Why A V8?
10-13-07, 07:55 PM
#52
This is very common. Your just not aware of it. Every time it rains heavy in my area we have at leasts 7 piston cars come in for flood related engine replacements paid through insurance. I see the damage 1st hand. What about you? Better yet contact any insurance company and ask how many engine replacements they do every year from flooding.
Not to the point it causes catastrophic damage and blows the block apart. We have an Rx8 right now in the shop that flooded (1st one for a rotary). I will update you later this week when we pull the plugs to get the water out and see if we can get it fired up. So far it turns over with no unusual noises.
So now your going to basically use one example of rotary (limited production 3rd gen Rx7) and compare it to all other piston engines on other forums? I'm smart enough to know that your singling out the 3rd gen here with the "reliability mod" comment. I wonder what your opinion would be if you weren't using the 3rd gen as a everything rotary related example? Hell if I thought your way, I could use the early Dodge neon as the poster child of NA piston engine durability/reliability. But I wont!
Reliability mods? So I guess you think piston engines don't need reliability mods? Here's one Jim, explain to me what will happen if you slap on a turbo or super charger on any NA V8 and start running 10psi boost on the stock internals? Lets see how long that engine last. Tuning aside, any rotary can be boosted from day one without issues.
Reliability mods in general have more to do with Mazda's poor designs with certain engine accessory components (AST, vacuum lines, pre-cat, ect) none of which is actually rotary related. Reality check.....my 94 Fd never had the so called "reliability mods". It had a factory authorized recall done on the vacuum lines. My stock engine lasted 108k with me blowing it due to over boosting (my fault). It was still making great power and never flooded. Bottom line you can't compare the reliability of a boosted engine vs a NA one. NA engines will always be more reliable period.
This is not a necessity however, most do it by choice! My 91 vert had 140k when I rebuilt it reusing 1 damaged housing and non lapped side plates. I spent less than 400 bucks getting it back on the road. Currently it has 14k on it, and I has compression in the 100's. This is the same engine that I got nearly 28mpg on in my 91 vert. Not bad don't you think?
By the way, does the excessive use of the
make you feel special?
Sure it does, because water compresses in a rotary and not in a piston engine...
Not to the point it causes catastrophic damage and blows the block apart. We have an Rx8 right now in the shop that flooded (1st one for a rotary). I will update you later this week when we pull the plugs to get the water out and see if we can get it fired up. So far it turns over with no unusual noises.
In fact, find me a piston engine car forum where one of the first things they have you learn are all the "reliability mods" required to even be able to expect average engine life.
Reliability mods? So I guess you think piston engines don't need reliability mods? Here's one Jim, explain to me what will happen if you slap on a turbo or super charger on any NA V8 and start running 10psi boost on the stock internals? Lets see how long that engine last. Tuning aside, any rotary can be boosted from day one without issues.
Reliability mods in general have more to do with Mazda's poor designs with certain engine accessory components (AST, vacuum lines, pre-cat, ect) none of which is actually rotary related. Reality check.....my 94 Fd never had the so called "reliability mods". It had a factory authorized recall done on the vacuum lines. My stock engine lasted 108k with me blowing it due to over boosting (my fault). It was still making great power and never flooded. Bottom line you can't compare the reliability of a boosted engine vs a NA one. NA engines will always be more reliable period.
Like lapping side housings?
By the way, does the excessive use of the
make you feel special?
Last edited by t-von; 10-13-07 at 08:20 PM.
10-13-07, 08:31 PM
#53
Super Snuggles
Right, common for people who try to drive through flooded roads. How much of the driving public do you think is included in that demographic?
Maybe people in the Northwest have more common sense...
No, I'm going to use as an example any turbocharged rotary engine, because why would I give a **** about the NA engines that produce less horsepower than an average 4-banger?
NA rotary engines don't make enough power to hurt themselves.
Not to the exent that a turbocharged rotary does.
Ever heard of Lingenfelter?
So can any piston engine, with proper tuning. Piston engines are far more resistant to detonation, however.
It's the only way to deal with retards, and that makes you special... 
What about you?
So now your going to basically use one example of rotary (limited production 3rd gen Rx7) and compare it to all other piston engines on other forums?
I wonder what your opinion would be if you weren't using the 3rd gen as a everything rotary related example?
Reliability mods? So I guess you think piston engines don't need reliability mods?
Here's one Jim, explain to me what will happen if you slap on a turbo or super charger on any NA V8 and start running 10psi boost on the stock internals? Lets see how long that engine last.
Tuning aside, any rotary can be boosted from day one without issues.
By the way, does the excessive use of the make you feel special?
make you feel special?
10-13-07, 08:35 PM
#54
Super Snuggles
10-13-07, 09:21 PM
#55
I'm a retard and you keep comparing the reliability differences of boosted VS NA? Lets compare apples to apples.
Ever heard of Lingenfelter?
Sure have! http://www.lingenfelter.com/Lingenfe...boCorvette.htm
Last I checked when he boosted the vette engine, it's completely rebuilt will all new forged internals as you will see in the link. Since you brought that up, explain to me why it cost 46k to add only 300 extra hp? Why does that large displacement engine need to be modified so extensively? You mean to tell me the superior V8 can't handle 10psi on factory stock internals and needs a complete and total overhaul just to be reliable? Oh my!
Lets see 7.0L and 800hp equal to 114 hp per liter. 114hp per liter on a rotary will go as follows. The 13b equivalent would be 296 hp. And yes I used 2.6 liters for a 13b. 4.0L 20b equivalent would be 456hp. 5.2L4 rotor egual 592hp. LOL you can just simply turn up the boost and reprogram to get these kinds of hp per liter numbers numbers from a rotary while a piston needs complete surgery to do the same. Hmmm 46k just to put a rebuild modified block back in the car with 2 turbos, and plumbing. Please break it down as to why it cost that much to add 300 hp on a piston? When was the last time you heard of anyone having to swap out the factory stock internals to double or even triple the hp on a rotary?
So can any piston engine, with proper tuning. Piston engines are far more resistant to detonation, however.
Last edited by t-von; 10-13-07 at 09:51 PM.
10-13-07, 09:58 PM
#56
Super Snuggles
Sure have!
http://www.lingenfelter.com/pack.htm
You mean to tell me the superior V8 can't handle 10psi on factory stock internals and needs a complete and total overhaul just to be reliable?
you can just simply turn up the boost and reprogram to get these kinds of hp per liter numbers numbers from a rotary
Please break it down as to why it cost that much to add 300 hp on a piston?
When was the last time you heard of anyone having to swap out the factory stock internals to double or even triple the hp on a rotary?
10-13-07, 10:04 PM
#57
To add 20b isn't even breaking a sweat at this power level. Atilla the Fun put over 75k on his 20b convertible making 114hp per liter on 100% stock factory internals. No porting, no special after market seals. 100% stock everything internal. His block was only re freshened engine for the swap. Kevin Landers at Rotary Resurrection reported that the internals were in perfect condition when he rebuilt the engine.
10-13-07, 10:20 PM
#58
Nope I do fair comparisons. Unlike you!
Right. You can't even turn around these days without stumbling over a reliable 800 horsepower 2-rotor engine...
I can say the same thing for a 2.6L 4 banger. Why not compare a turbo charged 5.2L 4 rotor ( even though it's still undersiezed when compared to that 7.0l V8)?
s the last time you heard of a rotary, any rotary, making 700+ horsepower NA on pump gas? Thought so.
787B came close! I'm not sure of the fuel used. Lets not forget how reliable this rotary was in the 24hr race. It still didn't need rebuilding to go another 24hrs.
Can you say the same thing for all the other piston engines in that race? Didn't think so!
Last edited by t-von; 10-13-07 at 10:30 PM.
10-13-07, 10:26 PM
#59
Oh yea someone made a comment about how rotary's sound shitty at lower rpm's. Opinions on this audio clip.
http://www.3rotor.com/cosmo_wave/1st2nd.wav
Nothing but pure sex IMHO!
http://www.3rotor.com/cosmo_wave/1st2nd.wav
Nothing but pure sex IMHO!
10-13-07, 10:42 PM
#60
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excuse me but this is nothing more than some senseless babbling.
Frankly I couldn't give a crap about the comparison between reciprocating piston engines and rotary powered engines, be thankful for what you have, be thankful for even being able to drive a car. Enjoy driving and be away from everything when on the road.
Jimlab: stop contradicting everyone
Problasphemer: stop trying to get a rise out of everyone
Everyone: don't let this petty BS get under your skin it makes everyone look bad
Anyways take it easy and God bless
James
Frankly I couldn't give a crap about the comparison between reciprocating piston engines and rotary powered engines, be thankful for what you have, be thankful for even being able to drive a car. Enjoy driving and be away from everything when on the road.
Jimlab: stop contradicting everyone
Problasphemer: stop trying to get a rise out of everyone
Everyone: don't let this petty BS get under your skin it makes everyone look bad
Anyways take it easy and God bless
James
10-13-07, 11:05 PM
#61
Super Snuggles
Right, which is why you've been comparing turbocharged rotary engines to NA V8s all along.
Or was it the NA rotary engines that could double and triple their power without any effort at all?
No, simple statement of fact. 800+ horsepower rotary engines of any type are rare as hell.
I figured you'd fall for that... all two of them.
Riiiiight... they use pump gas in the 24 Hours of Le Mans.
The only way to make big power with a rotary is to turbocharge, totally eliminate any pretense at controlling emissions, and to use the highest octane gas you can get your hands on. Pump gas vs. pump gas (there's that apples to apples comparison you were searching for) the rotary doesn't stand a chance against a V8 in an identical configuration. Hell, they can't even get a turbocharged rotary to pass current emissions standards, so you clowns got the anemic RX-8... wow.
You mean the one year they won, or the several years prior to that where there were a number of rotary DNFs, and no rotary entries in the top 10.
It was a record year for drop-outs. The 787B didn't even lead until the final 30 minutes or so of the race.
Now... can you say C5-R? Let me know how many Le Mans wins the Corvette C5-R team racked up. How about the C6-R?
Or was it the NA rotary engines that could double and triple their power without any effort at all?
Apples to oranges again.
787B came close!
I'm not sure of the fuel used.
The only way to make big power with a rotary is to turbocharge, totally eliminate any pretense at controlling emissions, and to use the highest octane gas you can get your hands on. Pump gas vs. pump gas (there's that apples to apples comparison you were searching for) the rotary doesn't stand a chance against a V8 in an identical configuration. Hell, they can't even get a turbocharged rotary to pass current emissions standards, so you clowns got the anemic RX-8... wow.
Lets not forget how reliable this rotary was in the 24hr race.
Can you say the same thing for all the other piston engines in that race? Didn't think so!
Now... can you say C5-R? Let me know how many Le Mans wins the Corvette C5-R team racked up. How about the C6-R?
10-13-07, 11:09 PM
#62
Super Snuggles
10-13-07, 11:44 PM
#63
No, simple statement of fact. 800+ horsepower rotary engines of any type are rare as hell.
So is the engine itself. Your point? We don't have 20b comsos running around here now do we?
I figured you'd fall for that... all two of them.
the rotary doesn't stand a chance against a V8 in an identical configuration.
You mean the one year they won, or the several years prior to that where there were a number of rotary DNFs, and no rotary entries in the top 10.
Prove to me the DNF were engine related with some internal problem? That research may take you a while.
Now... can you say C5-R? Let me know how many Le Mans wins the Corvette C5-R team racked up. How about the C6-R?
10-14-07, 08:06 PM
#65
Full Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: central Cali
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see a very simple solution to this debate.
Rotory Rx7 VS. V8 Rx7 shootout. All forms of racing.
If the rotory motor is better prove it. Any rotory guys want to try to keep up with a v8 7?
Rotory Rx7 VS. V8 Rx7 shootout. All forms of racing.
If the rotory motor is better prove it. Any rotory guys want to try to keep up with a v8 7?
10-14-07, 08:40 PM
#66
The rarity of the engine makes them expensive. The crank kit alone goes for $6,000 and you still have to buy two engine cores to finish the block off. Imagine if these engines were a dime a dozen like an LS1? Only then would we have a fair comparison to the V8 but we dont. This is why everyone compares to the 13b cause this is all we have. My personal goal with some of my experiments is to change the overall perception of the rotary engine and prove they can be both reliable, powerful (and most importantly) emissions friendly. If I'm successful 3 and 4 rotors will become more and more common.
Last edited by t-von; 10-14-07 at 08:48 PM.
10-14-07, 08:45 PM
#68
How sorry is this ****.. this thread just plain fails.. Who's seriously going to convert themselves to one side or the other through persuasion? None of you will persuade anyone. How can the outcome be positive by continuing this childish nonsense?? it's old, it got old years ago.
10-14-07, 08:52 PM
#69
How sorry is this ****.. this thread just plain fails.. Who's seriously going to convert themselves to one side or the other through persuasion? None of you will persuade anyone. How can the outcome be positive by continuing this childish nonsense?? it's old, it got old years ago.
Changing ones perception and converting them are two different things.
10-14-07, 11:02 PM
#70
The TII will live again
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Iowa City, Ia
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's one Jim, explain to me what will happen if you slap on a turbo or super charger on any NA V8 and start running 10psi boost on the stock internals? Lets see how long that engine last.
10-15-07, 08:28 PM
#71
Meth Head
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm a retard and you keep comparing the reliability differences of boosted VS NA? Lets compare apples to apples.
Sure have! http://www.lingenfelter.com/Lingenfe...boCorvette.htm
Last I checked when he boosted the vette engine, it's completely rebuilt will all new forged internals as you will see in the link. Since you brought that up, explain to me why it cost 46k to add only 300 extra hp? Why does that large displacement engine need to be modified so extensively? You mean to tell me the superior V8 can't handle 10psi on factory stock internals and needs a complete and total overhaul just to be reliable? Oh my! Lets see 7.0L and 800hp equal to 114 hp per liter. 114hp per liter on a rotary will go as follows. The 13b equivalent would be 296 hp. And yes I used 2.6 liters for a 13b. 4.0L 20b equivalent would be 456hp. 5.2L4 rotor egual 592hp. LOL you can just simply turn up the boost and reprogram to get these kinds of hp per liter numbers numbers from a rotary while a piston needs complete surgery to do the same. Hmmm 46k just to put a rebuild modified block back in the car with 2 turbos, and plumbing. Please break it down as to why it cost that much to add 300 hp on a piston? When was the last time you heard of anyone having to swap out the factory stock internals to double or even triple the hp on a rotary?
Sure have! http://www.lingenfelter.com/Lingenfe...boCorvette.htm
Last I checked when he boosted the vette engine, it's completely rebuilt will all new forged internals as you will see in the link. Since you brought that up, explain to me why it cost 46k to add only 300 extra hp? Why does that large displacement engine need to be modified so extensively? You mean to tell me the superior V8 can't handle 10psi on factory stock internals and needs a complete and total overhaul just to be reliable? Oh my!
Lets see 7.0L and 800hp equal to 114 hp per liter. 114hp per liter on a rotary will go as follows. The 13b equivalent would be 296 hp. And yes I used 2.6 liters for a 13b. 4.0L 20b equivalent would be 456hp. 5.2L4 rotor egual 592hp. LOL you can just simply turn up the boost and reprogram to get these kinds of hp per liter numbers numbers from a rotary while a piston needs complete surgery to do the same. Hmmm 46k just to put a rebuild modified block back in the car with 2 turbos, and plumbing. Please break it down as to why it cost that much to add 300 hp on a piston? When was the last time you heard of anyone having to swap out the factory stock internals to double or even triple the hp on a rotary?
I'd have no problem running 10psi on my stock motor. I can't say that for my FD which is bone stock.
Hell even a guy I know who has a 93' FD like me, after 2 rebuilds in 30k miles, is going to put an LSX motor in his FD. These rotaries are not what they're cracked up to be.
10-15-07, 10:22 PM
#72
there was a write up in car craft this month where they took a 5.0 straight out of a fox body, threw a carb and a vortex style supercharger on it and made 400hp. stock everything. even better they changed the heads out and added a cam and made 618hp!!! how about that?
That's a really nice power gain. That 5.0L engine is making 126hp per liter. A 2.6L 13b would be making 321hp using the same formula. Mathematically this is the only fair way to compare the two due to the huge displacement differences. Now lets compare that figure to a 5.2L 4 rotor. At 126hp per liter a 4 rotor would be making 655 hp. Since the 4 rotor is the closes rotary to match the displacement of the 5.0L V8, under racing conditions which engine do you think would last longer with stock internals? By the way a PP 4rotor wouldn't need boost to make that power.
I know I know a 4 rotor really doesn't exist in the real world since it mainly has been used for a competition engine however, that doesn't mean they can not be set up for average daily use. If you understand rotary's like I do a 4 rotor can easily be a multi purpose engine.
10-15-07, 11:08 PM
#74
Boosted my 2000 C5 at 108k miles. She still has the stock clutch and drivetrain, just added injectors, lingenfelter fuel pump, LG Longtube headers, and a D1 Procharger with 8psi of boost. HP went from 300rwhp to 485rwhp on a conservative tune. She's going to hit 113k miles end of this month and still runs like a raped ape(with the stock clutch!). Took her to the 1/8th mile drag races and put on quite a show.
I'd have no problem running 10psi on my stock motor. I can't say that for my FD which is bone stock.
Hell even a guy I know who has a 93' FD like me, after 2 rebuilds in 30k miles, is going to put an LSX motor in his FD. These rotaries are not what they're cracked up to be.
Not to people who are clueless about properly maintaining and modifying. I will say that the rotary isn't the most user friendly engine on the market when compared to a piston engine. But it goes both ways. Regardless you have to educate yourself about what your doing when owning a particular product. It took me 3 rotary cars to finally figure them out. Boosted rotary's are more temperamental and need to be run with-in certain parameters. If you or your friend don't understand these parameters, how could it be the engines fault when they blow? My stock fd lasted 108k and was the most reliable car I've ever owned. Keep in mind I had 3 previous NA rx7's before the fd so I know how to make them last that long. I blew my engine cause I over boosted well past the stock 10psi safe range when I didn't re-adjust my boost back to the stock 10psi level in cold weather. I had a couple mods and a manual boost controller that required me to adjust the boost from time to time depending on the weather. If I was 100% stock, adjusting wouldn't have been an issue. Plus I had been running 89 octane. Anyways, am I going to blame the engine cause it blew? Nope! How many people have done something similar to what I did and claimed this engine to be at fault or just plain unreliable? You would have **** loads of people in that category. And you know what happens when pissed of people start sharing their (ignorant) experiences over the internet? This is how the **** hits the fan and the real truth gets lost.
Last edited by t-von; 10-15-07 at 11:20 PM.