Quantcast
Rotary Engines - Page 2 - Beyond.ca - Car Forums
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 32 of 32

Thread: Rotary Engines

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Buenos Aires, Argentina
    My Ride
    Mitsubishi Eclipse GS-X 97
    Posts
    3
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I agree that high torque figures is very fuel consuming, but very low figures are very "unpleasant" to drive daily.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    335
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    it's nothing a supercharger can't fix.... IF the new Renesis can handle that.....
    i think the mazdaspeed version that mazda was talking about a few months back was either gonna be s/c'd or t/c'd...
    300/hp 3XX/lbs of tq
    that enuff torque for ya?

    what I wanna know is if mazda is gonna offer this engine as a crate engine too... it wouldn't be a bad idea to get a renesis and slap it into a miata..
    mazda did it in japan....

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    North East
    My Ride
    1986 Mazda RX-7 GXL (FC302)
    Posts
    117
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by thich
    it's nothing a supercharger can't fix.... IF the new Renesis can handle that.....
    i think the mazdaspeed version that mazda was talking about a few months back was either gonna be s/c'd or t/c'd...
    300/hp 3XX/lbs of tq
    that enuff torque for ya?

    if you had a centrifugal (spelling??) supercharger you wouldnt really notice a torque difference down low, i mean sure, at 9500rpm ur making well over 300ft/lbs, but down low, the supercharger isnt spooled. a centrifugal supercharger is pretty much the compressor half of the turbo, driven by the crankshaft. Personally i think this is quite dumb, having supercharger kits for 9000rpm engines because that compressor has to go from ~7500rpm at idle, way up to over 60,000rpm at 9000rpm back to idle in one blip of the throttle. Turbos make sence becuase they dont have that step-up ratio that the centrifugal compressors need to make decent boost. I think they should turbo the RX-8 just like the previous RX-7. That was an awesome setup.
    Just my 0.02

    Simon

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    BoostLand
    My Ride
    something green
    Posts
    1,931
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    The last generation rx-7 turbo was a warranty nightmare, sequential had to many hoses to break, and pop...
    Superchargers don't work very well on the rotary, in order to feed the motor at low rpms the pulley sizes then overspeed the supercharger at higher rpm's, most of the supercharger kits for the 13b have been abandoned due to speed related failures..
    Turbo is the way, but a large single is the way to go, the beauty about a larger turbo is that you can drive around in basically n/a mode with the turbo unspooled, my turbo car kicked the shit out of my non turbo car on gas mileage in normal driving, don't ask about on boost gas mileage though...:roll:..... Smaller turbo's spool so easily on rotary's, that you inadvertantly almost are driving in boost all the time, it makes for kick ass street driving, but is harder on the wallet and power falls off flat above 6500...
    Chrisng's car just seems to be in boost permanently ... Its the stock series 5 turbo with garrett compressor wheel..My turbo is from an 8.8 litre Ford diesel heavy truck, you have to really want to go, to get it to spool, put your foot to the floor, and then about a second later the turbo spools and things start to happen, but that is with a stock port motor as well, port the crap out of a rotary and it will spool turbo's that are larger than the engine itself..Lag does suck some times...
    I really don't think the renesis will be T-charged, the exhaust energy is reduced in the new design, and the compression ratio is to high, making the amount of boost on pump gas rather low, and thus the trade offs for a wee bit more power are to much..Maxt
    Too loud for Aspen

  5. #25
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    9.872604, -85.498802
    My Ride
    Turbos n Stuff™
    Posts
    5,960
    Rep Power
    27

    Default

    Originally posted by Wildcat


    more torque= more gas consumption= better daily driving mileage

    pfft, my car has lots of torque for its size (160/160) and its not any worse on gas than any honda, in fact I bet its actually better in daily driving because you dont have to rev the hell out of it to get it going, or downshift when going up hills/parkade ramps.
    Travel

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    '08 Mitsubishi Lancer, '97 GMC Jimmy
    Posts
    1,629
    Rep Power
    23

    Default

    Originally posted by Ben



    pfft, my car has lots of torque for its size (160/160) and its not any worse on gas than any honda, in fact I bet its actually better in daily driving because you dont have to rev the hell out of it to get it going, or downshift when going up hills/parkade ramps.
    EXACTLY!...one of the reasons i love Driving VW's over Japanese cars.
    "Car Manufacturers give us a well engineered basic car but leave it's real development to us."

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    1,039
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    turbo=import
    supercharger=domestic
    ben= niave (its not like hondas are bad on gas to begin with, MY car is bad on gas!)


    Professional DJ equipment for sale: Click Here

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    York
    My Ride
    1989 Ford Mustang
    Posts
    107
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by mad_psyentist
    Ok, I'm answering my own posting cuz I had to figure this out. I think the F's stay for the Wankel Rotary series (FC, FD)... but the Renesis is used in the RX-8. But I can't find info anywhere on what the chassis code would be for the RX-8... unless that IS gonna be the chassis code. ??
    I don't think it will will be "FE." Every RX model has a different chassis code.
    -Rob, Wannabe Director
    1987 Ford Mustang 2.3L Turbo


  9. #29
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    '87 RX-7 Tii
    Posts
    174
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by STI-Guy


    I don't think it will will be "FE." Every RX model has a different chassis code.
    ? Ya lost me.

    Every car has a different chassis code. Otherwise we wouldn't be able to use them to distinguish the diff. generations. The FC and FD generations of the RX-7 have virtually nothing in common save name and base engine (and some other parts), but they both stuck to the F-series chassis codes. I'm wondering if the RX-8 was sticking to the F-series codes, or if Mazda's opening a new code for them.
    "Well here's the problem. Some koot put an Acura engine in your Honda."

  10. #30
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    20
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by JustinL

    Justin
    not trying to be an ass but ive seen alot of 944's go for 3k to 5k, and plus i personaly wouldnt own a 944 thats older than an 86 because the earlier ones had more electrical problems.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Beaumont
    My Ride
    Touareg, Cayenne, 944s
    Posts
    717
    Rep Power
    29

    Default

    Have a look at www.canadatrader.com. Mine is in the lower end of the price range. The difference between the 85.5 and later vs. early production years is much more than the electrical, in fact i'd say the electrical is probably the part that was changed the least. Regardless it's a moot point, because mine is an 87.

    I don't think you are trying to be an ass, but this type of msg should be saved for PM. (I apolagize for the offttopicness for the both of us)

    Justin



    Originally posted by Arthur
    not trying to be an ass but ive seen alot of 944's go for 3k to 5k, and plus i personaly wouldnt own a 944 thats older than an 86 because the earlier ones had more electrical problems.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    York
    My Ride
    1989 Ford Mustang
    Posts
    107
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by mad_psyentist


    ? Ya lost me.

    Every car has a different chassis code. Otherwise we wouldn't be able to use them to distinguish the diff. generations. The FC and FD generations of the RX-7 have virtually nothing in common save name and base engine (and some other parts), but they both stuck to the F-series chassis codes. I'm wondering if the RX-8 was sticking to the F-series codes, or if Mazda's opening a new code for them.
    I meant the RX-1, RX-2, ect. I don't believe they were a part of the F-Series. So why would the 8 be?
    -Rob, Wannabe Director
    1987 Ford Mustang 2.3L Turbo


Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Tons of rotary video footage from Japan

    By Maxt in forum Cars, Bikes, Machines
    Replies: 6
    Latest Threads: 01-25-2003, 10:57 PM
  2. Mazda Rotary Commercial!

    By RX-7_TWINTURBO in forum Cars, Bikes, Machines
    Replies: 7
    Latest Threads: 11-23-2002, 08:49 PM
  3. Mustang GT-R with Rotary engine

    By gpomp in forum Cars, Bikes, Machines
    Replies: 13
    Latest Threads: 10-18-2002, 05:27 PM
  4. Rotary DeLorean

    By Arthur Dent in forum General Car/Bike Talk
    Replies: 2
    Latest Threads: 10-09-2002, 05:25 PM
  5. Rotary in a Mazda B2200

    By Lowlivin2002 in forum General Car/Bike Talk
    Replies: 2
    Latest Threads: 07-10-2002, 08:21 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •