Originally Posted by EJ25RUN
The only races I've watched with rotaries and pistons motors, the rotary cars dropped back about 5 places when the track went uphill![]()
Originally Posted by EJ25RUN
The only races I've watched with rotaries and pistons motors, the rotary cars dropped back about 5 places when the track went uphill![]()
'92 C2500 6.5 Turbo Diesel | '96 240sx
Originally Posted by EJ25RUN
there are also hundreds of capable rotary builders, even in the state of GA (we are home to Downing after all)....though most will be found in the aviation field. Rotaries are very popular in small prop type personal aircrafts.
-Super cool .gif TO UNBAN JITB, JM, Buttons AND NEMISIS here-
Is that why them bishes always crashin?Originally Posted by Sport1.3
'92 C2500 6.5 Turbo Diesel | '96 240sx
I do like LS swapped FD's...
It's just a 2JZ swapped FD seems weird.
I know people and have heard of cars with rotaries running for a LONG time if you take care of them PROPERLLY.
well when i see another japanesse car win le mans ill give them respect
until then mazda > all others
I'm not gonna respond cause you obviously haven't a clue, do you really not know anything about racing or are you just being ignorant?Originally Posted by cgEvan
lol my thought as well.Originally Posted by EJ25RUN
Nissan, Toyota, and Honda all spent millions and millions and Mazda won with a car that wasn't even in the highest class.Originally Posted by HypnoToad
i guess cause rotary is worthlessOriginally Posted by EJ25RUN
![]()
Originally Posted by EJ25RUN
Like I said, the races I've seen with both rotary cars and piston cars, the rotaries always dropped back when they had to go uphill. The commentator (sp?) said something to the effect of, "if you pay attention when the track goes uphill, you will notice the rotary powered cars always lose a couple places."
I don't know what is ignorant about anything I said, except the plane crashing comment... but I was joking with that.
'92 C2500 6.5 Turbo Diesel | '96 240sx
Sauber-Mercedes, Jaguar, Peugeot, Kremer Porsche, all lost to the 787BOriginally Posted by HypnoToad
then watch what i posted in previous post. That is a 1000 hp Mercedes C11Originally Posted by cgEvan
And here is a link to everyone else that lost.
http://www.racingsportscars.com/phot...-23-photo.html
The Norton TT F1 champs
PETE HALSMER GTU Champion
![]()
I would, but a rotary motor with 100k+ miles would be faster than my internet.Originally Posted by EJ25RUN
![]()
'92 C2500 6.5 Turbo Diesel | '96 240sx
Originally Posted by cgEvan
oh burn! lol
they arent horrible in stock classes....i just have a personal grudge against them being a previous owner. Though i still like the cars
-Super cool .gif TO UNBAN JITB, JM, Buttons AND NEMISIS here-
2008 Daytona 24 hour GT class winner.Originally Posted by cgEvan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xk7hcjX8fVU
![]()
The Renesis motor from the Rx-8 was definitely a fail. Sure the 7 bolt has its fualts, but which motor doesn't. The 6 bolt 4G63 however, was probably the best 4 cylinder turbo motor ever built.Originally Posted by EJ25RUN
And then there is this car that can do oh so much with 300hp.
RE Amemiya Racing Asparadrink Mazda RX-7 FD3S
The 2006 GT300 champion car and winner of round 1 in 2008.
Originally Posted by EJ25RUN
What about the GT500 class![]()
-Super cool .gif TO UNBAN JITB, JM, Buttons AND NEMISIS here-
I'll explain to you why it wasn;t a fail. Compare it to the N/A 13b that came before it. Compare how much worse the emissions were from that engine to the Renesis. Why else did it win so many awards.Originally Posted by Ronsam2006
i hate to quote wiki but......
These and other innovative technologies allow the Renesis to achieve 49% higher output and dramatically reduced fuel consumption and emissions (the RX-8 meets LEV-II). It won International Engine of the Year and Best New Engine awards 2003 and also holds the "2.5 to 3 litre" size award for 2003 and 2004, where it is considered a 2.60 L engine. Finally, it was on the Ward's 10 Best Engines list for 2004 and 2005.
The Renesis has also been adapted for a dual-fuel use, allowing it to run either on gasoline or hydrogen.
4G63 is a turbo motor so efficiency cant be compared to an N/A motor. And Honda's F22c is still the highest HP/Liter ever on that front.
f*CK YOU HATERS~!!!!
BAHAHHAHAHHAA
*points to his signature*
You are smart enough to know that the GT500 class was created to let the manufactures have a field to compete with unlimited budgets. That is why 2008 GT500 class cars have superior Aero to ACO/FIA GT1 class race cars and the only thing faster around a race track than a GT500 car with closed fenders is a prototype. A tuner like RE Amemiya can't afford a 100 million a year budget on a racing sport. That is why GT300 is fought amongst high end tuner companies.Originally Posted by Sport1.3
I mean.....remember my front engined NSX prototype Honda is testing? And to those that say, "we'll isn't MR better weight distribution" go read the GT500 rule book to understand.
![]()
Originally Posted by EJ25RUN
![]()
no factory backing huh?
remember not even too long ago Toyota was using heavily modified 3sgte's instead of the 6 cylinders......they were retarded fast......then led to a custom 1 off v8 specifically made for the series....and again Domination......its insane the steps they take and or are allowed to take in that series.....but its still insanely competitive and fun to watch![]()
-Super cool .gif TO UNBAN JITB, JM, Buttons AND NEMISIS here-
Don't run your mouth.Originally Posted by cgEvan
I get 32 mpg hwy, make 330whp with the stock turbo on a streetport, and haven't had any issues no matter how hard I beat on it.
That plus colonwrecking new DSM people that don't know who I am am is ****ing funny.
Originally Posted by 1439/2000
have fun with your carbon lock see ya in 6 months![]()
i kid, i wouldnt wish that on anyone
-Super cool .gif TO UNBAN JITB, JM, Buttons AND NEMISIS here-
That motor went in to a Front engine rear drive celica which has now become a mid engined IS-F...notice the air scoop on roof and doors.Originally Posted by Sport1.3
The GTR is also running a 4.5L V8 with a F/R setup
the "current" NSX uses a longitudinal Mugen made C32 and new to the series BMW has shoehorned a V8 into a Z4
In 2008, im most happy that a TRUE 4WD car has finally won a race since the R34 dropped the RB26 and 4WD for a 3.0tt v6 with F/R.
Symmetric AWD at that.![]()
![]()
Last edited by EJ25RUN; 09-11-2008 at 05:19 PM.
Originally Posted by PURE jdm
![]()
![]()
![]()
IA Rules doesn't allow these images in sigs
- IA Mgmt
good info/pics![]()
-Super cool .gif TO UNBAN JITB, JM, Buttons AND NEMISIS here-
I've probably owned more rotarys than anyone else on this board. I've had several that made over 200K without any engine problems. Out of all of them, one one motor has blown, and that was at the track, and due to my fault. It still drive home from Moroso - and was driving around a month later without a rebuild. Rotarys are reliable if you know how to maintain them.
2JZs are also good reliable motors, but I prefer to keep them in Supras. There is nothing wrong with the Supra either, it's just a different shell.
What he said.Originally Posted by Sport1.3
maybe they want to be somewhat unique n get on a magazine or something
....True ////OFFSET\\\\
Yeah you are smartOriginally Posted by Nick McCardle
![]()
That seems to be the trend i guess. Am i the only one that thinks motor swaps should atleast come from the same car brand.Originally Posted by Z33_kid
Anybody?
It depends on how you look at it. Some people will like the chassis of a car, but maybe their favorite motor to work with comes from a different car brand. You can't really speak for everyone on this issue, some people will have legitimate reasons for doing these kinds of swaps. Like this guy, maybe he doesn't prefer a rotary engine, but loves the FD chassis, which happens to be arguably the best to ever come out of Japan. And the 2jz, you can't really argue with that motor except for the weight issue. It's complicated, but it really depends on what the owner wants and I think that's all that matters. What I think the best example for this is Jeeps. A Chevy V8 swap is extremely common, and also very easy to do. The inline 6 can only do so much, and the only other options are from the old CJ's and modern GC's, and those V8's don't compare to the Chevy 350 as far as reliability and ease of modification are concerned.Originally Posted by EJ25RUN
Basically a kit car mindframe.Originally Posted by alpine_xj
I don't know if that's an insult, but regardless I would love to built a kit car some day if I ever have the time and money.Originally Posted by EJ25RUN
So what are the NA Rx-7s good for? Saying they have low displacement along with low HP tied with horrible gas mileage?Originally Posted by EJ25RUN
Not necessarily. You add a 1 more rotor and have a NA motor with 450hp (20b) or add add a 2nd rotor (r26b) and you are north of 600hp. Lightly built and tuned obviously.Originally Posted by Ronsam2006
I guessing the way you see hp and performance, yes a 1.2 or a 1.3 N/A rotary are just not good enough.
Originally Posted by EJ25RUN
Correct me if I'm wrong, because well, I know nothing of rotaries, but aren't multiple rotor motors pretty large... like stuffing an inline 6 in or something?
'92 C2500 6.5 Turbo Diesel | '96 240sx
lsx in a rx is > that all other motors put in it.. and dont give me weight bs, the ls is an aluminum motor and is lighter that the stock equipment and they have kits to bolt it right in.
i have seen a rotary in a chevelle...and a nova...and the mustang with the rb from 3fast and furious...seems anything goes now days...