Your stupidness gives me a headache. I love the car, hate the motor. Is it so wrong to love a 2800lb RWD car with the lines of the FD, and the fit of one, but not like the motor that came with it? Can you EVEN comprehend something like that?

Supra? Too expensive, heavy, and too expensive to mod. 300zx? A royal PAIN IN THE *** to work on. There's no room in that engine bay with the VG30DETT sitting in there! 3000GT? IT's a pig! The Transmission fails ALL the time on them. WRX? Why? I don't want a 4door car. I want a sport's car. Do you even know WTF you're talking about? I love the RX-7's look, it's handling, and how I fit inside the car. It's like a 2/3 scale Corvette. In someways, I think it's more beautiful. Next part of your idiotic post...


I already do. Infact, I'm on my second Corvette. First one was a 2001 automatic that I was going to turn around for a profit to fund my S13 project. Fell in love with the overall car but sold it to my dad for cheap, to buy my 6spd that's now supercharged. Makes 485rwhp at 8psi with just Headers and a Pro-charger. It's fun as hell. But it also is a bit bigger than an FD, so why not make the FD better? Easy concept to figure out, if you are a true 'car enthusiast'.

If You love the car, you want to DRIVE it. Whether it's racing, going to work, getting groceries, or going on road trips, you want to drive it! How is this hard to understand? Why would I want my car to only be driven on weekends? How lame is that? I want to drive it anywhere!

Because it says RX7CLUB not ROTARYCLUB. It's about the RX-7 CAR! Wow man. Can you even READ?

As I've explained, and you'd see if you looked at my profile, I'm on my second vette. Third boosted car. You don't know chit. Even though you're 4 years younger than me, you might as well be 20 years younger with how retarded your debate skills are. Join a debate class, and learn a thing or two.


My knowledge should overwhelm you. I've been wrenching on AE86's, Corvettes, RX-7's, S13/S14's, trucks, tractors, and airplanes. Oh but you're right. I don't know WTF I'm talking about.

14 year old teenager? Look in the mirror.

 

Or to repeatedly display your ignorance, it seems...

We've already established that.

Because you are completely ignorant of the construction of a V8 block and you're judging weight based on nothing more substantial than external appearance.

Where are the pistons in a V8 located?

They're located in the wider V section of the block you mention, in hollow sleeves (commonly called cylinders) that extend all the way from the block's deck to the crankshaft galley. This may surprise you, but most of the time they're filled with air, not metal. Furthermore, the area surrounding the cylinder bores is also hollow and filled with coolant, not metal. And then there are the oil galleries, the lifter valley, and various other hollow areas in the structure of the block. The block itself only weighs about 115 lbs.

Educate yourself.



Because you know next to nothing about piston engines, as far as I can tell.

Read between the lines. What it means is that not only is it possible to move the CoG lower, but that they have to weigh and perform complex calculations to determine if the CoG is within regulations... and these are professionals. Yet you'd have us believe that you're able to tell just by looking at an engine where the CoG is?!?

You still haven't been man enough to admit that you have no practical experience and all that you've posted are a bunch of uneducated guesses and assumptions.

Figured as much.

Yes. Constantly.

They have everything to do with your credibility.

Even if I wasn't aware that your statements are based solely on ignorant assumptions, you can't even express yourself like an educated person. That makes anything you post suspect. You are not a credible source of information on this topic.

They do, and your question is still irrelevant to the discussion of engine CoG and your claim that you are able to determine it solely by sight.

Your question was intended to change the subject and present a strawman argument that you felt you could win... because you're currently getting your *** kicked where factual V8 information is concerned.

I've been challenged by someone who doesn't have a leg to stand on, and is too stupid to realize it.

 

I don't give a **** what you want. I also don't need your permission to do anything.

 

Wow, you're my hero. Now, why don't you explain to me why the opinion of an snot-nosed punk like yourself is worthy of serious consideration.

 

I do have that effect on ppl.. I wasn't just speaking for myself. you would save a lot of us headache if you would act your age. and yet you would still get your point across.

 

Sometimes you just got to let the retarded kid take a few shots. Its just best not to argue on the internet because you don't get any awards for winning and it doesn't pay the bills.

 

Well, you just took yours.

Are you telling me that you can't recognize the lack of substantiating evidence and logic in his posts, or is the fact that he likes rotary engines sufficient reason to ignore it?

 

plain and simple without all the jimblabber, though i do side with him on all his factual information.

Because the ******* Ls1 is BETTER than a rotardly engine, FACT. All ******* bullshit aside, IF the rotary design was truely BETTER in ALL apsects over a piston engine, then why does 99% of production vehicles use piston power? DEEDEEDEE and if i hear "mazda owns the pattent" Kill yourself, if ford owned the patten for the piston engine, how could any other MFG Co have their own piston engine? DEEDEEDEE

the Ls1 was created damn near by god...

 

No I just don't see why someone who knows as much as you finds it necessary to have online arguments with people. Its one thing to know as much as you do but having flame wars on a car forum where 90% of the members can't even figure out why their car won't start, doesn't really help your credibility. You are probably right 99% of the time but who really cares? Motor Trend won't be writing an article about how you managed to prove everyone wrong in an argument that has no point.

With that in mind whatever someone does is their choice. If you want lots of power and torque out of a stock engine then put a V8 in your car. Better yet just buy a car with one already in it. If you want to drop a LS1 into a FD why not buy a C5 vette? I understand the skill it takes to do the swap, but in my opinion choose your preference and respect others. That goes for everybody.

 

If you want to be taken seriously try not to sound like an idiot. The LS1 wasn't created by god. It was created by the same people who took 44 years to build a car that actually resembled a sports car. The LS1 was a last ditch effort to save a car that people got tired of sucking. Yes the LS1 was a bad *** engine with tons of potential. Rotaries never caught on because they are too damn unreliable and inconsistent. They require way too much attention than the average american cares to give. And they smell.

So why do I stick by them? I don't have a garage or a shop for that matter. I have an unfinished basement where most my engine work happens. Its easy to get the engine in and out of my house and transport it. Also its quite simple to work on (for me at least) and parts are cheap. Its more practical for a person like me. Lack of motivation and initiative is what keeps me from doing a swap not fanboy loyalty.

 

Dude i dont care to argue with you anymore, because it seems your just going to be childish and put words in my mouth. "Why would I want my car to only be driven on weekends?" did i say only to drive the car on weekends? I was saying that you shouldnt complain about gas mileage because the car wasn't designed to be a miser on gas, its a performance driving machine, that has superior cornering ability, so dont complain about gas mileage. And what about my debate skills? again that has nothing to do with what we are talking about. You are simply immature eventhough you are 4 yrs older than me. My debate skills are retarded? First of all what a great line for someone who is 4 years older than me, and second my debating skills are not in question here. "why not make the FD better? Easy concept to figure out" Of course it is, with time , the knowledge and patience, not a quick fix v8 . Simply put, in my closing arguement by putting a v8 in the car ,you are ruining what makes the rx7 UNIQUE, but as i already said several times, YOUR Car, YOUR Choice. And no i dont care to look at your profile. I would rather look at someones profile who takes the time to mod their engine, or swap a 20b in. And I never said I was a car enthusiast, I'm an rx7 enthusiast, I no longer give a crap about other cars. This can go on forever so i'm ending it right now.

 

I haven't been a part of this, but I'm gonna just hop in anyways and straighten a few things out.

If you can have almost double the mileage, or even a significant increase doing the swap, then this is a VERY valid and viable benefit, which is amplified if you plan on daily driving the car. And especially if it is at no performance cost (V8's clearly can improve performance in many regards).

Debating skills aside, you don't have much of an argument when it comes to the actual content of the debate.

If the V8 improves and fixes most of the issues, problems, hassles, and shortcomings of a car - mileage, reliability, low end power - then it's not exactly just a 'quick fix'.

Nor is it a 'quick fix' to remove an engine yourself, buy an engine dropout, subframe, ect and do a swap.

Actually, you'd be making it more unique. Whereas there are maybe 10 FD's in my city, next summer I will be the ONLY one with a V8 most likely, and DEFINITELY the only one with a complete LS2 conversion.

So not only do I get all the obvious, and frankly undeniable benefits of the swap itself, my car is actually MORE unique.

I get to keep the fantastic handling, style, rarity - and lose the associated hassle, low mileage, and lack of torque.

I modded my engine, I did everything and then some, I ran a 400 rwhp-ish 13b. I already know I'm going to prefer my slightly less powerful v8 when I'm done already.

It can go on for about as long as you can keep ignoring logic, and trying to argue from authority.

 

Oh the irony. My car is faster and handles the same if not better, bottom line, hahaha.

 

Thx for the pick. So your telling me the entire block with heads has more weight below the crank? You still haven't proved to me that all the weight is below the crank. Use your imagination for my example here and why I still think the v8 block is top heavy. Imagine if you have this fully dressed block on a lathe (minus intake). Imagine the mounting point to be at the center of the crank front and rear. Now use your hands to rotate the engine so it's on it's side. Now let the engine go. My theory is that this top heavy V8 with rotate over till the crank is facing up. If you do this same thing with a rotary it wont topple over because its not top heavy.


News flash, the crank of my 20b swap is at the same height as your crank. I saw from your pics in your own thread. Nice by the way! Anyways, as soon as I get ahold of a v8 block, I will post side by side picks of that V8 and rotary with the cranks at the same height. Then you tell me which block has a lower center of gravity.


Lastly I asked that question just to see if you knew anything about rotary's. It wasn't to change the subject. I'll leave you alone about since you odviously don't know. With all your vast knowledge, you didn't even try to answer it.

 

Each head weighs 25lbs each with FULL valvetrain, intake manifold weighs 11lbs, coils weigh 7lbs, throttlebody weighs 3lbs. Aside from all these numbers, the ones that matter are the ones measured at the rear wheels. I know my car will straight clip the nuts off your 20b/fd on HP only to your single adder, dare i do spray my engine for an additional buslength on your ***. FACT the 20b swap TOTALLY outweighs a Ls1 swap by 60lbs i think the figure was. Assuming same COG from the ls1 to the 20b, i sure as hell would take the less weight option...

 

I know Jim is smart, but I don't think he'll be able to look at a picture of two engines and magically calculate the center of gravity of both of them...apparently you are the only human being on the planet with that special talent.

 

Jimlab for president.

 

100% internally stock 95 LT1. all bolt-in.

Oh I thought we were talking about STOCK engines, as in the way they came from the factory. There are 240hp stock 13b's?
If were talking about modified engines there are quite a few 500+hp na V8's out there.


This is completly irrelevant when comparing any piston engine to a rotary engine because the rotarys crank is in the center of the block instead of the bottom.

Why, name one car you can buy that runs 12's STOCK for less than $30k.




All of us with rx7's with "Crap *** engines" are more than ready to line up against you guys with "real engines" any time you want to prove there better.

 

Why are we arguing this, just take the cars to the track, then let the numbers do the talking

 

Exactly my point!

 

Sorry, asshat, the RX7 is more than just the engine: it's an inexpensive (at least the SA/FB and FC) lightweight, 2 seat, attractive GT with great suspension and brakes. Why can't we love THAT part of the car? Hmm? Why do rotards like yourself insist that a camaro with a V8 is THE ******* SAME as an RX7 with a V8? Do you know your car so little and hate the REST of the car other than the engine so much that you can make that claim? Hmm?

I've had plenty of rotary cars: an R100, RX2, 2 RX3s and 3 RX7s. I've rebuilt 12As on my dining room table before. When my last RX7 died, I decided to build a custom hot rod out of it, combining all that is good about the RX7 chassis with a much mor epowerful, torquey engine in the grand tradition of hotrodding and cars like the Cobra, Sunbeam Tiger, and TVR Griffith. And ignroant ***** like you and t-von make **** up just to hate on the conversion. And you think we hate RX7s because we don't worship at the altar of the rotary. It's a ******* machine. Grow the **** up.

 

CoG is CoG. if your mass is carried 50/50 or threabouts still then CoG ONLY AFFECTS ROLL. The mass is still completely behind the centerline of the front axle, and with the trans being back in the center of the car in these swaps, the mass is still close to the center of rotation, and does not negatively affect handling. Your point was that the car won't handle as good, and the fact is it will. The CoG of the V8 is carried low, just above the crossmember, even with my cast iron Ford swap. That's why it was still balanced after the conversion, and why it still was a successful autocross car.

See, I don't argue from a theoretical POV, but a practicval one based on real world experience.





I didn't have to mod the crossmember and steering rack at all, and did not mod the firewall, either, but if you've looked at the pics of my conversion, the enigne is so tiny in the engine bay it looks like a small V6... While the FD is tighter, the location of the enigne is the same: low and far back. The Chevy's simply sit lower and can easily go farther back than the Fords. Every V8 converted FD I've seen done has had a very low and reaward mounted engine. And from seeing them on the autocross track, I'd say that experience will show that they are not negatively affected by the swap, either.


Everything about the CoG and efficiency of the engines has been made up on the spot. I'd have to quote every post you've made on the subjects.



And the light is starting to come on in your head. The small engine makes more hp/liter because it is SMALL, not because it is better. Just like your ant example. it's strong for it's size because it's small. It's still weak overall. And you wouldn't power a car with an .049 engine because it doesn't make enough overall power to do the job. That's my point. The rotary makes better hp/liter because it's SMALL. It uses more fuel to do it, making it less efficient overall, and it's still small, so it makes less power overall, and is much higher stressed.

If hp/liter were important to real engineers, then Porsche would still have a 2 liter engine powering their cars, as we KNOW that turbocharging a 2 liter can easily make 400 hp or so. So why didn't they? Why did they grow their engine over the years to 3.6 liters? Because the larger displacement may not make as much hp/liter, but it makes BETTER power for pushing along a road car.

Why does Honda's S2000 not make as much hp/liter as Honda's own 600 cc road bike? I mean, hp/liter is a selling point in the S2k, right? So why doesn't it make 350+ hp, stock?

Because the engine is not as small as the 600 cc road bike.

The bike engine can make more hp/liter at the same level of tune due to it's displacement, just like the ant and the *** .049 engine. But it doesn't make enough power to move a car properly, which is why Honda made their sports car engine bigger. And when they wanted the engine to be even more flexible and useable, they increased displacement again, without increasing hp. Honda engineers must be so dumb, eh?

The lesson is, a larger engine at the same state of tune will have a lower hp/liter. But more power overall and a wider usable powerband. The higher hp/liter of the smaller engine is not due to the smaller engine being better but merely smaller. You thought I was being ignorant when giving you the *** .049 example, but it illustrated the point perfectly.

Hp/liter is not, cannot be, and will not be, a linear progression as displacement goes up. And the fact that the smaller engines will easily make more hp/liter does not mean that they are better engineered. It ONLY means they are smaller engines. And in this comparison, the rotary is MUCH smaller displacementwise than the V8s being swapped in. To the guys swapping, they are no different than that *** .049 engine: great hp/liter, but not enough hp/torque overall in that outstanding chassis.

 

To each his own. My dick is bigger than yours but does that really matter? My car is currently in the fab stages and is not complete. Even then, I'm not planning on turboing it anytime soon because I'm tying to engineer the ultimate NA set-up. Now as far as the weight comparison, if you compare the stock twin set-up then yes a 20b is very heavy. By the way, why would I handy cap my engine by running turbos not capable of any serious hp if that was what I was after? Also my engine completely sits behind my stock rack, because I moved the engine back 5 1/2" so I have an even lower CoG than a stock car. I'm not building my car just to be the hp king or some stupid **** like that. I care about total performance and engineering a better set-up than what Mazda was orginally willing to do. Lastly, you a fool if you think a 20b isn't capable of any serious hp. I've seen them in the 1,500hp territory. When was the last time an Ls series V8 made that much?

 

That's why I used the lathe example. You guys who assemble your engines on a engine stand can calculate the CoG the same way. Mount your engine at the flywheel at the center of the crank. Rotate the engine over an you can see where all the weight is if it topples over. Jim is claiming all the weight is below the crank. I think otherwise.

 

You should do a little research before opening your mouth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t65VypaaRJU

Now... why are you posting in this forum again? This is the OTHER engine conversion sub-forum. Take your ignorant *** back to the 20B sub-forum and impress everyone there with how much you love rotary engines.