Wow @ RX-7's

I will never in my life look at another RX-7 the same way again. I just test drove one with 609hp at the wheels with a single turbo kit, and uh I have never been so scared in my entire fucking life o_O. Lol the fastes stick I had ever driven was a 350hp Chevy Pickup when I was 12, ever since then been puttin around in a Eclipse RS with a 5 speed. Lol um I just gotta say getting to like 150mph in less then 10 seconds from 35 is pretty fucking god awfull scary o_O. I honestly have no idea how I was able to handle such a thing. But from now on Im gonna be working towards buying a 1993 RX-7 and not a Supra TT lol. I mean god damn you Rotary boys werent lying when you said thats one incredible engine. I thought it wouldnt be much diff then like a V8. But I mean god DAMN I tried to heal and toe from fourth to third and I over revved the fucking clutch locked and the tires started to burn and I was going like 40mph O_O.

"Welcome to the Rotary Power"!!!! I agree they are an amazing engine . And all comes in a 1.3 litre secret.:naughty::grinno::evillol:

You're in OUR world now...

You're in OUR world now...

:lol2:

lol I mean damn and that sound was like O_O I sware to god the accerlation made my stomach come out of my ass. it had one of those Greddy Single turbo kits. had a big ass blow off valve on it to.

rotary = panda

I just made that up but pandas look like cute little teddy bears but those things will tear the crap out of you if you mess with them... thats how I see a rotary engine :)

rotary = panda

I just made that up but pandas look like cute little teddy bears but those things will tear the crap out of you if you mess with them... thats how I see a rotary engine :)
:iagree: a lot!! . well said it !!!!

"Welcome to the Rotary Power"!!!! I agree they are an amazing engine . And all comes in a 1.3 litre secret.:naughty::grinno::evillol:

actually, 2.6L
If you dont believe me, go to http://rx7.com/techarticles_displacement.html

i don't think so

There are people out there who claim it's a 2.6 liter, but it doesn't matter.

Mazda says it is a 1.3 liter. . . The government says it is a 1.3 liter. . .

The fundamental problem with that guys argument is a ricdiculous oversight. The degrees of an engines thermodynamic cycle has nothing to do with determining its displacement. . . the volume displaced in the thermodynamic cycle does.
Let me illustrate this algabraically. (or at least try)

Basically we have 1 equation (the one that determines the displacement of a vehicle), since I'm too lazy to look up this equation (and it doesn't matter because no matter what equation it is the simple algebraic mistake he's made would negate it) I will set the equation of displacement to the letter X, and displacement to D

D=X (simple enough eh?)

Under all circumstances when you use an equation and get a value for D, using the equation again with the same values should also get D, or you've made a mistake.

Lets use this in a function for 2 enigines, Engine A(piston), and Engine B (rotary). For the sake of comparison, both will have the same displacement. That way we have a means of verifying our results.

Piston:
De(a)=X
Rotary:
De(b)=X

So we now use a 1.3 liter rotary and a 1.3 liter piston engine in this model.

De(1.3)=X
De(1.3)=X

It is easy to see that De(1.3)=De(1.3)

This is where this website made its mistake, it took to equal equations, and changed one but not the other, this breaks the rules of algebra and negates all values in doing so, because if you change one you must change the other. Or else you have no flooring to compare the results of the two, which is what that site is all about. He now has entered another variable into the equations.

Dp(a)=XT
Dr(b)=XT

T=(degrees of rotation for the thermal dynamic cycle to occur)

He is adding an irrelavent variable into an already complete equation. This is a twofold mistake.

1. Displacement has nothing to do with the degrees of rotation of the thermal dynamic cycle, it has to do with the amount displaced by the cycle.
2. Even if this variable he has entered into the equations was appropriate, there still is no room for comparison as they are different for each engine, the equations in their base form are no longer equal becase T is different. Soooo There is no point in using information derived from what are now TWO SEPARATE equations with noo foundation whatsoever for comparison as they are not equal in their base form. Basically his comparison is similar (and just as valid) as this one: Fish moves at 10 mph, and a cat moves at 10 mph.
Fs=fishspeed
Cs=catspeed

Fs=10
Cs=10
Fs=Cs

Now since these animals are different we have to account for their legs.
Fs=10(L)
Cs=10(L)

Fs=10(0)
Cs=10(4)

See what I'm saying. even if he used a valid variable in a valid model it would still be a moot point, he's defeating his orignal purpose of looking for a way to compare the two.
Luckily there is a way to compare the two
THE ORIGINAL FUCKING DISPLACEMENT EQUATION.
you know, the one mazda and the government use. . . They do it for a reason, because they are RIGHT.

PS: I'm sure I'm wrong, I don't know what I'm talking about, and I'm full of shit. :bs:

The displacement of 1.3L to 2.6L according to that tech article is more of a way to compare the power the two engines can make. the 1.3L rotary makes power every 360 degree cycle of the engine. The piston engine needs two cycles of 360 degrees to make power (intake and compression stroke) and then (power and exhaust) So to match the to figures they double the rotary displacement to balance the two. Power production and displacement are two different things. Stick with the factory displacement rating just like Devout said

in all honestly you can't say what liter the rotary is because everything works different and measures in different ways so none of the same test do piston and rotor engines so 1.3 was the closet they could get, the only reason some people call it 2.3 is because it has 2 rotors, and the 1.3 comes from one rotor, but it really doesn't matter because its a rotary, not a piston engine... so from now on call it a dang 2-rotor wankel or something else besides the equivalent to a piston engine

Welcome to the world of the Rotary, I may not be powered by the 13B but I dont respect it.

I recommend researching the Rotary, learning how it works then reading up on power primers for the best ways to make power from them. I'd start with howstuffworks.com

Oh god, lets not start this fucking displacement argument again :rolleyes:

HighwayRicer started it and now i am confuse:dunno: