High Revving cars?

bigbens6 wrote: 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

The KLDE will absolutely rev that high. Hilariously enough, people use parts from the KLDE valvetrain in their KLZEs in order to rev high often and NOT drop a valve.

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? I wouldn't worry about a rotary using a quart of oil every 1000 miles or so.

I thought people were getting 200+hp out of a 12a? Even if you double the rated displacement, you're still only at 2.2 litres.

Sure, it's not that impressive stock i guess.

A guy I knew in high school had a SBC which redlined at 9.5k in his DD Nova.

My VQ35HR winds out to 7500 rpm...

I hear some get it up higher, though.

I've revved my D16A6 to 8k several times. It's not making power there but it does it.

1988RedT2 wrote: 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 engineers who knew that certain things were not worth the effort for super high volumes and it was ok to let a small, insignificant Japanese company have the technology and use their research dollars on it.

FYP.

Seriously, to label a company as not being forward looking because they bailed on a technology that has major weaknesses but has a few cool advantages is not right. I'm sure GM knew they could make it work, but at what cost, and at what benefit? Why do people think that we make cars for the benefit of enthusiests only? We make cars to make money. If we can make money via enthusiests or cool tech- fine. But doing tech for the sake of tech is expensive and generally bad for business. Bean counters have their place, as much as most of you hate them.

Mazda, OTOH, needed something to set it apart from everyone else- so the Wankel was a perfect fit. Otherwise, ALL of the iterations of the RX would have been normal, mundane cars from Japan. Outside of the rotary, nothing on any RX was that unique at the time of introduction.

The 6g72 in my 3000gt redlines at 7000 with around a 7250 limiter. They can rev out close to 8000rpm on stock stuff and with a few upgrades up to about 9000rpm.

alfadriver wrote: Seriously, to label a company as not being forward looking because they bailed on a technology that has major weaknesses but has a few cool advantages is not right. I'm sure GM knew they could make it work, but at what cost, and at what benefit? Why do people think that we make cars for the benefit of enthusiests only? We make cars to make money. If we can make money via enthusiests or cool tech- fine. But doing tech for the sake of tech is expensive and generally bad for business. Bean counters have their place, as much as most of you hate them. Mazda, OTOH, needed something to set it apart from everyone else- so the Wankel was a perfect fit. Otherwise, ALL of the iterations of the RX would have been normal, mundane cars from Japan. Outside of the rotary, nothing on any RX was that unique at the time of introduction.

Obviously, you're right. The brilliant leadership at GM has led them to a position of financial strength and global supremacy. Their relentless pursuit of engineering excellence and innovation is noteworthy. Other companies may build boring cars that fall apart, but GM? Never!

/sarcasm

mndsm wrote: 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.

When you get RPM over 8500, engine life is measured in hours.

When you get it over 10k, it's measured in minutes (or number of drag runs).

RPM ruins what now?

Knurled wrote:

mndsm wrote: 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.

When you get RPM over 8500, engine life is measured in hours.

When you get it over 10k, it's measured in minutes (or number of drag runs).

RPM ruins what now?

Looks like my motor is lasting forever. I've tried many a time, but it just won't go over 6000.

1988RedT2 wrote: Obviously, you're right. The brilliant leadership at GM has led them to a position of financial strength and global supremacy. Their relentless pursuit of engineering excellence and innovation is noteworthy. Other companies may build boring cars that fall apart, but GM? Never! /sarcasm

Uh, had it not been for Ford, Mazda would have ceased to exist probably around 1981. Just sayin.

I never said that GM was brilliant, but how about Toyota- who has this glorious reputation, or BMW, or ANYONE ELSE? GM dropped it for good reasons, Mazda accepted the weaknesses, whereas every other OE in the world has not.

And as it stands today, GM was right.

Had Mazda spend the billions they spent on the Rotary on something else, how then would they have changed their position?

Outside of the rotary, name one significant piece of technology that has come out of Hiroshima. I surely can't think of one. Honda did the CVCC engines, which developed into a continuous 4 cyl path. Toyota developed their own series hybrids (which currently easily outsells all of the rotaries being sold), heck, even Mitsubishi was first to market with direct injection. Hmmmm.

Bash GM all you want, but when their small block V8, that was developed at the same time as their rotoary research was going on, lasts for as long as it has, I think it's pretty clear they chose well on that one.

I wanna play i wanna play!!!!!!!!

My 20 year old mazda has oscillating center air vents!!!!!

In reply to 93celicaGT2:

And I have been waiting for 20 years for those things to catch on. They rule.

93celicaGT2 wrote: I wanna play i wanna play!!!!!!!! My 20 year old mazda has oscillating center air vents!!!!!

Haha. My '89 626 had those. There's some Mazda technical innovation for ya! Take that, alfadriver!

1988RedT2 wrote:

93celicaGT2 wrote: I wanna play i wanna play!!!!!!!! My 20 year old mazda has oscillating center air vents!!!!!

Haha. My '89 626 had those. There's some Mazda technical innovation for ya! Take that, alfadriver!

ha- our '83 626 has them!!!11!

I also have:

A factory subwoofer. WOOT WOOT!!!!

And:

A remote electronically adjustable suspension. WOOT WOOT WOOT!!!!

I would also like to present THE MIATA as a significant piece of technology that has come out of Hiroshima. Your honor, this case is CLOSED. Mazda rules.

alfadriver wrote: Bash GM all you want, but when their small block V8, that was developed at the same time as their rotoary research was going on, lasts for as long as it has, I think it's pretty clear they chose well on that one.

Yeah, last I checked the SBC was introduced in 1955 with all its pushrod sophistication. Sure, it works. And I own one. It makes a good engine for a truck. But there's something magical about the rotary engine, and I'm glad that Mazda stuck with it. I've done my best to show them my support--I currently own three Mazdas.

And I've never had to make a major repair on any of them, least of all a major repair before I finished paying it off. Can't say that for the GM product I bought....

Well, I think we've about hashed this out enough. I'm done!

Back to the original topic now:

What about bike engines? 16,500 rpm

93celicaGT2 wrote:

bigbens6 wrote: 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

The KLDE will absolutely rev that high. Hilariously enough, people use parts from the KLDE valvetrain in their KLZEs in order to rev high often and NOT drop a valve.

I had to go check an old picture of my car but it did indeed have a 7000rpm red line, it also revved past the red line to a limiter near 7500. Factory tach could be the issue there, but there is still no doubting the awesome sound it made running hard.

1988RedT2 wrote: Yeah, last I checked the SBC was introduced in 1955 with all its pushrod sophistication. Sure, it works. And I own one. It makes a good engine for a truck. But there's something magical about the rotary engine, and I'm glad that Mazda stuck with it. I've done my best to show them my support--I currently own three Mazdas.

We-e-elll.... the SBC underwent a couple important changes in the early 60's-ish, was given a decently major redesign in 1986, and production stopped around 1999. If the current GenIII engines are "small block Chevys" then a Honda K24 is just a larger CVCC.

And don't knock the SBC for innovation... it was the first to have pedestal rockers oiled through the pushrods and the first to have an integral intake manifold/water manifold/valley cover. All what we'd consider to be normal practice. The Pontiac V8 beat the SBC by a few months for pedestal rockers but they were initially lubed like a shaft rocker. The Pontiac did, however, beat the LT1 (which isn't, technically, an "SBC") for reverse-flow cooling by 40-odd years.

The Mazda engine, aside from playing with displacement, seal composition and width, and moving some water seals around, was essentially unchanged from 1967 to 2002. The RX-8's engine is more of the same, with a different exhaust port placement. A few parts are still interchangeable with the original L10A.

Mind you, I have never owned any GM product and have just about zero inclination to, and I just got done driving my injected bridge-ported RX-7 home from the 1320 dyno. I just calls 'em like I sees 'em.

tuna55 wrote: RPM is overrated, and, as previously stated, ruins motors.

RPM's don't ruin motors. That statement makes no sense.

Your engine has RPM's. =) They all do. RPM's make power.

I'm sure you meant HIGH RPM's ruin motors, but I'd disagree with that to.

Poorly machine motors ruin themselves, high RPM's just ruins them faster.

Mine purs at 9k no problem (S2K).

I've always figured high revving the engine a lot kills the rings on your pistons.

I've seen way too many imports blowing the blue smoke out their exhaust outlets. Usually 4g63 Eclipseseses, Civics, and Integras.

But Dodge K-cars and Caravans don't count, I think they came factory new burning oil in the combustion chambers.

In reply to Knurled:

Unless it is a rotary, in which case you can run at 8500 RPMs for a good long while.

93celicaGT2 wrote: I would also like to present THE MIATA as a significant piece of technology that has come out of Hiroshima. Your honor, this case is CLOSED. Mazda rules.

Wait what?!? Isn't that just a copy of the Lotus Elan? Hethel. FTW?

That would be the mitsu 3.0L thank you.( POS of an engine)

AquaHusky wrote: But Dodge K-cars and Caravans don't count, I think they came factory new burning oil in the combustion chambers.

Besides when the 2.2/2.5 let the head gasket that is coolant (white)

Paul B