Yeah...that gets risky. I had a guy try to beat me up because I made him feel stupid.

 

I think I am one of very few people who can make that claim LOL And yeah, I beat the **** out of some mustangs around here, I can't lie.

 

Ummmm... upper = trailing... but those ARE what you want to unplug.

Brad

 

have you driven by a ford lately?

 

tell them......
grow up!!!!!!!
move out of your parents basement !!!!!!!
it's a car !!!!!!!
get a life!!!!!

 

hahahahahahha

 

The problem is that most of the stuff you guys are saying simply isn't true. The LS1 motors typically get a good bit BETTER gas milage than our rotary motors and it makes more power... I was fortunate enough to borrow a 99 C5 Vette for a week and I drove it fairly hard, probably about as hard as I drive my TII. The Vette got ~5mpg better than my RX-7) The Ford motors IMHO are not anywhere near as good as Chevy and their LT1/LT4/LS1/LS6 motors. Chevy simply knows how to make an awesome engine. The Corvette handles very well and if you look @ the skid pad #'s you'll find that the Camaro actually puts down very respectable numbers as well. The big thing that all the import guys assume is that just because the cars are big, heavy, ugly (personal opinion) that they MUST burn a lot of gas and they simply can't handle well.

 

I dont know why people think that V8s are so great and advanced. I think if you have 5.7 liters your car better be making that much power. A Honda S2000 makes 240 hp with 2 liters. A 5.7 liter V8 with a setup like the Honda would make 684 hp. And the Chevy only makes 350. Anybody and their momma could drop a big *** engine in a car to make it fast.

 

There's another factor in your equation, namely torque. An S2000 makes 153lb-ft of torque at 7500 rpm, while a Camaro with an LS1 makes 350lb-ft at 4000. That's why people like large displacement engines.

 

Yes you are right about torque, my dads 5.0 has got alot of it which is always fun. But back to my point, does any pushrod power primitive 2.0 liter make 153lb-ft?

 

Who makes a pushrod 2.0 these days?

The sole purpose of an engine is to make power to move a car...why does it matter what technology is used?

What Japanese engine makes 350lb-ft of torque under 5K rpm N/A?

 

just race them..race a 5L or something..u probably will lose by a bit but it will show them that your car isnt a slow civic or anything..Also august.17 in port alberni we got 1/4 mile races at the air port..it costs $10 bucks..i will pm u again about them

 

.85gs for a z28 camaro is hardly respectable... It's in the neighborhood of a Toyota pick-up truck. And for the amount of money you're dropping for a supposed "sports" car, straight line acceleration should cost a lot less. But skidpad numbers are sort of irrelevant... The domestic sports car's real enemy is it's weight. They run the same size tires as we do, but they're lugging around an extra 800-1000 lbs. That's going to increase tire wear, slip angle on tight turns, agility on the slalom, etc, no matter how you slice it. I think it's pretty safe to say that, when comparing sports models, domestic and import goals differ.

Steve

 

Doesnt Japan have a 280 hp limit on cars produced in Japan?? I mean except for cars they export. How could you make 350lb-ft of torque with 280 hp? Im not 100% sure on this law but atleast 90%. If this was true why would they make an engine that they couldnt use for theirselves?

Im not trying to say that American engines are bad because they make tons of power and torque. And Japanese engines are nice because they are beefed up to make up for their lack of displacement. I think we all believe that a large displacement engine with DOHC, variable valve timing, that could rev up to 9000rpms and make power all the way there would be the ultimate engine.

 

A lot of their engines are rated at 280 but make a lot more. It's not a law, but a gentleman's agreement among Japanese automakers.

An engine that could produce 280hp at 4200rpm would make 350lb-ft of torque, but I'm sure that wouldn't be the peak horsepower...just a figure.

The perfect engine to me would be a larger displacement rotary, because I like how smooth they are, but I could use some more low end torque.

 

Yes Mazda needs to make something like a 4-5 liter rotary engine. Talk about breaking every speed record ever. Too bad the engine block would be too big to put in a small sports car like the RX-7. What would that be like a 6 or 7 rotor engine.

 

The e-shaft alone on a 6 rotor would weigh more than a 13B. I'd be happy with a 20B if I had the $$.

 

.

 

phew, I'd say nota944 had sumpthin' on his mind!

 

Ok sorry... Reece left his account signed on to my computer... post was SUPPOSED to come from me


Who cares about displacement anyway? I'm talking END RESULTS. And the end result is that the LS1 doesn't weigh a WHOLE lot more than a turbo rotary, makes more power with ease, makes a TON more torque, makes power from 1000 rpms to redline, and gets better gas milage all the time while going faster.... How can you call that primitive? I would say it's a lot smarter than those of us who think that just because it makes more power per liter that the engine is "better" or more "refined". BTW- Don't think for a second that the Ford 302 is in the same class as an LS1. The 302 isn't a good example of a NICE modern day V8. FYI the LS1 is all alluminum....

Let's just look at a few of the things the LS1 accomplishes:
1. Consistant reliable power - I've seen these things dyno one after another putting down 330hp to the ground, with very few mods. Also on the dyno they aren't having to "cool down" between runs to get their intercooler cooled off, they can just do one run after another.

2. Light weight - yup it's not THAT heavy

3. Gas milage - look it up... they really do get pretty good gas milage

4. Power band - the best part about driving a C5 vette is the fact that you can start off from a stop light, let out the clutch normally, and floor it @ 1000 rpms and the car flys up to redline in 1st gear... you shift to 2nd gear @ ~55mph.... no turbo lag, no bs, just straight up instant power

5. Meets and exceeds all current emissions requirements, 330 LEGAL HP (or more) @ the ground

You call this engine "primitive"? I would say that OUR motors are primitive compared to it... I've spent a good bit of money on my car... and I'm still at least 100hp short of a stock LS1...
Our motors blow up all the time especially when modified.
Our engines DRINK gas (don't deny it...).
Our engines only make power when on boost (yeah, really our power bands are NOT as broad as a V8 especially when you combine that with the fact that our cars have to be geared so that they can be driven normally since without boost they could NEVER take advantage of the gearing that your average V8 has stock)
Our engines are not clean when modified to a "respectible level" (let's face it... how many 300rwhp RX-7s do you know of that are emissions CLEAN)
Our motors are very sensitive to temperature and humidity... (my RX-7 SUCKS in this hot summer weather... turbo lags worse, gas pedal feels like a suggestion pedal)

Ok, well if the LS1 is "primitive" maybe your elders really DO know something that you don't?

BTW- You will notice that both of my cars are imports. I do love both of my cars, I just like to "keep it real". My cars suit my needs perfectly, and that's why I choose them.

 

That's one thing i never really understood. why didn't Mazda create a larger displacement 2 rotor engine? I mean they started with the 10A which evolved into the 12A and eventually the 13B we know today. Of course, there is the 20B 3 rotor and 26B four rotor, but it's still that similar 13B design.

How come we haven't seen rotary engines like a 15B, etc.? Maybe somebody could clue me in on that.

 

FORD
Found on Rubbish Dump

 

this should help u i found it in the lounge
https://www.rx7club.com/forum/showth...highlight=FIAT

 

Brian_TII wtf are u talking about.. u r gongi to compare a 13b $2000 engine to a ls1 engine that costs over $10,000 buhaha...the semi engine is even better..its desiel and turbo charged..it makes 600 lbs-ft and 590hp beat that its way more refined etc then the ls1 engine..

ALso those V8's dont make **** all power up at there 5800 rpm redline...then u say the 302 is a shitty engine..well u know what?? the 5L engine was out the same time the 13b was getting made...compare the new rx8 motor to the ls1 engine please..Give me a freakin break here...

Also the gas millage is worse then the 13bt if u keep the rpms in both cars below 3000 rpms.. the 13bt only sucks lots of gas when in boost...

I love V8 power i would just never want to own it ..parents and friends etc all have the big v8's but its more of a challenge to make a 1.3L engine fast then it is to make a 5.7L+ fast...Also the 13bt weighs like 3/4 the weight on the ls1 engine not to mention the weight of the car alone..

 

First of all you are right, the RX-7 does get decent milage if you keep the RPMs below 3000, unfortunately the car makes no power below 3000rpm off of boost.

Second, I'm not mentioning the cost factor. I was refering to the claim that push rod V8's are "primitive". I mean, if the LS1 is really "primitive" then we should have no problems comparing it our rotary engines, since I think we all agree that it is NOT primitive.

Third, the LS1 is not as expensive as you might think. You can pick them up used with T56 6spd tranny for ~ $4000. I've seen brand new LS1's with PCM going for $6000. IMHO that's still cheaper than a 13BT + mods....

Forth, the power band IS very broad and the LS1 actually does have VERY good top end. It makes one of the nicest dyno charts I've seen.

Also a semi truck engine wouldn't make a good sports car engine. It's too big to fit under the hood of a sports car. The LS1 will actually fit under the hood of a 2nd gen RX-7 while keeping A/C, P/S.....