Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sp3aK
I never said I thought the RX8 was any great car. I think its ugly, the RX7 is much better looking. And read my last sentence.
I was just stating the information that Aru was most likely going based on. Like I said, if his mathematics were true then they could just make on big freakin rotary engine that would dominate everything.
The big limiting factor is the mechanics, and even though matehmatically the RX8 would pump out more HP per liter... it's still slower. I do side with you on this issue NoHook, even though Aru does in some strange way have his own points, I think they are a bit mis-guided and unknowledgable.
*EDIT - 5 minutes later*
I was taking a dump when I realized that, hell if we were going to go purely mathmatical about this, my stock Volvo has 114hp with a 2.3L non turbo engine, so thats basically 50hp per liter. The 700 series volvos with the same engine with the turbo run 160 horse power, so thats basically 70hp per liter. Hell lets just make one big Volvo engine and screw all of you! Cuz if we go with that math, 70hp into a 5.0L like in the mustang, would be 350hp! w00... stupid mustangs.... hah...
|
haha. I know all about the rotaries and the main thing that makes the engine fail in them is the apex seals. But technically the motors are not 1.3 liters the 2 rotors are 2.6 and 3 rotor is 3.9 liters. Your volvo would make make 99 HP per liter going by the way the rotards do their liter math, they figure since only 1 section of the engine fires at once and that part of the engine is 1.3 liters they can call it a 1.3 liter motor lol. only half of your volvo or my V8 fires at once but we don't say your volvo is 1.15 liters and my V8 which is Really 5.8 liters 2.6 liters. We measure the whole liter size of the entire engine and they only measure what fires at once
. The ****in motor is 2.6 liters if it is a 2 rotor and it is 3.9 liters if it is a 3 rotor. So rotary guys do not have a HP per liter argument they think they have. Thank you for agreeing with me
