what's the diff btw rotary engine and normal engine?
 

the rx8 uses rotary engine, and its only like 1.4 liter or something, producing like 200 + hp, how does that work?

The rotary engine is simply a engineering dead end. They get horrible gas mileage among other stuff I dont know why mazda uses them.Wankel tried and failed.

Built properly Rotary's = as good if not better than piston engines.

They can rev like bikes.

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/rotary-engine.htm

I play with my wankle .... lol

so does that mean that the rx8's engine is better than most of the piston engines other cars use? what about when it comes to horsepower? if it can produce 200hp with 1.3 litre engine, doesnt that mean that it's really effecient?

The most common rotary motor is called the 13B which is a 1.3 liter motor.
The 3 rotor motor is called the 20B.

Rotaries aren't bad on gas, not sure what buddy is talking about... If you modify them sure it'll chug gas but so will anything else. A non-turbo rx7/rx8 wastes as much gas as any stardard V6.

I've worked on piston motors and to be honest, the rotary motor has WAY less parts and very easy to work on. They even have videos that teach you how to rebuild, in roughly 2 hours. Plus to make power you just port the motor and add any forced induction, there aren't any aftermarket parts to buy for internals. Those guys putting down high HP numbers are done on factory Internal components. That alone is bad ass!!

Not to mention HP to Liter is unbeatable.

They are however sensitive to Tuning, but as long as you don't run lean/detonate your fine.

hp per litre ;)


HP PER CUBIC INCH.

If I was equally as ignorant as you, I would say the same about a domestic V8. Rotaries are an amazing engine, you would know this if you actually knew something about them and didn't base your opinion on what you hear on the internet.

LOL Yes V8's can produce insane power.... but in theory if you keep adding rotors to the rotary motor sky's the limit. Most I've seen is a 4 rotor, but I guess same could be said to the piston blocks.

But the weight and compact size of any rotary motor has it's avantages. It can get expensive to build but end result is a extremely light effecient motor.

It's a lot easier to add rotors, housings and lobes to an eccentric shaft then it is to add cylinders to a block.

Next thing we're building at the shop is a 4-rotor and maybe even a 6-rotor...

Do you have lots of experience with rotary motors? Last night my brother brought our recently completed rx7 to the etobicoke meet. Silver fully restored with a huge front mount, fuel cell, the works. You should definitely check it out.

As for building a 4 rotor, go for it.... Mazda did build a 4 rotor which I believe was what won le mans in 1991. Anyhow the toughest part is the ecentric shaft. But if you to a search on google or yahoo they have pictures of the shaft for the 4 rotor.

If you seach yahoo austrailia search a guy named hitman with a yellow first gen rx7 he made his own 3 rotor using 13b parts.

2004 mazda rx8

MPG (city) 18
MPG (highway) 24
MPG (combined) 20
Annual Fuel Cost 2258


2004 GTO

MPG (city) 17
MPG (highway) 29
MPG (combined) 21
Annual Fuel Cost 2149


yeah those damn gas sucking american v8s LOL idiot.

So because a GTO has better milage than a RX8 it has the better engine? So by that rational, my sisters tercel is better than almost any car.

Honestly, learn a thing or two about how engines work. Adam posted a great link about how rotory engines work. Within that same site you can learn about how your V8 works aswell. After you've gained all that knowlegde you should argue (BTW, it is up to you.) Sometimes shuting the up can make you seem smarter.

actually I was refering to B6Ts post but aviously you didnt notice,And yes the LS1 is a better engine :laugh:

HP per cubic inch? What the hell are you talking about?! Fine I'll take my 110 cubic in motor that puts out near 200hp vs. most 300+ cubic inch 8's that get 250-300 anyday.

to the wheels by the way.

So by that most domestic 300+ cu. in. V8's should put out about 550-600hp.

Besides LS6 is where it's at... :thumbsup

whats the difference between a 800hp supra and a 1200hp one? they both runs 12s. Your dyno sheet wont add up to reserection at the track. Most domestic V8s have been putting out over 250 since 1993.I know the LT1 was rated at 285hp and that was back in 93.Thats plenty enough for some punk to kill himself in.There was a documentry on on speedvison that most import brands have been overrateing HP since the mid 90s somtimes up to 20hp more then they should be rated.

I always wondered about those 13B's. Never actually worked on one before but stock the RX-8 only getting 18MPG city..lets say 20-21 MPG mixed driving is horrible for a car that runs high 14's!(correct me im just guessing on this one)

I was getting that exact same gas mileage in my old Stealth with 320hp running low 14's stock. and the car was almost 4000lbs with AWD too.

I just started *really* learning about rotaries a few weeks ago when I began my co-op job at a certain shop. I'm working with a really smart guy who really knows his stuff... for example, he made his own eccentric shaft for his three-rotor RX7 street/race car at the shop, in addition to building the entire remainder of the car himself, except the cage and 4-link drag suspension. PM me and I'll give you some details if you want to come and check it out. Bring a change of pants :D

Can an LS1 rev to 14 000rpm?

why the would I want to rev that high? :)

Just as I thought, I didn't expect you to be able to produce an actual intelligent answer... gas turbines in airplanes use a lot of fuel, I guess they are inferior to the almighty V8 as well...

Why wouldn't you want a longer power band?

i like the drag if my redline is 6500 and i can pull off 11s thats fine by me.

Obviously for you guys its a matter of opinion. No use arguing. Personally I like the rotary because of its compact size it can be mounted really low so it makes the car less top heavy for better cornering. The RX-8 motor lacks torque its a shame they didn't make a turbo version. Anyway. The car that won the '91 le mans was a mazda 787B and it had a naturally aspirated 2.6litre 4 Rotor making 700HP and 600lb of torque. Not to mention its the ONLY japanese car to EVER win lemans and the only Roraty to win lemans. So even if you don't like the technology. Show a little respect.

Funny that "imports over rateing HP" and "rotaries" came up in the same thread. Mazda Overrated the HP in the RX-8 BIG time and had to offer refunds to everyone that got them. LOL.

All I have to say about rotaries is this, how many V8, 4 cylinder Turbo swaps do you see in an RX-7. How many Rotary swaps do you see in... anything? Alot more of the first, a lot less of the second.

HP per Litre and HP per Cu. In. are essentially the same measure so what point are you trying to make.. you still compare horspower to a form of displacement.

That's not a fair comparison. It takes a more knowledge to make a rotary fast then it does to make a V8 or Turbo I4 fast, thats the reason why most people swap out their rotary. There aren't many people capable of building a crazy rotary engine, that's another reason.

By the way, people swap rotaries into Datsun 510s, into old Triumphs, into kit cars, etc.

Then consider this. The motor is inheritly flawed in it's design. It burns oil from the factory. They actually design this motor to burn oill. I find it hard to believe in a motor that is designed like that from the factory. Keep some spare Mobil1 one in the car. :sly:

Ok you don't make sense there... you say its flawed, then you say its because it burns oil, then you say its designed to burn oil... so if its designed to do something which you say is a design flaw, then how is it flawed?! You have no clue about how rotary engines work, or else you would understand how and why it burns oil. You need to put what you've learned on the internet aside and read some real factual information.

Sigh... it was a joke. :ohwell:
I know why the motor burns oil, it's for the apex seals. I know how they work. It was a jab at the motor. If an internal combustion piston motor burned oil it would be considered a problem or ... follow me here on this... a flaw. I don't believe in that motor was my point of the post.

Good to see everyone is keeping a sence of humor around here. :thumbsup

Hey look... I'm joking too... can you tell?!

:thumbsup

1.3 litre in the rotary world, 2.6 eveyrwhere else. I love rotaries but sometimes when i look at my neighbours FB broken all the time, i fell glad that i have a i6 with rod knock that still can drive. ;)

I take everything you say as a joke. :hah:
LOL, JK. It's all good.

And yeh RX7s break too much for me... and I drive a DSM!! :p

Can you explain why a rotary is considered a 2.6L by some people?

That argument has been going on forever. Each rotor is 650cc, making the engine 1.3L total. Fill the chambers with water, each one will take 650cc's, some people argue it's 2.6L for some reason, there is a write up for both arguments somewhere.

It's not ignorance it's an inextricable fact. Nearly every major manufacturer (GM, Toyota, Mercedes and a few others I don’t recall at the moment) poured million into researching and developing the rotary engine and all abandoned it because it’s simply an inferior design compared to the piston engine.

Because of its long and irregularly shaped rectangular combustion chamber, it gets VERY poor burn and can’t run high compression ratios. This is the reason for its poor fuel economy, low efficiency relative to the piston engine and very high emissions (have you ever seen the cat on an RX7). Long term durability is an issue particularly regarding apex seal wear.

It is indeed a dead end.