Uh Oh

[Super Jamie]

in fact you don't even need to tune [rotaries] to make then unreliable, fact is when compared to pistons rotorys lack well behind in reliability

what a deadset heap of shit

[Mr Revhead[RL]]

hey its simple fact! rotaries do not last as well as piston engines.

i never mentioned emissions, i mentioned fuel. lets take a typical touring car endurance race, rotary engined cars have to make more fuel stops than 2ltr turbos, thats why rotaries never win the puke 6 hour, even though theres a couple there that set fastest laps, they use too much fuel!

 

throw enough $$$ at anything and it will win le mans! an engine run hot all the time wont wear as much as one used in everyday life, thats why le mans engines seemingly do impossible kays in such a short time.

 

plenty of piston engines can run 45, i bet the rotary that does that had heap of $$$ thrown at it, as you would have to do with a pistion engine.

 

if they were so great why did every one ditch them? cause the wernt as reliable or efficiant as pistons engines.

oh and they arnt as ligth as people think either.... have you ever lifted one???

 

 

sure you can make a rotary make power, but the rebuilds are more frequent than pistons.

 

having said that if he really wants a rotor the 4/5 efi one would be the best, if he can't afford a later one.

 

whats this going into anyway? theres always the 1uz! :S

Edited April 15, 2005 by Mr Revhead

[Super Jamie]

i know you're talking but all i hear is "blah blah blah" :S

 

nobody's disputing rotaries use more fuel (especially ported ones). i can legally put a 12a in my car, i can also get my hands on a 12a cheaply, and have been offered sideplates from one of australia's most powerful bridgeports of the 90s (rainbow rotaries' pink motor if anyone knows it). but i'm not going to. because i don't want to spend 80 bucks a week just driving around doing stuff which costs me 20 bucks now

 

i will agree that earlier rotaries were unreliable pieces of shit. the only good thing about a 10a is that you can put one in a ke10. you'll recall that in their early days, piston motors had such great features as leather combuston rings, no exhaust springs, sidevalve heads, and ran massive compressions such as 3:1! 25 years into their development, you could coax a massive 100hp out of 350 cubes of v8 - feel the power. in their early days, piston motors were pieces of shit too

 

by the time the late 80s rolled around, rotary technology had improved to a level where you could get just as much life and reliability out of a rotor than a piston engine. with all the knowledge and parts and machining processes available these days, you can build a rotor which not only makes heaps of power, but will hold together against all odds. when they first came out, they did have problems, and this created alot of public sentiment that rotaries were crap. this isn't the case today, but all the old guys who saw rx2s with f@$ked seals after a few tens of thousands of km still go around saying rotaries are shit

 

i can show you a worked 4k which has done a little over 140,000km and is about ready to retire. i can show you a bridgeport 12a which is almost about to tick over 130,000km and showing no signs of slowing down. both engines would have been built about the same time. which is better now?

 

ps: try lifting a 4ag with your bare hands. f@$k that.

[Mr Revhead[RL]]

4age i have lifted by hand, doable but not reccomended!! just a lot of people claim rotaries are light, they arnt!! unless you compare them to iron block V8s!!

 

iv been around racing long enough to know whats what, fact is once you go past the size, or lack of it rotaries have few if any advantages over piston engines. and the cons really do mount up.

 

GM looked into rotaries and mercedes did the same in the early 80s. both deemed them not worthy of going any further with. as have many companies before and since.

if the car companys could find a better system than the internal combustion engine, theyd use it. but as yet no one has.

 

rotaries are an oddity, thats why people like them, for the same reason people still play with sidevalves and pushrod engines, you can make em go well, but not best :S

[Super Jamie]

GM had alot of problems with their LS1 when it came out as well. and it's not like they were trying anything new and dynamic either (like mazda were in the 70s) it's a f@$king pushrod V8!

 

does this mean LS1s are crap and a waste of time? despite the fact that the problems have now been worked out and the engines have a well publicised reputation for making big reliable power? tellya what, when you can convince the world that the Gen III V8 is a waste of time, i'll concede that rotors are a waste of time as well

 

you can start with all the guys who are running 9s in street driven Holden utes, and all the performance manufacturers (who know alot more about engines and business than you or i do) who are making bolt on performance kits for them

Edited April 16, 2005 by Super Jamie

[Mr Revhead[RL]]

how did we get onto chev V8s :S

[Super Jamie]

no retort means i win, yay i'm the biggest internet retard :S

[Mr Revhead[RL]]

sorry i saw the word "holdan" and dissolved into fits of laughter :wootjump:

 

 

 

 

ok jamie, you can be this weeks rollaclub geek :S

 

 

 

and gen 111..... HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA :)

[CUCUY]

damn.....this got quite long all the sudden......crazy, all the way up to the LS1 chevy engine....lol

[Mr Revhead[RL]]

yeah just stick a v8 in it, youll be right!

 

but seriously, whats it in???

[CUCUY]

right now...3TC.....would love a 3S beams engine with the matching 6speed from an altezza....but notm likely to find one here in the states.

[Redwarf]

and gen 111..... HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA :D

That's my living your talking about! :doublebird:

[Mr Revhead[RL]]

so youll know how leaky they are from factory? :D

 

 

no i mean what CAR is it in, not whats in the car.....

[CUCUY]

so youll know how leaky they are from factory? :D

 

 

no i mean what CAR is it in, not whats in the car.....

TE72 'rolla (1980 liftback)