caveat........ i skimmed this thread... but as i understand, you are planning the "ultimate" rotary blah blah blah. 20b, o k. i get it. figuring out what type of ports, o k.
my immediate observation is what the hell are you doing considering putting the motor in an FC?????????????????
the fc is a nice car but it doesn't have the fundamental engineering necessary to be an "ultimate" rotary car. please be clear, i am not knocking fc's. they were great cars and still are good cars. but they have major dealbreaking engineering drawbacks. they have a strut front suspension!!!! i believe you were talking about roadracing.
when a strut front suspensioned car goes around a right hand turn and the car leans 3 degrees the front tire leans out at the top 3 degrees. that's why real racecars, and the fd is a real racecar suspensionwise, have unequal A-arm suspensions. when the car leans the tire undergoes negative camber gain. the all important (in a right turn) front left tire maintains it's 1 degree, or whatever the static setting was, attitude. secondly the fc is way behind the fd as to torsional rigidity. i respect the fc. i put over 200,000 on my fc T2. but for a platform for the ultimate rotary. uh, no.
howard coleman

 

i think barwick just got T2 i'm not sure i was searchin around in the 2nd gen sales.

 

If I were you I'd buy this issue of NZ Performance Car and see a FD with a custom built NA quad rotor. It even show a good pic of trick parts like the 3-piece eccentric shaft.

How's that for a helping hand. Maybe you should do a motor like that one, it sure looks great. I haven't seen the car race but apparently it sounds great - big revs - big awesome noise.

FD Quad Rotor in NZ
That is one hell of a mean roadcar. My vote for my favourite road rotor goes to this car with its unique setup - AWESOME.

 

Funny thing. Porsche 911s use MacPherson strut front suspensions. Yes, even the new ones. Yes, even the GT3. Yes, even the race ones. This is brought up to provide a counterexample not as an ultimate defense of MacPherson struts.

Secondly, torsional rigidity... well. Looking at things realisticially, you'd expect a pretty decent amount of chassis buildup in either case. You'd expect a cage and stuff. Thus... well, it's not hard to engineer a cage that acts like most of a tube chassis.

I'm curious about what Bridgeported said, regarding Pineapple selling PPort 4-rotors. Especially curious given the dollar figure. That can't be right...

Finally... well, I'll believe this car is getting built when I see pics. But hey, whatever... dreaming large is the way to do things.

 

"ultimate" rotary going into a non-"ultimate" chassis?

it is irrelevant whether porsche/bmw run struts or A- arms. it is possible to band-aid over any kind of flawed basic engineering... and flawed is just what strut suspensions are whether on a porsche or FC.

(porsche us the primary example of fundamentally flawed engineering. look at where they have located the 911/thru gt3 engine for example. they have had to run 20 inch wide tires in the rear to try and balance the car and they are nightmares to drive w their huge polar moment rear weight. i have had 2 friends killed driving 911s thanks to their engine location promoting snap oversteer.)
there is no substitute for negative camber gain and strut cars have no, repeat no, camber-gain. on the racetrack you can try to compensate for camber-gain by running more negative static camber but you screw up your braking traction by doing it. is it possible to win races w a strut car? sure, with enough money thrown at the car.
if all things are equal will there be any doubt whether an unequal A-arm suspension (FD) car will beat a strut (FC) car. no, there will be no doubt. so why put the ultimate motor in an inferior chassis? the FD's chassis/suspension is pure racecar and as such is as unique as it's motor.

howard coleman

 

*shrug* Devil's advocate. Kind of off the subject, but why exactly would they stick with the struts? They redesigned large chunks of the car, and I wouldn't *think* there's any "traditional" reasons to stick with the struts, unlike the rear engine.

All righty, back on topic, what if I said that at this funding level it wouldn't be unthinkable to be fabricating a more ideal suspension/chassis setup? Obviously this is getting farther and farther away from an FC... and personally I'm not too fond of them anyway... but if someone were tied to the FC, they could probably redesign the whole suspension and incorporate various chassis stiffening measures, no?

... or just use one as a mold for a composite body for a tube-frame car... which really makes more sense to me anyway.

 

Because they're so much better than parallel trailing arms!

 

someone PM'd me for an update: As it stands the money is still an issue. I was expecting to be making more than I am right now, but buying a house kinda killed the extra spending. I have more than doubled the income from $40k to $90k in a year due to business, and expect the same to happen again by the end of this year.

And with respect to that, I'm almost torn. I've got my name on the 2 1/2 year list for a 360 Coupe at Cauley Ferrari, and if it came down to it I'd actually rather put $165k out for a 360 than $60k out for a built FC or even FD.

But the project will happen, it's just a matter of time. I've got in touch with a guy who makes silver core intercoolers (silver is a better conductor of heat than even aluminum) and he's going to be building the intercooler and piping.

I still need to find out if anyone makes forged housings, rotors, E-shafts, etc.. and if there's an option to add extra bearings somewhere in the 20B to prevent the E-shaft from flexing under high boost.

On the other hand, you probably all heard about the guy on here offering 3-rotor conversions for around $30,000 and guaranteeing 600+hp on pump fuel on low boost, and 800+ on race gas, and completely street drivable. I might even just go with that seeing as I wouldn't have to do any of the work myself.

Right now I'm looking at a bunch of projects:
Paying off the mortgage we got last April
Banking money to cut a check for the 360.
Getting a 4-door 5-series BMW for a business car.
Picking up an FC race car for ITS to get some track experience.
Picking up a new car for the wife.

So as you can see, the 3-rotor project isn't top on my list. But like I said, it'll still happen, whether it be fully custom or if it's a $30,000 drop-in advertised on here.

 

Are we going to argue about IC dimensions now?


-Ted

 

Dude, are you going to whine and complain about EVERY single thing I say? Do you have a life besides sitting on this forum and bagging on me because you and I don't agree? This is the third thread you've tossed some random insult at me in...

 

No, you misread the post. We are going to argue about IC materials.

I will begin. ...

Twice the thermal conductivity at over three times the weight. So where is the advantage in that for a vehicle?

 

There's probably a reason exotic car manufacturers use it now isn't there?

Crap now I see what my buddy was talking about when every cack on this forum has something to say about everything and how it can't be done and it sucks and the world will end... like how his 11 second FC on the stock (reprogrammed) ECU and additional injector controller was going to blow up in .2 seconds... yet the first thing that went was the transmission.

 

If that is your technical explanation for everything, then you should expect some snide remarks from the internet peanut gallery.

I try to keep the 20B forum technical in nature to attract the more advanced forum members, which means that anything and everything may be questioned. Even the more advanced forum members do not know everything, but they have enough base knowledge to participate in a good technical discussion. The environment of this forum is more harsh because of this. If you would like to post all your exotic ideas and have a bunch of ignorant yes-men bow to you, then I suggest the Lounge or one of the other internet forums. However, if you would like to take advantage of the more technical nature of this forum, then put on your flame suit and stay a while.

 

I just expect to give an idea and not have everyone try to find every reason it won't work. That's what turned a number of rotary experts I know away from this forum. I mean, the whole intercooler thing is supported by a number of people who build turbo systems for a living, and even write books on them. I bring up their theories and people go "AAAHAHA YOU'RE STUPID!! Look at this Supra, he did your idea, I bet you need that size intercooler huh?!?!"...

Stupid crap like that just pisses people off. If you want to bag on the idea then ok, post what's good about it, and post what could be better about it.

 

In that case, they were not experts, because they would have been able to support their theories. The thing that turns most of the actual experts away from this forum is that it is frustrating for them to try to explain things to those who are hyper-sensitive and do not want any criticism of their ideas.

1) You did not state any theories to support your intercooler idea.
2) I do not remember reading about silver core intercoolers in books by Corky Bell, George Spears, or Hugh MacInnes, but I could have missed it. I'm sure that others on this forum would like the author and title of the book you are referencing so we can read it. If you quote something, or somebody, but refuse to give your source or explain in simple terms, then how do you expect anybody reading your posts to understand your position?
3) I never said that you were stupid for considering a silver core intercooler, I simply asked a question, which you have so far failed to answer with any technical explanation. If anything, I am the one who is stupid because your idea makes absolutely no sense to me, except in a situation where space-saving is more critical than weight-saving, such as a fixed application like a generator or other industrial engine.

 

How about real world testing to support it? The dude ran for I don't even know how long with a setup that EVERYONE on here said "it'll blow up in a week". On a STOCK ported motor (he pulled the manifolds to check even), he was running mid to low 11's with none of the customary "you need this" crap like a standalone, and that was at about 85% throttle (the butterfly valve was hitting something in his ported TB and not fully opening).

Ok, now that we're both calm here..
1) Yes I had stated plenty of theories, like:

• As the larger surface area for the charge face to flow through, the less restrictive it becomes.
• I used examples of fluid flow to show that air will spend nearly the same amount of time in an identically dimensioned top-to-bottom setup than a left-to-right setup.
• I stated that the longer the air tubes that air has to pass through, the more restrictive those tubes become to the air passing through them.
• I stated how the same square inch area for ambient air to flow through would result in the same cooling effect whether the intercooler ran top-to-bottom or left-to-right.

2) The silver core intercoolers, is just a guy I know builds them and uses their cores. You can build silver core intercoolers to have thinner walls because the silver used is stronger than alumium at the same thickness. This results in better thermal conductivity between the charge air and the ambient air, as there's less material between them, not to mention the fact that silver has a better coefficient of thermal conductivity than aluminum. Yes it's heavier, but I can deal with that. Another ten pounds isn't going to kill me (I believe the 28x6.5x3 intercoolers with end tanks and all weighed in at 16 pounds or so). What would an aluminum core intercooler weigh with the same dimensions? Not to mention the fact that if silver is in fact stronger and the fins are made of the same material, then they should hold up better than aluminum fins when pelted with road debris.
3) Ok..

I'm outta here, I'l check back later..

 

The problem with any text based "forum" (even direct face-to-face speech) is that you can talk blue in the face trying to convince someone YOUR point of view.  I can only handle so much technobabble before I want to see real-world experimentation and proof of such theories.  Theories are just that - just theories.  If you're a good bullshitter, you can talk rings around almost anyone - whether you're correct or just bullshitting.

THIS forum is about RX-7's.  Sure, we can talk theoretical crap till the cows come home, but I think the majority of participants would like to see PROOF if you state something that hasn't been proven before.  This is why dyno numbers and 1/4-mile runs are so "important".

Take a look at the other thread about stuffing a Corvette transaxle with a 3 or 4 rotor.  I bet the guy does not have the money or the resources to do so.  That's why I told him...why don't you do it and report back to us.  This kinda extreme thinking will either make you a hero or make you a schmuck.

"Talk is cheap."



-Ted

 

Well... just as a note, checking some tables of materials properties gives aluminum an ultimate tensile strength value twice that of silver. Just my materials science textbook though.

You mention exotic car manufacturers using silver core intercoolers, but I've never seen mention of them before. Any examples you can point to?

 

Amen to that. I personally think that you're crazy but I have the common courtesy to atleast consider quietly what you are saying rather than poke fun at you at every oppurtunity, for whatever it's worth...

 

I would think the empirical testing results would be more satisfying to slam into the nay-sayers faces...


-Ted

 

Hmm, an interesting discussion here, but did anyone read this post? This FD is quite an achievement for the rotary community, I think this is the ultimate road car rotary in my opinion, but hey I've always liked N/A vehicles, and honestly is there anyone here who wouldn't want to have a well engineered quad-rotor setup in their car (provided you are blessed with a sweet street Rx or similar in the first place)?

I look forward to coming back to this discussion. Dream big guys I wanna hear what you guys think is ultimate - remember I'm basing my opinion on the idea that this car is going to see some decent road use too (20K miles).

And after all I'm still satisfied with 2 rotor motors of 2x573cc (12A) in the track proven (they won the touring car SPA 24H in Belgium for anyone questioning the ability of the chassis and reliability of components) SA22C 1st gen series 1 car. A firm in the UK builds 10A based 2L quad rotors for these cars, but they don't appear to be tuned to ultimate spec - I may have to troll around and provide a link later - I think I have one somewhere with my archived data.

 

silver intercoolers???...i think i saw 50cent with one of those around his neck

 

whooops ,..double post

 

if you really look at porsche they have a knack for designing cars that would seem to subscribe to a different set of laws of physics than the rest of the world... or "borrowing" from the czechs (ie the beetle)

imo, posche is great at taking a fundamentally bad design and making it work (the 911, the aircooled turbo race motors (ever wonder why nobody else was running air cooled engines?))

just my opinion, i could be wrong

ps, silver intercoolers? stop trying to reinvent the wheel and just build a good basic setup. if theres one thing ive learned while reading this forum its that you dont need a lot of fancy crap to make power.

mike

 

Take a look at SCOOT 4 rotor FD, you could do a similar setup with the f, the thing is beautiful, and mean, the car looks nice too, but the engine is a work of art. Without turbo's the hp was off the charts, with turbos it was estimated at 1200+ hp, if you want ultimate, look around the area of scoot.