Why Do Rotaries Suck?

[mad082]

hahaha. i'm laughing and want to strangle you at the same time. its very frustrating

Calling them Datsuns isnt offensive to us. We love our Datto's around here

have to agree with tony (i can't believe i just said that. going to go and scrub myself with bleach). love the datto's. them things is damn near bullet proof when it comes to reliability, LOL

oh and i could feel my brains turning to mush and dribbling out my ears until tits were posted (then something else started dribbling, LOL). then this thread became tollerable again, LOL

[RICE RACING]

120Y and 200B FTW

[ANK]

i saw a link to this thread from ausrotor

you guys cant be serious have any of you wanna be's stood next to a 13/20b on meth going past you at full noise smashing the tyres at the start line with the smell of meth filling the air!!!! its better then SOME head jobs

you CRUMS just dont have respect now before you all thrash me again like last time even with your moderater changing my avator then having a cry when i posted up his address you blokes should open your eyes and have respect in my stash of cars between me and my family we has a vl turbo a boat with a bathurst torana motor with side webbers my brother has a rx7 that made 340rwkw with a dirty old t04b it now has a gt40 on it waiting a re tune and my race car has a rb26/30 in a tubbed ke20

you need to learn to respect all cars i have had 2 r32 gtr's but i would love nothing more to open my garage to see a rx3 savana gt sitting in there

grow up guys !

i guess rb motors are shit then cause 2js are faster then.....PACK OF NOOBS

Edited September 20, 2009 by ANK

[Munkyb0y]

You rotary guys are a bunch of flaming homos, and that's what keeps the masses away from the Wankel. Gayness by association.

[GT-R32]

120Y and 200B FTW

They are sick, but nothing beats Toyo Cork Kogyo 's K360:

and the Toyo Kogyo K360 SP:

[GT-R32]

For all those saying rotaries sound shit:

Entertaining video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXjzLaVvhjU...feature=related

Mazda Furai:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtbjye3JABs...feature=related

787B:

It's the twin rotors that people don't like noise wise (I love them though).

[ADJUST]

Please don't tarnish all us rotor heads with the same brush. Some of us are normal people, who can have a normal conversations and simply enjoy our cars, and other makes/models as well. They all have a certain charm when viewed in the rear view mirror of an FD

Sure there are some funny, and uneducated things said on here, but that's half the reason for forums and the internet, to learn, (the other half has featured in this thread as well!).

[rxnomore]

I'd like to try and answer or rather mount an argument against the specific question "why do rotaries suck".

Before I start, I have a diploma and a degree in Mechanical Engineering, however, my argument has nothing to do with thermo dynamics, swept volume, number of rotations or any other techno terms and phrases that this discussion has raised. In fact, when I fell in "love" with rotaries, I had little understanding of how they actually worked.

Let me take you back to 1988, I was 16 years old and was driving a weber fed 13B RX4 coupe (yeah, okay I'm an old bugger!). These were the days before rotary hysteria had taken place, and in fact, the "rotor heads" were the minority and rotaries were hated and totally disregarded by everyone. If you wanted to go fast you were typically driving a Ford, Holden or Chrysler with a V8 or stinking hot six. Rotaries were given absolutely no respect. Terms like chook cooker, rotisserie, wanker engine, rice burner, jap crap and various other names were hurled as abuse whether you cruised through a carpark loaded with other car enthusiasts, or pulled up to a set of lights on Saturday night.

The reality for me was, the more people stirred me up, the greater the pleasure was to blow them away at a set of lights. I never forget the night when a 360 Chrysler pulled up next to me and the the passenger was making chicken noises and flapping his arms like a chicken, the driver was also laughing in hysterics. Lights turn green, a screech of wheels, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd gear to 8000rpm and the Chrysler is in my rear view mirror. The next set of lights the Chrysler pulls up again. This time there is no laughing, and both guys are looking straight ahead, pretending I'm not there. This scene is is repeated multiple times on any given night. Unfortunately, although the little rota proves itself time and time again, the competition decides not to acknowledge the performance, or acknowledges the defeat by hurling further abuse.

Fast foward to 1998. I'm still with an RX4, but now it has a turbo. I'm at a dyno shoot out, and my quiet, smooth idling RX4 just pulls an impressive 270 something RWKW. I'm beaten by 2 or 3kw by a guy in an AC Cobra replica with a 429 big block, Motec injected blah blah blah. The rumor was he had spent 40K on the motor. It was an impressive motor and vehicle without a doubt. After the event the owner comes over to me, and with his strong european accent, asks to have a look at my engine. When I pop the hood his eyes almost pop out of his head. His comment was "wholly f**k, where is the rest of it?. That thing makes all that power?".

Okay, I've rambled on here. But unless you've owned a rotary, you probably can't appreciate what I'm saying. Forget about whether it 1.3,2.6. or 3.9 litres, and whether it's 2, 4 or any other stroke of an engine. These are great little engines that for many many years have been given very little respect by the majority of car enthusiasts, even though their performance was widely proven. Matched with the right car, they are damn hard to beat on the street or the track. They are a performance engine and as such need to be treated accordingly. Flog the arse out of them day in and day out, they won't last (what engine would?), look after them and they will give a reasonable life.

In short, rotaries don't suck - I guess it's just down to personal preference. The history and heritage of the rotary is such that most guys that enjoy them are probably more sensitive to criticism than most.

My two cents. Good thread, let's not make this personal.

[GT-R32]

Great post rxnomore. And thanks for taking me back. However I was 10-12 years later than you to rotaries, but even then they were something of an oddity. And in my import engine 13B turbo Series 2 RX7 it was $30,000 R33 GTSTs that I loved to beat so much! There was nothing like that surprise on people's faces. Now the reputation of a rotary is that it is fast, it's the mainstream magazines and in drag racing they have made that mark.

[ylwgtr2]

I'd like to try and answer or rather mount an argument against the specific question "why do rotaries suck".

Before I start, I have a diploma and a degree in Mechanical Engineering, however, my argument has nothing to do with thermo dynamics, swept volume, number of rotations or any other techno terms and phrases that this discussion has raised. In fact, when I fell in "love" with rotaries, I had little understanding of how they actually worked.

Let me take you back to 1988, I was 16 years old and was driving a weber fed 13B RX4 coupe (yeah, okay I'm an old bugger!). These were the days before rotary hysteria had taken place, and in fact, the "rotor heads" were the minority and rotaries were hated and totally disregarded by everyone. If you wanted to go fast you were typically driving a Ford, Holden or Chrysler with a V8 or stinking hot six. Rotaries were given absolutely no respect. Terms like chook cooker, rotisserie, wanker engine, rice burner, jap crap and various other names were hurled as abuse whether you cruised through a carpark loaded with other car enthusiasts, or pulled up to a set of lights on Saturday night.

The reality for me was, the more people stirred me up, the greater the pleasure was to blow them away at a set of lights. I never forget the night when a 360 Chrysler pulled up next to me and the the passenger was making chicken noises and flapping his arms like a chicken, the driver was also laughing in hysterics. Lights turn green, a screech of wheels, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd gear to 8000rpm and the Chrysler is in my rear view mirror. The next set of lights the Chrysler pulls up again. This time there is no laughing, and both guys are looking straight ahead, pretending I'm not there. This scene is is repeated multiple times on any given night. Unfortunately, although the little rota proves itself time and time again, the competition decides not to acknowledge the performance, or acknowledges the defeat by hurling further abuse.

Fast foward to 1998. I'm still with an RX4, but now it has a turbo. I'm at a dyno shoot out, and my quiet, smooth idling RX4 just pulls an impressive 270 something RWKW. I'm beaten by 2 or 3kw by a guy in an AC Cobra replica with a 429 big block, Motec injected blah blah blah. The rumor was he had spent 40K on the motor. It was an impressive motor and vehicle without a doubt. After the event the owner comes over to me, and with his strong european accent, asks to have a look at my engine. When I pop the hood his eyes almost pop out of his head. His comment was "wholly f**k, where is the rest of it?. That thing makes all that power?".

Okay, I've rambled on here. But unless you've owned a rotary, you probably can't appreciate what I'm saying. Forget about whether it 1.3,2.6. or 3.9 litres, and whether it's 2, 4 or any other stroke of an engine. These are great little engines that for many many years have been given very little respect by the majority of car enthusiasts, even though their performance was widely proven. Matched with the right car, they are damn hard to beat on the street or the track. They are a performance engine and as such need to be treated accordingly. Flog the arse out of them day in and day out, they won't last (what engine would?), look after them and they will give a reasonable life.

In short, rotaries don't suck - I guess it's just down to personal preference. The history and heritage of the rotary is such that most guys that enjoy them are probably more sensitive to criticism than most.

My two cents. Good thread, let's not make this personal.

1988????please ,rotary hysteria as you call it was happening in the early eighties....

[rxnomore]

1988????please ,rotary hysteria as you call it was happening in the early eighties....

Oh really? Please elaborate so I can re-correct my own history! I hope you speak from your own experience and not your Dads.

[bloodzkull]

anyone else sick of the references to the 787b? perhaps we should just say all petrol engines suck given the race succes the DIESEL audi r10 is having? --- although seriously what a good car it has been

[Birds]

It is not selectable but it is a ratio nonetheless hence a bit misleading when people say... "oh man a 13b can do 13000rpm!!!!" with little knowledge as to how.

It's only misleading to the ignorant who haven't bothered to find out how a rotary works. But guess what, there are alot of people who don't know how a piston engine works either. You could say it's misleading when people brag about a motorbike piston engine revving to 14,000rpm...truth is it has a short stroke and wide bore allowing it to achieve this, but there are plenty of people out there who don't understand this - they just think motorbike engines are the best. The eccentric shaft on the rotary engine is where engine RPM is relevant and taken from, because when calculating anything important like vehicle speed you are using the speed of this shaft in the equation. Besides, people who focus on how high an engine can rev as opposed to what's happening before the engine gets there are pretty ignorant anyway.

People, saying that one engine is better than the other is so ridiculously subjective it's pointless. Why are we claiming any sort of engine superiority in this thread? Here's a very simple example for you all. A 10 second rotary powered vehicle will beat a 12 second piston powered vehicle. A 10 second piston powered vehicle will beat a 12 second rotary powered vehicle. When you have a variable like, I don't know, TIME/MONEY, involved in it all...it doesn't matter what engine you have...you can make it perform better than another.

Also, so many of you people, both Skyline and rotary fans, are talking like you've never lost a race in your lives. Where are the stories of you all losing? We never hear about these because all we hear about is how good your cars are. Boring. You don't need to prove how good your cars are to people over the internet using one sided stories!

For the guy who posted about beating a 360 Chrysler after they dished out a heap of crap to you at the traffic lights, only to find them looking dead ahead at the next set of lights after losing...that happens in ALMOST EVERY drag race when you beat someone. It's a male ego thing, not a piston vs rotary thing. Fark everytime a V8 loses to a Jap car you get that look from the loser. Everytime a Jap car loses to a V8 you get that look from the loser. It happens. Do you rotary fans have some sort of paranoia that the whole world is out to get you and doesn't respect you just because your car is rotary powered? Do you feel it your mission to get out there and prove to as many people as you can that "rotaries don't suck"? Why do you care about the opinions of the ignorant who can't be bothered researching it for themselves and discovering that rotaries aren't as bad as they thought?

And as someone pointed out...when you come to another forum, you are more likely to garner respect and have people consider your argument when you take an informative approach as opposed to a hostile one. Only one or two of you have actually shown a diplomatic approach to this - incidentally the same people whose arguments I've taken notice of. For the rest of you...for all your efforts to make people aware of the history/abilities/performance of the rotary engine, you've actually managed to throw more fuel onto the rotor bashing fire by making this into a "you vs us" thing.

RICE RACING you are probably wasting your time going over the Wankel cycle for people because those who cannot grip the concept after your first post will no doubt be lost on the topic until they are ready and motivated to learn about the Wankel for themselves. The rest seem to be just ignoring it for whatever reason!

[Johnny]

Please don't tarnish all us rotor heads with the same brush. Some of us are normal people, who can have a normal conversations and simply enjoy our cars, and other makes/models as well. They all have a certain charm when viewed in the rear view mirror of an FD

Sure there are some funny, and uneducated things said on here, but that's half the reason for forums and the internet, to learn, (the other half has featured in this thread as well!).

Thanks man for coming here to show not all rotory boys are like rice racing; I love to learn new things - knowing that the 13b has 3.9 litres makes me like them even more as i know that the terrible fuel economy is not from a 1.3 and that it can spool up n support big power of a large turbocharger.

doing 3000rpm each rotor is great too as it prevents wear compared to 7-10k rpm piston engines.

You know what, rice racing talks about how he dosent have an engineering degree yet talks himself up to 12 years experience; yet, a mechanic i know told me that a 12a was a single rotor - not bad for a 'professional' mechanic.

Continue to enjoy your cars, i know one day id love to own one now as i do actually like the sound - well not as an everyday car but weekend warrior, just like my r34 gtr right now.

I'd like to try and answer or rather mount an argument against the specific question "why do rotaries suck".

Before I start, I have a diploma and a degree in Mechanical Engineering, however, my argument has nothing to do with thermo dynamics, swept volume, number of rotations or any other techno terms and phrases that this discussion has raised. In fact, when I fell in "love" with rotaries, I had little understanding of how they actually worked.

Let me take you back to 1988, I was 16 years old and was driving a weber fed 13B RX4 coupe (yeah, okay I'm an old bugger!). These were the days before rotary hysteria had taken place, and in fact, the "rotor heads" were the minority and rotaries were hated and totally disregarded by everyone. If you wanted to go fast you were typically driving a Ford, Holden or Chrysler with a V8 or stinking hot six. Rotaries were given absolutely no respect. Terms like chook cooker, rotisserie, wanker engine, rice burner, jap crap and various other names were hurled as abuse whether you cruised through a carpark loaded with other car enthusiasts, or pulled up to a set of lights on Saturday night.

The reality for me was, the more people stirred me up, the greater the pleasure was to blow them away at a set of lights. I never forget the night when a 360 Chrysler pulled up next to me and the the passenger was making chicken noises and flapping his arms like a chicken, the driver was also laughing in hysterics. Lights turn green, a screech of wheels, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd gear to 8000rpm and the Chrysler is in my rear view mirror. The next set of lights the Chrysler pulls up again. This time there is no laughing, and both guys are looking straight ahead, pretending I'm not there. This scene is is repeated multiple times on any given night. Unfortunately, although the little rota proves itself time and time again, the competition decides not to acknowledge the performance, or acknowledges the defeat by hurling further abuse.

Fast foward to 1998. I'm still with an RX4, but now it has a turbo. I'm at a dyno shoot out, and my quiet, smooth idling RX4 just pulls an impressive 270 something RWKW. I'm beaten by 2 or 3kw by a guy in an AC Cobra replica with a 429 big block, Motec injected blah blah blah. The rumor was he had spent 40K on the motor. It was an impressive motor and vehicle without a doubt. After the event the owner comes over to me, and with his strong european accent, asks to have a look at my engine. When I pop the hood his eyes almost pop out of his head. His comment was "wholly f**k, where is the rest of it?. That thing makes all that power?".

Okay, I've rambled on here. But unless you've owned a rotary, you probably can't appreciate what I'm saying. Forget about whether it 1.3,2.6. or 3.9 litres, and whether it's 2, 4 or any other stroke of an engine. These are great little engines that for many many years have been given very little respect by the majority of car enthusiasts, even though their performance was widely proven. Matched with the right car, they are damn hard to beat on the street or the track. They are a performance engine and as such need to be treated accordingly. Flog the arse out of them day in and day out, they won't last (what engine would?), look after them and they will give a reasonable life.

In short, rotaries don't suck - I guess it's just down to personal preference. The history and heritage of the rotary is such that most guys that enjoy them are probably more sensitive to criticism than most.

My two cents. Good thread, let's not make this personal.

Mad reading right there, the whole rice burner, rice cooker names that were given to all rotory and small capacity FI engines back in the past has kinda dissapeared with the new generation who like all motors.

I have a couple of stories like that too in my rb26 gtr, keeps ya happy with your pride and joys.

lets not make this personal, unfortunately thats the ego of the internet; im guilty of it when im in a bad mood but feel pretty ashamed afterwards after what i post. Couple of mods on this site gave me some personal attacks n i let it get to me, not anymore - jst waiting to see them in real life now; have a proper 'talk'

[rxnomore]

Why do you care about the opinions of the ignorant who can't be bothered researching it for themselves and discovering that rotaries aren't as bad as they thought?

It's probably the same reason you post 6 detailed paragraphs in response to get your point across. Why are you bothering?

[rxnomore]

For the guy who posted about beating a 360 Chrysler after they dished out a heap of crap to you at the traffic lights, only to find them looking dead ahead at the next set of lights after losing...that happens in ALMOST EVERY drag race when you beat someone.

You missed my point altogether.

There is a good chance its because of the way I've written it , and I honestly wasn't trying to start another shit fight. However, I really can't be bothered explaining myself as I'm sure you will read into it anything you want.

Cheers

[Birds]

It's probably the same reason you post 6 detailed paragraphs in response to get your point across. Why are you bothering?

I'm not here to try and defend the reputation of my engine against fools who want to bash it...I'm here to create an information source and share truth seeking debates with people like Sydneykid. Did I mention the ego?

I apologise if you took my comments the wrong way, I was merely pointing out that I think alot of you rotary fans probably think there's more dislike for your engines out there (and on these forums) than there actually is. And that it's not just rotary engines that get snubbed/bashed by groups of car enthusiast - every configuration cops it - just look at Jap cars on V8 fan forums or pushrod V8s on Jap car fan forums. Hell, I would hate to be the lone wolf fighting it out for the Miller-cycle fans

[Sydneykid]

See with our engine we have distinct separate zones in which different parts of the otto cycle are conducted. This basic cycle in the RCE takes 1080 degrees to complete (as defined by geometrical relationship of its rotary combustion cycle V's your reciprocating versions), any engine is rated on all of its elements completing one cycle be it two stroke, 4 stroke or Wankel.

If you want to count all of the engine for a Wankel (as I do) then you find its full displacement is 3.924lt for a 13B engine. < How this compares to other principles for fairness in all forms of life I have explained many times already

For anyone in doubt I will spell it out for you....... you cannot with ANY ENGINE TYPE only count part of it Thus I call a 13B a 3.924lt engine which is what it is, but its a Wankel and if you don't understand how to compare it on an equivalence basis to other inferior engine types then you need to learn 1.3lt 2 stroke (is it "similar" YES!) 2.6lt 4 stroke (is it "similar" YES!) what is it really? its a 654cc chamber 2 rotor Wankel that actually displaces 3924cc in 1080 degree Wankel Cycle

That's what I said 20 pages back and you pulled out the insults and said I didn't know what I was talking about. Since you now agree with me on the capacity, let's move on to the 2 stroke/cycle discussion.

You are still following the same Mazda lies as on the true capacity, you are looking at only one side of the rotor and saying it's a 4 stroke/cycle engine. That would be like looking at the piston crown in a 2 stroke/cycle piston engine and saying it's a 4 stroke/cycle engine. For the very same reasons it's illogical to only look at only one side of the rotor, when the undeniable fact is another side is inletting while the side you are looking at is combusting. That's a 2 stroke/cycle at work. Now the non thinking rotary supporters point at the fact that a rotor has 3 sides, which of course is true, but it's irrelevant when determining the difference between 2 stroke/cycle and 4 stroke/cycle. The fact remains that a 4 stroke/cycle engine does one of the 4 things at a time and a rotary doesn't, so it can't be a 4 stroke/cycle engine. A rotor does multiple parts of the combustion cycle at the same time, hence it's a 2 stroke/cycle engine.

For the others, go back and look at what I have posted and you will find nowhere have I knocked the rotary engine itself. What I have a problem with is Mazdas 40 years of lying on capacity, rpm and 2 stroke/cycle. The engine itself is fine and I would have no objection if the truth of 3.9 litres (using a 13B example), 2 stroke and 3,000 rpm had been revealed from the start. So do rotors suck, no they don't, but Mazda does.

Cheers

Gary

[ylwgtr2]

Oh really? Please elaborate so I can re-correct my own history! I hope you speak from your own experience and not your Dads.

i have 5 brothers and one sister and i remember in the early eighties i would have been around 8 years old and the whole lot of us were into cars and motorbikes....they all had friends of course and and i remember rx3's,rx4's,rx2's with Bridge port engines,murgo motors was the place to go,he would be constantly flat out with engine mods ect....i also remember my sister used to start the car in the morning and before the cat even had a chance to escape from sitting on top the front left hand tyre the car would be in 1st gear ready to take off...poor little engine

[rxnomore]

i have 5 brothers and one sister and i remember in the early eighties i would have been around 8 years old and the whole lot of us were into cars and motorbikes....they all had friends of course and and i remember rx3's,rx4's,rx2's with Bridge port engines,murgo motors was the place to go,he would be constantly flat out with engine mods ect....i also remember my sister used to start the car in the morning and before the cat even had a chance to escape from sitting on top the front left hand tyre the car would be in 1st gear ready to take off...poor little engine

If you read my post again, I did not say that rotaries were unknown in the 80's or that they weren't attracting any type of following by enthusiasts. Having been involved in the rotary scene through the late 80's & then 90's, it's my impression (and it's been written before elsewhere by others) that the rotary following really took off in the early to mid 90's.

To further emphasize this point, show me early 80's car magazines that regularly featured on the front cover a hot rotary? Sure, you may be able to point out one or two (I don't know of any personally), but through the 90's newsagancies were exploding with magazines specifically targetting rotary enthusiasts (Hot4, Fast 4's, Tuffest rotaries, How to build a rotary engine etc etc).

How many rotary engine vehicle events were held anywhere in Australia in the early 80's? My guess, probably very few, if anything at all. Nothing like the 4 & rotary Jamboree which started in the 90's and still in existence today. Go on rotary cruise in the 80's and you were going with a handful of cars. I have video from the 90's on a cruise with literally hundreds of rotaries & enthusiasts.

Even in the late 80's, performance parts seemed few and far between, finding a rotary specific workshop was hard as there wasn't very many, and bumping into another car enthusiast who hadn't even heard of a rotary was common. I could go on and on, but I probably have bored you already!

I guess its subjective, but having been there, it's my opinion that rotaries really become popular through the 90's, not before.

Thanks.