I'm thinking of purchasing a parts rx-7 with a blown motor and buying a conversion kit with a v-6 or v-8 to replace it. Is this a realistic goal, and is so, where can i purchase a kit. i know they exist, i have friends who have them. thx, KC

im sure it would work by why retrogress to an inferior engine design??

A piston engine in V-formation is unbalanced, the pistons violently change direction, is unable to acheive high revs due to the mass changing direction so quickly, and it has many moving parts.

A rotary has 3 cycles per revolution due to its design, it has the best hp/liter ratio of almost any engine, its perfect for a twin turbo setup, it has THREE moving parts, it stays in one direction, and it revs high due to this.

if you're worried about having an engine problem solved: www.revolutionrotary.com

only a couple thousand. good luck

Oh yeah, tons of people are doing this. Turns out when a rotary goes, people aren't willing to sacrifice the multiple limbs necessary to get it rebuilt/replaced.

I am doing this in an 81, with a 400CI Ford... I think the 5.0/early eighties first gens are the easiest, you just turn the engine/suspension crossmember around 180 degrees, and bolt up the stock Ford mounts. The tranny requires a custom fabbed crossmember, but grannys sells em for about $300.

Budget $2000 for parts if you do it yourself, including engine, new 4 core aluminum rad, and new crossmember.

These guys will show you everything you need to know...
http://members.tripod.com/~grannys/

or you can put in 1700 bux for a remanufactured rotary. Why bother getting an RX-7 if you aren't going to have the rotary in it? If you want a V8, theres plenty of Camaro's Firebirds and Mustangs out there.

Originally posted by Steel
or you can put in 1700 bux for a remanufactured rotary. Why bother getting an RX-7 if you aren't going to have the rotary in it? If you want a V8, theres plenty of Camaro's Firebirds and Mustangs out there.

exactly my point: http://www.revolutionrotary.com

they sell reman 13b AND the king of rotaries the 3-rotor twin turbo 20b engine.

plus you can get the option of 3mm apex seals and other upgrades like street porting and what not. it's inexpensive and its like a new rx7 when you drop it in.

Originally posted by Steel
Why bother getting an RX-7 if you aren't going to have the rotary in it?

Becasue the RX7 is a very light weight car, with competent for its time handleing (and when well sorted awsome handleing), and any small black V8 fits rather nicely in the frount.

You get the best of both worlds. Light weight Japanese car with lots of American V8 grunt.
Becuase lets be honest here, as cool an engine as the Rotory is, it will never make as much hp as a V8.

Originally posted by Moppie
Becuase lets be honest here, as cool an engine as the Rotory is, it will never make as much hp as a V8.

not true. The reason most people baby rotaries is because mazda holds the patents to alot of the technology behind them, and they have ALWAYS skimped on power (miata, mp3, etc). They always go for low displacement engines. If another company would be able to make use of the rotary technology, they'd use more rotors etc. The 20b uses 3 rotors and puts out 280hp stock if you port the I/E, get a new pully system, new computer, and remove the old TT and put a quick spooling single turbo, it can touch 400+ easily. An experimental 6-rotor engine from mazda put out 900hp. It's just like an I-4 compared to a V-12 in the piston world, theres no replacement for displacement.

As mazda loses it's patents (i think theres a time limit isn't there?), maybe someone would make good use of the design. In fact i think i recall GM having solved some of the rotaries difficulties but couldn't apply it and never released the technology as they don't hold the patents.

I like rotary engines. If I had a good 13B, or a 20B, I would drop it right in the RX7. I don't though. What I do have is a huge Ford smallblock, and it was free. I also have a Porsche transaxle from a 931, which is going to be my tranny. I can get a first gen second series Rex with a blown motor for around $300 CDN. I can rebuild the motor for $600 CDN with forged pistons, add $150 for a new cam, let's say a $900 rebuild with 400hp. With the Porsche transaxle, the car will weigh 2300-2400lbs, have 400hp, and a 50/50 weight balance.

Now I just need flares for wider tires.

Putting that V6 or V8 into a rex is totally nuts, you are ruining the whole concept of the car, with an almost perfect 50:50 weight distribution you are going to throw that all off.

yeah, that v8 is gonna be a LOT heavier than the 13b, totally screw your weight distrobution. Your rear end will be kicking out on you when you pull into the supermarket! unless you wight it down, bu then you will be the only owner of a 4500 pound rex.

Well, thats one of the benefits of using the Porsche transaxle, it combines the differential and transmission, and only weighs 80 lbs.

I'm not replacing a 250lb 13B, I'm replacing a 350lb 12A with a 500lb 400M. The tranny is going to the back, and so is the battery. This will keep an optimum weight balance :)

Look, I don't mean to offend any rotary purists, I love rotaries as much as anyone else. I can't afford one though! Besides, this motor is a test bed for my shop, and it needs a home.

You all are idiots. the right V8 will overpower ANY rotory you have. Even a 20b turbo wont give out as much power as a modified v8. And you all must not read around. You can put a v8 in your car and gain MAYBE 150lbs. And that is NOt throwing off the balance. You can put a v8 in a TII and even make the car LIGHTER then it was stock. SO get off the V8's. Plus, i have a V8 in my 7 and all my fiends have a 7. I can either hang or BEAT them on the corners, and on the strait ways i can eat them all alive. one of my friends has a TII with about $15,000 of mods to it. Plus you all say its killing the car. Maybe some of us can afford to keep the rotory running. Stuff for those engines are expesive. You can go down to almost any autzone or pepboys to get what u need, (i recomend using summit for all your parts though). So get off this guys back. V8 will do just fine in a 7. A v8 will outperform any rotory. And like i daid the weight differance isnt that much. 150lbs...thats al. So before you all start talking crap...do the research. and if any of you are EVER in Ky, bring your 7 and ill show you what a v8 can do. BIOTCHES

Well any RX7 with a V8 is no longer a RX7 as far as I am concerned and alot of other 7 lovers feel the same way. 150 pounds huh?!? Yeah maybe after you strip the interior. But hey it's your car.

What a joke!!! This is an absolute insult to every 7s out there. There is no place for a "piss-ton" engine or V8s in any 7s for that matter. Anyone who disagree can tell it to Mazda. I think it will surely disappoint Mazda, especially Mr. Rotary, Mr. Yamamoto will came out with rotary to complement the 7s handling and performance. Rotary is the soul of Mazda and 7s. If there is no rotary, then no RX7.

Let's put it this way, if u do not have money to maintain the 7, then don't think of buying 7 at all because if u have good money to spend, then the word piston should not even come into your mind. Also, if u are a true rotary fan, u will not sacrifice rotary for that crap for money's sake.

As for performance wise, v8 can overpower any rotary??? Then, why don't beat try on the RX7.com stock body street legal RX-7??? That's the fastest RX-7 @ 9 sec in 1/4 mile run.

To all rotary fans, cheers....long live rotary and 7s!!!:D

Riiiiight...hmmm the rx-7.com car. Let me think...im sure they dumped allot more money into there car then i will ever be able. But i will race ANY of you othat think this is a bad idea. And i bet i can still kick your ass around corners. I bet i will be able to take a corner faster now. So dont talk carp about peoples car just because they do something different. And i love the rotary engine, but it doesnt do what i want it to do anymore. I wanna be able to kick a vipers/ corvette z06's ass...and i will. Oh, if any of you are in the louisville,ky area. post it up...cuz i need people to check how my tail lights look on the road. BIOTCHES

Since V8s can produce more horsepower than rotary, why fear it then? May i ask how quick is your V8 1/4 mile run?

Who says rotary cannot kick vipers and corvette z06s ass? If a rotary engine is well-tuned i seroiusly don't think vipers and z06s are worthy opponents. Their tuning are almost at their peak so means not much room for improvements left. Also, given equal horsepower on both cars, a rotary have high chances of kicking the opposite's ass.

there's no replacement for displacement - unless its a rotary!

Listen man, a stock V8 wont be making you go much faster than a stock N/A rotary. But you want to make your V8 7 fast right? Well guess what, you're gonna be spending JUST as much money on that as you would if you were to mod a rotary. Plus, you're gonna end up sepnding a LOT to get that bitch monted in there, getting the tranny, making the different tranny fit under the car, getting a new driveshaft and rearend, getting a new computer to control your engine, fucking with the electronics because the tach's work different, and it'll be a general pain in the ass. Sure you can get a nice crate V8 for what was it, $400? but you're looking at 10 grand to make it fit and make it fast. If i had 10k's i'd jsut get a 3 rotor cosmo engine that STARTS with ~300 hp IMO and can EASILY hit ~700. Chew on that for a bit.

Look, I have a free engine, and a tranny that cost me $100. I have a RX7 which will cost me $50, and has no engine. It has cost me about $500 so far, and I have everything I need to put the engine in the Rex with the exception of a fuel cell. I'm removing the stock fuel tank, to make room for the transaxle.

This engine is getting

cylinder heads ---------- $300
Rebuild------------------- $300
efi ------------------------ $400
crane 268 cam ---------- $120

The engine will make 400hp, and 500lbft of torque! As much as I love the rotary engine, show me a rotary engine that makes 500lbft, and then show me exactly how much it cost to build it. Could I build it in my backyard, like I can with the 400M?

Originally posted by Cbass
show me a rotary engine that makes 500lbft

Why? You looking to tow something with your RX-7?


Heh, seriously though. It's your car, do what you want. Sounds like you have a good deal on parts there, so just go for it. Sure, you'll get no love from the RX-7 community... but who cares? When it comes to your car, the only opinion that really matters is yours.

Now look...since the engine you had is free, you can do whatever you want for sure coz' you won't be spending on another engine. Definitely a rotary will cost more than what you are getting.

That engine of yours make 400hp and 500lb/ft torque @ ???? rpm coz' the rotary engines are peaky and torquey by nature.

13B Rebuild kit price:
APEX SEAL ($6.00 each)
CORNER SEAL ($12.00 each)
SIDE SEAL ($12.00 each)
OIL SEAL INNER/OUTER ($4.00 each)
O-RING, OIL SEAL INNER ($4.00 each)
O-RING OIL SEAL OUTER ($4.00 each)
OIL SEAL FRONT COVER ($1.00 each)
OIL SEAL REAR ($1.00 each)
GASKET O-RING SET ($1.00 each)
INNER APEX SPRING ($6.00 each)
OUTER APEX SPRING ($6.00 each)
CORNER SEAL SPRING ($2.00 EACH)
SIDE SEAL SPRINGS ($2.00 each)
OIL SEAL SPRING-FRONT ($2.00 each)
OIL SEAL SPRING-REAR ($2.00 each)

Found this thread, so I had to register and add my 2c's!

Until I can find a rotary that gets 27mpg daily, and has almost 400hp.....

ok, have any of you looked into this?

the granny's website and the folks at torquecentral.com can really helped you with this. you will get a car that is almost just as light, has the same 50/50 weight distribution, will handle just as well (depending on how the weight issue goes), has way more power, and has a significantly power / reliability / MPG issue

some things i have read in this thread:

"A piston engine in V-formation is unbalanced, the pistons violently change direction, is unable to acheive high revs due to the mass changing direction so quickly, and it has many moving parts."

is that why honda motors rev so high? what about motorcycle engines, they have pistons. LS1's and many SBC's rev to 7 or eight every day and have no problem

"v8 is gonna be a LOT heavier than the 13b"

not really. aluminum heads / intake, and no PS / AC, and you have a car that is practily the same and has about 3 times the power

"if u do not have money to maintain the 7, then don't think of buying 7 at all "

what? i don't buy / build a car so i have to screw with it every 100 miles. a reliable 350hp small block is cheap and well documented. let me see that in a 1.3 liter rotary, and not well my friend has or mazda built one of....

"with an almost perfect 50:50 weight distribution you are going to throw that all off."

if you had bothered to go to the granny's site or torquecentral you would see how this can be maintained by moving your battery and a few other minor things

just do a little research instead of being so close minded, and you will see that it is a good swap that greatly improves the performance of the rx7

this will REALLY make some of you cringe - www.hinsonsupercars.com

Wow, this thread turned ugly really fast...

If I had a FD, I would keep the 13B rotary...

but I don't, I have the 81, and the previous owner never changed the oil, this thing is hooped. I don't feel like rebuilding a carbureted 12A, because it's not worth my time or money.

It's still all in pieces right now, I'm rebuilding the 400M right now, and the G31 transaxle needs new synchros.

Putting that V6 or V8 into a rex is totally nuts, you are ruining the whole concept of the car, with an almost perfect 50:50 weight distribution you are going to throw that all off.

It is quite apareant that you dont really know what your talking about and you dont have 1st hand knowledge of what you say..Speaking from both sides of teh coin (yes i have had several rotarys including the 3rd ccartech 12a turbo kit many years ago before most here probally had a bike!) The V8 with alloy heads and water pump a relocated battery and removal of the needed 13B wires and coils and so forth will net 52/49 dist ratio as the case with my car..Thats on my scales in my shop..

You will never ever get a 13b to make relighable power no matter what you do..And after you factor in the cost of teh added support equipment to the turbo rotary and teh turbo you could have an all motor V8 with a solid roller cam and alloy heads with change left over..

You freak'n rotary PINHEADS!

What none of you seem to understand is that to have a v-8 RX-7 you most likely FIRST owned an rotary RX-7 which means that in addition to understanding piston engines (which are superior in every objective measure of performance) we understand in detail the workings of rotaries as well.

I have gutted the rotary out of my 3rd gen RX-7 and am installing an alum GM LS1 in it's place. The 13B-REW as compared to the v-8:


* Weighs as much as the vette engine.
* It gets worse gas milage.
* Higher emissions.
* Less torque.
* Less horsepower.
* Smaller powerband.
* It doesn't last as long.
* It is more maint intensive.
* It requires complex turbocharging to produce meaningful power


If you want to keep your wankler for emotional or subjective reasons I understand. But if you want a *RELIABLE* source of large amounts of responsive horsepower the v-8 is the better way to go.

Steel, you are an idiot, its official. Do the research before you open your mouth, ever again. I hereby revoke your right to speak to any intellegent human being ever again. To fill you in, you can build a 500hp, 600ft. lbs small block v8 for about $1500 with good parts and it will get prolly 18mpg and last forever. Then the ENTIRE kit with the motor AND tranny mounts, driveshaft, speedo and tach recalibration and everything is about $500. I wanna see ANY 13b get 500hp, and ESPECIALLY 600ft. lbs for 2g. I personally got my 87 NA for $100 with a blown motor and I spent about $1000 to build a 486hp, 574ft. lb. v8 plus $400 for the kit and my car runs ~10.40's ALL day on PUMP GAS. Also I put the battery in the back and put a hood scopp on and the car is a total of 22lbs. heavier in the front and will kill any of your cars immediately. SO with that I tell you that yes, rotaries are a great concept but until they became semi-budgetable to build, throw them in the parts heap.

its a disgrace to the rx-7 all over to put a v-8 into a rx-7!
ddaaammm it, buy a 5.slow mustang den!
rx-7 can easily make 450+hp @ weels and do the 1\4 in low 10s.
my friends have 2 rx-7s that do 10s one is a 93 wit a worked 13b and it does 10.6
and the other is a worked first gen that also has a 13b and does 10.1, both of these cars are driven every day to work and back and driven to the track and bak!

so i think that the rotory engine is a very capabile engine!

Sr20, you have fallen victim as well, no more talking. No one ever said a rotary couldn't make 400hp or run 10's, ITS THE COST. The money it would take to put a 13b-rew into the 10's is LUDICROUS. It cost me 2000 for a complete fresh motor (specs in post above) and the swap. It costs you more than that for turbo upgrades, then you have to deal with injectors, cooling, all of that crap, ITS NOT WORTH THE HASSLE, especially if you're starting with a blown motor because a stock rebuild for a regular 13b is in excess of a $1000 in most places. But hey, if you have the money to waste on crap and one car, you do that, I would rather build my rx-7 how I did with the v8 for $2000 and smoke you and put the rest towards finishing my 1967 Chevelle (Blown 427) that will also smoke you. Hmmmm, two cars that will look better, run better, and smoke you, for the price of one that will self destruct at any given point. I think not.:flipa:

This brings to mind a line that Dan Aykroyd used to say when he reported the news on SNL during it's original run in the 1970s;

"Jane you misguided ignorant slut."

A 13B can't EASILY make 450hp, rather a it is possible to make 450hp with a 13B in highly modified form, on racing gas, in a highly controlled environment, with expert tuning and no hope for reliability. It's just waiting to blow out and cost you big dough!

Now contrast that with a stock Z06 Corvette engine. 405hp and:

* Runs on pump gas
* Good gas milage
* Passes emissions
* Reliable as a brick factory warrenty on the crate engine
* More responsive (no turbo lag)
* Wider powerband
* Similar installed weight to a turbo 13B.

So again, tell me in objective terms why the rotary is better?




Originally posted by sr20det2nr
its a disgrace to the rx-7 all over to put a v-8 into a rx-7!
ddaaammm it, buy a 5.slow mustang den!
rx-7 can easily make 450+hp @ weels and do the 1\4 in low 10s.
my friends have 2 rx-7s that do 10s one is a 93 wit a worked 13b and it does 10.6
and the other is a worked first gen that also has a 13b and does 10.1, both of these cars are driven every day to work and back and driven to the track and bak!

so i think that the rotory engine is a very capabile engine!

A 13B can't EASILY make 450hp, rather a it is possible to make 450hp with a 13B in

yea my boys both run about 400hp every day on pump gass and over 450+ hp at races ,
yes i agree that rx-7 take alot of $ to hook up but 2 me it is worth it come on having a 400+ daily driven race car..
its worth it... the fact that u can say i beat ur 5.0l+ wit a 1.3L thats enuff satification 4 me.

bty their rx7s are highly reliable:flipa:

Wow you must be very special. Because no one else has ever made that much reliable horsepower on pump gas out of a 13B.

BTW: The effective displacement of the 1.3l 13B is 2.6L. Don't forget that rotaries use all of their displacement with every rev. 4 cycle piston engines use half of their displacement with every rev.




Originally posted by sr20det2nr


yea my boys both run about 400hp every day on pump gass and over 450+ hp at races ,
yes i agree that rx-7 take alot of $ to hook up but 2 me it is worth it come on having a 400+ daily driven race car..
its worth it... the fact that u can say i beat ur 5.0l+ wit a 1.3L thats enuff satification 4 me.

bty their rx7s are highly reliable:flipa:

"yes i agree that rx-7 take alot of $ to hook up but 2 me it is worth it come on having a 400+ daily driven race car.."

but what if you were able to have that horsepower at half the price?

This place is funny as all hell..SR20 claims his boys have reliable 13bs that are street driven..Lets see, whats teh name of the shop...I used to live in NY and started working at paisley automotive when i was there and im also good friends with Job Spetter of turbo people..I pretty much know of every fast shop there so it seems weird to me that you make this claim..During recent phone calls to NYC to catch up on BS these said cars werent known of..Kinda odd......................BTW puimp gas would be something at every gas station not race gas sold from a pumpWhat track do they drive them to? E town? I talked to the guys at neverlift and wild rides as well as cartec and know one knows of such a rx7?????
At any rate they may run 10s and be street driven but its not a 10 sec street car unless you can run it on the track with just a tire change..Hell I drove my 10.0 LT1/700R4 RX7 from philadelphia to atlanta without any problems...Except for the people at the rest stop harrasing me to look at the car in detail..

I love this forum!

The idea of V8 in RX-7 is unacceptable by many great mechanics and automakers in the world!!! How can people ever come out with such ideas??? :o

To those who cannot understand rotary can be as reliable and powerful as pistons is just plain ignorant. It is greatly known that pistons are more reliable but not necessarily more powerful just b'coz pistons has less chances of breaking and having higher reliability percentage than rotaries does not prove that rotary cannot be reliable. Plus twin-rotor rotaries are only equivalent to 4-cyl pistons so to be equal, tri-rotor rotary = V8 piston category. :eek:

We all rotary players understand it is the matter of cost when it comes to rotary maintainance. But heck, I own a junk-yard(spare parts) shop so I know it is not that expensive to maintain except for the motor, which can cost a bit more than pistons if you have to do a full rebuild. Otherwise, other parts you can just buy used parts, get them reconditioned and it is almost brand new.

I own a 346bhp '90 TII and it has almost 70K mileage on current motor (exact 69+K) and still performs like almost new. Also, my 1st gen motor breaks at 153K mileage in addition to that I bought it at a used car shop with 131K mileage. My '93 R1 ran 114K up to date and still going strong.

Another note is no other can rival the rotary in smoothness(linearic motion) and non-vibration.

I love this forum its so full of ignorance. You guys keep saying stuff about rotary enthusiasts and crap like that, give me a break. 80% of the guys dropping V8's used to be rotary guys but wanted real power. Hey, rotaries may be smooth but expensive and a pain to deal with. You say they are just as reliable. HA, I have seen guys run 9 second Big Block 78-81 Chevy Malibus (Flint Michigan) that are street driven every day. And, not quite a V8 but the Grand NAtional guys. Buick 3.8 turbos are probably the greatest power plant EVER and they can run 9-10sec in full street trim. I have NEVER seen a rotary pull a car into the 9's or even deep 10's without having more money put into them than they're worth. It's insane, the turbo upgrades and exhaust (downpipe, manifold) ALONE could break someone who isn't loaded. I don't know about anyone else but if I am gonna put that kind of money into a car I want it to have a great motor making good power that I Can still build on and not have tuned to the hilt. There are people running 8-9 second quarters off of small block chevy's that cost nearly the same to build as 11 second rx-7's, it ludicrous. Not to mention that the car with a small block will have a lot better temperment. SO say what you will and make up all of hte little facts and stories you want but the truth of the matter is that, while rotaries are good motors, they will never compare to a BUILT v8.

well i aint bullshitin the name of the shop is" tnr racing" located on parsons intbetween jamaica and liberty ave, o yea they also have a web site where u can see there e.t's so here u are go and check out www.rx7s.com and see for ur self.

and one year in bandcamp....................Websites are nice..

Since your so cool with them ask them to bring it to atco during the pan american nationals..Havent seen either car there and i didnt miss an event last year or the year before..If they are daily driven im sure they wouldnt mind proving to all us V8 Rx7 owners how stupid we are for saveing wads of cash and having a proven reliable drivetrain..We could go for a cruise through south jersey NMRA true street style and then make some passes....

Since your so cool with them ask them to bring it to atco during the pan american

we'll i could do that if i was cool with u and all but scine you are trying to make me look like a lttle bitch, and i gave you proof of my claims i do not owe you anything else ....
... if you want to race them call up the shop and ask to talk to tony and\or romeo and set up a race date or something! i am not there agent i cannot tell them to go race someone all the way in alanta and also they have a shop to run! there shop is open monday through saturday so they are very busy but if u really want to race them give them a call and work something out.
their phone number is on there web site!

1

Typical rotary "purist" ignorance being shown here.

An RX7 is a CAR, not a religious shrine. It isn't rare or particularly valuable. Even a NICE 2nd gen can be had for around 2 grand, because they are so common. Dead ones can be had free.

People call the cars crap if they don't have the rotary, meaning you people who like the RX7 even feel that other than the engine, the car ITSELF is crap! As if without the engine, it loses it's superior suspension design, it's superior build quality, it's superior ergonomics, and it's outstanding styling. If I wanted another Mustang, i would have BUILT another mustang. If I wanted another 145 hp stock RX7 engine I would have SPENT the $2000 on doing that.

Here's the FACTS:

My '86 RX7 Sport had no AC, stock, no sunroof, and no power steering. But it had all teh suspension from teh Turbo. I added Tokiko sport springs and Tokiko HP struts, Yokohama A008 RSII autocross tires, and raced it for a year, winning the BSCC season's championship in it's class. At the end of that year (1993), the stock 145 hp rotary died. It was going to cost, at that time $2500 to build a new, stock 145 hp rotary. Or considerably more to install a stock 200 hp turbo rotary (or a Cartech turbo upgrade to a stock N/A rotary). Once the horsepower goes up, especialy in the early '90s, rotaries simply DO NOT LAST. For a grand, I bought a nearly 400 hp Ford 5.0 that had just been built for a friends drag car (but he decided not to go small black). I spent less than a grand doing the rest of the conversion (starting with $20 in materials to make the mounts). there was NO WAY to match the hp/torque per doller of the conversion by using a rotary.

Because of the engine setback (the V8, like the rotary, sits nearly completely behind the front axle centerline) the added weight of the V8 (420 lbs vs 330 lbs) was spread between the front and rear axles. Moving the batter y to the rear balanced that out, and WITHOUT GUTTING THE INTERIOR the weight balance ended up at 49/51! The total car weighed 2720 lbs, and 1300 lbs of that was on the nose. The pivot point is the wheels when judging mass. That's why corner scales are used, and not just one big one in the center of the car. Using corner scales, the pivot point is at the wheels. Since the weight is behind the wheels it pushes down not only on the front pivot point, but on the whole car to the rear of that pivot point, thus weight/mass is carried by the rear pivot point as well. Since both pivot points carry the mass, they split the total weight. That's the whole POINT of a mid engine car.

This a recorded, repeatable, fact. If you say the cars become nose heavy, you are WRONG. Get over it. If your theory doesn't fit with demonstrable fact, change the theory to match the facts.

http://speed.supercars.net/cboardpics/2002-8-16/259260a.jpg

http://speed.supercars.net/cboardpics/2002-8-16/259264a.jpg

A stock RX7 Turbo weighs 2880lbs. So even if I took my conversion, and changed it to a cast iron Chevy, thus adding at least another 100 lbs overall, the total weight is still not going to be heavier than a stock RX7 Turbo as a complete car (under 2900 lbs), and the weight balance will not be much different than my car, even though the total is up, for the reasons outlined in my description about weight pushing on a the pivot points. My car pulled over 1 G laterally, and even with teh RX7 rear end and gearing limited speed AND road race suspension setup (with short autocross tires) ran low 12s in the quarter. All for a $2000 total investment in the conversion.

Since a turbo RX7 is not considered a nose heavy pig, then obviously a car with the same weight and overall weight balance cannot be so considered, either. And that's the part we try to convey. What's funny is that people complain about the V8 being nose heavy and expensive, then offer up the 20B Turbo as a more appropriate option, even though it costs VASTLY more and actually ends up with much worse weight balance than even a stock RX7 turbo, due to the added forward length and the fact that the 20B with turbos and intercooler weigh more than the small block V8...

V8 RX7s are a cheap way to have a balanced handling car with superior style, ergonomics, and build quality, with the high power and high torque, and reliability of a low cost understressed domestic V8.

Cbass, me thinks your idea about the Porsche transaxle may be undermined by the available gearing. When doing a V8 swap, the rear end gearing is a concern because V8s produce their power and torque lower in the rev range than rotaries do. You are swaping in a motor that will only need about 2500 RPM to EFFORTLESSLY propel a car with the aerodynamic properties of the RX7 at 100mph but you require the gearing to do so. Typical RX7 gearing is in the 3.90-4.10 to 1 range with a rotary that can turn 7000rpm with more revs in reserve (at the cost of worn apex seals) so when you swap in a SB ford that makes all its HP below 4500 rpm and can (on average) safely spin to about 5500 rpm before doing bad things, the final drive gearing becomes an issue. With a SB V8, your motor will be turning in the neighborhood of 4000 rpm at 70 mph! While this may be great for autocross, you will find that it won't be very good on the road. Find out what your ratios are and do the math to see if you will end up with something streetable or with something that will need 5000 rpm to maintain 80mph on the highway! Now, while it is easily possible to build a SB Ford that can spin to 7000 rpm, it is NOT cheap and it certainly won't be very civilised on the street.

My '82 will be getting a SB Ford sometime in the next couple of years so I have done quite a bit of reasearch on this. For all you die-hard rotary guys, I think it's sad that you do not see the merit in an engine swap of this nature. You are absolutely correct that per displacement, the Wankel rotary is a tough design to beat when it comes to making horespower. The problem is that I want a car that can last a long time before needing a rebuild all the while giving me the power to be able to hang with 'vettes and vipers. To each his own.

Toughguy :)

P.S. I turned every bolt on this car and I'll be damned if ANYBODY is gonna tell me what I can and can't do with it! If you don't like the color, close your eyes.

Good info ya got there, but........

Those of us who use the T56 (6 speed) come out perfect. My car, on the Interstate at 75mph, turns 2400rpm. That's not to bad!

By the way, I'm running 4.10's in back...

Dude, your car is a work of art. You did a fantastic job.



Originally posted by Chris V
Typical rotary "purist" ignorance being shown here.

An RX7 is a CAR, not a religious shrine. It isn't rare or particularly valuable. Even a NICE 2nd gen can be had for around 2 grand, because they are so common. Dead ones can be had free.
d reliability of a low cost understressed domestic V8.

Originally posted by Chris V
Typical rotary "purist" ignorance being shown here.

An RX7 is a CAR, not a religious shrine. It isn't rare or particularly valuable. Even a NICE 2nd gen can be had for around 2 grand, because they are so common. Dead ones can be had free.


To some people, a car almost is a religious shrine.

People love different cars for different reason, and it's not always something that you can just boil down to numbers. Heritage and history have a lot to do with it.

Yes, you can put a V8 in a RX-7 and make more power than most rotaries out there. Sure, you can make it handle about the same. If that's the way you want to go, then by all means go for it.

Understand, though, that to a rotary "purist", the rotary is part of the car. Taking the rotary out of the RX-7 is like taking someone's heart out. It can be replaced with something else... but to some people, it's just not the same.

It's not ignorance, it's love. Love for the car as it was built, and the history that the line has. If you refuse to accept that some people can hold such reverance for a car's design, then it is you who is ignorant.

Toughguy, the transmission I am using is a transaxle for a front engined, rear transmission Porsche 924 Turbo. There is a traditional bellhousing, and a driveshaft that goes to the transmission, in the rear. Actually, there is an outer shell containing bearings, and an inner 1.25" solid driveshaft, this arrangement is called the torque tube. The differential is contained inside the transaxle, so the gearing should be perfect. At 5000 rpm, I should be doing 160mph.

Kaneto, I understand exactly what you mean. There is a certain mystique and feeling about rotary engines, and if I had the money, I would have a FD parked in my driveway right now, powered by a 400hp 13B.

A common misconception is that rotaries are unreliable, and this is a half truth. An engine is only as reliable as you make it, and if you abuse any engine, it will fail. Some engines have more tolerance for this than others, but that doesn't make them more or less reliable, that makes them more tolerant to abuse. A rotary that is well cared for will last a very long time, just the same as a smallblock. A smallblock that never gets it's oil changed, is overheated, and then flogged daily will break down fairly quickly.

We all love RX7s, why should we quibble about which engine powers the car?

Originally posted by Kaneto


To some people, a car almost is a religious shrine.

People love different cars for different reason, and it's not always something that you can just boil down to numbers. Heritage and history have a lot to do with it.

If you make a mass produced compromise of a car a religious shrine, you have a problem. And if you start denigrating people who are building personalized versions of that car to better fit THEIR desires, then you have a SERIOUS problem, and need to step back.

Yes, you can put a V8 in a RX-7 and make more power than most rotaries out there. Sure, you can make it handle about the same. If that's the way you want to go, then by all means go for it.

You can make it handle better. My car, with no other suspension mods, handled better after the conversion than before. Do you understand that? That isn't "about the same." I've been autocrossing for a couple decades, and was an SCCA and BSCC driving instructor. I've driven everything from huge sedans to formula cars on the track, and built national championship winning autocross cars. I know what handling is about.

Understand, though, that to a rotary "purist", the rotary is part of the car. Taking the rotary out of the RX-7 is like taking someone's heart out. It can be replaced with something else... but to some people, it's just not the same.

No, to a rotary purist, the rotary is theonly part of the car that matters: without it, the car is crap. They completely ignore every other good quality of the car. It is not a complete package. It is a home for the rotary, and the rotary, to them, is what imbues the rest of the car with goodness, as though the ONLY reason it works the way it does in every other area is that engine. This is demonstrably untrue! The rotary is ONE internal combustion engine design. It's a fabulous design. But it's only one part of the whole car.

It's not ignorance, it's love. Love for the car as it was built, and the history that the line has. If you refuse to accept that some people can hold such reverance for a car's design, then it is you who is ignorant.

I don't refuse to accept it. I refuse to allow those narowminded fools to denigrate people who are NOT narrowminded, who are NOT mentally challenged by being religiously blinded by a goddamn bit of mass produced, manmade mechanical invention!

Telling people that they have irrational "love" for a mechanical device is not being ignorant. What is ignorant is the statements of "fact" they make about the cars in stock and modified form, most of which are demonstrably untrue. Spouting non-facts to a quasi-religious bent is ignorant.

(edit- dang tags...)

Originally posted by Chris V
If you make a mass produced compromise of a car a religious shrine, you have a problem. And if you start denigrating people who are building personalized versions of that car to better fit THEIR desires, then you have a SERIOUS problem, and need to step back.

It's called a figure of speech. :rolleyes:

And in no way am I denigrating anyone else's decisions on what they do to their cars.


You can make it handle better. My car, with no other suspension mods, handled better after the conversion than before. Do you understand that? That isn't "about the same." I've been autocrossing for a couple decades, and was an SCCA and BSCC driving instructor. I've driven everything from huge sedans to formula cars on the track, and built national championship winning autocross cars. I know what handling is about.

You'll have to explain how a car with roughly the same weight distribution, as you've pointed out, and no changes to the suspension, handles better. Are you sure it isn't in your head?


No, to a rotary purist, the rotary is theonly part of the car that matters: without it, the car is crap. They completely ignore every other good quality of the car. It is not a complete package. It is a home for the rotary, and the rotary, to them, is what imbues the rest of the car with goodness, as though the ONLY reason it works the way it does in every other area is that engine. This is demonstrably untrue! The rotary is ONE internal combustion engine design. It's a fabulous design. But it's only one part of the whole car.

Then I don't know what rotary purist you've been talking to. For myself, and every other rotary fan I know, it's about the total car package. It's about the car as a whole, and the rotary is part of that car. I doubt your "rotary purists" would be so adamant about a rotary engine in a Mustang. Sure, it would be a neat conversion, but they would still recognize the fact that the Mustang wasn't built with a rotary in mind, just as an RX-7 wasn't built with a piston engine in mind.


I don't refuse to accept it. I refuse to allow those narowminded fools to denigrate people who are NOT narrowminded, who are NOT mentally challenged by being religiously blinded by a goddamn bit of mass produced, manmade mechanical invention!

Telling people that they have irrational "love" for a mechanical device is not being ignorant. What is ignorant is the statements of "fact" they make about the cars in stock and modified form, most of which are demonstrably untrue. Spouting non-facts to a quasi-religious bent is ignorant.

Well then good for you. Just understand that not all "rotary purists" are like the ones you've talked to. Just because I would never put anything but a rotary engine in a RX-7, doesn't mean I think a 7 with a piston engine will be any less of a car performance-wise.

Can't find the source, but Yamamoto himself said (paraphrasing) "Without the rotary, the RX-7 cannot exist..."

edit: here it is! "Almost immediately after taking over the RX-7 program, Kobayakawa began work on the next generation. And while there was total freedom over the powerplant choice for the new sports car, the rotary was selected, first for compactness and power potential, but also for heritage. Said Yamamoto: "To forsake the rotary would be losing our identity. The RX-7 could not and would not exist without the rotary"

-Very Good RX-7 page (http://members.rogers.com/sofronov/Cars/Mazda/Past/Rotary/91RX7.html)

Originally posted by Kaneto


Well then good for you. Just understand that not all "rotary purists" are like the ones you've talked to. Just because I would never put anything but a rotary engine in a RX-7, doesn't mean I think a 7 with a piston engine will be any less of a car performance-wise.

I built the car in '93. Since then, teh vast majority of people who have seen it have ben understanding, including on RX7 mailing lists and message boards. But ALL of the rotary "purists" that have chimed in have said very nearly verbatim (including some of them right here in this thread) what I described. Trust me, after hearing the same thing from a small group of people (all of whom claimed to be rotary purists), for nearly a decade, you get the idea that they really are all the same. Everyone who liked the car made sure to state that they weren't rotary purists, and everyone who spouted the misinformation and the claims I stated made sure to announce it.

Originally posted by Kaneto
You'll have to explain how a car with roughly the same weight distribution, as you've pointed out, and no changes to the suspension, handles better. Are you sure it isn't in your head?

Did I not state that clearly enough? I autocrossed the car before the conversion for a year and after the conversion. I got to drive it extensively in both forms: as a rotary engine autocrosser and a V8 autocrosser. In V8 form it was more stable and turned in better. It was easier to balance on the throttle and wasn't as twitchy (which I really wan't expecting...). The weigh was approximately the same, but it went from 51/49 to 49/51. When going for that last few hundredths of a second, that's a noticeable difference. Especially to someone trained to notice such differences.

Originally posted by Chris V


Did I not state that clearly enough? I autocrossed the car before the conversion for a year and after the conversion. I got to drive it extensively in both forms: as a rotary engine autocrosser and a V8 autocrosser. In V8 form it was more stable and turned in better. It was easier to balance on the throttle and wasn't as twitchy (which I really wan't expecting...). The weigh was approximately the same, but it went from 51/49 to 49/51. When going for that last few hundredths of a second, that's a noticeable difference. Especially to someone trained to notice such differences.

No, you didn't. But thank you for clarifying. Moving 2% of the wieght from front to back really isn't that difficult, regardless of what engine you have in there.

Basically it tells me than a V8 conversion can be made to handle better than a stock RX-7 similar to how a few simple mods in a rotary-powered RX-7 can be made to handle better than stock. All that seperates then is personal preference in the power delivery.

what about that new renesis motor? if there is going to be a 3 rotor version (:devil:) to compete with the v8 sb im pretty sure it would beat the crap out it.

my $.02

I really hope for good things from the Renesis. But, like the 20BTT, it isn't a cost effective swap compared to the V8 in a car like the 2nd gen RX7 (though it would be a much better choice than the 20B for handling). All I really hope is that the Renesis engine will start a resurgance of rotary engine interest in new cars and race cars.

.................................................. .........


Basically it tells me than a V8 conversion can be made to handle better than a stock RX-7 similar to how a few simple mods in a rotary-powered RX-7 can be made to handle better than stock. All that seperates then is personal preference in the power delivery.

Which is what I try to impart to people that say the car has had it's balance ruined. The car is balanced better than a stock RX7, and weighs less than a stock RX7 turbo. Even though you can improve both the stocker and the turbo, no one calls them poorly balanced or overweight, so any version that is improved over the stockers cant be called bad, regardless of how the power is delivered.

And yes, personal preference is the key. I love rotaries, but my wallet wouldn't let me have a 300+ hp one. Heck, at the time, it didn't want me to spend more on a stock rebuild.

well, IMO, V8 7's don't bug me. Not my cup of tea, but i think it's cool if people want to do it. The guys at rx7club are are anal-retentive. Uh that's about it.

*edit* actually, i think it'd be really cool if someone put a FERRARI V8 in their 7. Somehow. That would just kick major ass.

So true, Steel.

BTW, looking at your sig for coming mods:

"Remanufactured street ported TII S5 engine, TII Tranny and drivetrain, GReddy T04E Turbocharger, GReddy 24v FMIC, Haltech E6K EMS, 760cc/1600cc injectors, Corksport single/dual (still deciding)catback, Electric fan"

What's the cost, and what's the power output (both hp AND torque)? How about daily driver reliability and docil street manners when off the throttle? These are the reasons that I couldn't budget to build a turbo rotary for my car when it died. As I recall, just the Haltech E6k is around $1200, and that doesn't include the specialized MAP sensor, O2 sensor, connectors, or terminated wiring harness. I did my conversion to 390 hp and 400 lb ft of torque for under $2000 total (not including purchase price of the car itself, which was a trade for a car I got for free...).

A lot of people say they can get 400 hp from a rotary. But the cost is enormous in comparison. If they wanted me to go that way, THEY should have had to come up with the difference in cost. :) I have nothing against building a fast rotary. I just want to stress this isn't a bad way to go, either.

400hp with a ported TII engine isn't hard at all... then again, there's no need to buy outlandishly expensive GReddy stuff. A rebuilt T04 will provide all the air you need, and with stand alone engine management, you don't need an extra fuel, ignition or boost controller.

Rotaries aren't all that expensive, as was shown earlier in the thread in a link that I think Kaneto gave me... $2400 for a professionally ported and rebuilt TII, which is quite reasonable if you look into buying a crate engine. That's comparable with a 330hp Vortec 350 for $2500, and the RE has more potential on it's stock internals.

Still, $2500 is completely out of my league right now, so I'm going to stick with the 400M/G31 concept.

eh, check the sig again. I'd rather waste the money on a FD now, because that 2nd gen wont be very streetable.

Originally posted by Cbass
400hp with a ported TII engine isn't hard at all... then again, there's no need to buy outlandishly expensive GReddy stuff. A rebuilt T04 will provide all the air you need, and with stand alone engine management, you don't need an extra fuel, ignition or boost controller.

That stand alone engine management runs close to $2k all by itself.

Rotaries aren't all that expensive, as was shown earlier in the thread in a link that I think Kaneto gave me... $2400 for a professionally ported and rebuilt TII, which is quite reasonable if you look into buying a crate engine. That's comparable with a 330hp Vortec 350 for $2500, and the RE has more potential on it's stock internals.


Add to that $2400 of the rebuilt TII (which did not exist back in '93, sorry.) the cost of the previously mentioned engine management, and the rebuilt larger turbo, and you can see the costs spike pretty quick, and teh end result is a ported rotary with a turbo, which makes great uppper rpm power numbers, but becomes not very driveable in daily use and has a vastly reduced lifespan.

I've seen these rotary cars and how long they last between rebuilds at these relatively low hp numbers. To me, they are very simple to rebuild, but the benefits don't outweigh the drawbacks.

The Vortec SBC can withstand greater amounts of detonation if it happens (read it can withstand any detonation, which the rotary can't), and overal potential is greater from the smallblock. The rotary is a turbo already at that power level, while the SBC can still be turbocharged or supercharged for serious power with similar reliability and driveability to the lower power turbo rotary. Most guys, however, are buying good used V8s from late model Camaros and Firebirds, and getting the engine management and 6 speed transmissions with them for that price, and not dealing with the lower potential of the Vortech engine.

Of course, in both cases, you've left budget way behind, so to me, it becomes immaterial what its ultimate potential is, as I'm never going to spend that much on an engine. :)

Anyone know of anyone running a LS6 in a 7? I have a Turbo II (no engine/transmission) and a machine shop next-door with a LS6 that may be for sale... I've found kits for the LS1, but not the LS6... Can anyone help me out in pointing me to the right direction?

Please, no need for "Don't do that to your RX7" comments.

Well now, im thinking of going piston power.

NO! not what you think! my 7 is keeping its spinners.

Nope, what i meant is that toyota supra's have caught my eye. Only problem is that mk4 supras are ridiculously overpriced. But i might get lucky.

theres some pretty pathetic and ignorant responses here.... a v8 has its advantages... so does a rotary... the worlds fastest rx-7's are all rotary powered. a 20B engine has the potential for 4-digit HP on the stock engine block. a v8 will have more low end torque, and in the 450-500hp range, will be more streetable. but when you get up to the higher hp ranges, both of them throw streetability out the window... probbably a supercharged v8 would have the best streetability with the highest HP... but superchargers arent cheap. even if you make a v8 rx-7 as light as a stock t2... you can still make the rotary rx-7 lighter. the block itself it lighter. any weight reduction can be done to both versions. even at the same weight, the rotary one will have a lower center of gravity because of how the engine sits... a n/a v8 wont be able to make as much power as a turbo 20b. but a turbo v8 would be able to... but again... turbocharging a v8 isnt cheap or easy. and in terms of gas mileage and reliability... i ask you this: would you swap a 1.6L honda engine into your car? probbably not.
theres plenty more to go into, but the fact remains that everything has its ups and downs. you have to evaluate your own goals and see what suits you best.

i drive a rotary powered rx-7. heres my reasons
-handling
-its different... most people dont even know what it is let alone how it works
-power:weight
-rotary's love turbos, and so do i.
-in my opinion, a rotary engine has a superior design, it just lacks the overwhelming R&D that piston engines have and that one day all cars will be rotary powered...it almost happened once already! as long as the internal combustion engine doesnt become obselete first...

the only thing i cabn add is that while the new rx-8 will make some 200 sumthin HP its lb ft of torque will only be like 138. that is my one and only arguemnet agains t rotaries NO TORQUE. wtf can i do with all that hp if i cant grip anything. other wise they are friign wierd and badass. and v eniges have their own right in being cool. this stupid argument will go on for ever.

-GTi-VR6_A3

its true that rotary engines lack torque... but torque is a function of horsepower. low torque at low rpm's is just crappy, but in a racing situation low rpm's arent used... so it's not an issue.. however low torque at high rpm's can be compensated with gearing. 150lb-ft@9000rpm with a 5:1 differential will have the about same turning power as 300lb-ft@4500rpm with a 2.5:1 differential... the 9000rpm engine will move through the rpm's faster, but will probbably have a powerband about double the range of the other one... maybe 4000-9000 as opposed to 2000-4500.... if both cars have the same HP, then the lighter one will cross the finish line first. this applies to all engines, not just rotary VS piston... but its also how those hondas can be fast with no torque.

but low end torque is just so much more fun for daily driving.... so like i said, it all depends on your goal.

one more thing..... formula 1 cars have 3L of displacement. they rev to 18000ish rpm's. they seem to do alright. world rally cars have 2L of displacement. they do ok too.

getting air in and out of the engine is what makes its power... 3 basic ways to increase it... displacement, rpms, and volumetric efficiency (boost). to go fast you need a lot of one of those, have a lot of 2, and you're guaranteed for tons of power... have a lot of all 3, and you're in for one hell of a ride.

welli got owned in general even though i know most of that i could never have worded it like that hahahah good show and welcome to AF...

-GTi-VR6_A3

Originally posted by GTi-VR6_A3
the only thing i cabn add is that while the new rx-8 will make some 200 sumthin HP its lb ft of torque will only be like 138. that is my one and only arguemnet agains t rotaries NO TORQUE. wtf can i do with all that hp if i cant grip anything. other wise they are friign wierd and badass. and v eniges have their own right in being cool. this stupid argument will go on for ever.

-GTi-VR6_A3

um... ok... have u ever driven an RX-7??? even tho it lacks torque... it can outperform many other cars in its class... mazda is known for their handling... until u drive one urself, please dont come to a conclusion that rotaries cant grip... cuz they can. The new RX-8 will be beast.

opinion: placing a v8 in an fd is full of stupidity... ud mess up the weight, the front would be more heavier than the back and ur killing the name (RX)...

Originally posted by BluStori


um... ok... have u ever driven an RX-7??? even tho it lacks torque... it can outperform many other cars in its class... mazda is known for their handling... until u drive one urself, please dont come to a conclusion that rotaries cant grip... cuz they can. The new RX-8 will be beast.

opinion: placing a v8 in an fd is full of stupidity... ud mess up the weight, the front would be more heavier than the back and ur killing the name (RX)...

another rx-zealot.... ive had way to many of these arguments. as for handling i didnt say jack shit about their handling i know its good ive ridden and a few and they are cool cars. im just saying that I would like a car with a lb ft of torque in the area of its hp.

-GTi-VR6_A3

"I would like a car with....."

thats exactly what i'm talking about....there is no best... different cars are better for different people... most people cant understand that... rotary engines are better for me, but i dont expect everyone to see it my way... and i certainly dont think everyone should have one, at least not yet.....

Originally posted by BluStori


um... ok... have u ever driven an RX-7??? even tho it lacks torque... it can outperform many other cars in its class... mazda is known for their handling... until u drive one urself, please dont come to a conclusion that rotaries cant grip... cuz they can. The new RX-8 will be beast.

opinion: placing a v8 in an fd is full of stupidity... ud mess up the weight, the front would be more heavier than the back and ur killing the name (RX)...

I HAVE driven an RX7. Many of them, in fact. And didn't you read the thread u pto this point? The V8 does NOT upset the balance, becasue the car remains front/mid engine. Weight is added pretty much evenly front to rear, and not that much weight to boot (about 150 lbs in the typical install, spread front to back, with the battery moved rearward means the balance is identical if not better than stock!

What's stupid is holding on to this myth that the cars get ruined.

Originally posted by FunkLord
theres some pretty pathetic and ignorant responses here.... a v8 has its advantages... so does a rotary... the worlds fastest rx-7's are all rotary powered. a 20B engine has the potential for 4-digit HP on the stock engine block. a v8 will have more low end torque, and in the 450-500hp range, will be more streetable. but when you get up to the higher hp ranges, both of them throw streetability out the window... probbably a supercharged v8 would have the best streetability with the highest HP... but superchargers arent cheap.

Sure, the pwrlds fastest RX7s are rotary powered. THey are HUGE dollar cars, too. The guys doing the V8 (and turbo V6) swaps are making very fast cars on extremely limited budgets, which is the point. Get the speed and reliability of an understressed enigne in a light car, for low dollar amounts. My complete conversion cost me less than $2000. Considering I was working at a $7/hr job at the time, there was no way to build the same power and reliability into a rotary for my budget, and the car wasn't worth ANYTHING as a dead RX7.

And 400-500 hp is more than enough in a street car of this weight, so why spend more on a race engine of either type?

Ignorant? I've been building rotaries for a long time, as well as non-rotary cars. I've swapped rotaries into nother sports cars. Been racing for a couple decades. I've read the Carrol Smith series on "Engineer to Win" to build national championship winning sports racers. You want to say my responses are ignorant becasue, out of all teh rotary cars I've had, I KNOW that it's cheaper to get a lot of streetable power from a lightweight V8, and so chose to go that route with this particular car?

even if you make a v8 rx-7 as light as a stock t2... you can still make the rotary rx-7 lighter.

No one ever argued that. What I said was that converting an N/A RX7 to V8 power STILL leaved the car lighter than the stock Turbo. If the stock Turbo isn't a bad handler at it's weight, then the V8 version will not be, either. Get it? I could have made MY car lighter, too, as I didn't do ANYthing to make it lighter. It STILL handled better than it did stock, and better than a stock Turbo (in fact, as was proven on the autocross track, it also was better than many modded turbos...)

The argument isn't that you can't make them lighter, it's that it's not ruining the car. Period.

the block itself it lighter. any weight reduction can be done to both versions. even at the same weight, the rotary one will have a lower center of gravity because of how the engine sits...

THe differnce in engine weights isn't that much, and the rotary sits comletely above teh corssmember, with the eccentric shaft (the crank in a V8 car) held considerably higher up. The difference in CG is barely any differnt, and certainly not enough to negatively affect the V8 car. Been there done that, not working from "theoretical speculation" like some RX7 purists do...

a n/a v8 wont be able to make as much power as a turbo 20b. but a turbo v8 would be able to... but again... turbocharging a v8 isnt cheap or easy. and in terms of gas mileage and reliability... i ask you this: would you swap a 1.6L honda engine into your car? probbably not.

A 450 hp turbo 20B wieghs more than a 450 hp/ NA V8, makes less torque, and is vastly more expensive. It isn't about the total ultimate potential, it's about whet you get per dollar. Dollar for dollar, you get more from the V8 swap than you do from a high powered rotary. I dont' spend more to get less in a computer, and I don't spend more to get less in a house. Why should I be required to in a car, just to satisfy someone's quasi-religious feelings about a unique engine?

theres plenty more to go into, but the fact remains that everything has its ups and downs. you have to evaluate your own goals and see what suits you best.

And this would be the perfect response, but it doiesn't seem to work this way. Those of us who have built V8 7s always have to be on the defensive from people who can't seem to let the religious furor go, and ALWAYS call us ignorant, rednecks, or even blashemers!

i drive a rotary powered rx-7. heres my reasons
-handling

I had that too. In fact, mine probably handles better than yours does, as I proved regularly on the autocross track. Here's a video of the start of an autocross run:

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/cvetters3/rex1.MPG

[/b]-its different... most people dont even know what it is let alone how it works[/b]

I have to agree. I loved being able to rebuild the engines on my kitchen table if I had to... :) Like aI said, I've had a lot of rotary powered cars, and worked on many more. But I daresay my last car was vastly more unique than the legions of cheap, beat up secretary mobiles that the average 2nd gen RX7 is.

-power:weight

Of the engine? Or of the whole car? In stock form, it doesn't really have a lot of either. The stock '86 Sport I started with had 145 hp. With only the addition of 150 lbs overall, I had almost 400 hp. And since teh 185 hp '87 Turbo wighed more than my 400 hp '86 V8 car (with no provisions made to lighten it further) then I had better power to weight ratio even then.

-rotary's love turbos, and so do i.

Ahhh, rotaries do good with turbos like any engine. Unlike any engine, they can't handle detonation, so you have to be ULTRA careful not to let the rotary run hot or lean. One single ping can destroy an engine, while it takes a lOT of detonation to ruin a piston engine.

-in my opinion, a rotary engine has a superior design, it just lacks the overwhelming R&D that piston engines have

This might have flown as an excuse back in the day, but development of new tech happens so quickly anymore than somthing that's been around since the '60s can be developed as far as something that's been around since the turn of the century. Back then, learning didn't happen at a rapid rate, so decades of development back then can happen in a year or less now, because you get to build on everything that's gone before, and use computer power to accellerate that development. The rotary has too many limitations to be able to be used in widespread applications.


and that one day all cars will be rotary powered...it almost happened once already! as long as the internal combustion engine doesnt become obselete first...

Hydrogen wiil be the fuel of choice in the next 20 years, if less, due to all teh new developments of the last 5 years, and the new Presidential decree to get away from foreign oil dependency (billions of dollars have now been set aside for hydrogen ICE and fuel cell research and the construction of the hydrogen infrastructure.) This is something I'v ebeen keeping close tabs on for the last 5 years, and you would not believe what is happenning. Hydrogen fuel cell buses are already in use. Hydrogen ICE cars arte already in use. Refueling stations and storage systems are being put to use in more and more places, and the Oil companies are paying for a lot of that development, because they know the first one to set up a successful hydrogen infrastructure will rake in the profits.

Originally posted by FunkLord
its true that rotary engines lack torque... but torque is a function of horsepower.

Ummm. no. Horsepower is a calculated value from the measurement of torque. Torque is work. Horsepower is work over time. It's a function of torque x rpm. Period.


low torque at low rpm's is just crappy, but in a racing situation low rpm's arent used... so it's not an issue.. however low torque at high rpm's can be compensated with gearing. 150lb-ft@9000rpm with a 5:1 differential will have the about same turning power as 300lb-ft@4500rpm with a 2.5:1 differential... the 9000rpm engine will move through the rpm's faster, but will probbably have a powerband about double the range of the other one... maybe 4000-9000 as opposed to 2000-4500.... if both cars have the same HP, then the lighter one will cross the finish line first. this applies to all engines, not just rotary VS piston... but its also how those hondas can be fast with no torque.

but low end torque is just so much more fun for daily driving.... so like i said, it all depends on your goal.

Like your last sentence says, low end torque is more useable for daily driving. And a low, wide powerband is more suited to the average street car, as it does it's job better in moving the mass of the car, passengers, and cargo around. A high powerband can be fun, in the right venue. The street isn't really that venue.

wow mr chris v went at it and pwned for almost a page. good for him. finally some actual fact based arguing.

-GTi-VR6_A3

here we go

Sure, the pwrlds fastest RX7s are rotary powered. THey are HUGE dollar cars, too. The guys doing the V8 (and turbo V6) swaps are making very fast cars on extremely limited budgets, which is the point. Get the speed and reliability of an understressed enigne in a light car, for low dollar amounts. My complete conversion cost me less than $2000. Considering I was working at a $7/hr job at the time, there was no way to build the same power and reliability into a rotary for my budget, and the car wasn't worth ANYTHING as a dead RX7.

so a v8 makes for a better budget-racer. no argument here.
i've said it once and i'll say it again.. it depends on what your personal goals are. with a $2000 budget i wouldnt come close to my goals. but my budget is a little more than $2000. a lot of my budget is for the suspension and other things. unfortunately, none of my friends are selling me their 400hp drag engine for a grand.


And 400-500 hp is more than enough in a street car of this weight, so why spend more on a race engine of either type?

if your goal is to make a pass faster than 11 seconds, then you need more than 500hp.

Ignorant? I've been building rotaries for a long time, as well as non-rotary cars. I've swapped rotaries into nother sports cars. Been racing for a couple decades. I've read the Carrol Smith series on "Engineer to Win" to build national championship winning sports racers. You want to say my responses are ignorant becasue, out of all teh rotary cars I've had, I KNOW that it's cheaper to get a lot of streetable power from a lightweight V8, and so chose to go that route with this particular car?

i didnt say your responses are ignorant. i said there have been some pathetic and ignorant responses on this thread. and i'm sure you'll agree.


It isn't about the total ultimate potential, it's about whet you get per dollar. Dollar for dollar,

not everyone is trying to go as fast as they can for as cheap as possible.

'86 Sport I started with had 145 hp. With only the addition of 150 lbs overall, I had almost 400 hp

you're comparing a stock engine to a modified engine...


In fact, mine probably handles better than yours does

maybe, what do you have in the way of suspension mods?


Ahhh, rotaries do good with turbos like any engine. Unlike any engine, they can't handle detonation, so you have to be ULTRA careful not to let the rotary run hot or lean. One single ping can destroy an engine, while it takes a lOT of detonation to ruin a piston engine.

the average rotary engine makes more gains from a turbo than the average piston engine. just use common sense while tuning.. its not that hard.

i'll finish replying later, i have to go to work

And this would be the perfect response, but it doiesn't seem to work this way. Those of us who have built V8 7s always have to be on the defensive from people who can't seem to let the religious furor go, and ALWAYS call us ignorant, rednecks, or even blashemers

i have nothing against a piston swap. i'm all for it. i may one day put a piston engine in my car. but right now, my goals dont call for that. to me it would be a waste of time and effort. rotary engines have advantages and disadvantages, and i dont expect that everyone would be better off with a rotary. its a different engine, and people have different things they are working towards. some people worship the rotary engine and get very defensive about it. i see nothing wrong with having such a love for the engine. it is afterall an amazing design. i think its great that they can appreciate it on another level. i do however, disagree with them bashing everyone who does a piston swap. i see it as one more rx7 saved from the scrap yard.

Ummm. no. Horsepower is a calculated value from the measurement of torque. Torque is work. Horsepower is work over time. It's a function of torque x rpm. Period.

torque is also a function of hp and rpm. it goes both ways. but the bottom line is having as much HP as possible for as long as possible. is what gets you over the finish line. what i said with the theoretical engines still stands. torque is a twisting force, not go-fast power. if gobs of low end torque is what wins races, then why don't we see a lof of diesel engines at the track?

A high powerband can be fun, in the right venue. The street isn't really that venue.

daily driving is not my venue. i wont be using my car to run errands and such. it will be used for racing. a streetported turbo rotary will have a huge powerband... starting from 3000-4500 (depending on the turbo) up to 8 or 9k depending on the size of the ports. even if i had low-end power, i wouldnt really need it for daily driving. being able to floor it from stoplight to stoplight or bumper to bumper without having to launch isnt realyl what i'm after. if i need power to pass someone, i can downshift. its not a big concern for me.

heres a video that makes a very good comparison of the rotary engine and piston engine. it should answer all your questions.

http://members.shaw.ca/funkotron/boing21.avi

Originally posted by FunkLord


torque is also a function of hp and rpm. it goes both ways. but the bottom line is having as much HP as possible for as long as possible. is what gets you over the finish line. what i said with the theoretical engines still stands. torque is a twisting force, not go-fast power. if gobs of low end torque is what wins races, then why don't we see a lof of diesel engines at the track?



Torque vs horsepower, a primer:
http://vettenet.org/torquehp.html

Basically, you are not correct. Torque is NOT a function of horspower. Torque is a real force. Horsepower is a measure of that force over time. And the diesel racer argument? A lame argument always brought up by people who simply don't understand torque and rpm.


hp = Torque X RPM / 5252


Now, what does all this mean in carland?
First of all, from a driver's perspective, torque, to use the vernacular, RULES :-). Any given car, in any given gear, will accelerate at a rate that *exactly* matches its torque curve (allowing for increased air and rolling resistance as speeds climb). Another way of saying this is that a car will accelerate hardest at its torque peak in any given gear, and will not accelerate as hard below that peak, or above it. Torque is the only thing that a driver feels, and horsepower is just sort of an esoteric measurement in that context. 300 foot pounds of torque will accelerate you just as hard at 2000 rpm as it would if you were making that torque at 4000 rpm in the same gear, yet, per the formula, the horsepower would be *double* at 4000 rpm. Therefore, horsepower isn't particularly meaningful from a driver's perspective, and the two numbers only get friendly at 5252 rpm, where horsepower and torque always come out the same.

In contrast to a torque curve (and the matching pushback into your seat), horsepower rises rapidly with rpm, especially when torque values are also climbing. Horsepower will continue to climb, however, until well past the torque peak, and will continue to rise as engine speed climbs, until the torque curve really begins to plummet, faster than engine rpm is rising. However, as I said, horsepower has nothing to do with what a driver *feels*.

You don't believe all this?

Fine. Take your non turbo car (turbo lag muddles the results) to its torque peak in first gear, and punch it. Notice the belt in the back? Now take it to the power peak, and punch it. Notice that the belt in the back is a bit weaker? Fine. Can we go on, now? :-)


The main reason you don't see too many diesels racing (though have you seen the European diesel truck road racing series???) is that you can't gear them up to take advantage of gearing. You run out of top speed. If you gear them low enough to get good top speed, you lose the torque multiplication that affects accelleration. Which is why trucks usually have so many gears. the powerband is so narrow that you have to spend more time shifting to keep it in a tiny LOW powerband. They'll pull buildings down, but becasue they don't rev well, they aren't very fast.

this
hp = Torque X RPM / 5252 (hp is a function of torque)
is a mathematical equation. it goes both ways.

torque = hp x 5252/rpm
this is a real equation, and in this equation torque is a function of HP.

i know how torque and hp and rpm's work. maybe im not very good at explaining it, but that doesnt matter since you know how it works too.

its true that rotary engines lack torque... but torque is a function of horsepower. low torque at low rpm's is just crappy, but in a racing situation low rpm's arent used... so it's not an issue.. however low torque at high rpm's can be compensated with gearing. 150lb-ft@9000rpm with a 5:1 differential will have the about same turning power as 300lb-ft@4500rpm with a 2.5:1 differential... the 9000rpm engine will move through the rpm's faster, but will probbably have a powerband about double the range of the other one... maybe 4000-9000 as opposed to 2000-4500.... if both cars have the same HP, then the lighter one will cross the finish line first. this applies to all engines, not just rotary VS piston... but its also how those hondas can be fast with no torque.

this was my main point, and i still see nothing to discredit it.

i just read over that link you sent... and basically it says exactly what i've been saying.
torque = feels better for the driver
hp = what gets you over the line 1st

The Only Thing You Really Need to Know
Repeat after me. "It is better to make torque at high rpm than at low rpm, because you can take advantage of *gearing*." :-)

compare the torque of a 2002 mustang gt to a 2002 honda s2000.

the mustang makes 302@4000 and the honda makes 153@7500. yet somehow the honda is faster. if you take 153@7500 and gear it down to 4000rpm, you get 287lb-ft. so the output to the wheels is a lot closer than it would appear. the honda still makes a little less hp (240 vs 260) and torque, but its also using half as many cylinders and less than half the displacement. overall the car is about 500lb lighter. so using that old saying "100lb or 10hp = 1/10) the honda should be about 0.3 seconds faster in the 1/4 mile.

Car-Stats.com Report for 2000 Honda S2000
Obtained from MT February, 2000
0-60: 5.2 Transmission: Manual
1/4 Mile: 13.8
1/4 Speed: 100

Car-Stats.com Report for 2001 Ford Mustang GT
Obtained from MT June, 2001
0-60: 5.4 Transmission: Manual
1/4 Mile: 14
1/4 Speed: 100

looks pretty close to me. looks like having twice as much torque didnt overcome the similarities in the HP. the mustang might *feel* faster, but the s2000 is faster.

do you guys have any good sites for kits. I have a 95 rx-7 with a perfect motor, but a wrecked body... Any suggestion? It's not easy finding a body. I figured a kit would look hot?

S2000s hit 60 in about 5.8 if you are a really good shifter.
Mustang GTs in 6.0.

I agree that putting a piston engine in an RX-7 is sacreligous. The rotary is a huge attraction to the RX-7 for me. It has so many advantages over reciprocating engines. It also sounds much better!!

I agree that putting a piston engine in an RX-7 is sacreligous. The rotary is a huge attraction to the RX-7 for me. It has so many advantages over reciprocating engines. It also sounds much better!!

Advantages in a 2800 lb car that mean that it has 143 hp and less torque, lower lifespan due to overwork, and a greater rebuilld dollar amount per hp? Side, tip, and apex seals that can't stand even a single instance of detonation? Horrible fuel mileage for it's displacement?

It's a great engine, but it's still just a car, not a religious shrine. And 143 hp isn't the best tool for that job. Oh, and make one make 300+ hp, and the reliability goes straight in the toilet.

Leave the rotary in seriously lightweight cars, like RX3s, R100s, and early RX7s (or Austin Sprites, triumph Spitfires, Fiat X1/9s, and some kit cars, like Lotus Super Seven replicas).

And after years of racing various rotary powered cars, and listening to built ons on the street day in and day out, I don't think the weedwhacker-on-steroids sound is all that pleasant.

First of all the FD3S didnt have 143 hp. It was 255hp. 215 ft/lbs of torque. Take a Mustang GT 260hp, 300 ft/lbs. the Mustang hits 60 in 6 seconds. the RX-7 in about 5. With less power, and a smaller powerband. Camaro Z28s get to 60 in a little over 5 seconds.

The rotary engine is not as cheaply built up as a V8. They also dont have the ability to make the same amounts of power. That doesnt mean that you should put a V8 into an RX-7. If you have the money to keep up a rotary its not a problem though.

How old are all of you Anti-Rotary bigots? I can imagine that an older adult would lean more towards the tried-and-true,classic V8.

im 20 years old, I like the "weedwhacker on steroids" sound, i like the feeling when your boost comes up, I like having an engine that is not the same as EVERY other damn car on the road.

I dont care if you want to put a 5.0 Mustang, LS6, L-88, even a Flat 4 Beetle engine in YOUR Rx-7. I would never put one in MINE. It doesnt mean YOU are right, it doesnt mean IM right. Its a matter of opinion and personal tastes.
:flipa: :flipa:

Originally posted by VR6Turbo
First of all the FD3S didnt have 143 hp. It was 255hp. 215 ft/lbs of torque. Take a Mustang GT 260hp, 300 ft/lbs. the Mustang hits 60 in 6 seconds. the RX-7 in about 5. With less power, and a smaller powerband. Camaro Z28s get to 60 in a little over 5 seconds.

First of all, the STOCK engine in my FC3S had 143 hp. If you're going to talk about a car like mine, know what you're talking about. It was a NON turbo 2nd gen RX7. 1986. 16 second quarter mile time, stock.

But to go on about the hp of the rotary being better due to the slightly quicker time stock of a vastly more expensive twin turbo FD3S (the 93-newer version) completely ignores that the RX7 has lighter weight and considerably shorter gearing. Simply putting the final drive gear ratio of the RX7 into the Mustang would make it quicker.

The rotary engine is not as cheaply built up as a V8. They also dont have the ability to make the same amounts of power. That doesnt mean that you should put a V8 into an RX-7. If you have the money to keep up a rotary its not a problem though.

Ok, so I should be able to afford a $2500-4500 stock rebuild on a car that was only worth $2000 in stock form? Why should someone have to be rich to own a $2000 car? Just so they can go around saying "I have a tiny little engine, and teenage boys that worship it will like me?"


How old are all of you Anti-Rotary bigots? I can imagine that an older adult would lean more towards the tried-and-true,classic V8.

im 20 years old, I like the "weedwhacker on steroids" sound, i like the feeling when your boost comes up, I like having an engine that is not the same as EVERY other damn car on the road.

I dont care if you want to put a 5.0 Mustang, LS6, L-88, even a Flat 4 Beetle engine in YOUR Rx-7. I would never put one in MINE. It doesnt mean YOU are right, it doesnt mean IM right. Its a matter of opinion and personal tastes.

First you say that I'm an anti rotary bigot, then say it isn't a matter of me being right or you being right. :rolleyes: I've owned quite a few rotaries (from RX2s and RX3s to RX7s, and put rotaries into cars that didn't have them, stock). Just because on one of my cars I wqanted to make it have huge power and torque to go along with the excellent chassis, and didn't want to have to spensd a huge cunk of change to do it, does NOT make me an Anti-rotary Bigot! I LOVE rotaries. I just don't think they are god's gift to teh automotive world. Cars are not religious shrines, especially in mass produced, stock form.

I've owned over a hundred different cars in the past 20 years. From rotary engine cars and tiny 4 cyl traditional sports cars, to 600+hp musclecars. My RX7 with the V8 was VASTLY more unique than the legions of stock 2nd gen RX7s out there. How DARE you say that merely having a rotary car makes your car unique! A one off custom is MORE unique, and got more respect from more people than a clapped out GXL would have!

You can find those conversions but theyre only in like Puerto Rico where the rotary engine was and still is very popular. I personally wouldnt waste my money on a conversion like that because of the possibilities that you have with the rotary engine but...

Its very nice that you have a FC3S, good job, I understand buddy. Calm down. You keep complaining about the power of the car, "....143 hp is not exactly the tool for the job."
I was just bringing up the VAST difference in performance between 2nd and 3rd gen.
I called you an Anti-Rotary Bigot because you seem to believe that the engines are better off in a junkyard rather than in an RX-7, replaced by some lo-tech V8 out of a 5.Slow. Everytime someone made a post talking about the rotary, you made this HUGE elaborate post, quoting EVERYTHING that they said, then telling them how wrong they were. If you were so ENORMOUSLY concerned with the cost, why didnt you just cut the floorboards out and make yourself a FLINTSTONES car!!!!
Yes, you probably did the right thing with your old a$$ blown engine 2nd gen.

"From what I can tell it seems like Chris V has a lot of pent up anger directed towards rotary engines. This could trail from his childhood past, maybe his father owned a rotary, and mistreated him with it, or maybe he just couldnt take the power at such a young age. Or Maybe he had a bad experience as a teenager when on prom night he and his date in his big Mustang 5 point slow pulled up next to an FC3, and got the living crap beat out of him. There are several contributing factors Im sure, but there is still only one reason for Chris V to not like Rotary Engines, he cant hang with the rest of them, cuz theyre already across the finish line baby!" these and more words from Dr. Phil when we return. :flipa:

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That was great. You shouldnt bring those horrible memories back to him, it could trigger some kind of psychotic breakdown. Oh wait, by the looks of it, it already happened!!!

I want Chris V to go to "Those Annoying RE Haters' and to respond so that we dont have to keep coming here to continue this conversation. :frog: :monkeypis

Originally posted by VR6Turbo
Its very nice that you have a FC3S, good job, I understand buddy. Calm down. You keep complaining about the power of the car, "....143 hp is not exactly the tool for the job."
I was just bringing up the VAST difference in performance between 2nd and 3rd gen.

You made the ASSUMPTION that every RX7 is an FD3s, and that EVERY rotary is a TT 13B or 20B. The power of my car when I did the conversion was exactly Zero HP.

I called you an Anti-Rotary Bigot because you seem to believe that the engines are better off in a junkyard rather than in an RX-7, replaced by some lo-tech V8 out of a 5.Slow.

You seem to feel that I feel that way because you only read as far as seeing I put a V8 in my car, and no goddamn farther. You made a WRONG assumption and started insulting me. Then you want ME to "calm down". Sheesh. You COMPLETELY missed ALL the references to how many rotary cars I've owned and enjoyed.

And do we have to go into the whole Low Tech vs High Tech crap again? Until you actually HAVE any experience in car building, you don't have a clue. YOur narrowmindedness shows up in your rather BS nickname for a Mustang 302 (which is proven daily ion dragstrips and road race tracks around the country).
The Ford 302 is a thinwall desing that is extremely compacrt, not just for it's displacement, but for automotive enignes in general. It got that way by using more modern technology than the average OHC engine (hell, the first DOHC enignes were around in 1912, and even the US had a production DOCH, 4 valve per cyl, alloy engine by 1932! The thinwall pushrod V8 came from technology developed dacades later (about the same time Felix Wankel was developing the rotary from a design patented in 1908...)

Everytime someone made a post talking about the rotary, you made this HUGE elaborate post, quoting EVERYTHING that they said, then telling them how wrong they were.

Because, like you , they WERE wrong, and didn't bother to read completely. Maybe your short attention span is WHY you don't know squat...

Originally posted by MyGTR34
"From what I can tell it seems like Chris V has a lot of pent up anger directed towards rotary engines. This could trail from his childhood past, maybe his father owned a rotary, and mistreated him with it, or maybe he just couldnt take the power at such a young age. Or Maybe he had a bad experience as a teenager when on prom night he and his date in his big Mustang 5 point slow pulled up next to an FC3, and got the living crap beat out of him. There are several contributing factors Im sure, but there is still only one reason for Chris V to not like Rotary Engines, he cant hang with the rest of them, cuz theyre already across the finish line baby!" these and more words from Dr. Phil when we return. :flipa:


This of course is a PRIME example of someone thinking they are smart, but NOT FU(KING READING!

When I was in high school, I was racing both my 429 powered Torino GT AND my rotary powered RX3. That RX3 is STILL one of my favorite cars. '73, with a '78 12A, heavy street port, Racing Beat header and Holley carb kit, RX7 5 speed, 4.88 rear gears. Very quick, and very good handling. But not very streetable, with no useable power below 3000 rpm and a lightened aluminum flywheel.

Sorry, asshole. I love rotary cars. It just happens that ONE of them I owned got a built V8 when it died... Sorry you're too stupid to be able to handle that.

Whoa, BIG words from a BIG man. I hope I didnt hurt your feeliings big guy! We dont care to know what kind of car you drove in high school, or how it ran or what it had on it. And Im not stupid you big Jack A$$! YOU seem to have a problem with people who disagree with you. cuz all youve basically complained about in all of your replies is how youve owned at least a million cars by the sounds of it, and how youve raced and autocrossed and all kinds of other bull, and even working with all of those people, you still have a problem grasping the fact that there are people who disagreee with you. Am I dense? I think not. Are YOU dense? YES! In the words of Alowicious the great... "Those who complain for no reason, have nothing to complain about. Those who complain for a reason, must know the guy with nothing to complain about." :bandit:

No fella, I didnt think all RX-7s were FDs.
AGAIN, I was just bringing up the VAST difference in performance between 3rd and 2nd gen. I saw you pics in the earlier posts, and unless you got some extreme body kit, your car is a 2nd gen. That was obvious.
Your incessant slaying of any other person who has an opinion that differs than yours, makes you a bigot. Its not that hard to understand. You think that just because you have experience with different cars and such, that you are right and that everyone else can kiss your ass because you are the 'King Of All Car Knowledge'. We understand that you are a middle aged man with a superiority complex. That doesnt mean that you should come to the RX-7 forum and tell everyone how terrible rotary engines are, but how you still love rotary cars so much.
:rolleyes:

Your incessant slaying of any other person who has an opinion that differs than yours, makes you a bigot

Usually said by a person who's first post is an insult. :rolleyes: Since the ONLY people I'm "slaying" are being closed minded and making factually WRONG statements, not merely everyone who has a different opinion than me (how you get that, I don't know, but it's probably related to you lack of brainpower). :rolleyes:

You were insulting everyone who thinks different than you right off the bat, by saying anyone who replaces ANY rotary with a V8 is an idiot and an "anti-rotary bigot" Which is just retarded. But you're too dense to see that, aren't you? You couldn't factually refute anything I said (hell, you didn't even READ half of it), so all you could do was call me an anti rotary bigot, and think that I'M the one with the problem. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!


AGAIN, I was just bringing up the VAST difference in performance between 3rd and 2nd gen. I saw you pics in the earlier posts, and unless you got some extreme body kit, your car is a 2nd gen

You responded to ME saying MY RX7 had a 143 hp engine by saying "it didn't have 143 hp. It had 255 hp." And you STILL won't acknowledge that. In effect, you were saying I was wrong about the 143 hp, and that since a stock Ford 5.0 in a late Mustang puts out 225, it's less than the stock engine in RX7s. As though ALL RX7s had 255 hp TT 13Bs. And as though ALL 302s has 225 hp. Since you KNEW my car was a 2nd gen, then your arguing about how much hp the 3rd gen has isirrelevant! And not germane to the discussion.


You think that just because you have experience with different cars and such, that you are right and that everyone else can kiss your ass because you are the 'King Of All Car Knowledge'. We understand that you are a middle aged man with a superiority complex. That doesnt mean that you should come to the RX-7 forum and tell everyone how terrible rotary engines are, but how you still love rotary cars so much.


And STILL you think I'm saying that rotary engines are terrible. Are you stupid? You just can't get it through your ignorant, closed minded head that I never said that!

Sorry that you are too stupid to deal with real knowledge. Get a clue, bozo.

Whoa, BIG words from a BIG man. I hope I didnt hurt your feeliings big guy! We dont care to know what kind of car you drove in high school, or how it ran or what it had on it

Sure you did, or you wouldn't have thought to make the comments you did, little boy. You made a mistake in assumption, them tried to make an insulting comment based on that assumption. But then again, you're obviously too stupid to make real observations. You think I'm against the rotary engine, and make up some story about how I must have been traumatized by one when younger. :rolleyes: I'm merely refuting that BS.

cuz all youve basically complained about in all of your replies is how youve owned at least a million cars by the sounds of it, and how youve raced and autocrossed and all kinds of other bull, and even working with all of those people,[quote]

?? Complained? You mean the sig? It's a joke! A way of stating that I've had a lot of cars, worked on a lot of cars, etc. SInce most people only onw a small amount...

Of course you wouldn't get it, you're a 'tard.


[quote]you still have a problem grasping the fact that there are people who disagreee with you.

Hello! There's disagereeing, and there's making factually incorrect statements! If the teacher tells you you're wrong when you say 4+7 is 29, he's not "disagreeing" with you. If your boss tells you you're wrong when you screw up a job, he's not just "disagreeing" with you. If I say you could fly, and tried to push you off a cliff, would you say I was right? Opinions can indeed BE wrong, when they are based on wrong information. If you say all horses have 6 legs, and I tell you you're wrong, it isn't just a "difference of opinion." What would you say if you went to the doctor for a heart attack and he said, "just rub grape jelley on your chest and you'll be fine!"

What if someone walked up to you and said it's his opinion you're a lazy theif? What if he said it's his opinion that, say, people like you should be killed, and brings out a gun? Would you say he's entitled to his opinion? He obviously disagrees with you. Is it ok for him to disagreee with you? What if instead, he though everyone else should think you should die, and posts it up everywhere in posters? Would his opinion of you be valid, simply because he disagrees with you?

Hey that was pretty good,but what exactly are we talking about here? Im simply disagreeing with... oh wait I disagreed with nothing! I simply was starting a joke, just like your signature. Im not disagreeing with you and how some cars are more powerful than others, If anything Im telling you that I dont agree with putting a V-8 into an RX-7. Sure you did, or you wouldn't have thought to make the comments you did, little boy. You made a mistake in assumption, them tried to make an insulting comment based on that assumption. But then again, you're obviously too stupid to make real observations. You think I'm against the rotary engine, and make up some story about how I must have been traumatized by one when younger. I'm merely refuting that BS.
And again, merely making another joke. I know that it may have offended you, and Im sure you knew that what you typed may have offended somebody who reads it that feels the same way we do, but you still replyed the way you did. No I dont think that I would like to have a doctor tell me to "Rub grape jelly on it and you'll be fine," But did you like it when your doctor told you its not your wifes fault, you actually DO need Viagra? Thats not disagreeing with you, thats merely the truth.:bandit:

Hey by the way, I wasnt trying to say that you complained about ownng that many cars, I WAS ONLY SAYING THAT THE ONLY REASON YOU HAD ALL OF THAT EXPERIENCE WAS BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE DOMESTIC LEMONS THAT YOU HAVE OWNED AND HAVE HAD TO REBUILD OVER AND OVER AGAIN. And one would hope that after rebuilding something that many times,you would at least know SOMETHING about that car.:flipa:

You continue to believe that I thouight that your car was a 3rd gen. NO FOR THE THIRD OF FOURTH TIME, -----I WAS JUST BRINGING UP THE VAST DIFFERENCE IN POWER-----You must have just skipped over that part EVERYTIME I wrote it. Ok-I will explain myself. I will use small words just for you.
1. FD3S -I would never put any other engine in it ever. I think that it is a part of the cars attraction, to me at least.
2. FC3S with blown engine -You apparently spend all of your money on beer, so you didnt have the money to put in a rotary. For the third or fourth time, YOU PROBABLY DID THE RIGHT THING WITH YOUR CAR.

I never said people who replaced rotaries with V8s were IDIOTS.

:monkeypis On you, your bullshit arguments, and your V8 FC.

come on guy's no need to be hostile, this is a non-flaming forum... REMEMBER THAT!
-Dave

I think that we all need to just step back and relax and have a normal forum, like all the others. :) Maybe we could continue the thread by talking about the v-8 engine swap in an RX-7 or something, which happens to be what this thread was started for. :alien2:

ain't that the truth my brotha.:huh:
-Dave

So, if RX's were originally made with V8's and Ford's and Chevy's were made with Rotary's would you guys be arguing to keep a V8 in the RX?

The way I look at it: RX 3rd gen is an awesome vehicle but the motor can get pricey. For me to make a better RX 3rd gen I'm putting in a V8. Just my opinion.

I haven't owned a 100 cars in 20 years but every car that I have owned, for the most part, I pulled out what I didn't like and replaced with something I liked better. Reality is, every one has there preference and I think it's great we can have a debate like this!!!

Can you guys really tell a 1% shift in weight? Better watch your fuel levels!!

v8 on a 3rd generation rx7 would be a monster especially with a 427 big block and with 2 greddy t88 turbo's, I wonder if anyone has done it before, I've only seen it in the single turbo form in race car's but how about two, too much lag I guess and with 200 shot nos it would remove that lag hehe so you basically have a 1000hp+ monster.
-dave

I believe it is blasphemy to put a V8 in an RX7 but to each their own. The handling of the car would be way worse. My RX3 had a 13B turbo from a second gen and I was getting 330RWHP with just a high flowed turbo. This engine originally only had 205Hp at the engine. It is not hard to make a 13B turbo get up and go.

yeah i know what you mean when i dynoed my engine(93 stock rx7 r1) I got 225rwhp and after that I got a pettit ecu, a k&n filter,apexi n1 exhaust,hks downpipe,I got Pettit race ported engine 3mm seals,Greddy Profec B, HKS turbo timer,Greddy blow off valve,and a intercooler, my rx7 dynoed in at 360rwhp so I guess it does make a big difference when you do some mod's to it and LET IT BREATH.these were the best bang for the buck mod's I got for it and I had spent nearly 2k to get this done including the oil change(synthetic racing oil), ngk racing brand new spark plug's,mgk wires, and the the new wiper's I bought when I got the car, there was a few problem's it had but It was fixed, no problem's with the engine though.After a month of owning it I had pted for a 75 shot nos"wet" system, I had it for 2 year's and it did well but I sold it later on, I sell my car's soon after they're not as challenging as before.
-Dave

Originally posted by phatdex
I believe it is blasphemy to put a V8 in an RX7 but to each their own. The handling of the car would be way worse.

funny seems as though everyone that has doen it says it handles the same or better

-GTi-VR6_A3

I personally havent seen an rx-7 rotary to v-8 conversion yet, but i have yet to see one. And i also personally thiink that the swap is kind of crazy, but its all in the eye of the beholder, so u guys do whatcha gotta do and hold your own. I really favor the rotary engine over a reciprocating engine, but thats only my opinion. :licker: :bloated:

How could it handle better with a heavier engine at the front that doesnt sit as low either?

read back farther in the thread and you will see

-GTi-VR6_A3

Originally posted by MyGTR34
.....I really favor the rotary engine over a reciprocating engine, but thats only my opinion... :licker: :bloated:
I do too, it might be the most expensive car you get, not buying it but yet maintaining it.. thst's the hard part with the fd rx7's they are reliable as heck but god know's that if one little thing break's it spread's like a cold :( and goes on to create more havoc, my opinion's are from personal experiences I had when owning the rx7, your's may entirely differ.
-Dave

Mine are also from personal experiences as well, believe me! but buying into an RX-7 is like buying into an old VW Bug or something, just ten times as expensive. You take the risk of losing something and having a hard time trying to find someone who can fix it. But to me the car seems worth the risk. Others may differ and thats okay. :bandit:

that is a good point. but if a v8 wopuld fit in a bug i would like to see it done. personally id like to have 2 bugs. one restored and one witha porsche engine in it...

-GTi-VR6_A3

THESE PEOPLE CAN HELP YOU (http://www.torquecentral.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=11)

Hey! I think I used to beat you up in middle school? Or someone that was just as much of a pansy.

While you are talking about balance and revs the v-8s will be driving right around you with superior horsepower and torque.

You must be an art major.

twit.


Originally posted by kcxox
I'm thinking of purchasing a parts rx-7 with a blown motor and buying a conversion kit with a v-6 or v-8 to replace it. Is this a realistic goal, and is so, where can i purchase a kit. i know they exist, i have friends who have them. thx, KC

ok

say you were to drop an all aluminuim motor with a composite intake and about 400 hp into a light weight car. the v8 only weighed a little more than an iron motor when you include the turbo(s), intercooler, piping and such that your are removing anyways. this iron motor was very expensive to maintain, made little power, and inefficient.

it SLIGHTLY altered the balance of the car in favor of better handling.
(most race cars are not 50/50 but more like 53/47 or 55/45 front to rear distribution)

is this a good idea?

you decide

Cbass, I really havn't read through this whole thread cause it's sooo long. I did see the part about your efi system for $400 though.
What system is that? where'd you get it? You got a link?
Thanks yo, Good luck with the car!

well the 3rd gen with 02 Ls-1 is the best car ive ever seen, and im going to hinsonsupercars to have it done. actually the 13b with all the turbo cmpnts is heavier than Ls-1, and less up keep!! sorry its just a better car with the Ls-1!!!!!!!!!!!!

Someone please lock this thread.
Ls1mazda you should look at the post dates before you post, since most of these people arn't posting here now and the last post was over a year ago.

Riiiiight...hmmm the rx-7.com car. Let me think...im sure they dumped allot more money into there car then i will ever be able. But i will race ANY of you othat think this is a bad idea. And i bet i can still kick your ass around corners. I bet i will be able to take a corner faster now. So dont talk carp about peoples car just because they do something different. And i love the rotary engine, but it doesnt do what i want it to do anymore. I wanna be able to kick a vipers/ corvette z06's ass...and i will. Oh, if any of you are in the louisville,ky area. post it up...cuz i need people to check how my tail lights look on the road. BIOTCHES

Hey man, i live in the st mathews area. My v8 240Z 383 stroker car will be ready in about 2 weeks. I would like to see how our cars compete. Give me a call at 502 472 0560 or email me at pauleitel4@aol.com and we can schedule something.

uh check the date of the thread next time you post, its 2 years old.

why you would want to swap a rotors for pistons is beyond me... there are some bad ass piston-powered engines out there... but c'mon now... rotarys have potential

apparently down under in australia there's a guy who owns a peripheral-ported 20b with about 1200hp... runs 7's in the 1/4 mile, as seen in a series of videos called "high octane"... or how about a 13b with over 700hp, stock body ... 9's !

the 7 has a perfect 50/50 balance and such linear power, why you would swap that for a rough, front-end heavy car that oversteers badly is beyond me... sure it may go in a straight line fast, but anybody can go fast in a straight line... its in the corners that my heart skips a beat...



just my $.02

they move the battery to the back and set the engine further back so the weight distribution is maintained. the car does get heavier but that is offset by the fact that the v8 has more torque. thats the reason for the swap.

swapping a 30 lb battery to the back of the car and setting a 400lb cast-iron v-8 block "back" in the car does not maintain the 50/50.. . if you are going to set the engine back, what about knocking back the firewall ??? ... the 13b as it sits weighs a whole what 200lbs (IF THAT) ? and revvs to 7000 with ease... very smoothly i might add.

why you would want to destroy a perfect fc is beyond me... only reason one would abandon the rotary is because they don't understand what they truly have.

hell a ported 20b would run circles around any v-8 conversion fc or fd, not to mention out handle it.

i may be new to the rotary scene, but i take the time to cover all aspects of the market.... i'm not going to shun something simply because "it ain't got no pistons"... typical quote of a v-8 owner.

give me a bridge ported 20b, a decent fc or fd, and i'll run circles around your v-8. this thread should die... there's a reason the rex'es came with a rotary ... it was meant to be different, not like every other car out there.

just my $.02 and all in good fun guys...

let me tell you something. the 13b does not weigh 200lbs, at least not a turbo one. Trust me, because it took 3 people to lift my turbo motor into my garage. Maybe its 200 without anything on it, its more like 260-270 lbs.

the fc engine bay has alot of space in it, so moving the v8 further back isnt as impossible as it seems. the weight distribution is maintained. if somebody knows what theyre doing they will do it correctly.

but i completely agree with you about the rotary engine in teh rx7 and why it should not be replaced. hell. i'm not getting a v8, i got a turbo 13b, were no enemies. btw the 20b would throw off the weight balance of the car also if not for other modifications.
the v8 conversion is only cheaper because its easier to find some dumb chevy 350 than it is a japan only 20b.

lol... i've got a 13b in my garage, in pieces, DON'T MAKE ME WEIGH EACH PIECE !!!! LMFAO... kidding.

i daily drive a piston-powered car, and its reliable, and runs fine.

i have a rotary toy, and there's no way to describe the powerband, you can certainly attest to that... why anyone would want to trade that giant smooth powerband for a rattly v-8 ... i guess i just don't know.


pound for pound, i'd put a tweaked turbo fc against any v-8.... but that's just me

I dd my FC...

dd your fc ? sorry i'm not up on all the recent terminology

daily drive... lol man i'm retarted.

its ok.

well since you daily drive your fc, what kind of mileage do you see out of it ... (curious, since yours is a turbo)... i get no better than 20 no matter what i do.

my car is non turbo, and i am swapping in a turbo engine in a few weeks.

i never really checked the mileage, but i guess mine is around 18-20 depending on how i drive

stock ecu runs rich which is part of the reason why its so bad.

when i swap the motor, i'll have a apex safc and see how that affects anything.

why would you take the BEST part out of the car and replace it with a PISTON ENGINE :S

hey ... in addition to the "richness" of the ecu ... yeah, that's true...

buut. i'm pretty sure the side seals are gone in my 7 ... if you park it cold or hot, and re-start it, and get into it leaving, it smokes like a cropduster until it fully warms back up, which i am assuming is oil leaking past the seals, and then burning off when you re-start it. which is no big deal, but...

i took my 7 thru emissions here in ohio... with no air pump, shitty plugs, and the faulty side seals... passed emissions with flying colors, i was sure it was going to fail, which blew my mind...

burning oil and richness from hell .. and it runs great... lol

Lets just put all this bickering behind us and marvel at the fact that a 1.3L engine can do such wonderful things. lol

hey ... in addition to the "richness" of the ecu ... yeah, that's true...

buut. i'm pretty sure the side seals are gone in my 7 ... if you park it cold or hot, and re-start it, and get into it leaving, it smokes like a cropduster until it fully warms back up, which i am assuming is oil leaking past the seals, and then burning off when you re-start it. which is no big deal, but...

i took my 7 thru emissions here in ohio... with no air pump, shitty plugs, and the faulty side seals... passed emissions with flying colors, i was sure it was going to fail, which blew my mind...

burning oil and richness from hell .. and it runs great... lol

Fuck, i need to move to ohio.

why, to get around emissions where ur from ? (what state are you from?) e-check is hell on older piston engines and diesels, but they're doing away with it after this year. its only a caunty based thing right now, but they're talking about making something state-wide later on

Lets just put all this bickering behind us and marvel at the fact that a 1.3L engine can do such wonderful things. lol

if you really think about it, yeah mazda calls it a 1.3L, but ... in all reality its really 3x that size, and has 3 power pulses per revolution. its similar to a 2-stroke in setup (porting, oil injection) and a 13b has the equivelant setup to a v-6, because each side of each rotor is doing a different thing (compression, intake, ignition, exhaust) ...

this explains terrible fuel mileage, and power that's equivelant to a 3.9L in power potential.

if you really think about it, yeah mazda calls it a 1.3L, but ... in all reality its really 3x that size, and has 3 power pulses per revolution. its similar to a 2-stroke in setup (porting, oil injection) and a 13b has the equivelant setup to a v-6, because each side of each rotor is doing a different thing (compression, intake, ignition, exhaust) ...

this explains terrible fuel mileage, and power that's equivelant to a 3.9L in power potential.

lol, you dont know shit about this stuff, go do ur homework before trying to put up arguments.

and since you've bring up that argument swapping a 30 lb battery to the back of the car and setting a 400lb cast-iron v-8 block "back" in the car does not maintain the 50/50.. . if you are going to set the engine back, what about knocking back the firewall ??? ... the 13b as it sits weighs a whole what 200lbs (IF THAT) ? and revvs to 7000 with ease... very smoothly i might add.most of today's recent v8 can be found with an aluminium block, and whats nice about the gm engines is the T56 tranny.

im not saying i like those v8 swaps, but dont spit on em, they're as heavy as a 13b is and that has been proven. the battery swap is to give more space under the hood, since the only real difference is the height of the engine. but since none of us here compete in any big class world racing or rally shit, its not realy a valuable argument since u wouldnt even notice the changes

oh i forgot ... pistons are so cool. asshole

just dont piss on em, thats an easy thing to do.
let those pricks play their game alone, dont become a prick by playing too.

alright ... sorry for my foul mouth and etc. this thread needs to die

having a V-8 in an RX-7 would make it front heavy, meaning you would need new steering components, and maybe if you were to build it with lots of power drifting around every corner could be the best thing in the world. you could drift like a pro just trying it for the first time.

I guess you could look at it like that... But in my own eyes I just couldn't justify a v-8 in an rx7. If you want a v-8 in a car go buy a mustang or a camaro. They're just as capable in their own respect.

I've seen 5.0L mustangs that would eat an rx7 alive, but I've seen rx7's that outran the large v-engines like they were sitting still.

all in good fun ... read the signature

having a V-8 in an RX-7 would make it front heavy, meaning you would need new steering components, and maybe if you were to build it with lots of power drifting around every corner could be the best thing in the world. you could drift like a pro just trying it for the first time.

no.

havent we discussed this already? read the last 2 pages to see why its not true. the ls1 weighs slightly more than a turbo 13b.

ok, i'll spell it out...

if you put a v-8 into an rx7, you are ignorant because you are simply giving up on the potential a rotary has... or the unwillingness to try something that's part of a new territory to someone who only knows "it ain't got no pistons"

JUST MY OPINION, NOT LOOKING TO START A FIGHT

having a V-8 in an RX-7 would make it front heavy, meaning you would need new steering components, and maybe if you were to build it with lots of power drifting around every corner could be the best thing in the world. you could drift like a pro just trying it for the first time.

No, it doesn't, proven earlier in the thread.

hey chris..

http://www.brockmoore.com/images/funny/STFU-nice%20cup%20of.jpg

I guess you could look at it like that... But in my own eyes I just couldn't justify a v-8 in an rx7. If you want a v-8 in a car go buy a mustang or a camaro. They're just as capable in their own respect.


So you're essentially saying that putting a V8 in an RX7 makes it the same as a camaro, (or, worse). So that, outside teh engines, there's nothing special about the RX7 that you can't get in a Mustang or Camaro? You really hate the RX7 that much to think that the engine is the only part of the car that is important?

That attitude completely ignores the fact that the FC is lighter, looks better, is better built, has better brakes, looks better, has better ergonomics, is smaller, looks better, has a better interior, better suspension, looks better, etc... the FC is numerous, cheap, easy to get, and unlike a lot of swaps, is dirt easy to do as the engine compartment accepts the V8 as though it was designed to be there. And the chassis carries the engine in such a way that it simply doesn't change the balance that the original car had, due to how far back it sits.

The car is far more than the engine, and we can be a enthusiast of the rest of the car, and even still like the engine, and still want to swap the V8 in. And it's been proven time and again that the conversion doesn't "f*ck up a unique car" but it DOES change it into a torquey, fun car with a different character than the stocker. Not necessarily better or worse, just different. In fact, most V8 swaps aren't done to cars that are in good running condition (though as those get cheaper, more conversions to running cars will happen), and are instead done, as my car was, to dead cars that even you rotary purists won't pay any money for.

I love rotaries. I'd love to see a TT 20B in a '66 Mustang fastback (a car that weighs about the same as a stock FC TII, BTW). A rotary porsche 914 is cool. I'd put a 13BT in my Fiat 124. I've put one in an MG before, and have drooled over Gibson's 400+ RWHP turbo 13B in a Triumph Spitfire. But somehow, because I support V8 RX7s, I'm a rotary hating redneck to people like you, and I just don't get it. This is supposed to be a fun hobby. It'll be the most fun if people simply knew what they were talking about, and didn't give others shit for building cars the way they want.

The RX7 is a light, balanced chassis regardless of engine. It's a GREAT looking car regardless of engine. It's a well built car regardless of engine. How come ALL you can see in your OWN CAR is the effin' engine?????? Apparently you think the rest of the car is a POS that only exists to give the rotary something to move around.

hey chris..


Why? Is it too hard for you to be able to actually use yor brain?

Why can't we have an intelligent conversation without people like you being little bitches about it?

ok, i'll spell it out...

if you put a v-8 into an rx7, you are ignorant because you are simply giving up on the potential a rotary has... or the unwillingness to try something that's part of a new territory to someone who only knows "it ain't got no pistons"

JUST MY OPINION, NOT LOOKING TO START A FIGHT

I had an R100, RX2, 2 RX3s, 2 first gen RX7s, then the FC. I also had a 12A powered MG Midget, crewed for an SCCA rally RX2, and an IMSA RS RX3 road racer and the same team's Formula Libre 13B powered formula car. All my rotaries (except the R100) were slalom racers and street cars, with my '73 RX3 with the heavily ported later 12A single dizzy engine being my favorite (wish I had another one). Fricking fast little car (ran 13s back in '84) and a lot of fun to race and waste the average musclecar with back then (most street musclecars back then were like jacked up Novas and the like that weren't as fast as they could be. 13s on the street was enough to win a LOT of the time in stoplight confrontations...).

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/cvetters3/RX3.jpg

One of my first gen RX7s had an RX4 13B that was heavily ported. the car was beat up , but that engine was nuts in there. ;)

My FC was bought to go autocross instead of teh Porsche 944 I was looking for at the time, and after I had Greg Fordahl set up the suspension, it was a champion autocrosser. But when it died in '93, and I had the choice of rebuilding it to stock specs for big bucks, or trying to make it fast for even bigger bucks (and unreliable), I got to looking at the empty engine compartment and realized that the small block Ford would fit in there perfectly. hell, there was more room in there than in most Mustangs...

http://speed.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/484414b.jpg

I had the car for 5 years in V8 form, finally selling it in '98 to pay back taxes. It was completely reliable and an excellent autocrosser and street driver. Yes, it was different than it had been as a rotary car. That was the point. I wanted to build a unique hot rod, similar to a modern version of the Shelby Cobra Daytona Coupe.

I still love rotaries, and would love to build a rotary powered hybrid car. If I hadn't gotten my '63 Comet convertible project started, I'd love to put a turbo 13B into my Fiat 124. Wouldn't this car be cool with a Turbo II engine in it??

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/cvetters3/fiat_spider.htm

Does that look like a car an ignorant redneck would build?

This is a HOBBY. It's supposed to be FUN. It's not supposed to be about worshipping religious idols and attacking people who you label as heretics! Cars don't HAVE souls. Cars are mechanical objects built by people.

I built mine for fun after my autocrossing FC died. And it was a faster, better handling autocross car after the conversion.

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/cvetters3/rex1.MPG

But that wasn't why I built it. I built it because that's the way I wanted it at that time. it was fun, and when I built it in '93, it was the cheaper route. As well as being more unique. I HAD Mustangs and a Trans Am before. I didn't want another one. I wanted to see what would happen if I took the nearly perfect FC chassis that I loved the looks of and already had, and ran a cheap, light, high torque engine in it. The result was much more than the sum of it's parts. Much like the result when I put a 12A into an MG. that's what the hobby is all about. And here, I run into closed minded idiots who would rather insult me and the car than just learn from it, basically saying, "I don't care what the facts are, I want to be closed minded and insulting" as though thats a valuable goal for your life.

ok, i'll spell it out...

JUST MY OPINION, NOT LOOKING TO START A FIGHT

BTW, opinion can be wrong. Here's an analogy (you do know what that is, don't you?): Let's say someone came on here and started a thread that said RX7s will never be fast, and rotaries will always be slow, because he once had an N/A RX7 that ran 16.5 second quarter miles, and was beaten by a stock Civic Si.

How do you think that would go over?

Do you think people here would not only tell him he's wrong and an idiot, but back it up with proof that he's wrong?

And if he came back and argued with them the it was just his "opinion" and he should be allowed to state it without being insulted, do you think he would be let alone? You think everyone would go, "oh, it's ok now, because it's just his opinion."

No, being insulting and factually wrong can't be simply ignored because you say it's "your opinion."

Always amazes me that people like you want to be able to state your opinion without anyone being able to state theirs in return.

i can use my brain chris, i just dont know why you keep up answering the thread, its been 10 pages now, i think everything has been said and done, and theres no use to repeat something thats been said 2 post earlier.

i can use my brain chris, i just dont know why you keep up answering the thread, its been 10 pages now, i think everything has been said and done, and theres no use to repeat something thats been said 2 post earlier.

Because no matter how many times things have been proven, little kids with no experience keep saying the same retarded things.

This is a hobby. It's supposed to be fun, and not about attacking people who modify or otherwise have fun with their cars as though someobeody's religion is being upset by said modifications.

It's sad that there are musclecar guys out there insulting small engine cars out of ignorance, and it's sad that there are small engine fans attacking hot rodders out of similar ignorance. I try to educate people when I have time by using direct experience garnered over decades, and people like you complain about it. Why? Why do you care if *I* take the time to try to educate people and tell people they need to be more openminded? I'm not telling anyone they have to make theri own cars like mine. I'm only educating them on why their misconceptions are just that.

Tubjub basically directly insulted me by making the statements he did about the conversion in his last few posts. So now I'm attempting to address those insults in an intelligant, and informative manner, and you tell me to shut the fuck up? Why is it so important to you to be that insulting? Up to the point you said that, I didn't even insult HIM, much less YOU. Are you that immature?

the picture is more a gross maner to tell you were all bored of seeing this thread up to the top again and again,

let tubjub think whatever he wants, you cant teach someone how not to be dumb on internet, and by trying to do so, you look like a dumb yourself.

and i think you should stfu, take it as an insult or not, im fucking bored of seing this thread, and im not the only one.

and tubjub, stfu too.

the picture is more a gross maner to tell you were all bored of seeing this thread up to the top again and again,

let tubjub think whatever he wants, you cant teach someone how not to be dumb on internet, and by trying to do so, you look like a dumb yourself.

How? How is putting factual information on the internet 9which is what it was designed for), especially factual automotive[ information on an automotive forum, "dumb?" Seriously why would you complain about that?

and i think you should stfu, take it as an insult or not, im fucking bored of seing this thread, and im not the only one.

and tubjub, stfu too.

If you're bored, don't fucking click on it. It's apparent that people still don't have any knowledge of the subject, so teaching them is still just as important to those of us who actually like the hobby, regardless of when the thread was started.

If it isn't important to you, don't participate. But factual automotive knowledge is kind of the purpose of an automotive forum. You have zero influence over whether I post factual information about various cars here. And in fact complaining about it makes you look like a whiney, immature retard that would rather be ignorant than actually know anything. Why is that a valuable goal? I can easily tell you why having automotive knowledge is important on an automotive board. Can you make a relevant case for promoting ignorance and closedmindedness without looking like a fucktard?

Grow up, loser. :loser:

putting factual information is ok, i see nothing wrong with this, i have a problem with repetitive useless thread.

anyway, im off
im rx7less and im bored of this fucking site

chris, pm igor about being a mod, you seem to be just like the looser they hire

damn, i ain't been here in a while...

funny how chris talks to his damn self ... (must have nothing else better to do ?)

oh well who cares... this thread is old ... and i simply don't give a fuck anymore.

and if ur still around, go ahead, start some more shit ... i'm sure we can argue mindlessly about it for another couple weeks.

peace

and where's drftk1d at ? decided to sit this one out eh ?

oh well ... i sold my 7, became a bottomless pit... lol

why was it sold?

well, it got to the point that the side seals were so shot that it used a quart every day or so, you couldn't get "on" it hardly at all without it blowing oil like hell... which fouled the plugs out so bad the car lost a ton of power... and other than cleaning the plugs everyday, i found someone who had the time and money to rebuild it, i had $300 in the car, got $1000 for it... they are priceless to the right person. ran like a dream otherwise but i got bills to pay... ya know ?

i feel that, ya gotta take care of whats important first. any plans to re enter the rotary world later on?

aw hell yeah ... i got plans to find something more exotic

i wanna find a first gen with a 12a ... i know someone local who had one for sale but swapped it out for giant ford v-8 ... just not my style if i want a 7.

i'd like to find any mazda rotary car to be 100% honest...

any ideas ?

if not i may pursue the toyota scene and get a mid 80's RWD corolla

i like the 80s corolla idea. a friend of mine is going to drop the engine from his 2nd gen supra into a celica gts convertible, last year they made them RWD. the engine isn't turbo, but still, it'll be a nice horsepower gain from the 22re... well i think that's the engine that's in the celica... anyway, that'll be a fun project.

lol... i was hoping, and i guess i'm fortunate that i didn't just start a war, considering the toyota has PISTONS and all... lmfao. yeah i know they didn't have the 22re... i think that's a truck motor ? not sure tho. they weren't all that powerful, but they had some crazy handling and impressive drift capabilities. had a friend with an 85 celica supra... cleanest 85 i've seen. i want that motor in a smaller corolla of same year... lol anywho i'll stop be4 i get told to take this to the toyota forums...

well this thread has officially gone off topic, so i'm going to try to get a mod to close it off... it's gone on for way too long.

i've seen 12a's and 13b's in hachis... :)

Posted by tubjub - 06-05-2005 at 03:02 AM
aw hell yeah ... i got plans to find something more exotic

i wanna find a first gen with a 12a ... i know someone local who had one for sale but swapped it out for giant ford v-8 ... just not my style if i want a 7.

A friend of mine has a 85 with an 81 12a motor thats been built pretty well. It was a carbed turbo conversion but since blowing the turbo hes just went back to na. Hes got a full build sheet for the car including suspension upgrades. Has nice recaro seats . Was settup for scca. PM if you want more info about it.

Hey Guys, Don't mean to steal this thread but here's a concept you should all try to embrace...

Its kinda hard to judge a vehicle's performance just based on 1/4 mile times. I mean, think about it. An engine with less cylinders can rev up faster than one with more (ie: a 2-cyl bike motor revs up so much faster than a V8) So, when comparing this on short distance runs, of course a small quick spooling rotary will proove challenging to a v8. What the smaller motors have in acceleration, they lack top end. on the highway, a V8 will be able to crumble a small 4-cyl because of all that extra power available. Quick and light is the best way to accelerate. Now I'm also not discrediting the v8 and saying it can't accelerate like a smaller rotary or 4-cyl, it would just have to make up for its acceleration lag via pure brute force. Same for the rotary engine. I'm not saying it can't keep pace or even beat a V8's powerband at speeds over 100mph, its just the characteristics of these different motors make it hard to compare...

so thats the explanation as to why a lancer evolution down in florida rips on vipers, vettes and camaros all day and its a 4 cylinder? btw rotaries are pretty good on top end. (try driving a FD)

to everybodyout there that thinks v-8's are better than rotary's think again. Just of few turbo changes and fuel managment you can easily get 650+hp out of a rotary. Check out this web site they have the kits.

First of all i started reading this topic and had to join. I am on both sides of this arguement most of the time, but have to side with V8. My buddy has a rotary and it is FUN to drive. Shifting at 9000 rpm, quick, just over all fun. But anyone who thinks that a rotary will out run a v8 they are on some sort of drugs. i have a stock chassis car, with 8.5 inch slicks. it is a small block chevy, but it runs 5.20 in the 1/8th mile at 135 mph. The motor cost me bout 6000 to build and is done the right way. if yall ever find a rotary that can keep up yall let me kno and send them to tx. I will show them what a real hot rod can do!

this thread is old as hell dude.

check the post dates before you decide to bump a really old thread