Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

that was a theoretical statment, they may be. Personally i don't like the sound of rebuilding and engine <100,000km's so i'll never play with them. But i shouldn't actually say never becasue the do make huge power considering their displacement.

  • Replies 14.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Tell her that it is a 2 storke engine (Even though it doesn't have any strokes), so in effect it'll use twice the fuel that a regular 1.3 litre 4 stroke engine does. It's also why they are rated at 2.6 litres when compaired to piston egines and why they make so much power from 1.3 litres.

told her that. she looked at me like id just asked her the square root of 16 billion.

that was a theoretical statment, they may be. Personally i don't like the sound of rebuilding and engine <100,000km's so i'll never play with them. But i shouldn't actually say never becasue the do make huge power considering their displacement.

theyre pretty average on fuel. lowest ive seen the consumption for one in town/suburbia (where she and most people will use it) was about 10l/100km, highest was in the 20's...

as for the rebuilding engines every 100,000km, very true for the older design engines (fd and older), more so when theyre boosted and modded, but not so true for the new peripheral port engines they use in the rx8, service life is a lot more generous.

... but its also a lot less exciting.

Edited by scandyflick

"lol"

:lol:

:D

:O

I thought that you couldn't type in the emoticoms but it must just be that there isn't one for :lol:

Oh it's 126491.10640673517327995574177731 by the way but i did use a calculator. :P

Edited by D_Stirls
Tell her that it is a 2 storke engine (Even though it doesn't have any strokes), so in effect it'll use twice the fuel that a regular 1.3 litre 4 stroke engine does. It's also why they are rated at 2.6 litres when compaired to piston egines and why they make so much power from 1.3 litres.

I would've thought closer to 3.9L

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/Ro...ck-t287781.html

Knock yourself out on that thread... :D

on the topic if rotories, id love to have one of these;

3034238344_37d8c017b1_o.jpg

jc04.jpg

with a 20b twin turbo itd rival both my old celsior and the 200 for fuel consumption, but itd be a great cruiser.

its the same old thread as every other rotang thread.

"rotors suck, why?"

cue jokes about busted seals and the rspca.

argument about why everything else a superior engine and that rotors sound like bad gay sex.

finish with something about an ls1.

i just saw the 3.9 litre bit but i think that is a crock, they only use 1 side of the rotor each power (Stroke) so they are only using the 1.3 litres. that's like saying that a 2 litre engine is really 4 litres because the pistons sweep 4 litres per full cycle.

Also that bit about gearing up the eccentric shaft 3 times to use regular gearboxes is also grasping at straws. They use a 3 times gear up because the rotor has 3 sides, so him saying that they could step it up to 6:1 then there would have to 6 sided rotor which would be huge.

Edited by D_Stirls

uuuugh.

itunes just decided to purge 80gb of music from my ipod.

now for the tedious task of reloading all that music from about 12,000 different sources (3 hd's, and a couple hundred cd's...)

235's all round could work. but im not lowering it more. low enough as it is. srs. exhaust scrapes and front wheels scrub as it is.

lulwat? What are the wheel and tyre specs on the one in the pic?

Tuck the exhaust up and roll the front guards and maybe a slightly narrower tyre and you will be able to go lower to end up with the real shit fitment wise, or just pull your guards a bit so it reps flushness and doesn't look so cop-happy.

i just saw the 3.9 litre bit but i think that is a crock, they only use 1 side of the rotor each power (Stroke) so they are only using the 1.3 litres. that's like saying that a 2 litre engine is really 4 litres because the pistons sweep 4 litres per full cycle.

Also that bit about gearing up the eccentric shaft 3 times to use regular gearboxes is also grasping at straws. They use a 3 times gear up because the rotor has 3 sides, so him saying that they could step it up to 6:1 then there would have to 6 sided rotor which would be huge.

I have nothing against rotary engines, in fact I love them and the sound they make, but I have to agree with the whole 3.9L displacement argument as each rotor has 3 combustible sides to it for every one rotor revolution (not crank or eccentric shaft revolution).

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • How's everyone going? Just a shout-out introducing myself. I'm James, I live on the north side of Brisbane. I bought an R33 that had been left to rot in someone's front yard for 14 years. Apparently, it has immobiliser/fuel issues. Long story short, it's suffering from a seized engine, plus whatever else turns up once it runs. The car is pretty good considering it sat for so long. It pretty much died after being imported. It has a bunch of Jap parts and a full Top Secret body kit. It's painted Fiat Turchese Festival, or aqua blue if you're not French. Another project to throw money at!
    • So the clockspring is responsible for the indicators cancelling on their own? I thought that was the function of that white thing in the center (any idea what it's called?)
    • Can you log IAT? Whilst WTA coolers have their place, doing any sort of sustained run is not one of them There are fixes that slow down the heat soak, like ice boxes, which don't last that long, and interchillers, which are fairly expensive, up grades to the WTA cooling radiator, which may require a bigger pump, and upgrades to the reservoir size,  and upgrades to the cooling fans, but, it all still heat soaks, and takes ages to come down in hot weather  For a turbo, that isn't locked into WTA like my PD blower is, can you not possibly swap to a nice air to air intercooler????, it would be better for sustained runs then, and have alot less things that could go wrong in my opinion 
    • So, the other thing I've sorted is a baseline dyno run up at Unigroup's new location. The auto trans was a little unco-operative by both shifting down when the throttle was floored on the dyno (so Mark had to ramp it up more slowly than in a manual) and also by shifting up at 6,000 even in sports mode instead of the indicated redline of 7,000 Still, on a hot day it made 240rwkw at 16psi which seems about right for 300kw (400hp) through an auto at the wheels.  The shape of the curve is not quite right because it was not full throttle to about 4,500 to stop it kicking down, but until I can get a tune on the auto trans control this was the best we could do.....full boost will be well below 5,000 once that is sorted, I'll get some data logs when I can to confirm For comparison, the R32 made 255 at 12psi (at 4,500) on the same dyno with tune, n1 turbos, cam gears, big exhaust but otherwise all standard so the v37 is likely a little better out of the box. One thing that is very clear is that the standard water to air intercoolers are not up to sustained use at full throttle in warm ambient temps. After about 5 runs (so only a few minutes full throttle), it was pulling boost and timing and dropping 10-15% power. Unfortunately I didn't get that printout and the Unigroup guys are away at the moment, will try and get hold of it on their return. So, looks like a healthy engine to start modifying and the only real area of concern is the w2a heat exchangers which the aftermarket has plenty of solutions for    
    • I maintain it actually looked really nice in person. So much so that I thought "No, this is illegal" but there it was, clear as day. I think we can easily call the wing and wheels/height to be transformative. Not saying it's better than the GR Whatever, or the 86, or the WRX STI or anything of that sort (the internet says it all bolts up so you can buy best of all worlds?) but it's still at least a thing and not nearly AS bad as people say.
×
×
  • Create New...