Mazda returns to Prototype racing with 3 rotor
03-30-05, 01:05 AM
#27
Senior Member
Check Page 13 of this PDF..
http://www.scca.org/_Filelibrary/Fil...chbulletin.pdf
This is in reference to the GT-2 classification of the 20B RX-8.
Yes this is SCCA.. but if I am not mistaken.. this classfication is a crossover to the IMSA/(whatever they are called now) version.
I am wondering if people in the press are mistaking the 20B.. as in Cosmo 20B.. with the Renesis... assuming that because it says 20B.. and is in a RX-8.. that it is a new engine design.
YES I do know we are comparing apples and oranges.. being a prototype.. and a GT class RX-8..... BUT. I figured I'd point this out for reference.
Street ported 20B in the RX-8.. in GT-2
Yes N/A...
BUT... as to needing a E-Shaft....
http://www.gurumotorsports.com/produ...20products.htm
Maybe soon............
http://www.scca.org/_Filelibrary/Fil...chbulletin.pdf
This is in reference to the GT-2 classification of the 20B RX-8.
Yes this is SCCA.. but if I am not mistaken.. this classfication is a crossover to the IMSA/(whatever they are called now) version.
I am wondering if people in the press are mistaking the 20B.. as in Cosmo 20B.. with the Renesis... assuming that because it says 20B.. and is in a RX-8.. that it is a new engine design.
YES I do know we are comparing apples and oranges.. being a prototype.. and a GT class RX-8..... BUT. I figured I'd point this out for reference.
Street ported 20B in the RX-8.. in GT-2
Yes N/A...
BUT... as to needing a E-Shaft....
http://www.gurumotorsports.com/produ...20products.htm
Maybe soon............
03-30-05, 02:27 AM
#28
Originally Posted by RX-Heven
Why? To make less power with the side port design than the tried and true p-port design. Not likely.
Plus they will have a hard time engineering around the center rotor and the heat surrounding it.
Plus they will have a hard time engineering around the center rotor and the heat surrounding it.
You misunderstood my comment. I understand that the P-port is tried and true, I just hate the fact that it's not a new Renesis design. If it was, that could lead the way to a possible production engine.
03-30-05, 10:15 AM
#29
Rotary Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rocket City, Alabama
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
The SCCA GT-2 20B motor is in no way related to a renesis - it is just a 20B motor. Someone has been petitioning the SCCA for years to allow a 3 rotor in the GT-2 class, so now they will but it will be restricted to street porting and also it must breathe thru a choked single intake restrictor.
03-31-05, 11:58 AM
#30
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Kenku
I... just... but... but...
... someone else want to field this?
... someone else want to field this?
what i mean is to create a single center housing and two external housings (for a two rotor)
i have a poor cg representation of this if it would be more helpful. it could eliminated the need for the water seals we currently use which are (afaik) one of the major failure locations after apex seal (which i had an idea for as well.)
04-01-05, 05:54 PM
#31
Originally Posted by t-von
You misunderstood my comment. I understand that the P-port is tried and true, I just hate the fact that it's not a new Renesis design. If it was, that could lead the way to a possible production engine.
I'm sure with support from Mazda and the platform being an RX-8, they intended to call it a Renesis engine even though it is not. After all, win on Sunday, sell on Monday.
This is probably a good reason why they are using the tried and true 20b design. As we all know, n/a rotories have an excellant reputation when it comes to reliability under racing conditions and I doubt they would do anything to rush development of something new and jeapordize that well earned reputation and possibly hurt new car sales.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
KAL797
Test Area 51
0
08-11-15 03:47 PM
