Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

i own one, also own a 32 gtr, and i love it but i really cant answer your question without writing an essay, and i cant be bothered, they get crap fuel economy tho

They can handle big massive turbo's with minimal turbo lag!

They rev high when ported and modified.

They sound so great.

They have shit fuel econemy

They are very light

They sit back in the firewall, good weight distrubution

They are cheap to fix

There is jack shit to modifiy on them

Thats about all...

Ill be buying one soon :Pimp2:

my interpretation is thus: It is very similar to the 4 stroke, 2 stroke debate, as rotary's operate as essentially a 2 stroke. Thus while they can burn a lot more fuel per second, and hence get more power, they do so inefficiently. This has become a problem with changes in emissions regulations. However practically you can get a lot of power out of very small displacements, and hence get fantastic power to weights. Similarly because of the large amount of fuel they can burn, they couple with turbo induction very very well. A typical downside is things like that the whole central rotor has to move, and so there is a lot of friction wear on the seals, which has given it a bad reputation (I think) for reliability. Overall many companies and individuals worked on the rotary concept (mercedes, nissan to name a few) however only mazda continued for such a long time (rather like wankel). They certainly have some great positives, but also a number of downsides, which is perhaps why they have never been largely taken up. That's just my rough overall summary of rotaries :P.

I'm in the exact same position as you Lang!

Although I'm off-loading my RX7 for an sr20 180sx X-Type, hopefully, this week.

For me, the 7 was a fun, quick, sidways car. Love the way it looks from the front, hate the back (series 5)

Lang is spot on, they drink! Also I have found that they are very high maintenance, so cbs with it anymore. BUT, they have very high modification potential, hence their popularity and I suppose there's something about a rotary engine that draws people towards it, that I just can't put my finger on.

my interpretation is thus: It is very similar to the 4 stroke, 2 stroke debate, as rotary's operate as essentially a 2 stroke. Thus while they can burn a lot more fuel per second, and hence get more power, they do so inefficiently. This has become a problem with changes in emissions regulations. However practically you can get a lot of power out of very small displacements, and hence get fantastic power to weights. Similarly because of the large amount of fuel they can burn, they couple with turbo induction very very well. A typical downside is things like that the whole central rotor has to move, and so there is a lot of friction wear on the seals, which has given it a bad reputation (I think) for reliability. Overall many companies and individuals worked on the rotary concept (mercedes, nissan to name a few) however only mazda continued for such a long time (rather like wankel). They certainly have some great positives, but also a number of downsides, which is perhaps why they have never been largely taken up. That's just my rough overall summary of rotaries :P.

2mm Ceramic seals can fix that problem :D

New,good seals should last upto 100,000klms with a high powerd engine running sufficient boost levels.

people are scared but they don't understand or have sufficient knowledge, explaining how a piston engine makes power is easier to ur average joe then explaining how there a chamber with a triangular shape thing in the middle which sits on an eccentric shaft and rotates thru a epchyotroidal (spelling) revolution and makes power 3 times per revolution.......

the main reason why rotoarys got a bad reputation of reliability is because thed mazda service folks would replace the whole engine instead of replacing the broken part. My house mate has a mazda RX3 which still running and has never needed a rebuild.

The other reason that the have an unreliable name is that they can very easily run hundreds of KW's and like any engine need to be very well built to witstand the force. A dodgy 6 will still die as 500kw if it is dodgy.

In their stock condition they can be fairly efficant and the RX8 is one of the cleanest cars for emissions. The old ones aren't because they are before the times off emmision control and therfore no cat etc.

The engine is very small and very simple (only 3 moving parts). Because if goes around and around instead of up and down they can rev much higher then a piston engine up around 12000rpm if you really want to.

They are great for turbo's as the engine moves alot of air. This allows for monster turbos on a 1.3L engine.

Overall they are a great engine to work with as long as you have apassion for them and you know what you are doing with them.

Igonr: Each rotor will have 3 power "strokes" per revolution. The 10a, 12a and 13b have 2 rotors so that is 6 power "strokes" per revolution of the engine. A piston has one power stroke every 2 revolutions. Therefore a 12 cylinder piston engine will have the same number of power strokes as a 2 rotor engine. If you move to the 20b (3 rotors) or 26b (4 rotors) then your going to have more power then you know what to do with.

Igonr: Each rotor will have 3 power "strokes" per revolution. The 10a, 12a and 13b have 2 rotors so that is 6 power "strokes" per revolution of the engine. A piston has one power stroke every 2 revolutions. Therefore a 12 cylinder piston engine will have the same number of power strokes as a 2 rotor engine. If you move to the 20b (3 rotors) or 26b (4 rotors) then your going to have more power then you know what to do with.

Interesting... thanx for that.

A few people i know seemed to have changed with the wind and are now on the rotary band wagon and i dont know why.

Whats the pros and cons with a rotary engine over your normal 6.

I own a bridgeport RX4 coupe and an R31 GTSX . The skyline is a great cruiser for everyday travel.Its even got a child seat in the back.Economical and goes pretty hard(r32 silver top engine).The RX4 is brutal!!!! Heaps of grunt from the Weber fed 13b(turbos go so much harder too!) But the best thing is the sound.Love it or hate it every one knows you are coming and boy do they look.(Coppers too!).

Fuel economy is shithouse(advise getting 2nd job) especially when you realise that we are talking about 12A(1200cc) and 13B(1300cc) motors.To make good power ie;200 rwk from a rotary costs a lot less than a 6cyl.Check out how fast they go at the drags.Sub 7 sec passes in O.Z!!!!! Some bent 8 cars spent 30 - 40 thou to run 10sec 1/4 times.10sec eng packages for rotarys from about 6 - 10 grand.And still streetable with programmable engine management.Thats why there are so many cars on the track!

The price of a good car is still affordable, remembering most are 30 + years old(unless you have lots of dough to buy late model RX7's).Parts are available for most but more and more expensive all the time.(check ebay.)RX3 is the most popular and buying one is an investment you won't loose from.The price of import skylines has fallen pretty hard lately,old rotary cars have increased.

A lot of people(Simple minded neanderthal types)write off rotary cars because they have never driven one or have had their ego dented by one in a traffic light drag.Typical Holden or Ford V8 fans call them by heaps of names "chook cookers" "beer kegs" and just "jap crap".I could go on forever but you have probably already stopped reading by now anyhow.

By the way, my R31 GTSX is up for sale!!! Not the RX4though.Love the Skyline but need the dough for a new bussiness.If interested call me on 0405 202 395.Wazza.

every time the engine performs one revolution, it combusts 3 times. that's good for power.
And what does a 6 cylinder in-line do??????

The main advantage of the rotary is that the "piston" (rotor) mass keeps moving in the same direction, unlike a "conventional" 4-stroke, in which the piston has to stop twice in each cycle (once at TDC, and once at BDC). So rotaries just keep revving. which is why they can make big power numbers (power = torque * rpm). They have pretty shite torque, but loads of rpm. (diesels on the other hand have enormous torque and shite rpm, but that's )

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, the latter. No diff should have a centre replaced without checking clearances because its unlikely to be the same as whatever came out. Not that that stops most people just checking a new centre in
    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
×
×
  • Create New...