View Poll Results: Do you agree with the article?
YES
10
71.43%
NO
4
28.57%
Voters: 14. You may not vote on this poll
Another interesting article about how the rotary is superior to the piston
on the article. That's it. Oh and a :bs: flag on Decroz's old fugly *** hood. That **** was fugly!!!
01-28-08, 11:39 PM
#54
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Pacifica
Posts: 1,090
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I vote yes. The 944-T I owned was the only car I ever regretted buying, and I will claim that Rotaries and RX-7s are better than anything that comes out of Stuttgart until the day I die, regardless of what they may/may not do.
01-29-08, 12:13 AM
#55
Look at the BSFC of the rotary engine compared to the piston engine. Rotary uses more fuel for the same HP. I never seen/witness a 2nd or 3rd gen rx7 get better than 25mpg on the highway with a stock ECU.
I have a newer 996 Porsche 911 and on the freeway from SF to Tahoe, it got an average of 28+ mpg round trip. It's reliable, similar performance #'s, better gas mileage and gets more chicks than a rotary. I won't get into your 350hp rotary as being smog/street legal.
Compare the Rx8 compared to the Vette. Which has more HP/torque? I don't see how you can say the rotary has torque? The vette gets better or same mpg as the Rx8. Look at real world figures and EPA data. Heck take a Honda Odessey minivan. I bet it gets better gas mileage than the RX8 and probably weighs close to 4000lbs with more HP than a RX8. Maybe your rental car had some problems.
I have a newer 996 Porsche 911 and on the freeway from SF to Tahoe, it got an average of 28+ mpg round trip. It's reliable, similar performance #'s, better gas mileage and gets more chicks than a rotary. I won't get into your 350hp rotary as being smog/street legal.
Compare the Rx8 compared to the Vette. Which has more HP/torque? I don't see how you can say the rotary has torque? The vette gets better or same mpg as the Rx8. Look at real world figures and EPA data. Heck take a Honda Odessey minivan. I bet it gets better gas mileage than the RX8 and probably weighs close to 4000lbs with more HP than a RX8. Maybe your rental car had some problems.
. Porsche 911, Consumer Reports 20mpg overall (real world mileage city/freeway mix). RX-8, 20 mpg. Odyssey, 19mpg. Corvette, 21mpg. And for $50,000 you better get something more.Why are people all hung up on gas mileage? What's the matter, can't win races? Honestly, the FC swept IMSA and the FD is still in the top racing class after 15 years. And, gas prices and all, rotaries are still much cheaper than the competition.
The rotary is still the way to go because it's still much lighter and much more compact than any piston. Heck, a 20 year old 13B is still a bit lighter than an s2k 4-banger (and the Renesis is much lighter). There's a reason Honda didn't save thousands of dollars and give the s2k 240HP with an aluminum Accord V6 instead. The v6 is just way too heavy.
The article is accurate, buy greatly outdated. All old news.
Last edited by ericgrau; 01-29-08 at 12:30 AM.
01-29-08, 12:50 AM
#56
don't forget the 24hours of Daytona that was just won. All the porsches were defeated. BY 5 LAPS.
1st in GT class
9th overall
can anyone say Pwneage????
http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=278599
1st in GT class
9th overall
can anyone say Pwneage????
http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=278599
01-29-08, 12:50 AM
#57
I fix planes...
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Murica
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gotta agree with pheonix7. I love the rotary because it does what I want the way I want it to.
The rotary is a great engine, but its got its problems. Even so I choose it above any other motor.
The rotary is a great engine, but its got its problems. Even so I choose it above any other motor.
01-29-08, 12:53 AM
#58
werd, if you expect perfection in everything then you're going to have a very disappointing life when nothing meets your expectations.
My only complaint about the rotary?
i'll post it when I have a real complaint.
My only complaint about the rotary?
i'll post it when I have a real complaint.
01-29-08, 06:35 PM
#59
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Fremont, Ca
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course the 911 is much more expensive than a Mazda rx7 ever will be. I would rather pay more for something that is better designed. I think the 93' FD3S is the most unreliable automobile that came from Japan.
I've had numerous rx7's of all generations. The gas milage of the rx7 vs 911 is what I have personally have seen. BTW, EPA revised ratings a few years ago so I'm not sure how consumer reports got those numbers. The earlier EPA ratings were too high and were lowered. Check out the forums of the other cars. Most users get more than 25 mpg on the corvette and 911.
The rotary is lighter but I do not think it is much lighter. The rotary makes less HP compared to the banger in NA form. S2k vs Rx8
I knew someone would bring up the IMSA. That's like the only thing rotaryheads ever bring up. I said look at everything. This is taken from wikipedia:
14 Makes and Team World Championship (1964, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1994)
8 Long Distance World Championship
3 IMSA Supercar-Series (1991, 1992, 1993)
6 German Racing Championship (1977, 1979, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985)
20 European Hill Climbing Championship
20 Daytona 24 Hours (1968, 1970, 1971, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1995, 2003)
15 IMSA Supercar-Race (USA)
16 24 Hours of Le Mans (1970, 1971, 1976, 1977, 1979, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1994, 1996, 1997, 1998)
17 Sebring 12 Hour (1960, 1968, 1971, 1973, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988)
11 Targa Florio (1956, 1959, 1960, 1963, 1964, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973)
4 Rallye Monte Carlo (1968, 1969, 1970, 1978)
2 Paris-Dakar Rally (1984, 1986)
1 Formula 1 victory (1962)
[edit] TAG-Porsche engine in McLaren cars
3 Formula 1 Driver World Championship (1984, 1985, 1986)
2 Formula 1 Constructor World Championship (1984, 1985)
25 Formula 1 victories (1984, 12 wins; 1985, 6 wins; 1986, 4 wins; 1987, 3 wins)
Please show me something comparable and I will stand corrected. In the article it said Mazda used a Porsche engine in one of the race cars.
I'm glad that Phoenix7 is all happy that they finally won GT class after years of trying and using a 20B engine. Maybe this will make you feel better, maybe not.
24 hours of Daytona
Frequent winning cars (engines) were Porsche with 20 victories scored by various models, even the road based 911, 935 and 996. All other major car making brands had
five wins: Ferrari '63, '64, '67, '72, '98,
four wins: Ford '65, '66, '97, '99
three wins: Lexus '06, '07, '08
two wins: Chevrolet '69, '01, Jaguar '88, '90, Nissan '92, '94, Pontiac '04, '05,
one win: BMW '75, Toyota '93, Oldsmobile '96, Dodge Viper '00
I've had numerous rx7's of all generations. The gas milage of the rx7 vs 911 is what I have personally have seen. BTW, EPA revised ratings a few years ago so I'm not sure how consumer reports got those numbers. The earlier EPA ratings were too high and were lowered. Check out the forums of the other cars. Most users get more than 25 mpg on the corvette and 911.
The rotary is lighter but I do not think it is much lighter. The rotary makes less HP compared to the banger in NA form. S2k vs Rx8
I knew someone would bring up the IMSA. That's like the only thing rotaryheads ever bring up. I said look at everything. This is taken from wikipedia:
14 Makes and Team World Championship (1964, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1994)
8 Long Distance World Championship
3 IMSA Supercar-Series (1991, 1992, 1993)
6 German Racing Championship (1977, 1979, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985)
20 European Hill Climbing Championship
20 Daytona 24 Hours (1968, 1970, 1971, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1995, 2003)
15 IMSA Supercar-Race (USA)
16 24 Hours of Le Mans (1970, 1971, 1976, 1977, 1979, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1994, 1996, 1997, 1998)
17 Sebring 12 Hour (1960, 1968, 1971, 1973, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988)
11 Targa Florio (1956, 1959, 1960, 1963, 1964, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973)
4 Rallye Monte Carlo (1968, 1969, 1970, 1978)
2 Paris-Dakar Rally (1984, 1986)
1 Formula 1 victory (1962)
[edit] TAG-Porsche engine in McLaren cars
3 Formula 1 Driver World Championship (1984, 1985, 1986)
2 Formula 1 Constructor World Championship (1984, 1985)
25 Formula 1 victories (1984, 12 wins; 1985, 6 wins; 1986, 4 wins; 1987, 3 wins)
Please show me something comparable and I will stand corrected. In the article it said Mazda used a Porsche engine in one of the race cars.
I'm glad that Phoenix7 is all happy that they finally won GT class after years of trying and using a 20B engine. Maybe this will make you feel better, maybe not.
24 hours of Daytona
Frequent winning cars (engines) were Porsche with 20 victories scored by various models, even the road based 911, 935 and 996. All other major car making brands had
five wins: Ferrari '63, '64, '67, '72, '98,
four wins: Ford '65, '66, '97, '99
three wins: Lexus '06, '07, '08
two wins: Chevrolet '69, '01, Jaguar '88, '90, Nissan '92, '94, Pontiac '04, '05,
one win: BMW '75, Toyota '93, Oldsmobile '96, Dodge Viper '00
Last trip down I got 27mpg on my stock 2nd gen, Bay Area to Orange County . Porsche 911, Consumer Reports 20mpg overall (real world mileage city/freeway mix). RX-8, 20 mpg. Odyssey, 19mpg. Corvette, 21mpg. And for $50,000 you better get something more.
Why are people all hung up on gas mileage? What's the matter, can't win races? Honestly, the FC swept IMSA and the FD is still in the top racing class after 15 years. And, gas prices and all, rotaries are still much cheaper than the competition.
The rotary is still the way to go because it's still much lighter and much more compact than any piston. Heck, a 20 year old 13B is still a bit lighter than an s2k 4-banger (and the Renesis is much lighter). There's a reason Honda didn't save thousands of dollars and give the s2k 240HP with an aluminum Accord V6 instead. The v6 is just way too heavy.
The article is accurate, buy greatly outdated. All old news.
. Porsche 911, Consumer Reports 20mpg overall (real world mileage city/freeway mix). RX-8, 20 mpg. Odyssey, 19mpg. Corvette, 21mpg. And for $50,000 you better get something more.Why are people all hung up on gas mileage? What's the matter, can't win races? Honestly, the FC swept IMSA and the FD is still in the top racing class after 15 years. And, gas prices and all, rotaries are still much cheaper than the competition.
The rotary is still the way to go because it's still much lighter and much more compact than any piston. Heck, a 20 year old 13B is still a bit lighter than an s2k 4-banger (and the Renesis is much lighter). There's a reason Honda didn't save thousands of dollars and give the s2k 240HP with an aluminum Accord V6 instead. The v6 is just way too heavy.
The article is accurate, buy greatly outdated. All old news.
01-29-08, 07:38 PM
#60
Congratulations, you hate the rotary.
You're now comparing a 1.3L to a 2.0L/2.2L (rx8 and S2k)
S2k:
00-03 stock = 195-215whp = 97.5hp/L to 107.5hp/L
04+ stock = 195-220whp = 88.6hp/L to 100hp/L
RX8
stock = 145-186whp = 111.5hp/L to 143hp/L (the higher number IS NOT COMPLETELY STOCK since the guy had an intake but it doesn't seem to affect the overall point I'm trying to make.)
You posting the Porsche info not only HELPS me prove my point that the rotary can be competitive AND OWN porsches, FERRARIs and other boingers who have multiple titles under their belts.
Thanks.
Edit: how big were the porsche engines used in the most recent Daytona race? I'm sure they were bigger than the huge 2L motor that the rx8's had, right? What about Ferrari? How big is the LS2 used in the GXP-Rs?
Sounds like you're getting bent over nothing. You're can type all you won but the tiny 2L, 3-rotor still killed porsches by 5 laps. Let's not even get started with the porsches that overheated or the ones that crashed in the first minute of the race.
You're now comparing a 1.3L to a 2.0L/2.2L (rx8 and S2k)
S2k:
00-03 stock = 195-215whp = 97.5hp/L to 107.5hp/L
04+ stock = 195-220whp = 88.6hp/L to 100hp/L
RX8
stock = 145-186whp = 111.5hp/L to 143hp/L (the higher number IS NOT COMPLETELY STOCK since the guy had an intake but it doesn't seem to affect the overall point I'm trying to make.)
You posting the Porsche info not only HELPS me prove my point that the rotary can be competitive AND OWN porsches, FERRARIs and other boingers who have multiple titles under their belts.
Thanks.
Edit: how big were the porsche engines used in the most recent Daytona race? I'm sure they were bigger than the huge 2L motor that the rx8's had, right? What about Ferrari? How big is the LS2 used in the GXP-Rs?
Sounds like you're getting bent over nothing. You're can type all you won but the tiny 2L, 3-rotor still killed porsches by 5 laps. Let's not even get started with the porsches that overheated or the ones that crashed in the first minute of the race.
Last edited by phoenix7; 01-29-08 at 07:48 PM.
01-29-08, 07:50 PM
#62
plus, imagine if the FIA hadn;t banned the rotary from Lemans? Do you think Porsche would have the titles in 1994, 1996, 1997, 1998?? 
let me help you. NO.
Porsche is the reason the rotary was not allowed to race anyways. You sure you're in the right thread/forum?
EDIT: WORST MOTOR EVAR!!!!!!! EVAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://car-reviews.automobile.com/ne...ed-records/61/
let me help you. NO.Porsche is the reason the rotary was not allowed to race anyways. You sure you're in the right thread/forum?
EDIT: WORST MOTOR EVAR!!!!!!! EVAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://car-reviews.automobile.com/ne...ed-records/61/
01-29-08, 08:06 PM
#63
The key to this stratospheric power increase was a technique called peripheral porting. There is really no true equivalent in piston engine terms, and it’s something that motorsport authorities would struggle to control for the next four decades around the world. Put simply, the modification of a rotary engine’s ports is actually quite similar in principle to smoothing and enlarging a piston engine’s cylinder head ports, increasing the camshaft and valve size.
However, it is simply not possible for a piston engine to double its engine output due to cylinder head and camshaft modifications alone, whereas a 100% power gain from peripheral porting is perfectly possible, due to the far greater volumetric efficiency of the rotary engine.
So racing authorities for the next 40 years would struggle to level the playing field for piston and rotary engine racers.
On the one hand, allow rotary engines to port their housings, and piston engine teams would complain that it’s an unfair advantage. On the other hand, ban porting and rotary teams would be up in arms about how piston teams are allowed to do similar (conceptual) mods to their cam timing and cylinder head.
To be honest, the motorsport playing field has rarely been level between the two types of engines, and over the years, rotary teams in various racing classes have had periods of feast and periods of famine, when the rules have either worked in favour of the rotary or not. For decades, this has applied equally, from weekend club racers to the high budget Mazda factory team at Le Mans.
But in 1969, the motorsport organisations didn’t really understand the rotary and so for the period right up until the early 70s, Mazda had largely a free rein when it came to interpreting the rulebook……so when Mazda headed back to Europe, their little Familia Coupes had a full 200hp.
However, it is simply not possible for a piston engine to double its engine output due to cylinder head and camshaft modifications alone, whereas a 100% power gain from peripheral porting is perfectly possible, due to the far greater volumetric efficiency of the rotary engine.
So racing authorities for the next 40 years would struggle to level the playing field for piston and rotary engine racers.
On the one hand, allow rotary engines to port their housings, and piston engine teams would complain that it’s an unfair advantage. On the other hand, ban porting and rotary teams would be up in arms about how piston teams are allowed to do similar (conceptual) mods to their cam timing and cylinder head.
To be honest, the motorsport playing field has rarely been level between the two types of engines, and over the years, rotary teams in various racing classes have had periods of feast and periods of famine, when the rules have either worked in favour of the rotary or not. For decades, this has applied equally, from weekend club racers to the high budget Mazda factory team at Le Mans.
But in 1969, the motorsport organisations didn’t really understand the rotary and so for the period right up until the early 70s, Mazda had largely a free rein when it came to interpreting the rulebook……so when Mazda headed back to Europe, their little Familia Coupes had a full 200hp.
good reading, love it. Better than soft-core.
Originally Posted by MazdaUSA
Now under the Mazda umbrella, MAZDASPEED continued to receive recognition for its amazing on-track performance and its many victories around the globe. Sights were turned to the 24 Hours of Le Mans. Privateers had raced Mazdas through the seventies, but MAZDASPEED had decided that it was time to join the fray. The eighties saw some class wins, and then in 1991, the MAZDASPEED team succeeded in doing what no other Japanese auto maker before or since has been able to accomplish: capturing the overall win at the world's most prestigious endurance race.
Fearing a long-standing technical single-brand dominance, FIA outlawed rotary engines after the 1991 Le Mans race. Unable to race Mazda's trademark rotary engine in the world's most prestigious venue, MAZDASPEED began focusing more on the business side of motorsports and started developing and building aftermarket parts and accessories, while continuing grassroots motorsports initiatives.
By this time, it was clear that a disproportionate number of Mazdas were appearing and winning in small owner-driver sports car events all over the world, and that this was where Mazda truly belonged and should focus its competitive efforts.
Fearing a long-standing technical single-brand dominance, FIA outlawed rotary engines after the 1991 Le Mans race. Unable to race Mazda's trademark rotary engine in the world's most prestigious venue, MAZDASPEED began focusing more on the business side of motorsports and started developing and building aftermarket parts and accessories, while continuing grassroots motorsports initiatives.
By this time, it was clear that a disproportionate number of Mazdas were appearing and winning in small owner-driver sports car events all over the world, and that this was where Mazda truly belonged and should focus its competitive efforts.
RX713BT: You were right, your post DID make me feel better.
01-31-08, 01:43 AM
#64
02-01-08, 01:55 PM
#67
Caramelldansen
Join Date: May 2005
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 1,182
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
02-04-08, 06:45 PM
#71
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Fremont, Ca
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So now you are going to use the displacement as a factor? Many people would consider the 13B to be 2.6L. Your little superior "1.3L" engine uses gas as much as an engine over 2 times the size.
And for you to even talk about the Porsche crashing because of driver error or track condition has nothing to do with the topic. Instead you just go on and on about Daytona and how the rotary owns the piston motors. One race out of how many Daytona 24 hours? Have you looked at past results? Do I go about bragging how the rotary was killed last year?
Can you provide a list of all accomplishments in professional racing that the rotary engine has won? Let's compare.
Can you tell me why the BSFC of the rotary is lower than a piston engine?
I do not hate the rotary. If I did then I would not be trolling around on the rx7 forums or even have a rotary powered car.
I'm not getting bent on this topic. It's just when some thinks the rotary is god gift to internal combustion engines and claims that it is superior over pistons in so many aspects, they need to be checked.
And for you to even talk about the Porsche crashing because of driver error or track condition has nothing to do with the topic. Instead you just go on and on about Daytona and how the rotary owns the piston motors. One race out of how many Daytona 24 hours? Have you looked at past results? Do I go about bragging how the rotary was killed last year?
Can you provide a list of all accomplishments in professional racing that the rotary engine has won? Let's compare.
Can you tell me why the BSFC of the rotary is lower than a piston engine?
I do not hate the rotary. If I did then I would not be trolling around on the rx7 forums or even have a rotary powered car.
I'm not getting bent on this topic. It's just when some thinks the rotary is god gift to internal combustion engines and claims that it is superior over pistons in so many aspects, they need to be checked.
Congratulations, you hate the rotary.
You're now comparing a 1.3L to a 2.0L/2.2L (rx8 and S2k)
S2k:
00-03 stock = 195-215whp = 97.5hp/L to 107.5hp/L
04+ stock = 195-220whp = 88.6hp/L to 100hp/L
RX8
stock = 145-186whp = 111.5hp/L to 143hp/L (the higher number IS NOT COMPLETELY STOCK since the guy had an intake but it doesn't seem to affect the overall point I'm trying to make.)
You posting the Porsche info not only HELPS me prove my point that the rotary can be competitive AND OWN porsches, FERRARIs and other boingers who have multiple titles under their belts.
Thanks.
Edit: how big were the porsche engines used in the most recent Daytona race? I'm sure they were bigger than the huge 2L motor that the rx8's had, right? What about Ferrari? How big is the LS2 used in the GXP-Rs?
Sounds like you're getting bent over nothing. You're can type all you won but the tiny 2L, 3-rotor still killed porsches by 5 laps. Let's not even get started with the porsches that overheated or the ones that crashed in the first minute of the race.
You're now comparing a 1.3L to a 2.0L/2.2L (rx8 and S2k)
S2k:
00-03 stock = 195-215whp = 97.5hp/L to 107.5hp/L
04+ stock = 195-220whp = 88.6hp/L to 100hp/L
RX8
stock = 145-186whp = 111.5hp/L to 143hp/L (the higher number IS NOT COMPLETELY STOCK since the guy had an intake but it doesn't seem to affect the overall point I'm trying to make.)
You posting the Porsche info not only HELPS me prove my point that the rotary can be competitive AND OWN porsches, FERRARIs and other boingers who have multiple titles under their belts.
Thanks.
Edit: how big were the porsche engines used in the most recent Daytona race? I'm sure they were bigger than the huge 2L motor that the rx8's had, right? What about Ferrari? How big is the LS2 used in the GXP-Rs?
Sounds like you're getting bent over nothing. You're can type all you won but the tiny 2L, 3-rotor still killed porsches by 5 laps. Let's not even get started with the porsches that overheated or the ones that crashed in the first minute of the race.
02-04-08, 07:10 PM
#73
Explain to me how you come up with a 2.6L when Mazda engineers built a 1.3L 1300cc motor.
And for you to even talk about the Porsche crashing because of driver error or track condition has nothing to do with the topic. Instead you just go on and on about Daytona and how the rotary owns the piston motors. One race out of how many Daytona 24 hours? Have you looked at past results? Do I go about bragging how the rotary was killed last year?
Can you provide a list of all accomplishments in professional racing that the rotary engine has won? Let's compare.
http://www.speedarena.com/news/publi...ter_3903.shtml
http://rotarynews.com/node/view/983
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...eritage&bhcp=1
http://grandjdm.com/2007/07/23/racin...rotary-part-1/
http://grandjdm.com/2007/07/25/racin...rotary-part-2/
Can you tell me why the BSFC of the rotary is lower than a piston engine?
I do not hate the rotary. If I did then I would not be trolling around on the rx7 forums or even have a rotary powered car.
I'm not getting bent on this topic. It's just when some thinks the rotary is god gift to internal combustion engines and claims that it is superior over pistons in so many aspects, they need to be checked.
I'm not getting bent on this topic. It's just when some thinks the rotary is god gift to internal combustion engines and claims that it is superior over pistons in so many aspects, they need to be checked.
You can Disagree with me but who are you to tell me I'm wrong in believing in this lil motor?
Is it flawed? to you it may seem so.
To me? It's a work in progress and I'm liking what I'm seeing. The progress the rotary community has made over the last 5-10 years is amazing and it's not over yet.
What more can you do to the boinger? Increase engine size, make it out of lighter materials, use better/more durable parts to make sure they can hold up to the inherently excessive wear and tear of the reciprocal motion. The rotary is where the piston engine was 40 years ago.
Last edited by phoenix7; 02-04-08 at 07:16 PM.
02-04-08, 08:33 PM
#75
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Torrance
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mods, please change the title to "how the rotary compares to the piston"
Buttons were pushed with the current title.
It is an awesome looking car though, just ask the ppl that put pistons in them.
It is an awesome looking car though, just ask the ppl that put pistons in them.
Last edited by SA_RX7; 02-04-08 at 08:39 PM.