Needs a fin.

Discussion in '1998 Mazda Pettit Racing RX-7 Banzai' started by Priviledge of Speed, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. Re: What's with that engine????

    rotary engines are great i agree with the fact mentioned before that a single rotor has more power strokes per cycle than a sing piston. the only problem is that the apex seals on the rotors can only handle so much pressure thus making them harder to tune because they can only handle a sertain amount of turbo boost or pressure within the combustion chamber. other than that rotary engines weigh a lot less and i mean A LOT. they have no camshafts or any other complicated valve mechanisms which saves weight and cuts down on the recipocating mass which in turn alows them to reach extremely high rps [when compared to normal piston engines] and they allow the car to more easily achieve the perfect 50/50 weight distribution.<!-- Signature -->
     
  2. Re: What's with that engine????

    ok first of all felix wankle was a genious. This wasn't the only rotary that has been invented. there are some out there that keep a continous 24000 rpm. The rotary is the most efficient why of generating power next to a nuclear reactor. they are 3 times as light as a piston engine...will sustain high rpm much longer without misfire...have no rings to fry...rotors don't have to stop and change direction every stroke...put out more horsepower per litre than a jet engine...and finally you can pull a 12 to 1 compression ratio easily without having any trouble blowing off heads. not to mention they don't need lifters, valves, cams, or mechanical timing. let me know when a piston engine achives that and then we can talk...till then I know where my heart is...

    the rx7 junkie
     
  3. Re: What's with that engine????

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from grahambo</i>
    <b>ok first of all felix wankle was a genious. This wasn't the only rotary that has been invented. there are some out there that keep a continous 24000 rpm. The rotary is the most efficient why of generating power next to a nuclear reactor. they are 3 times as light as a piston engine...will sustain high rpm much longer without misfire...have no rings to fry...rotors don't have to stop and change direction every stroke...put out more horsepower per litre than a jet engine...and finally you can pull a 12 to 1 compression ratio easily without having any trouble blowing off heads. not to mention they don't need lifters, valves, cams, or mechanical timing. let me know when a piston engine achives that and then we can talk...till then I know where my heart is...

    the rx7 junkie</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    most efficient way next to a nuclear reactor is a HUGE statement - and an incredibly incorrect one too

    rotary's are less efficient than piston engines - fuel wise. they consume a lot of gas - lower thermal efficiency than normal piston engines.

    gas turbines are the most efficient ways to make power from the combustion of gases.

    rotary's run about 8-9:1 compression - much lower and it's much harder to adjust their compression - i believe you'd have to use a completely differnet rotary/housing setup to change the compression.

    more hp/liter than a jet engine??? hahahaha exactly HOW would you measure displacement with a jet engine??? like i said before, any form of gas-turbine engine which includes jet engines is going to be far more efficient and far more powerful than any internal combustion engine. their only fault is that they are very picky about what rpm range they want to operate to be most efficient and powerful - therefore they don't have the flexiblity of internal combustion engines. the M1A1 abrams tank uses a 1500hp gas turbine that weighs only several hundred pounds. and that thing's powering a 70 ton tank.

    the type of rotary which can spin at 24,000 RPM is different than the rotary's that are generally used. those have spark plugs in the rotor itself and is an impractical design - you'd have to tear apart the motor everytime you needed to change spark plugs.

    rotary engines are good but not god's gift to the automotive world - do a little research instead of pulling "facts" out of your ass next time.
     
  4. Re: What's with that engine????

    to that Phat keed,they are only unreliable, if ur a jackass that doesnt know what he doing<!-- Signature -->
     
  5. Re: What's with that engine????

    Will someone tell me what a rotary engine is and how it works, I'm just getting into cars.
     
  6. #31 car-god, Aug 9, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: What's with that engine????

    this is for the guy who wanted to know how rotaries work. you should go to www.howstuffworks.com and search for rotary. they'll show you everything with full animations.<!-- Signature -->
     
  7. Re: What's with that engine????

    Lack of reliability? My RX-7 has hit 151000 miles and it runs great!
     
  8. Re: What's with that engine????

    The rotary engine is a great invention but if it brakes down you have to order the parts from japan for an arm and a leg<!-- Signature -->
     
  9. Re: What's with that engine????

    Rx-7s are great cars but the only problem is that the rotary engine is known for breaking down and the rx-7 is known for back firing in high rpms. I think people should buy rx-7s but they must have enough money to replace any parts that you will have to order from Japan.
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  10. Re: What's with that engine????

    well if you dont maintain your rotary engine of course its going to break down. try getting carbon apex seals, you can change the comp.ratio by getting a performance rotor installed to replace the factory item. sure they can use heaps of gas but thats mainly because at one point in the rotors cycle the inlet and exhaust ports are exposed at the same time, so unburned fuel escapes to the exhaust hence the backfires. Man all you rotary fans should come live in new zealand, pleanty of parts and cars and at way lower prices than what u guys pay. I was also wondering if anyone in america has heard of porting a rotary engine before?
     
  11. #36 NismoMasta, Aug 9, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: What's with that engine????

    The coolest thing is to tune a rotary, all you need to do is make larger ports. No messing with camshafts and other mechanical crap. Drill some bigger holes, tuned intake and exhaust and you have as much power as you desire.

    I've heard of a 4 rotor in a RX7 doing 12,000rpm and making 889hp on **98 OCTANE STREET GAS** I believes it holds alot of the records for a non-turbo street legal car.

    The poor fuel economy and reliablity (more driver fault than anything) is only a question of engineering. Mazda made cheap rotarys with common materials. Look at what Moller industries is doing with Freedom Motors making wankel rotarys, they have rotarys that make Hp/litre/weight to rival a dragster, and make about 4% of the emissions of a standard engine.

    We're going to have zero emission flying cars soon because of it.
    www.moller.com
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  12. Re: What's with that engine????

    Exactly guys, rotary engines are just like any other, if you run the hell out of it and dont take care of it, its gonna break, its as simple as that. You need to know what your doing with any engine; period
     
  13. Re: What's with that engine????

    Exactly guys, rotary engines are just like any other, if you run the hell out of it and dont take care of it, its gonna break, its as simple as that. You need to know what your doing with any engine; period
     
  14. RX-7 VS SUPRA

    I THINK THAT SUPRAS HAVE GOOD POWER BUT THEY ARENT AS GOOD AS RX-7'S AND THERE NOT AS FAST STANDARD. DONT GET ME WRONG SUPRAS ARE NICE BUT THEY JUST HAVE TROUBLE GETTING INTO THE 9'S AND 10'S WITHOUT PUTTING A T88 TURBO OR SOMETHING ON IT SO OVERALL I THINK THAT RX-7 ARE A LOT BETTER
     
  15. Re: RX-7 VS SUPRA

    I think you should learn where the Caps-Lock button is.

    This is a modded RX-7. You can have better Supras than this car. Though I wouldn't call those Supras, the only thing they got in common with basic Supras is chasis (barely) and extirior.<!-- Signature -->
     
  16. In top fuel a V-8 has 3000 horsepower!!!

    Well can a rotary make 3k???
     
  17. Re: In top fuel a V-8 has 3000 horsepower!!!

    Do 3000 horsepower, NOT A CHANCE!!!
     
  18. Re: In top fuel a V-8 has 3000 horsepower!!!

    I do love the RX-7 and it is a real SUPERCAR, just a V-8 can be pushed more. A re-build on a top feul V-8 is every three quarter mile races. So horsepower does have it's price. With 550 bhp what would the re-build be on this car if it were raced???
     
  19. Re: In top fuel a V-8 has 3000 horsepower!!!

    I do know the 3 rotor can be pushed to 1000hp, how much further I don't know. 4 rotor nat asp I seen best is 700 out of the R26B. The bottom line as to why it can't make more is to do with the apex seals - they are only held in by springs and a bit if rubber!
     
  20. Re: In top fuel a V-8 has 3000 horsepower!!!

    top fuel V-8's actually make like 7000hp

    but then consider this

    they are rebuilt every RUN ( great if you've got a warranty that covers engine damage every 0.25 miles )
    they run nitromethane, not gasoline
    they are supercharged
    they are 8.0+ liters
    they have no exhaust system, no cats, just a pipe that leads air out


    i really dont get the point of this
     
  21. Re: In top fuel a V-8 has 3000 horsepower!!!

    yo this v8 u talkin bout.......prob american car......
    All american cars have muscle but way a shitload. Japanese cars kick ur asses.....Ok....u think that V-8 is amzing..everybody that supports Japanese cars.....Go get the most recent Turbo Magazine.
    A 4 cylinder Integra engine pumps out 4000 yes four thousand horse power so lets see ur damn ameircan cars wit a v4 pull that shit......i'm out
     
  22. on a scale of 1-10

    On a scale o 1-10, what do you give it? i give it a 9
     
  23. Re: on a scale of 1-10
     
  24. Re: on a scale of 1-10

    It is an RX-7.
    i dont have to rate it. it rates itself.<!-- Signature -->
     
  25. Re: on a scale of 1-10

    well on a scale of 1 to 10 i give it a 10 with a pair of creamed in undies<!-- Signature -->
     

Share This Page