Any rotary powered car
Any rotary powered car
93celicaGT2 wrote:Bobzilla wrote:Besides the oil aspect, same as a rotary.93celicaGT2 wrote:Swift uses NO oil between changes, makes decent torque for it's displacement (1298cc) and while you don't need to spin it high.... it really loves to.Bobzilla wrote:See your post before this one.1988RedT2 wrote: No discussion of high-revving engines can leave out the immaculate Mazda rotary. While most (if not all) reciprocating piston designs feel like they're going to come apart at high revs, the rotary seems to thrive near redline, delivering power with a sweet, sweet smoothness utterly unmatched in any other engine. You pistonheads truly have your hands on your wankers, while utilizing a reciprocating action. It's time you woke up and smelled the exhaust of a Mazda rotary. Nothing else can compare.as long as you don't mind no torque, high oil consumption and the NEED to spin it high.....
If you're too lazy to check your oil occasionally, then don't buy a rotary. It's that simple.
It's not that at all. I just don't like having to ADD a quart every 1000-1500 miles.
I usually check my oil in all my cars about every other oil change. The worst offender is the truck.... it burns about 1 quart every 9k miles.
Bobzilla wrote:93celicaGT2 wrote:It's not that at all. I just don't like having to ADD a quart every 1000-1500 miles. I usually check my oil in all my cars about every other oil change. The worst offender is the truck.... it burns about 1 quart every 9k miles.Bobzilla wrote:Besides the oil aspect, same as a rotary.93celicaGT2 wrote:Swift uses NO oil between changes, makes decent torque for it's displacement (1298cc) and while you don't need to spin it high.... it really loves to.Bobzilla wrote:See your post before this one.1988RedT2 wrote: No discussion of high-revving engines can leave out the immaculate Mazda rotary. While most (if not all) reciprocating piston designs feel like they're going to come apart at high revs, the rotary seems to thrive near redline, delivering power with a sweet, sweet smoothness utterly unmatched in any other engine. You pistonheads truly have your hands on your wankers, while utilizing a reciprocating action. It's time you woke up and smelled the exhaust of a Mazda rotary. Nothing else can compare.as long as you don't mind no torque, high oil consumption and the NEED to spin it high.....
there, fixed that for you..
Chrysler's Turbine car would routinely spin to 44,500 rpms. Not a production car, but not a one off or hot rod.
Is checking oil that big of a pain in the ass? I own three rotaries,and I don't find it that difficult to check,and add a little oil every now,and then. I don't drive them that much however,so adding oil isn't that often due to low mileage every year. The joy I get from each one makes up for the mind numbing task of checking,and filling the oil. It makes me feel like I have a piece of machinery in my possession instead of an appliance. About the biggest pain in the butt is with my 78 production RX-7 that has the hood prop rod on the passengers side,so I eithe rhave to just hold the hood open with my shoulder,or walk around the car to prop the hood open to check the oil. I can see why Mazda fixed that mid 79,but I like it the JDM way myself,Yo!!
An engine builder I like has this to say...
"RPM stands for Ruins Peoples' Motors."
You add a quart every 1,000-1,500 miles? You need a new engine. I've never had a rotary use anywhere near that amount. I was usually almost a quart down at time to change the oil.
Well...
I've seen usage as high as a quart in 200 miles. Don't compare apples to oranges, with every generation of car, Mazda reduced the amount of oil injected.
When the engine gets worn, a rotary will actually add fuel to the oil, so the oil level will go up. This is especially noticable when you are running without the oil metering pump.
My current engine gets about 1500 miles before the oil is a quart overfull. But then, I can't get it to run leaner than 14:1 under ANY conditions, so it's always rich. Silly bridge ports.
Has anyone heard of a 377? A 350 crank in a 400 bottom end with long rods... I bet with some good heads and a good cam that would SCREAM. Good rod/stroke ratio.
With the ITR cams in my B16A2 and I have to watch the tach to ensure I don't hit the 8450rpm limiter, 'cause it doesn't sound like it wants to shift.
cxhb wrote: Has anyone heard of a 377? A 350 crank in a 400 bottom end with long rods... I bet with some good heads and a good cam that would SCREAM. Good rod/stroke ratio.
Yep, and it does scream
Run_Away wrote: With the ITR cams in my B16A2 and I have to watch the tach to ensure I don't hit the 8450rpm limiter, 'cause it doesn't sound like it wants to shift.
Sounds similar to my favorite "cheap" LS Vtec recipe.
B18B block, CTR pistons, B16 head, CTR valvetrain, ITR cams.
EASILY good for 9000rpms.
Not OEM but I have been patiently waiting for the miata hayabusa swap kit to hit the market, I think that would be an incredible swap having owned both a miata and hayabusa in the past...
I had a buddy with a ported 13b rotory that reved to over 13,000 rpm, the motor lasted all of about 4 months but that thing was a monster!
RPM is overrated, and, as previously stated, ruins motors.
tuna55 wrote: RPM is overrated, and, as previously stated, ruins motors.
I don't think i'd be real psyched about a cummins in my Celica.
My 3.0 OHV Ranger's Tak-o-meter goes to 7k, there is no redline, just a rev limiter (somewhere in the 5500-6000rpm range), but my whole post is moot since it sounds like a squirrel in a blender above 3k, so I just don't go up there very often
1988RedT2 wrote: No discussion of high-revving engines can leave out the immaculate Mazda rotary. While most (if not all) reciprocating piston designs feel like they're going to come apart at high revs, the rotary seems to thrive near redline, delivering power with a sweet, sweet smoothness utterly unmatched in any other engine. You pistonheads truly have your hands on your wankers, while utilizing a reciprocating action. It's time you woke up and smelled the exhaust of a Mazda rotary. Nothing else can compare.
Oddly enough, that's pretty much the reason why rotary engines are not very popular with people who make cars. Too much exhaust nasties to deal with.
So, yes, nothing can compare- well, unless you have a poorly running piston engine...
alfadriver wrote: Oddly enough, that's pretty much the reason why rotary engines are not very popular with people who make cars. Too much exhaust nasties to deal with. So, yes, nothing can compare- well, unless you have a poorly running piston engine...
Yeah, yeah. Details. I threw that bit about the exhaust in there intentionally. Glad you were paying attention.
If you took the billions of dollars that have gone into making the reciprocating piston engine as clean and efficient as it is and applied half that amount to refinements of the Wankel design, do you think there would be any contest?
Mazda has done a good job of proving the effectiveness of the rotary in racing at virtually every level. When the superiority of their small, lightweight, smooth and powerful engine shows its dominance over inferior reciprocating piston engines, the sanctioning bodies, under pressure from other manufacturers, re-write the rules to ban or handicap the superior rotary-engined vehicles.
I agree that in its current iteration, the Mazda rotary is not ideally suited for use in "daily drivers" because of emissions and fuel economy. But as a race engine, it's superiority is indisputable.
As an aside, I would add that I have driven rotary-powered cars both daily, and at the track, and I have never owned one that used an "excessive" amount of oil. Maybe I'm doing something wrong.
tuna55 wrote: RPM is overrated, and, as previously stated, ruins motors.
Wrong on both accounts!
In the late 60's my dad was racing limited late model stock cars. Most guys were using 283's. The old man somehow got his hands on a 302 Z28 motor, and built it. It sounded like he came out of the turns 1000 RPM higher than everybody, and screamed down the straight. You could hear it over every other car. 4" bore, and 3" stroke, with a 6" rod, that was a screamer.
1988RedT2 wrote: If you took the billions of dollars that have gone into making the reciprocating piston engine as clean and efficient as it is and applied half that amount to refinements of the Wankel design, do you think there would be any contest?
No, it still would not be a contest. The rotary has some serious flaws WRT emissions that makes it a lot harder than piston engines. #1 being the massive surface area which quenches the flame front- which is both a waste of fuel and a huge source of HC emissions. If you could re-design the wankel so that the surface area was a lot smaller, then you'd be onto something.
There's a reason Mazda was the only one who kept the Rotary- it was purely marketing. And it's perfectly ok that many of you side on what the marketing is correct on- power density.
Even if CNG becomes the fuel norm, it will have problems.
Oddly enough, I'd be willing to bet that with H2, it still wouldn't be perfect. (there's a lot of HC's left over in the current commercially available Hydrogen- made a lot of people red in the face for them to find out that a PZEV car emits less HC's than a fuel cell car)
Eric
alfadriver wrote:1988RedT2 wrote: If you took the billions of dollars that have gone into making the reciprocating piston engine as clean and efficient as it is and applied half that amount to refinements of the Wankel design, do you think there would be any contest?No, it *still* would not be a contest. The rotary has some serious flaws WRT emissions that makes it a lot harder than piston engines. #1 being the massive surface area which quenches the flame front- which is both a waste of fuel and a huge source of HC emissions. If you could re-design the wankel so that the surface area was a lot smaller, then you'd be onto something. There's a reason Mazda was the only one who kept the Rotary- it was purely marketing. And it's perfectly ok that many of you side on what the marketing is correct on- power density. Even if CNG becomes the fuel norm, it will have problems. Oddly enough, I'd be willing to bet that with H2, it still wouldn't be perfect. (there's a lot of HC's left over in the current commercially available Hydrogen- made a lot of people red in the face for them to find out that a PZEV car emits less HC's than a fuel cell car) Eric
Okay, I'm willing to concede that point. I do think that there are a lot of improvements that a multi-billion-dollar research effort could develop. And I disagree on why only Mazda saw fit to continue with the rotary--namely that stodgy behemoths like GM were managed by people who were fearful and lacked vision.
In reply to Nitroracer:
For probe wont rev past 7K on stock motor and runs out of breath around 6500, if you got a KLZE it might be made to run that high
In reply to 1988RedT2:
The stated displacement of a rotary really is about half of the real number, according to the experts. So its power per displacement isn't particularly impressive either. Maybe its power for its weight is impressive?
I wouldn't worry about a rotary using a quart of oil every 1000 miles or so.
CLNSC3 wrote: Not OEM but I have been patiently waiting for the miata hayabusa swap kit to hit the market, I think that would be an incredible swap having owned both a miata and hayabusa in the past... I had a buddy with a ported 13b rotory that reved to over 13,000 rpm, the motor lasted all of about 4 months but that thing was a monster!
Peri port? Sounds like a peri port if it grenaded after 4 months.
Otto_Maddox wrote: In reply to 1988RedT2: The stated displacement of a rotary really is about half of the real number, according to the experts. So its power per displacement isn't particularly impressive either. Maybe its power for its weight is impressive?
For me, the most impressive things about the rotary are its smooth power delivery all the way to redline, its ability to run flat out for extended periods, and the compactness of the package.
I enjoy giving people rides in my Turbo II. They look under the hood after a drive and are FREAKED OUT by what they see. I guess that's the best part.
You'll need to log in to post.
