Why Do Rotaries Suck?

[Birds]

personally though I still don't give a crap. engine size is not important to me. I have owned vehicles from .13cc to 4.2L and some small engines were better than some bigger ones and vice versa. there are so many factors that go into a good engine package, materials, quality of manufacture, ancillaries (turbo? super charger? NA?), and the list goes on.

Agreed

[bozodos]

This thread is starting to die off a bit, so before someone takes it and collates it into their university thesis, is the wrong side willing to concede to the Mazda lies?

[fuzzy_scuz]

Shhhhhhhh,

They are sleeping.

[Birds]

zzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZ

[ylwgtr2]

[R-R-Rx7]

lack of expertise is what makes the rotary weak. its not as reliable as the rb26 or the 2jz but its not as weak as they say.

[skyline_man]

I stumbled onto this thread accidentally and after reading through the first 26 pages, I have come up with the conclusion that Gary is THE MAN.

He is spot on with his logic and reasoning. His arguments are factual and contains no bias.

It makes me laugh when I read the response and counter argument from the anti-Gary brigade trying to defend their beloved rotary. All i can see is DENIAL. Just like the denial from Porsche fanbois when the R35 GTR came along and whipped the turbo's ass left right and center.

In one corner you have Gary arguing his point like a passionate engineer, and in the other corner, you have rotary fanbois arguing their point like politicians.

As sad as it seems, it's very very hard to 'unwash' someone who has been subjected to 40 years of brainwashing in just a few pages. But if there's anyone out there who can do, then that anyone is Gary.

[Silvia GTR]

f**k me some incredible info in here!

I think Gazza has a secret admirer

[GT-R32]

I stumbled onto this thread accidentally and after reading through the first 26 pages, I have come up with the conclusion that Gary is THE MAN.

He is spot on with his logic and reasoning. His arguments are factual and contains no bias.

It makes me laugh when I read the response and counter argument from the anti-Gary brigade trying to defend their beloved rotary. All i can see is DENIAL. Just like the denial from Porsche fanbois when the R35 GTR came along and whipped the turbo's ass left right and center.

In one corner you have Gary arguing his point like a passionate engineer, and in the other corner, you have rotary fanbois arguing their point like politicians.

As sad as it seems, it's very very hard to 'unwash' someone who has been subjected to 40 years of brainwashing in just a few pages. But if there's anyone out there who can do, then that anyone is Gary.

LOL!!

You are a Gary fan boi! An engineer, any engineer, let alone one worth his salt, understands the concept of torque. Which is but one of Gary´s fatal mistakes in his ´arguments`.

[scathing]

Torque's that irrelevant thing that people who don't like rotaries seem to be obsessed with.

[Birds]

I stumbled onto this thread accidentally and after reading through the first 26 pages, I have come up with the conclusion that Gary is THE MAN.

He is spot on with his logic and reasoning. His arguments are factual and contains no bias.

It makes me laugh when I read the response and counter argument from the anti-Gary brigade trying to defend their beloved rotary. All i can see is DENIAL. Just like the denial from Porsche fanbois when the R35 GTR came along and whipped the turbo's ass left right and center.

In one corner you have Gary arguing his point like a passionate engineer, and in the other corner, you have rotary fanbois arguing their point like politicians.

As sad as it seems, it's very very hard to 'unwash' someone who has been subjected to 40 years of brainwashing in just a few pages. But if there's anyone out there who can do, then that anyone is Gary.

Err come off it...whilst I don't want to re-ignite what was the main debate in this thread, I will happily challenge what you have just said...

GT-R32 and I are both far from rotary fanboys, I've never owned one in my life and we're hardly regulars at the rotary forums...so where do we fit in this two corner bout between Gary-almighty and the rotary boys? I'd have to say that whether wrong or right, both of us had the least bias of anyone in this thread given we have no direct association with rotaries which is more than I can say for both Gary (who claimed to be working on the very things as he wrote his replies) and the rotary fans. I took to this thread with an open mind and learnt more about rotaries than I already knew...in contrast, some took to this thread with only what they already knew, not prepared to accept the possibility of any alternative (or even look at it subjectively) at all.

The funny thing about your writing in bold is that this was exactly my sentiment towards Gary for the entire time I participated in this thread. I'm not looking to start it over with Gary again, but what you've claimed right there was the feeling on both sides of the argument...so why you think your ultra belated opinion might suddenly settle something of a 40 page debate because you chose a side after reading 26 pages without backing up your point is beyond me.

[GT-R32]

Birds, he referred to Gary as if he had made his point like an engineer - given some of the most basic mistakes made in many of his posts discredits that bloke´s conclusion entirely. He had made his decision prior to writing in this thread.

Torque's that irrelevant thing that people who don't like rotaries seem to be obsessed with.

Torque is changed at the wheels with gearing. So yes it`s kind of irrelevant and I agree people talk as if it`s some form of defining point. Average power is what matters over all else. When people talk of torque (which given something doesnt even have to be moving to get a torque rating, talk is all toque good for!) they mean average power and for some frustrating reason people use the word torque as if it`s something really clever to say.

A side point... Given torque and revs calculate work done and what counts - power and speed potential, if a car is making 500hp at 6500RPM as plenty of 13B turbos do, then it is making bags of torque!

[Jez13]

I also think our buddy 'skyline man' needs to read the rest of the thread too. Many arguments from other perspectives outside of Gary's theories are illustrated and well supported.

[bozodos]

birds you just like to take the opposing view for the hell of it!

[Birds]

Nar I have to believe in the opposing view or I won't take it on lol. It's just...if something CAN be argued then I will argue it yes

Should have considered a career in law maybe? :S

[skyline_man]

We'll, I've got news for you Rotary huggers. I've spoken to a friend of mine in Japan and he so happens to know an engineer working for Mazda. I asked him to ask his engineer friend about the 3 points that Gary brought up regarding the 13B rotary engine.

Here's what the engineer said:

1) The 13B does indeed use 3.9 liters in one complete cycle. But 2.6liters is the normally accepted figure.

2) Piston engines 'revolve' a lot faster than rotaries. The rotary engine itself only spins 3000rpm. The eccentric shaft speed is irrelevant. The engineer went on to say that 90% of people are misguided into thinking that the engine spins 9000rpm when it's not. Mazda doesn't mind though.

3) The rotary is pretty much a 2 stroke. If it sounds like a 2 stroke, smells like a 2 stroke, uses oil like a 2 stroke, fouls the plugs like a 2 stroke, cycles like a 2 stroke - then it must be a......... (No prizes for getting the answer right). Mind you, these are the exact words that the engineer said, translated of course.

So I guess Gary is pretty much dead on right.

Next topic. You rotary huggers want to argue that 1+1 is NOT equal to 2?

Edited November 10, 2009 by skyline_man

[bozodos]

haha thread revival, awesome!

[Jez13]

We'll, I've got news for you Rotary huggers. I've spoken to a friend of mine in Japan and he so happens to know an engineer working for Mazda. I asked him to ask his engineer friend about the 3 points that Gary brought up regarding the 13B rotary engine.

Here's what the engineer said:

1) The 13B does indeed use 3.9 liters in one complete cycle. But 2.6liters is the normally accepted figure.

2) Piston engines 'revolve' a lot faster than rotaries. The rotary engine itself only spins 3000rpm. The eccentric shaft speed is irrelevant. The engineer went on to say that 90% of people are misguided into thinking that the engine spins 9000rpm when it's not. Mazda doesn't mind though.

3) The rotary is pretty much a 2 stroke. If it sounds like a 2 stroke, smells like a 2 stroke, uses oil like a 2 stroke, fouls the plugs like a 2 stroke, cycles like a 2 stroke - then it must be a......... (No prizes for getting the answer right). Mind you, these are the exact words that the engineer said, translated of course.

So I guess Gary is pretty much dead on right.

Next topic. You rotary huggers want to argue that 1+1 is NOT equal to 2?

Thats if you believe that 3 combustions of a rotor is a complete cycle. Think about one combustion from each rotor is one cylce. Just becuase its not a full rotation from the rotor doesn't mean that it is not a full combustion cycle.

I have a feeling your not going to try and understand that simply by the way that you write. You sound like a person who will view only what he beleives and refuse to see logic in any other perception no matter the logic. Please read the rest of the thread before we do the freaking circus thing again.

[Birds]

LOL I agree Jeremy. Using terms like "rotary huggers"...somewhat nullifies the credibility of anything that follows. My cousin knows a friend who knows some guy whose uncle is that dude that owns Mazda...and he says you're wrong...what have you got to say about that skyline_man?

[GT-R32]

LOL I agree Jeremy. Using terms like "rotary huggers"...somewhat nullifies the credibility of anything that follows. My cousin knows a friend who knows some guy whose uncle is that dude that owns Mazda...and he says you're wrong...what have you got to say about that skyline_man?

Yeah grain of salt. Hilarious attempt at adding credibility or clout to his post with hearsay, it almost sounds as if Gary wrote that... And he hasn't appeared in the thread himself since the torque accident, LOL.