2nd Generation Specific 1986-1992 Discussion

Scc Gots Me Confoozled

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-20-2003 | 07:25 PM
  #1  
foopy's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 181
Default

in march's Sports Compact Car magazine, they got this article on FD's.



my question is on a specific sentence that appears in the 3rd paragraph (for those of you that have the mag)



taken verbatim:



"The car's twin sequential 13B churned out 255hp from the same 2.6 liters (or 1.3 if you prefer convention over logic) that made 135hp in the first generation car."



my question is, what da hell is the writer talkin about 2.6 liter or 1.3 liters if you prefer convention over logic??



is he saying that the car is really 2.6 liters? maybe i missed a memo but i thought the displacement on rx7's was 1298cc (or thereabouts, too much drinking lately, memory gone to ****)



in a related note, on the last page the mag features this crazy SUPER stretch limo seven, looks crazy. i'll try to find a pic.
Old 02-20-2003 | 07:26 PM
  #2  
vosko's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,839
From: NJ
Default

the 1.3L rotary makes as much power as a 2.6L piston engine.... that is what they mean
Old 02-20-2003 | 07:28 PM
  #3  
foopy's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 181
Default

thats a retarded conversion. its like saying a space rocket makes as much power as a 8million liter engine.
Old 02-20-2003 | 07:32 PM
  #4  
foopy's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 181
Default

eh you've probably all seen this. but for those of you that havent: super stretch limo seven.

Old 02-20-2003 | 07:34 PM
  #5  
75 Repu's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,848
From: Mike is a Liar!
Default

the piston lovers are always trying to look for a way to put the rotary in a higher class, because liter to liter it is definately gonna win...
Old 02-20-2003 | 07:39 PM
  #6  
Apex13B's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,679
From: Colorado Springs
Default

it always wins..it is superior!
Old 02-20-2003 | 07:49 PM
  #7  
Erik's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 458
From: New Jersey YO!
Default

I think the conversion comes from comparing CFM's of displacement between the rotary and piston...to put them on equal terms perhaps?



Or someway forming a relationship between the cyclical motion of the rotary to that of the more linear motion of a piston...



I have a few Euro mag reviews of the TurboII and they are all listed as 2.6L as well...
Old 02-20-2003 | 07:51 PM
  #8  
Jerk_Racer's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 602
From: Okinawa, Japan
Default

Many European sources seem to say that it's 2.6 liters. Or at least it seems that way to me.
Old 02-20-2003 | 09:21 PM
  #9  
j9fd3s's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 22,465
From: California
Default

if you compare volume of firing chambers per rotation the 13b rotary will fire its full 1308cc's, while a piston engine will fire half of its displacement.



mike
Old 02-20-2003 | 10:25 PM
  #10  
R45's Avatar
R45
Member
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 59
From: Portland, OR
Default

I think that the mag. was referring to how the rotary is class in races. They measure one rotors displacment on a single face, times it by two, for two rotors and then times two. This is to put the rotary in a more equal class with pistons. Because they know that a rotary will kill pistons any day all day long. :twisted:










All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:17 AM.