Outkast

Let's clear a few things up.

#1) - One guys results don't mean anything
#2) - What's nice about running 11s and occasional 9s? - EVERYTHING
#3) - If you think that rotaries need a rebuild every 30k miles you are still living in the 80s.
#4) - You only get 25 miles per gallon in your V8 when you're cruising, not hauling *** running 11s and 9s. If you want gas mileage buy a hybrid or a Honda, better yet buy a 15 second 90s V8 Mustang GT that gets walked by 146 hp non-turbo RX-7s with exhaust.
#5) - Listen, I live in deep Homestead and work for GM and I drive a 13 second bone stock GMC truck so I respect your beer drinking mullet ways but your V8 still sucks!!!

Outkast

In all seriousness I give you props for recognizing the performance and power potential of the rotary and respect the V8, hell I'm trading in my RX-8 for an '06 2500 HD 6.6 Duramax turbo. 360 hp and 650 torque!!!!!

academytim

I was about to post how I didn't care what you thought about my car, that you were a ***** for posting that ^

But since you posted that ^, I'll retract my opinion. I love all different powered Rx7's. Nothing compares to the style and feel. I still go to all the local rotary meets, and still get asked lots of questions by newbies...and believe it or not, I don't tell all of them to swap engines. lol

Outkast

Cool. I've been wearing a rotary tatto for over 8 years and have owned 15
RX-7s, on the other hand, I absolutely LOVE our truck and like all the V8s I rag on at work. The GTOs I have to PDI every day spin BFG tires with the traction control ON from a roll and my buddy has 2 '06 Z06s, both of which scare the living shiet out of me. I still am and always will be a rotary man.

Turbo II

iTrader: (1)

Ok, I'm going to clear this up. It's 1.3 litres because one rotor has a 3 point flux angle that is in direct proportion to the exact opposite of the other thus creating a BFE ratio of -.02 that equates to an analog displacement of the digital equivilent to each other on reverse circumtrigaforce. By activating the hydeactivator reactivator disamogulator regulator accelorator ports that by USDA standards has to be 0-69 half the time you can round off the extra decible point and state unequally that by the rotors spinning in a squared circle that the DB level is 1/3 that of the SPL divided by the spiining of the eccentric shaft, which by the way is a bad mother... watch your mouth. So stated as below with the results published in Darwin's Revolution of the Species and shown in Fisher Price's First Rotary that the aff4mentioned equation does not Equate or even Splenda. There4 you have to imply the U underhood senario of a prostitue that was put forth by original creator of the Matrix that ergo you cannot understand the equivicable, that there is a flaw in the equation. Furthermore, because displacement is a fixed variable that does change with amplitude you must captivate the total sircomefrench. Even moresoover since the fact that the eternal volume of the inside of the housing is smaller that what is outside the housing that it must be smaller, maybe even smaller than small. So if you take the tonal weight of the fractions stated above and divide by a number that will go into it you come up with the answer that the answer to the question is 43 as stated in the end of the book, divided by 2 rotors equals 21.5 which divided by the 6 sides of the rotors equals 3.58 which divided by the 3 turns of the shaft equals 1.17 which when rounded up to account for the flaw in the equation equals 1.3 litres.

Oh yeah, btw, cool vid.

Outkast

I agree 100% with the above statement. 1.3 litres indeed.

Nihilanthic

I really love how some people here can't give a reasoned or mathematical explanation to their claims, they just keep repeating them until everyone else gives up and goes away, and think they're right, even in light of a fully explained one.

Heres a cookie. Oh, and the person who thought he was being cute by spouting nonsense becuase he can't understand what I say gets two!

**** like this is why "ricer" is an insult. Im done with this thread.

Outkast

So why don't you just give up and go away.....? You just turned driniking age and you have a lot more braincells to burn than us. Although you drive a beater pos for now, you can already mathematically explain why the hard earned supercars we drive aren't really the way we think they are. We are here to enjoy our cars. Who's the ricer?

Turbo II

iTrader: (1)

My feeling just got hurt. It was the only one I had left and now it's all bummed because someone couldn't see the humor in my post. And on top of that I get two cookies and no milk to wash them down with. I'm just gonna take me and my so called 1.3 litre back to the lounge where I'm appreciated.

boostd4

iTrader: (4)

This is what stifles innovation. The, "I'll defend to the death my purchase, and nothing you say will convince me otherwise [facts or not]" attitude.

It's also fundamentally what fuels racism way to go!

Rotortuner

Its a 12a engine with a turbo. thats what he says.
CJG

turbogarrett

iTrader: (1)

blah, blah, blah, blah........same arguments, by the same kids.

Cool video! A fast car is cool in my book, no matter what is under the hood.

Outkast

Turbogarrett, teach me to drive like you

turbogarrett

iTrader: (1)

huh??

Outkast

.

mark57

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...ne_of_the_Year

Outkast

They classify it in a bigger category and it still wins....

Outkast

Best 1.3 = 238 hp Renesis
Best 2.0 = 20b 3 rotor
Best 2.6 = 4 rotor
best 6.0 = GM Vette & truck engine
best 6.6 = Duramax - 650 torque @ 1600 rpm
best 7.0 = Z06 530 hp 470 torque
Questions?
That's according to **** in Ricer Scientists Mouth Magazine

Fire85GSLSE

iTrader: (29)

Sweet video thanks.

gnode

Anyone know where this movie is hosted?

73IMPORT

CFan you post the link again? Can't see the vid...

SMonty

I couldn't see the video, but shouldn't you guys be saying "rx-7 owns" and not "rotary owns", I'm in the process of throwing an LS1 in my FC, because I dont wanna deal with turbos and forced induction, and I love low end grunt. But really if this video is racing a rotary/rx7 chassy against a v8/v8 chassy. Its the RX-7 thats owns not the rotary, its not really an engine comparison. I dunno if someone posted this already I got sick of reading that arguement about v-8s or rotors and wanted to put my $.02
Just out of curiousity how much does it cost to turn a stock n/a 13b to a 13b-t with over 500 hp at the flywheel?
Because I figure it will cost me about $5-6k to get it from the LS1 including the engine itself

Nihilanthic

heeeeeere we go again....

jarred

I can't see the video!!! And guess what nihilanthic, rotories are a different breed of engine than a piston power motor. Although we can try to settle the arguement with mathematical knowledge, it is impossible to tell what the better motor is. Now I am a diehard fan and my opinions are biased, but we can't all be so nieve to think that we know everything and what we think is always right.

SMonty

I dont think my comment should ruffle any feathers.