a given rpm.

All that being said I still have great respect for the Corvette and the Viper and I'd love to be able to take them out on the track, but given the choice, I'd rather have a 20B RX-7.

Well that's my rant for today.

gnx7

iTrader: (10)

Black 91 n/a. This difference in paths to reach a similar power output could be argued for days.

I think an all aluminum V8 where you can add $125 rod bolts to allow it rev to 7,000rpm to a factory shortblock isn't old tech. Factory composite intake manifolds.... major refinement of cylinder head port shapes/flow, bolt ons that yield n/a 400rwhp+ with a stock longblock (cam change only).

Built up the LS1 with a good crank/rods/pistons and you can rev it to 8500rpm. There is a stock crank/block LS1 with good rods/pistons making over 1,000rwhp and he shifts at close to 8,000rpm. 3400lb drag car that has gone low 8's@over 170mph.

Do you want a rev monster... or one that actually hauls ***? Torque talks and when an LS1 with only a cam/LT headers can make 300rwtq at just over 2,000rpm, 350rwtq at 3,000rpm and it climbs to over 390rwtq+ at 5250rpm that should be enuf said (HP peaking at 400rwhp+). Add some ported heads and you can add 50rwhp+ and additional torque.

I agree 4 valve technology is better.... but it is also pricey as hell, makes for a wider engine package, more weight, and more camshafts to buy with other exotic parts. Way too much $$$.

As for the reliability argument..... I have a friend with a 20B FD that has blown it up twice and this is under normal driving conditions... not racing. Another friend that blew up his 13B 2x (with under 2K miles on each of them) as well and it was built by a top rotary specialist and tuned by one of the best in the country.

I like rotaries also... but until they can match the torque/reliability of a V8 there is no comparison... and bang for the buck the V8 wins.

$3K Vmount intercooler.... you guys must be smoking some good sh*t. I wouldn't pay that when that core can be probably bought for $500 and then the rest fabbed up.

Different strokes for different folks... I know this is a rotary forum.... but they aren't the beat all, end all, baddest of the bad motors out there. There is always something that is better whether you are comparing rotary to piston or vice versa. They both have their strong points.

It is all ego and how much people have to spend when choosing the car/powerplant anyway. You can reach similar goals in many forms for all sorts of $$$$. Some of us choose the cheaper way that is different in the sense that we too are hot rodders just like you rotary guys building powerful turbo 13B/20B setups. Do you think JimLab is happy with his now outdated stroker LT1 project.... when he could have a 440+ci all aluminum LSx based engine making 600rwhp+ n/a.

-GNX7

Black91n/a

To each their own, hell some people like front wheel drive and think that Civics are sports cars!

RX-Ben

I used to think pushrods were low tech, and therefore bad. But what exactly is low tech? Is it heavy, slow, unreliable? What if low tech were relatively light, with a huge powerband, was cheap, and reliable? What if "high tech" meant a huge increase in the amount of moving parts, increased mass, higher center of gravity, more complicated, and most importantly, much more expensive??
A BMW M5 V10 engine is a generally considered an engineering marvel. It has every bell and whistle available, from variable valve events to varying intake track, to ITBs, etc. But what does it put out? 500 hp at the flywheel, and you need to spin high to get that. What does a low tech aluminum block pushrod V8, in a small package size, put out at literally a small fraction of the BMW's price? Anywhere from 500-550+ flywheel hp with a head/cam swap in a bone stock LS1 to 650+hp in 427 form. These are streetable engines with good manners.
Call it "low tech" or whatever you want. But dismissing somethat is cheaper, light, less complicated, and puts out tons of power is a big mistake. I have yet to come across an engine that can beat the LS1 from a performance/weight/price/reliability standpoint. Toss one of these in an FC or FD and you instantly have a supercar with 50/50 distribution.

What are you really after? When you have a slower car and an empty bank account...does it really matter if your slower car is considered "high tech" or can spin to 9000 rpm?


Ben

owen is fat

right on Ben...

and to Black91n/a -
I have no devotion to either motor design, so I am not the blind one. I dont care how it makes power but I need the power and I dont want to spend a load of money on it. now that all-aluminumn V8's are a dime a dozen (cheap) AND with incredibly modern designs from the factory AND with bulletproof 6 speed transmissions that fit in a FC tranny tunnel.. the choice to go LS1 for power is obvious. its not like I bolted in an iron block, 3 speed automatic big block and try to go autocrossing... Ive got a wicked lightweight engine for its size and power rating, huge power off the showroom floor for a V8 engine that fits without hacking the chassis and the entire car when complete is even more capable than I could have imagined for autox. I am not blind, Ive driven rotary rx7's, v8rx7, swapped civics, turbo civics, s2000's, big block chevy's, etc, Ive been around and seen a lot, so I dont have a pre-disposition to like any certain setup... its the end result that I am after... one sick car. if I need to hybridize it to get there, I'll do it and actually, I did, by myself and it rules.

your arguments about pushrods, valves and efficiency can be great on paper for beancounters but in the real world where I drive and live, the LS1 motor iis wonderful, I think you are against it for reasons I cant understand, not to come off as a dick but possibly you are into number crunching instead of actual real world performance.

dont even go into the displacement argument since most rx7 guys drool over a 3 rotor setup, why? more displacement... duh.

hi revving is fun but its not required to have fun... I dont understand why you think the LS1 is not as smooth at 6000 rpm as your rotary is at 8000 rpm.
I loved revving my built Honda 1.8L GSR motor to 9500 rpm in its 2000 pound hatchback shell and I loved the silky smooth Honda LSD transmission too. But after driving my buddy's S2000 in a few autox's, I realized that you really need rwd to USE power above 200hp and to seriously enjoy autox (unless I was gonna build a non streetable fwd'er under 1800 pounds). Ive compared the options out there and for the price, you cannot beat the FC chassis with a 340hp/350tq LS1 engine in it. you just cant beat it for the low cost of the swap.

I'm surprised there aren't shitloads of them in every city by now, but I think over this winter and next summer there will be dozens more everywhere... if you only knew how many emails and PM's I get every week from people, young and old, asking me about my LS1FC and asking me to check their cost spreadsheets for corrections, you rotary-***** would **** in your pants. The LS1FC hybrid age might have just begun... you remember how crazy the import world went a few years ago with a jdm honda hype motor swap frenzy, it got huge, well, I think the LS1FC craziness is about to start up.

I'm glad you have respect for the Corvette and we all know it has serious performance out of the box (the Z06 model of course). Ya know, until you drive a LS1FC, that has the exact suspension/chassis set up the way YOU would want the car set up, dont hate them, because you might have your world turned upside down some day... just like mine was.

DamonB

Here, let me show you a stone age engine full of valves, cams, pushrods, pistons and connecting rods that weighs about the same, makes more power, gets better gas mileage while doing it and is much more difficult to turn into shrapnel.

People can't see the forest for the trees. Rotor heads get too caught up in "It's only get 3 moving parts! It's smooth! It revs high! It's small! etc etc etc". What counts is how hard it will twist the axles. 3 moving parts isn't such a big deal when the engines constantly fail anyway. How about "Hey, it's only got 3 moving parts and at any given time 2 of them are trying to explode!"

Great. You can pat yourself on the back about that while choking on the v8 car's dust. Then you can tell everyone "It's not how fast you go, it's how smoothly you get there!" You cannot dispute the fact that the modern v8's make more power more fuel efficiently and are more reliable while doing it.

I still love my twin turbo rotary but I don't let that blind me to reality. Seems like in order to be a true rotor head you must wear blinders and ignore all sound logic. Enthusiasm is great and doesn't need justification. It's only when you try to justify rotary enthusiasm with it's "increased" performance over pistons that it starts to sound dopey.

Carl Byck

O'k, now you crossed the line Bring your ultimate FC, and I'll bring mine Time, and place??? I'll need a couple months as I just popped my motor on the way to the grocery store(JK). Anyway, Ultimately, Everyone should build what they want, it's their money. If however you come on a forum askuing for opinions, you'll most likely get some. BTW anyone AX'ing at JGTC on Saturday? I'll be there showing y'all what a 3700lb stock turbo'd Supra on street tires can do Hope to see you there, Carl

owen is fat

heh heh... Carl, too funny.

hey if I had a widebody setup in my budget then I'd LOVE to have a go at a real autox and track lap-time comparo between our cars, that would be cool as hell. Even on 285 rears and 245 fronts I'd be willing to autocross with you if we could run the same model tire, it'd be a good comparo but you're more setup for roadracing correct? I guess you gotta bug Rx-Ben to finish his LS1 widebody FC, then you'll have a run for your money on track. Ha, of course if you called me and soloracer out... then we'd finally have the push we need to buy a Tripoint replica widebody and some fat *** CCW wheels!

Carl Byck

Actually Mark GNX7 will be fielding an LS1 FD by mid year, that will have to do for now. then there's Dave, and his 20B widebody FC. Plenty of fun I suppose if I pop my motor, I'll have to look at options. How hard is it to make ~450 with one of those?

RX-Ben

450rwhp is no problem with a just head/cam swap and longtube headers. If you won't be street driving the car you could get very close to 500rwhp with a more extreme cam and a great set of heads (AFR), and over 500 with better intake and TB (FAST 90mm, $1100 for the intake/TB).

You can spend money pretty quickly on V8s as well. It is relatively cheap to get to right around 450-500rwhp since you can utilize almost all of the stock parts. After that you start needing to upgrade basic systems to make more power: stroker crank and/or resleeve the block to larger bore, rods, pistons, intake manifold/TB.

However, an LS1 running at 500+ hp isn't a time bomb, basic reliability is still intact.

Ben

The countdown to JGTC begins...3 days!!!!

7to6

Everyone for the most part has made good points and arguements for both sides. I just really love the idea of putting a 20b into my car and as has been stated to each their own that is what makes the car world so great. Everyone would be driving around in the exact same car if people didnt have different tastes and goals for their cars.

jimlab

550+ RWHP N/A isn't enough?

The only way to avoid being outdated is never to start in the first place.

Black91n/a

I agree that the LS1 is a high tech engine, but they built it with a less than optimal configuration. It's sort of like a Porsche 911, on paper it would seem to be a bad idea, but it works really, really well. They worked around the problems to make something spectacular. I've seen several Corvettes (a couple were Z06's) on the track and they were amazingly fast, but the engineering is a little primitive (leaf springs for instance), but hey, it works. I'm an engineering student so I tend to like the setups that have a more elegant solution to a problem, not just a brut force solution (power by displacement, rather than higher tech).

I agree that the V-8's are more reliable, but they have the advantage that 99% of all cars are piston engined and piston engines have been around much longer, so there's infinitely more developpment money in them. They are also more fuel efficient, and make alot more torque, but they're also alot bigger, if you want to compare apples to apples then you need to compare a 2rotor to a ~2.5 litre 6 cylinder, not a 5.7+ litre 8 cylinder.

Hey I wouldn't mind having a LS1 RX-7, but I'd prefer to have an equally powerful rotory one. Why? I can't really say for sure, there are alot of reasons, like rarity, having it dofferent than more than 99% of all other engines, etc. I just love them.






Holy ****, look what I've started!

jimlab

Huh?

Um, OK.

Um, yeah.

Ignorance has that effect on this forum...

gnx7

iTrader: (10)

The 20B does sound like a Ferrari... the sound of my buddies is soooo intoxicating. Beautiful music from the tail pipe.

Jim- 550rwhp in any form is enuf... but for the $$$ you put in yours you could've had the baddest of the bad LSx based setups. I realize that as time goes on things continually get better with technology advancements and hindsight is always 20/20. Also you will have plenty of trouble putting that power to the ground anyway... Any more and it would be like ice skating (zero traction).

My LS1 engine kit is supposed to arrive tomorrow..... I can't wait.

-GNX7

owen is fat

heh heh, I'm surprised this thread is very mature in its content, I like it.
yeah once you get over 500 whp you will end up spending BIG money in the traction side of things... diff's, rear ends, widebody, monster wheels, etc.
Also, the key to getting around the unavoidable "outdating" of parts/setups is to get your setup done as quickly as possible! hurry up! that's exactly one of the reasons I decidied to use a stock LS1 and keep the bodywork stock... I put my project together in just a few months. I'm happy enough with the power from a stock LS1, the torque is ridiculous, even punching it at idle the car is silly fast.

So, to get back to the thread's initial purpose... Touge huh? that's canyon carving and road racing...right? I'd consider my LS1FC to be one hell of a Touge Demon!

Carl, good to hear youve got some playmates!

jimlab

True. The Motown blocks and LS1s in the 400+ CID range didn't exist when I started my engine build-up, and I didn't know that the LT1's front mount (Opti-spark) distributor wasn't going to work out. On the other hand, my engine sits lower and farther back in the car than an LS1, so there are some advantages, and my engine is about 45 lbs. lighter than the average LT1.

That's what the RaceLogic traction control system is for.

Congratulations! I've been quietly watching the progress on your car.

Black91n/a

What I meant by the 911 analogy is that pushrods and 2 valve heads aren't the best way to make a high performance engine, but they seemed to make it work fairly well. It's like the 911 in that on paper having the engine hanging out past the rear axle seems stupid, but they put lots of developpment onto it and it works well now.

jimlab

They aren't? Would you care to elaborate on that?

Black91n/a

To make power you need to be able to flow alot of air (that's why turbos and superchargers work). To this end the amount of air a valve cam flow is propotional to the "skirt area". This is basically the circumferance times the lift. With 2 valve heads you can have bigger valves, but with 4 valve heads you can get more skirt area, thus you can flow more air and make more power. Properly done a 2 valve head can flow quite well, but an equally well developped 4 valve head will flow more air. Secondly as I said before, pushrods add inertia to the valvetrain and to the engine in general. This means that it'll take more power to move the valvetrain, robbing acceleration power. It also means that your redline will be limited. You can get around this with stiffer valve springs, but that stresses the valvetrain and requires more power to open the valves. With the same heads but ohc (if that was possible) you'd be able to get away with a higher redline (assuming it's valvetrain limited) or softer valve springs, as the springs no longer have to push the pushrods back down. They will also mean that the engine will be less responsive (slightly), as they have the same effect as making the flywheel slightly heavier.

Basically there's a reason that all (AFAIK) Japanese and European high performance engines have at least 4 valves per cylinder and have no pushrods. This has been more or less true for many years now.

fc3s-gxl

i dont think u need to have 500hp ona rotary for it to be incrdiably fast,down in here in miami 380hp 1st gens cant stay ina str8 line , neither can 2nd gens with 500plus power ,theres a big differnce on how roatries are built donw here then up north u want to turn ,u dont use 1000hp ona turn yea v8's are the all mighty ,p.o.s v8 can kiss my **** , its not bout torque when ur turning i wanna see ur almighty mustangs and camaros turn with fd's and fc's screw it a friggin 4banger ,a corolla witha built 3tc will out turn ur v8 mules lol(btw i m talkin bout daily drivers.)

fc3s-gxl

btw toomany ppl herer get their panties in a knot lol friggin ppl should relax