i was reading the articale about the RX-8 over at Rotary News and i did the math on the torque number they posted. It came out as 162.14 ft-lbs!?!?! That's only slightly more than the S2000's 153 ft-lbs!!! I know rotary engines aren't know for their impressive torque numbers but i think that's ridiculous. Was Mazda just being conservative in that asessment or is that really the kind of number you can expect from a car that's not turbo/supercharged?

~ Phu5ion

 

*cries*

That disgusting lack of torque is going to hurt low-end and top speed.

 

Torque is a function of displacement, compression ratio, and VE. As a rule of thumb, it's difficult to make more than 1lb-ft per cubic inch (4-stroke boinger) or 2lb-ft per CI (Rotary, due to the pessimistic way they measure displacement) in a N/A applicaiton.

162lb-ft is almost exactly double 80ci. That's about right then. Don't lose heart, Mazda can't bend the laws of physics. It's going to make around 162lb-ft peak no matter what, the important part is "how is the torque curve shaped?"

The reason the Honda has 153lb-ft for only 122ci (IOW it's much more efficient than the RX-8) is because it has MUCH higher compression, and the peak torque occurs at a really high RPM where Honda could take better advantage of airflow resonance and scavenging. IOW, they increased VE.

- PJ (Is this what you wanted? This is what you get...)

 

yeah that sounds pretty good, thanks.

~ Phu5ion