Piston Engine RX-7?

[2000_SI]

Ok, so I have this bet with one of my students at my Taekwon-Do school.

This kid is fresh out of high-school, and thinks he knows everything.... So he says that Mazda released a version of the RX-7 with a inline 4 engine (He said it was probably gen 1 or 2)....

I know he is talking out of his ass, but i need proof. Anyone got any resources to help me out?

[Lo)2enz0]

I search and couldn't find anything. Why would the call it an rx-7 if they took away the rotory. But I have heard a rumor that mazda is going to be releasing a new rx-7 but I am not even to sure about that, just remembered reading about it somewhere.

[Lo)2enz0]

http://forums.beyond.ca/showthread.php?threadid=68500

[JAYMEZ]

Negative on the Piston RX-7 ... People do throw in piston engines , but not Mazda.

[heavyD]

Originally posted by JAYMEZ_STi
Negative on the Piston RX-7 ... People do throw in piston engines , but not Mazda.

Correct. IMO the rotary engine is a waste as piston engines have far surpassed it in all areas of power, efficiency, etc. but I give Mazda credit for sticking to it and trying a different approach compared to the boring cars devoid of any soul and individuality that Honda & Toyota create.

[duffspec]

How much was the bet for? It there was money involved, I think you have won.

[calgarys13]

maybe hes confused and is thinking about a miata?

[2000_SI]

I know he was talking about the rx-7, and im still trying to find proof (maybe a engine list?!?) so i can put this tool in his place...

He bet me his Z24.... so im going to take it and trade it for a tim hortons coffee, cause thats about all they're worth :poosie:


(its just a joke.... J-body nuts... dont flame me :thumbsup: )

[CSMRX7]

Originally posted by heavyD


Correct. IMO the rotary engine is a waste as piston engines have far surpassed it in all areas of power, efficiency, etc. but I give Mazda credit for sticking to it and trying a different approach compared to the boring cars devoid of any soul and individuality that Honda & Toyota create.

So a 1.3L engine that puts out 300 + whp is not good enough?

[ecstasy_civic]

Originally posted by CSMRX7


So a 1.3L engine that puts out 300 + whp is not good enough?

:rofl: :burnout: :bigpimp:

[heavyD]

Originally posted by CSMRX7
So a 1.3L engine that puts out 300 + whp is not good enough?

Not when 2.0L 4-clyinder engines can make 400hp more reliably that will use less fuel and not require rebuilds every year. I don't want to start an argument about this but you know what I'm talking about. There's a reason the gnenesis engine makes under 200whp and isn't turbocharged.

[JAYMEZ]

How about a 550hp 2.0 20b Rotory engine ( 3 rotor) , muahah.. As for the rebuilds , they suck , and it should be covered under warranty LOL

[JCX]

Originally posted by heavyD


Not when 2.0L 4-clyinder engines can make 400hp more reliably that will use less fuel and not require rebuilds every year. I don't want to start an argument about this but you know what I'm talking about. There's a reason the gnenesis engine makes under 200whp and isn't turbocharged.

Exactly, let's not turn this into a piston fight. We know rotaries can make good power. That is not in question. But can they do it reliably on a mass produced scale while conforming to emission / fuel efficiency standards? Seems to be no.

[GQBalla]

the 13 b's are small so there would be better 50/50 wieght distribution

[QuasarCav]

Originally posted by GQBalla
the 13 b's are small so there would be better 50/50 wieght distribution


The size just means the engine can be placed closer the the centre of the car. You can get 50/50 without using a small engine.

[JAYMEZ]

As for engine list

12a 79-85
13b 84-85
13b T 87-88
13b NA 86-88
13b NA 89-92
13b T 89-91

13b TT 93-95
20b TT UBER

[dymz999]

Coolest Rx-7 I ever ever saw was a newer Rx-7 with a 400hp SR20DET engine in it. That is mega pimp. Wicked engine with a wicked car... I think the car was running high to mid 11's...

[heavyD]

Originally posted by JAYMEZ_STi
How about a 550hp 2.0 20b Rotory engine ( 3 rotor) , muahah.. As for the rebuilds , they suck , and it should be covered under warranty LOL

Listen Rotary guys, the last generation RX7 is one of my favorite cars of all time but they were a disater for Mazda warranty-wise. The RX8 to me is an insult to past RX7's and rotary fans as they are slower than RSX's, WRX's, SRT4's, even the porky 2006 Eclipse. Why bother making a great handling car and stuffing in an underpowered N/A rotary that can supposedly last 150 miles between rebuilds.

[dymz999]

LOL i love that sentiment. Most rotaries i've ever been in are never running perfectly always something wrong with them. Cool engines that can make good power just not always reliable. The RX-8 and its specs are due to the retards at FORD likely.

[CSMRX7]

One of the biggest problems with rotaries is improper tuning.

My car is almost always in good running order.

They are pretty fragile but if you are careful and take care of it it really isn't that bad.

My first car J-Body was way worse, but thats not saying much!!

The problem with rotaries is you can just bolt on a bunch of aftermarket parts and expect it to be great. You have to tune it right but then they are amaizing!!!

You get 300-400 whp, fairly reliable out of a 1.3l with a super low center of gravity.

But hey if you do have problems you don't even need an engine hoist to get it out!!!!:D

[2000_SI]

Originally posted by JAYMEZ_STi
As for engine list

12a 79-85
13b 84-85
13b T 87-88
13b NA 86-88
13b NA 89-92
13b T 89-91

13b TT 93-95
20b TT UBER

Thanks Jaymez :thumbsup:

[JAYMEZ]

Yah my 7 is being a bitch to me right now , a few kicks here and there should fix the problem :rofl:

[CSMRX7]

Originally posted by JAYMEZ_STi
Yah my 7 is being a bitch to me right now , a few kicks here and there should fix the problem :rofl:

Bitch is an understatement!!!

[Redlyne_mr2]

Originally posted by CSMRX7


Bitch is an understatement!!!
RX7's scare me

[rage2]

Originally posted by CSMRX7
So a 1.3L engine that puts out 300 + whp is not good enough?

Originally posted by JAYMEZ_STi
How about a 550hp 2.0 20b Rotory engine ( 3 rotor)
Again with the displacement comparisons ;).

http://forums.beyond.ca/showthread.php?s=&threadid=46316

Can't really compare rotary engine displacement to piston engine displacement, read the thread in detail to understand why 1.3L rotary engine is equivilant to 2.6L piston engine.

[CSMRX7]

If your comparing air flow. But if it is weight and weight distribution we are comparing it is a lot closer to a 1.3 L engine.

[rage2]

Yea, I know. You were comparing displacement to power. I'm telling you why it's misleading. :)

I never said anything about rotories being inefficient in packaging hehe. But if we wanna go there, weight distribution is overrated anyways!

[CSMRX7]

Originally posted by rage2
Yea, I know. You were comparing displacement to power. I'm telling you why it's misleading. :)

I never said anything about rotories being inefficient in packaging hehe. But if we wanna go there, weight distribution is overrated anyways!

How is weight distribution overrated?

[EK 2.0]

Originally posted by Redlyne_mr2
RX7's scare me

In all fairness to Rotaries Ryan, so do Porsche's...haha

[Rockski]

the under 5000$ trader has one thats a cylinder engine in it for sale if that helps any... (probably not)

[rage2]

Originally posted by CSMRX7
How is weight distribution overrated?
In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't make a big difference on mechanical grip, especially the very overrated 50/50 balance. Hell, my 944's 50/50, yet my SLK 32 AMG will easily outcorner it with 53/47 weight distribution, and a Porsche 911 will slaugter both cars with a 36/64 distribution.

Point is, it's all over the map (weight distribution vs mechanical grip). Suspension has way more to do with it than anything. Of course, handling traits will be dictated by the different types of weight distribution, and it all comes down to driver preference.

Oh, handling traits can be "tweaked" if you have enough power too haha.

[CSMRX7]

Originally posted by rage2

In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't make a big difference on mechanical grip, especially the very overrated 50/50 balance. Hell, my 944's 50/50, yet my SLK 32 AMG will easily outcorner it with 53/47 weight distribution, and a Porsche 911 will slaugter both cars with a 36/64 distribution.

Point is, it's all over the map (weight distribution vs mechanical grip). Suspension has way more to do with it than anything. Of course, handling traits will be dictated by the different types of weight distribution, and it all comes down to driver preference.

Oh, handling traits can be "tweaked" if you have enough power too haha.

I knida figured thats the answer, but 50/50 is a lot more comfortable to drive that 36/64.

It is hard to drive a 911 fast, but my RX7 is 45/55 so I guess I don't have perfect weight distribution, unless you consider perfect to be somewhat rear biased.

I personally just enjoy the feel of a car with a bit of a rear bias :D

[JAYMEZ]

I like ice cream :dunno: ... ANyways there you go , you got the engine list

[Redlyne_mr2]

Rage2 you and a small group of people are only some of the few who praise the handling of the slk. Every car show or article that I have seen or read shoots down the slk for it's handling. While on the other hand the 944 chassis was said to be one of the best handling porsches ever. When it comes down to it its all personal opinion for sure. Im with Jason, I prefer a little junk in the truck as well.

[CSMRX7]

Originally posted by Redlyne_mr2
When it comes down to it its all personal opinion for sure. Im with Jason, I prefer a little junk in the truck as well.

I like my women that way too ;)

[Go4Long]

Originally posted by JAYMEZ_STi
As for engine list

12a 79-85
13b 84-85
13b T 87-88
13b NA 86-88
13b NA 89-92
13b T 89-91

13b TT 93-95
20b TT UBER

to really get more specific,

86-88 motors(both n/a and turbo) are S4's, 89-92 are S5 which have higher compression and an electronic OMP instead of the mechanical one on the S4's. the twin turbo 13B for 93-95 is the 13b REW according to mazda's engine codes, there was also an older 13B twin turbo that was available in the Cosmo for a while(with the optional motor being the 20B) shame that it was only available in an automatic.
the "true displacement of a rotary" argument has been tossed around more times then Jenna Jameson, bottom line is you can't really take the formula for determining displacement on a piston engine and apply it to a rotary, because they really don't function the same. Which is why the S2000 still could make the claim of the highest HP per liter in a factory car when it came out.
back to the topic at hand...

[Arthur Dent]

Rx-7s only had rotarys in them from the factory. Some of the early stuff like Rx-3s and the like had piston powered equivalents but they had different names. RX stands for Rotary Experiament ...

here's my Rx-7

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v197/arthurdent/RX7/50b564c0.jpg

[Redlyne_mr2]

Ohh nice first gen man, super super clean.

[962 kid]

Originally posted by Arthur Dent
Rx-7s only had rotarys in them from the factory. Some of the early stuff like Rx-3s and the like had piston powered equivalents but they had different names. RX stands for Rotary Experiament ...

here's my Rx-7

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v197/arthurdent/RX7/50b564c0.jpg

do you have any pics of your stellar? :D

[EK 2.0]

wait, I wanna stir the pot...


Wankel's SUCK-ASS!!...god damn Rotaries, sucking gas like a V12 Ferrari...haha

just kidding guys really I am...;)

[Team_Mclaren]

Originally posted by Go4Long


there was also an older 13B twin turbo that was available in the Cosmo for a while(with the optional motor being the 20B)

Just wanna add to that, the 13B-REW that came with the Cosmo was rated at 230 instead of 255 in the RX7, it's also the first 13B-REW that that came out (started in 1990 compares to 1991 for the RX-7)

[BerserkerCatSplat]

The only reason I could think of for Mazda releasing an inline-4 RX-7 would be for countries around the world that aren't as rich as North America, Europe and Asia. In countries (say, like Chile) parts for a rotory engine would be impossible to find. Thus, it would make sense to sell it with a readily-available piston engine.

But that's just speculation on my part.

[JAYMEZ]

^^ But none of that ever happened :D

[BerserkerCatSplat]

^^Oh, I'm pretty sure it never happened! They'd have to call it the PX-7 or something. :D

[FiveFreshFish]

Originally posted by 2000_SI
.... So he says that Mazda released a version of the RX-7 with a inline 4 engine

He might have confused it with the Triumph TR7 with the 2.0L inline 4.

[Arthur Dent]

Originally posted by 962 kid


do you have any pics of your stellar? :D

haha - sure. Its getting chopped up for Lotus Seven clone soon!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v197/arthurdent/Locost/e1c93e7b.jpg

[rage2]

Originally posted by Redlyne_mr2
Rage2 you and a small group of people are only some of the few who praise the handling of the slk. Every car show or article that I have seen or read shoots down the slk for it's handling. While on the other hand the 944 chassis was said to be one of the best handling porsches ever. When it comes down to it its all personal opinion for sure. Im with Jason, I prefer a little junk in the truck as well.
Don't get me wrong, the SLK is a bitch to control approaching and at the limit. It behaves very well until about 8/10ths when you need very precise inputs to make the car go fast. And when it exceeds it's limits, it's a sloppy mess (remember my SLK drift videos, I think I've put 2 drifts together only 2-3 times in that car). This is probably what people are talking about. I'm praising the mechanical grip level of the car, it's way better than the 944, much faster through the turns. Then again, it's got 20 years of suspension advancements on the 944.

My personal opinion differs with the general public. I don't look for how easy it is to drive, I look for how FAST it is. How it behaves, well, you get used to it pretty quick, as long as it's predictable and repeatable.

[heavyD]

Rage is right about the 50/50 bias being overrated. Properly tuned suspension is just as important. Take for instance the 2006 Eclipse. It has a 61/39 bias which is pretty poor but it runs near identical skidpad & slalom numbers (even with the handicap of running goodyear eagle RSA tires which are IMO among the worst allseason performance tires ever made) and has superior braking distances to the 2005 Mustang GT with a 53/47 f/r bias. This is due to the Mustang's antiquated rear end. The 350Z on the other hand has the same 53/47 f/r bias and destroys both cars (all three cars weigh in between a porky 3370 & 3570 lbs) in every handling/braking category because it has the suspension technology to take advantage of the f/r bias. Superior suspension technology wins races not f/r weight bias.

[Maxt]

Yeah you can make a cummins turbo diesel 50/50 by putting 2 chev 350 blocks over each rear tire, stil wont handle worth a pinch..its just one aspect.
With the rx-7 its about engine placement, in terms of not only fore and aft, but height in the car, with the powerplants centre of gravity, being low, and less than conventional piston engines.
To the original question, there was never a piston rx-7 from Mazda.
And yes its all in the tuning.. I have been to 20 psi on pump gas on a 13bt, and all was well afterward...Maxt

[crazydave]

heres a irelavant thought. i like rx-7's because they are loud and shoot stock flames....YUM! always wanted one,but the gas mileage scared me away every time.:rolleyes:

[Arthur Dent]

gas mileage isn't that bad - at least in a 12A carb'd one.

[Hollywood]

Originally posted by CSMRX7
But hey if you do have problems you don't even need an engine hoist to get it out!!!!:D

Nope!, You just need your wallet!



Originally posted by CSMRX7
How is weight distribution overrated?

I had 50/50 in my 240....I did not feel any magic. Maybe if my tires were all the same size all around I might have felt it more. :dunno: Real coilovers were the biggest difference I felt in the car handling wise.

But honestly 'roteries' and 'reliable' are two words that should never be in the same sentence....

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by Hollywood



But honestly 'roteries' and 'reliable' are two words that should never be in the same sentence....

Not on this continent anyways. The main reason for that is the lack of decent engine builders and tuners.The engine just doesnt have the technical backing here that it does in Japan. As Max mentioned there seems to be heaps of high horsepower reliable rotary's in Japan.

[Maxt]

Yep, its not the motor , its the people...It was an eyeopener to see rotaries getting rebuilt due to wear instead of being blown up..
All sorts of stuff can go wrong on any engine, having a problem with peripheral equipment on any tightly wound motor will result in engine damage, I dont care if its a 13bt, an sr20det, 2tgz, or a 500 cid donovan hemi.
In terms of rotary development, power output and tuning level, North America is about 10-15 years behind Japan, we dont even have access to half the "brand name" parts sold their for rx-7's. There is a ton of stuff made specific for the rx's by trust, hks, blitz etc that was never sold here and never advertised here, having that stuff makes life alot easier. On top of that here we have all sorts of people trying to reinvent the wheel when it comes to the internal parts of the engines, alot of that stuff is crap and is not helping the rotary cause or reputation..
Alot of people underestimate the power ouput and the subsequent hp requirements of the systems to run a rotary, on top of that alot of the components sold for other cars just arent up to the task of being on a rotary.

Check this stack of housings out, out of that pile there was maybe one blown housing, the rest just measured out to a worn spec or close to that.. They dont like to use used housings there anyway, 99% of all the motors that I saw go together there were always new housings. These housings even though "cherry" by North American standards, were on there way to the recycler, they were nice enough to give me on to take home..:)..Maxt