LS1 Rx-7

[Rotorsaru wa]

I think you forgot to paraphrase this by adding " In America "... because the rest of the world does just fine with the rotary. It's just designed to be tuned by cultures with a higher level of education and understanding..

Originally Posted by Souperduck

[Ford88]

you are from canada and saying that lol

[SevPP]

I like that pic 60% of the time they work everytime

Now I'm a huge rotary fan but I'm not going to pretend they are the best things since sliced bread. The LS1 swap imo, is actually not a bad idea- especially considering the backup and aftermarket gear readily available for them. (in the US anyway)

I actually hate the rotary capcity ratings. The rotary engine is the only engine rated on a part cycle rather than a full one. No other type of engine has its capacity measured on a part cycle....

Reliability comes down to knowledge- ****ing simple maintainance and good tuning. In my 10 years (almost 10 now) I've only had one engine fail- through high mileage and imo- not great maintainance. It was the engine that came in the car. I have a 12a n/a block running a s4 hiflow @ 19psi- going on 2 years now with huge ammount of abuse- track days mainly. It also has done over 60000 milessince I've owned it. I also have a 13b peripheral port-260rwhp n/a that has only ever been used in competition. I have owned this engine for 6 years and only now requires a freshen up- carbon seals don't last forever. Now I don't know of any piston motors that have had that sort of use and held up so well.
I have also built a 12a which is currently running in a mates car as a daily driver.
I also part own with a mate, an NSU Ro80. So its not all about performance.

Like I said earlier- I'm a huge fan of the rotary but I'm not going to blatantly tell people it is superior. It has it's place, as do piston engines and that is that.

[Soup]

I like you sevpp, there aren't many people willing to be adult on the internet. I remember hearing something about the part cycle capacity rating somewhere, along the lines that if they rated it more honestly it would be double the displacement? That would make sense seeing as the power output of them and the gas consumption is about on par with a 2.6 (talking about the rx-7 motors, but I'm no expert so there's no need for anyone to get all heated about what I'm saying.)

And rotosaurus rex, maybe people would have a more open mind to what you have to say if you weren't such a douche about it. How about a few more insulting generalizations about americans, cause we're all the ****ing same right?

[BOTLFEDLT1]

HP/Litre-And again, I still ask "so what" to the high hp/litre relevance end user. If high hp/litre directly correlated to a benefit to the user - like better fuel economy for the a given power then it would mean something (funny how an FD uses more gas than a 6 litre corvette that makes more power/torque and weighs more). If I stuck the motor from my ZX-6R into my car, Id have 175 hp/litre rather than the 70 I have now yet my car probably wouldnt move. Does this tell me that my car is faster or better in anyway as a result of having a high hp/litre? talk about a meaningless metric...

Weight of a LS1 long block
It weighs about 450 lbs, full dressed w/ clutch manifolds and fluids. What does a fully dressed 13B TT weigh including tranny? The LS1 will have a better center of gravity than a rotary b/c the crank resides lower than the eccentric shaft of the rotary and the placement of the transmission.

Use of rotaries by OEMs and in racing
Yes, GM considered it, but ultimately abandoned that idea. Coming from an economics background, Im a big believer in power of the market... If its such a great idea and technically advanced, why wouldnt the idea be furthered?

Ok, how about racing events that have an unlimited class. Say, unlimited class Silver State Classic open road racing, Pikes Peak or the "One lap of america" road racing week. If they have such a huge advantage over piston engines, why hasnt someone decided to field a rotary and clean up in these races?

You keep harping about how the rotary is is so much more technically advanced. Theory and practice are two different things. Much in the way that 911 Porsches has a theoretically inferior engine layout, yet they somehow manage to produce some of the quickest track cars. Piston engines "may" be inferior in theory, but they have been refined to the extent they surpass rotaries in practice. Some chip on your shoulder?

Anti-americanism and insults
I enjoy a discussion as well as the next guy, but whats with the anti-american rant? I thought this was about rotary engines vs piston engines and why people would replace a purportedly superior powerplant with an "lesser" engine. FYI - Im not american (Canadian, nor do I sport a mullet -> why does this keep coming up?. Whats with the insults? Inferiority complex?

Originally Posted by Rotorsaru wa

.. wow.. It's representative of the fact that a rotary engine of 1.3L is capable of competing with a domestic piston engine of 5+L. It's a statement that the technology in the rotary is far superior to that of a piston engine. The only people it's not relevant to are the north american mullet heads like you.

'Your understanding' is fairly typical of deep knowledge you and your ilk use to argue rotaries. That comparison weight is, IN CONTEXT, a short block, dry LS1 compared to a fully installed, wet long block in a car, 155kg to be exact. the weight of an aluminum block, short block LS1 with nothing but the oil pan and plastic intake manifold is ~300lbs.

Sure it will fit but so will a few cu/yd's of concrete.. When a rotary is sitting in an RX7 engine bay you can clearance a t90 turbo down both strut towers, you can mount a 26" deep IC in V mount.. you can hardly fit a honda battery into the engine bay with an LS1 in there.. yeah , they are SOclose in size.. not.. try to at least use your proofs In context. A typical FC engine bay will fit a 4Rotor if chose to do so, easily.. as it is the 3 rotor requires very little movement to regain balance points ~7cm and car is back to 50-50

Trying to explain the limitations of the rotaries manufacturer baser to a rah rah domestic lover is at best futile.. however when GM was looking to beef up the power on the 72 corvette the intention was to use a 4 rotor.. NOT a piston engine. You might want to take a look around and see how many international and domestic sanctioning bodies have banned the rotaries use due to its power potential over piston engines.

As for the flagship sports car? thr rx8 you mean? it's NOT a sports car gump. it's the end result of Fords fingers in the pot.. they didn't want a sports car that would damage the sales of their mustang. Which a NEW rx7 at the price point they were shooting for, whould have done easily.. but that just allowed MAZDA to develp the next itteration of the rotary for use in the NEW rx7 .. a 16B. a 2 rotor motor developing as much power as the 3 rotor in a smaller, lighter package.

Those 'owners ' you speak of are 99% American based owners.. and as much as it pains you to hear I'm sure.. America is NOT the rest of the world.

To sum this up The rotary is and has been the number one engine of choice for non certified aircraft use. NOT the V8.. It's size, light weight, reliability under load, radial to radial power transfer, 3 moving parts, almost a complete lack of vibration/harmonics, and the fact that even if by chance one rotor is damaged and stops function.. the other chamber is self contained.. yeah that's bad technology alright.

[SevPP]

Originally Posted by BOTLFEDLT1

Weight of a LS1 long block
It weighs about 450 lbs, full dressed including transmission. What does a fully dressed 13B TT weigh including tranny? The LS1 will have a better center of gravity than a rotary b/c the crank resides lower than the eccentric shaft of the rotary and the placement of the transmission.

Centre of gravity will not be much different. Crank in the LS still lines up with the gearbox as it does with the rotary You can only sit engine/componentry so low. But then the LS still has weight up higher in the heads etc. I think the rotary would retain better cog but not by fu(k all.

Also imo the rotary is in no way anymore advanced, be it in theory or reality. They are a pump, nothing more. They just work differently to the more common pumps.

I also agree with unlimited racing-they would not be competitive unless someones going to go with a 26b- turbo or not. The highest hp- genuine street car in Aus has a Holden (not chev) 383 stroker, twin turbo, cast iron block, old school, not advance in anyway at all and its made 1800+rwhp on pump fuel. The most I've seen from any rotary is ~1100.

Rotarsaru- I'm interested what seals you guys use in your aviation rotaries. Rotary Aviation seals have a bad rep here in Aus for eating housings.

[Rotorsaru wa]

.. fuel economy.. common.. 99' FD3S ( restricted* 280hp) 17/35 01' z-06 19/26 (385hp ) ... seems to me your trying to blow your SBC propaganda up my ass. *The restriction is a limit value imposed by JDM auto makers. This has been lifted as of last year. Simple adjustments to the boost will net you in the order of 350hp. HP/L ( and I'll use the little kids words for you since you didn't seen to follow my last rendition.. more power from a smaller displacement, lighter engine = more efficient design

weight well seeing as you must have skipped that part I will reiterate what I said above a 'wet' REW ( all dressed in engine bay ) is 155kg. And that BS about lower center of gravity.. common.. the SBC has ~ 10cm of height over the 13B, your accessories sit higher and your engine placement is further forward. Top that off with over a ~100lb difference in wet weight, you've got nothing but more useless domestic myths and fabricated lies.

GM abandoned the rotory for one reason the 70's gas crisis. Then again the whole musclecar industry was abandoned at that time as well. so based on your 'theory' the muscle car concept was not a 'great idea anymore ' either..:thumb:

take a look at racing history.. chances are if a rotory was run in that class, esp. North america, it was banned pretty quickly. It hasn't been till just the last few years when rotaries have been allowed back into FIA and SCCA top shelf events. How about you look world wide where the rotory is more 'accepted' then the US , where prejudice like yours towards the norm. Super GT 06' season, the FD3S 3 rotor 20B NA won the championship over F360's, S7's, NSX, lambo, Vemac, mosler, Porsche..
First year of GT cup in the US .. the RX8's take the championship.. I'd say that's pretty good. Given they only competed in two series in the north america and the ratio was ~ 30:1 pistons to rotory..

'Track times' involve way more then just the engine.. suspenion, frame design and aerodynamics all come into play.. but based on that .. the rx7 is the ONLY RWD car under 58 sec at Tsukuba. it's surrounded by AWD GTR/EVO/WRX cars..

As for my other comments.. if the shoe fits.. however I will ask, why do you act like an american if your not one? .. that's pretty pathetic.. and so is your ACTUAL knowledge about the engine you are trying to argue against.

I'm interested what seals you guys use in your aviation rotaries. Rotary Aviation seals have a bad rep here in Aus for eating housings.

with NA I use the RA 'classic' seals with the RA springs. REW corner seals For Turbo I use the RA super seals with the mazda springs, REW side seals and dual springs with Atken's solid corner seals.. I use both primary oiling as well as a 75:1 premix, 3L of methyl hydrate and a teaspoon of acetone per full tank 92 octane.

[BOTLFEDLT1]

What is "acting american"? Did I come in here saying ricers suck ass and v8's trump all? Is this the part where Im supposed to reply in kind and call you a JDM fan boi? I came in here after I saw your comment about how people must be too stupid to make power with the rotary by swapping in LS1's. Obviously someone is on to something as the swap is becoming more common.

Thanks for pointing out the weight differential between the LS1 and the 13B.
My understanding was based on quotes provided by Hinson supercars who does these conversions. Their converted FD weighed less than the rotary equiped car. Balance affected minimally:

(post LS1 conversion)
LF: 746
RF: 677
Total Front: 1,423 lbs

LR: 678
RR: 733
Total Rear: 1408 lbs

So please address my question about why rotaries havent been competitive in racing classes with run-what-you brung unlimited classes (I think I cited a few examples). Surely they should wipe the field clean against the inferior piston engine crowd.

As for fact vs theoretical discussions, the results from the swapped cars speak for themselves. Big power while on pump gas, neglible weight gain relative to the boost in power/fatter powerband, increase in fuel economy, no loss in weight balance, lower maintainance and ease of tuning.

Im sure the rotary has its positive attributes, but the fact remains that if it was superior to the piston engine, 1) someone else would have stepped up to the plate to develop it further, 2) a market would not have been created solely for the purposes of swapping v8's into rx7s. Maybe everyone else in the world is stupid and you are the only smart one Personally, I think Mazda only kept the rotary to differentiate themselves because they didnt have anything else.

Have a good one

Originally Posted by Rotorsaru wa

.. fuel economy.. common.. 99' FD3S ( restricted* 280hp) 17/35 01' z-06 19/26 (385hp ) ... seems to me your trying to blow your SBC propaganda up my ass. *The restriction is a limit value imposed by JDM auto makers. This has been lifted as of last year. Simple adjustments to the boost will net you in the order of 350hp. HP/L ( and I'll use the little kids words for you since you didn't seen to follow my last rendition.. more power from a smaller displacement, lighter engine = more efficient design

weight well seeing as you must have skipped that part I will reiterate what I said above a 'wet' REW ( all dressed in engine bay ) is 155kg. And that BS about lower center of gravity.. common.. the SBC has ~ 10cm of height over the 13B, your accessories sit higher and your engine placement is further forward. Top that off with over a ~100lb difference in wet weight, you've got nothing but more useless domestic myths and fabricated lies.

GM abandoned the rotory for one reason the 70's gas crisis. Then again the whole musclecar industry was abandoned at that time as well. so based on your 'theory' the muscle car concept was not a 'great idea anymore ' either..:thumb:

take a look at racing history.. chances are if a rotory was run in that class, esp. North america, it was banned pretty quickly. It hasn't been till just the last few years when rotaries have been allowed back into FIA and SCCA top shelf events. How about you look world wide where the rotory is more 'accepted' then the US , where prejudice like yours towards the norm. Super GT 06' season, the FD3S 3 rotor 20B NA won the championship over F360's, S7's, NSX, lambo, Vemac, mosler, Porsche..
First year of GT cup in the US .. the RX8's take the championship.. I'd say that's pretty good. Given they only competed in two series in the north america and the ratio was ~ 30:1 pistons to rotory..

'Track times' involve way more then just the engine.. suspenion, frame design and aerodynamics all come into play.. but based on that .. the rx7 is the ONLY RWD car under 58 sec at Tsukuba. it's surrounded by AWD GTR/EVO/WRX cars..

As for my other comments.. if the shoe fits.. however I will ask, why do you act like an american if your not one? .. that's pretty pathetic.. and so is your ACTUAL knowledge about the engine you are trying to argue against.




with NA I use the RA 'classic' seals with the RA springs. REW corner seals For Turbo I use the RA super seals with the mazda springs, REW side seals and dual springs with Atken's solid corner seals.. I use both primary oiling as well as a 75:1 premix, 3L of methyl hydrate and a teaspoon of acetone per full tank 92 octane.

[Ford88]

they have zoom zoom

[BOTLFEDLT1]

oh yah.. I forgot. Zoooooming all the way to a 15 second quarter mile.

Im going to have to dig up my footage of me putting the hurting on an RX8 at shannonville soon before someone gives me the "but they are fast in the twisties, YO!" come back.


Rotararu - I notice you are from Canada too. You wouldnt happen to be within driving distance of mosport, shannonville or calaboogie, would you?

Originally Posted by Ford88

they have zoom zoom

[Ford88]

lol for real i was watching the miata mx-5 cup racing on speed channel it was fuking hillarious watching em off road and bang into eachother great stuff and so you all know

i know miatas arent rotary

[crazyboosta]

waa fukin waa. One eyed piston heads are just as bad as one eyed rotor heads.

[SevPP]

From what I've seen of the RA seals here (can't actually specify as I don't know which ones exactly) they are very strong and don't wear, but are hard on the housings. I've seen a number of pics of stuffed housings and good seals from very little use.... In automotive use PTS, SCR and NRS seals seem to be a lot more popular- My personal preferance is NRS.

Racing history. The 20b na RX7 won the GT300 class. So it wasn't an outright win. Still impressive in my books though.
The RX7 is the most succesful car in IMSA history.
In Australian production car racing the RX7 was the dominant car, winning all 12hour races that it contested at Bathurst (3) and then won at Eastern Creek 12hr with the RX7 SP. Porsche was running factory backed 968CS at Bathurst and the 911RSCS at EC. Other cars consisted of GTR's, Supras, NSX,WRX's Corvette, Viper, Maserati and others. The significance of this is that these cars had to race as they came off the showroom floor with very minimal mods. (exhaust & ecu free, slicks on stock rims, all interior etc)
Tsukuba imo isn't a good track for comparison to other cars- to tight favouring 4wd cars on corner exit.
In many classes the rotary engine has been banned or severely restricted.

The RX8. A good car for getting around in. They are reasonably good in the twisties but to underpowered imo. I'd like one as a daily driver though.

FD power restrictions are well known. Exhaust, Power FC, and boost increase will yield impressive gains. the prob is some people don't get the Power FC. Larger exhaust frees up the turbos causing boost increase. Stock ecu doesn't recognise this and engine runs lean and 'pop'. Major reason for FD's apparent unreliability.

[BOTLFEDLT1]

Appreciate the info. Thanks.

Originally Posted by SevPP

Racing history. The 20b na RX7 won the GT300 class. So it wasn't an outright win. Still impressive in my books though.
The RX7 is the most succesful car in IMSA history.
In Australian production car racing the RX7 was the dominant car, winning all 12hour races that it contested at Bathurst (3) and then won at Eastern Creek 12hr with the RX7 SP. Porsche was running factory backed 968CS at Bathurst and the 911RSCS at EC. Other cars consisted of GTR's, Supras, NSX,WRX's Corvette, Viper, Maserati and others. The significance of this is that these cars had to race as they came off the showroom floor with very minimal mods. (exhaust & ecu free, slicks on stock rims, all interior etc)
Tsukuba imo isn't a good track for comparison to other cars- to tight favouring 4wd cars on corner exit.
In many classes the rotary engine has been banned or severely restricted.

The RX8. A good car for getting around in. They are reasonably good in the twisties but to underpowered imo. I'd like one as a daily driver though.

FD power restrictions are well known. Exhaust, Power FC, and boost increase will yield impressive gains. the prob is some people don't get the Power FC. Larger exhaust frees up the turbos causing boost increase. Stock ecu doesn't recognise this and engine runs lean and 'pop'. Major reason for FD's apparent unreliability.

[R1KID]

The rotary engine is like masturbation, at first it may seem like a good idea, but at the end you're only f*ucking yourself.