Results 1 to 14 of 14
Thread: 4 rotor rx7
-
05-05-2008, 11:31 AM #1
4 rotor rx7
A rx7 with a n/a 2.8L rotary engine. I remember reading about this in a fd forum a couple years ago and it doesn't even have nitrous in it. Just a racing port. I'm not gonna lie, i wish i had one of these under the hood.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...OJO-rQK945HOAg
-
05-05-2008, 11:41 AM #2
fast... but unreliable i'm sure.
rotary engines are shit, and there is a reason that they are only used in the RXx cars. I have several friends who owned Rx7s at some point... every one of them blew up, one of them ended up with an LT1 6spd swap and never had another problem with the car.
-
05-05-2008, 11:54 AM #3
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Location
- Durham, NC
- Age
- 46
- Posts
- 53
Black- 1994 Firebird Formula
Were your buddys cars turbo? The turbo cars ended up being unreliable because rotorys hate heat. Add a bigger intercooler and radiator and they last just as long as a piston engine if not more.
The NA rotarys are farily reliable, the biggest problem they have is they carbon up if you take them for short trips and the apex seals will basically be glued open so you lose compression(like your rings going out). The 20B that was in the cosmo was a badass motor and runs strong as shit and that was a 3 rotor. A four rotor would BE BADASS,as this video demonstrates. NA rotaries love nitrous too.
All in all, I'd probably have gone the small block route too, as the 3 and 4 rotor engines are expensive and kinda rare. Shit, I'm going up to WI in a few weeks and I might bring back a 88 SE my dad still has and do a LS1 in it.
-
05-05-2008, 12:24 PM #4
One was turbo the rest were NA. The turbo car got the LT1 swap, the others were either scrapped for parts and one even got a nice trip out to a field with some gas and a match
I personally LOVE the styling of the FD's and would absolutely love to have one with an LS Swap, but the rotary's lack of torque alone is enough to keep me away from one.
-
05-05-2008, 12:48 PM #5
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Location
- Durham, NC
- Age
- 46
- Posts
- 53
Black- 1994 Firebird Formula
Yeah, your not going to mash the pedal and break the tires loose in fourth or anything, but they are pretty fun to drive non the less, very nice handling and even the NA ones can put down some decent power numbers for being a light car. IMO a rotary is one of the best sounding engines out there, right up there with a SBC and followed by a boxer.
-
05-05-2008, 05:34 PM #6
yeah roaries are by far the best engine ever. somewhat unreliable, but thats cuz there hasnt been much research put into them. mazda can't outdo every other company combined. now if ferrari had rights, that would be different. its much lighter and easier to make it go to higher rpm.
the rx8 does seem to be reliable tho. they use to have short trip problems but a free mazda upgrade fixes that. plus, im over 6ft tall and fit easily and comfortably in the rear. but my friend has one (yellow, looks awesome) and gets much worse gas than me lol, especially on the highway.
on expense tho, a 4 rotor costs about $50k installed lol.
also, yes 2 rotor engines aren't torquey, but neither are 4 cylinders. and 3+ rotor engines have same torque as horsepower, or higher.
-
05-05-2008, 05:47 PM #7
-
05-07-2008, 06:50 PM #8
They have plenty of torque (and are reliable as one poster mentioned if properly tuned when making engine mods & replacing the stock radiator with a larger one). Here, read up (I think 590 rwtq is adequate in a 2700 lbs car - it goes sideways at 120 mph....in FOURTH gear ironically enough).
It's funny how people only look at the torque a car produces, but don't account for its light weight....HINT: a light car needs much less torque to get "work" done when it weighs significantly less.
http://www.ls1.com/forums/showthread...ght=rx7&page=2
-
05-07-2008, 07:23 PM #9
i was referring to a fairly stock one as having no torque (which they do not) sure you can build a torquy one if you want, but that was not what i was referring to.
I just prefer a car that can cruise along decently without having to rev the piss out of it just so it will get out of its own way.
I dont race my car alot, nor do i drive it overly hard on the street. I can shift at 2-2.5k rpm and still move along at a nice pace. Rarely do i ever rev it over 4k unless i am messing around but that is just my driving style.
I was not bashing RX7s, Like i said before... i like the FDs but I don't personally like the rotary engine.
-
05-08-2008, 09:34 PM #10
The current Renesis motors are torqueless turds. The non Renesis motors found in all RX-7 had plenty of torque (and arguably one of the smoothest/linear power deliverys of any engine produced). RX-7s are all light, so the torque needed to move them was negligable (especially FDs with twin sequential turbochargers....the first turbo always on spool during low revs to provide adequate low end grunt & the 2nd engaging at 4,500 rpms for major thrust).
Another point to consider....(let's not consider the Renesis because we are in vehement agreement on that crappy rotary variant), RX-7s were purpose built sports cars with engines produced to "live" on a track where RPMs are always high. Serious/dedicated sports cars typically produce power & torque upstairs (technolgies have improved to offer more available torque down low in many more of today's cars, but that is a more recent phenom....the exceptions are typically big displacement powerplants). Examples: Ferraris, Porsche powerplants, Lotus's (ie Toyota engines), etc, etc.
I do agree with you though - different strokes for different folks. I have both powerplants & like/appreciate them both for what they are. They are just different & you adjust your driving & derive pleasure from them differently (my RX-7 likes to scream up stairs, the SLK with a blown V8 pushes you down low with a low but loud authority). Have a good weekend Kyle.
-
05-08-2008, 09:49 PM #11
-
05-10-2008, 07:54 PM #12
I'm not a big fan of 2 rotor engines. They are low in torque. But i would never put an ls1 in one. Takes away the soul of the car. Plus, the T/A is a very similar car, but i think the t/a is better looking.
-
05-12-2008, 10:34 PM #13
Rotary=junk. Period.
-
05-13-2008, 05:45 PM #14
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
rotor direction
By dklowrider in forum Suspension and HandlingReplies: 12Last Post: 07-30-2009, 09:02 PM -
MSD cap and rotor LT-1
By Teknik_SS in forum LT1Replies: 2Last Post: 06-01-2009, 10:39 AM -
Rotor on a LT1
By camarostripes96 in forum LT1Replies: 5Last Post: 09-27-2007, 04:03 PM -
04 gto rr brk/rotor problems?
By plasterman182 in forum General HelpReplies: 0Last Post: 05-21-2006, 05:21 PM
Bookmarks