The Subaru SVX World Network   SVX Network Forums
Live Chat!
SVX or Subaru Links
Old Lockers
Photo Post
How-To Documents
Message Archive
SVX Shop Search
IRC users:

Go Back   The Subaru SVX World Network > SVX Main Forums > Not Exactly SVX

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16  
Old 11-16-2004, 01:25 PM
Whoru465's Avatar
Whoru465 Whoru465 is offline
The name's...
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Boston, Ma
Posts: 356
Send a message via AIM to Whoru465
I seem to remember reading somewhere that the original Mazda rotary engines suffered from "Acute Rotor Wear" and thats why they were discontinued for a while....They also had trouble making them meet smog regulations as far as I recall... But I always thought it was a cool concept.
__________________
-Mike

'92 Pearl LS-L (sans Spoiler) #0993 Mfg. 5/91

"It says here, 'Breakfast any time'...
That's right...
In that case, I'll have the pancakes in the Age of Enlightenment..."
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-16-2004, 01:29 PM
Treppiede Treppiede is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 254
Upnygimp, Landshark and Pavanbabut, I certainly see your point and agree with it, a perfect example is the new Cobra which comes factory with high-300 horses (supercharged) and with a pulley, intake and exhaust will easily produce low-mid 400s. A force-induced 4-banger like the EVO, STi or SRT-4 will NOT make in excess of 400 horses with only a boost controller (similar to pulley for supercharger), intake and exhaust.

I guess that the point I was trying to make is that size of the engine alone won't determine the power of the powerplant, since a 2.0l 4-banger like the revised 4G63 that powers the EVO 8 can handle in excess of 500whp on its stock bottom end.

Regards,

Walter
__________________
1995 SVX Green - now 5spd! ..::|SOLD|::..
1991 Talon TSi AWD (~400 whp pump gas)
1993 Civic CX Hatch (daily driver)
1999 Ducati 748S (built 996 engine)
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-16-2004, 01:33 PM
upnygimp's Avatar
upnygimp upnygimp is offline
Unstoppable
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Knox, NY
Posts: 809
Re: Re: Re: wht makes big difference between 1.5l and 3.3L

Quote:
Originally posted by huck369


I'm not saying they are easier to blow up, but that thier sealing edges(as they don't have rings) wear out before a comparable set of rings on a piston engine will, or basicaly, you can get more miles out of a piston engine before it need to be overhauled....and it's harder to find anyone that will work on a Rotary engine to boot.....

I like the rotary engine, but was just bringing up some of the differences he was asking about...
Well, thats only half true. If his friend had a FB or FC RX7, those were pretty bulletproof having the same lifespan of a regular piston engine. It was the FDs that blow up every 60k miles, due to the stress put on the engine by the twin turbos.
__________________
2008 Mazdaspeed3 GT
1985 Toyota MR2 (10 yr project)

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
-George Carlin
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-16-2004, 01:35 PM
pavanbabut's Avatar
pavanbabut pavanbabut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Fremont. CA
Posts: 1,269
Send a message via MSN to pavanbabut Send a message via Yahoo to pavanbabut
Quote:
Originally posted by Treppiede
Upnygimp, Landshark and Pavanbabut, I certainly see your point and agree with it, a perfect example is the new Cobra which comes factory with high-300 horses (supercharged) and with a pulley, intake and exhaust will easily produce low-mid 400s. A force-induced 4-banger like the EVO, STi or SRT-4 will NOT make in excess of 400 horses with only a boost controller (similar to pulley for supercharger), intake and exhaust.

I guess that the point I was trying to make is that size of the engine alone won't determine the power of the powerplant, since a 2.0l 4-banger like the revised 4G63 that powers the EVO 8 can handle in excess of 500whp on its stock bottom end.

Regards,

Walter
ok... i got ur point in the begining..... but atlast wht will u conclude ont he performance of those two types.... please tell me overall... dont tell me like "if we consider tht this will be better or if we consider tht tht will be better..." please gimme an exact overall answer.

Thanks,
Pavan.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-16-2004, 01:42 PM
pavanbabut's Avatar
pavanbabut pavanbabut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Fremont. CA
Posts: 1,269
Send a message via MSN to pavanbabut Send a message via Yahoo to pavanbabut
Re: Re: Re: Re: wht makes big difference between 1.5l and 3.3L

Quote:
Originally posted by upnygimp


Well, thats only half true. If his friend had a FB or FC RX7, those were pretty bulletproof having the same lifespan of a regular piston engine. It was the FDs that blow up every 60k miles, due to the stress put on the engine by the twin turbos.
yeah one of my friends is having eclipse and the other is having mazda MX-5

Pavan.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-16-2004, 01:45 PM
pavanbabut's Avatar
pavanbabut pavanbabut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Fremont. CA
Posts: 1,269
Send a message via MSN to pavanbabut Send a message via Yahoo to pavanbabut
Hey guys,
U can call me as Pavan or by Babu (my pet name).....

pvanbabut is part of my name... anyway u can't call me with my full name,,, and i bet tht... if u want to try this is my full name...

Naga Siva Kesava Pavan Kumar Babu Tiruveedhula.

My SSN name is Pavan Kumar N Tiruveedhula.

Pavan.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-16-2004, 01:57 PM
upnygimp's Avatar
upnygimp upnygimp is offline
Unstoppable
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Knox, NY
Posts: 809
Quote:
Originally posted by Treppiede
Upnygimp, Landshark and Pavanbabut, I certainly see your point and agree with it, a perfect example is the new Cobra which comes factory with high-300 horses (supercharged) and with a pulley, intake and exhaust will easily produce low-mid 400s. A force-induced 4-banger like the EVO, STi or SRT-4 will NOT make in excess of 400 horses with only a boost controller (similar to pulley for supercharger), intake and exhaust.

I guess that the point I was trying to make is that size of the engine alone won't determine the power of the powerplant, since a 2.0l 4-banger like the revised 4G63 that powers the EVO 8 can handle in excess of 500whp on its stock bottom end.

Regards,

Walter
Well yes, it does have a lot to do with design what the engine can take. But no replacement for displacement does hold true. Thats just how it is. More displacement means more air and fuel and that means more power.
__________________
2008 Mazdaspeed3 GT
1985 Toyota MR2 (10 yr project)

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
-George Carlin
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-16-2004, 02:52 PM
Earthworm's Avatar
Earthworm Earthworm is offline
Meow!
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Posts: 11,957
Send a message via ICQ to Earthworm Send a message via AIM to Earthworm Send a message via MSN to Earthworm Send a message via Yahoo to Earthworm Send a message via Skype™ to Earthworm
Quote:
Originally posted by huck369
The main differance between the RX-8's 1.5L and the SVX's 3.3L is the fact that the RX-8 has a rotary engine, NOT a piston engine like most cars, so in a rotary engine the 1.5, is more like a 4.5 piston engine....so that why they get more power from less liters....but they won't hold up near as well as a piston engine....
Actually the RX8 uses a 2 rotor design...not 3. The rotary would be comparable to a 3.0L engine.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-16-2004, 03:09 PM
Matthewmongan's Avatar
Matthewmongan Matthewmongan is offline
no limitation as limitation
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Original Northwood, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Posts: 1,794
what i find intresting and sad is micro rotory engines. rotary engines on a microscopic level powered by hydrogen canpower a cell phone for its entire life at a size comparible to a watch batery. they have been experimenting with the application at mit for quite some time. however personaly i feel that the large scale rotary engine in the rx line is largly novelty. eventough the new genoration has made huge hp gains by modifying the placement of the intake exaust ports i dont think its a fiesable large scale application. turbines however are a nother story those things will run forever, are fuel efficent, compatible will most forms of combustible fuels and small enough for a bike powerful enough for a car. MTT makes some nice products as they are willing to put a turbine into anyhting
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-16-2004, 03:23 PM
pavanbabut's Avatar
pavanbabut pavanbabut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Fremont. CA
Posts: 1,269
Send a message via MSN to pavanbabut Send a message via Yahoo to pavanbabut
Re: Re: wht makes big difference between 1.5l and 3.3L

Quote:
Originally posted by Rotorflyr


Simple........1.8L
you are tooooooo smart.......

Pavan.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 11-16-2004, 11:18 PM
Tim's Avatar
Tim Tim is offline
My car's Italian, right?
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: New Brunswick, New Jersey
Posts: 3,304
Send a message via AIM to Tim
Actually I'm pretty sure a common misconception is that the 13B rotary engine has an actual displacement of 2.6L according to an article I read in Sport Compact car.

I always wanted an RX-7 with an LS1 engine.... *drool*....

Can you say haulin' ass? Hehehe
__________________
Tim
92 Liquid Silver SVX 5MT
2009 BMW Z4 (Gone)
2012 Camry V6 SE
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-18-2004, 09:22 AM
87f383's Avatar
87f383 87f383 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 207
Quote:
Originally posted by TE1221
[BI always wanted an RX-7 with an LS1 engine.... *drool*....

Can you say haulin' ass? Hehehe [/B]

Good Choice! Those damn things are fast w/ even just a stock Ls1. I'm putting and LS1/T56 into my 87 Formula 350. W/ a stock LS1 it will run high 12's.
__________________
1995 Subaru SVX
-Accel Green Filter *
-Flowmaster Exhaust
-ECU Stage 1 Chip *
-Alluminum Drive Pulley *
-Stage 1 Shift Kit
-Small Car Clear Lenses and Corners
-1997 SVX Grill
-17" X 7" Enkei Shoguns
*Thanks Dayle! (SVX Motorsports)

1987 Pontiac Formula 350
-Enough (Once I put it back together again)
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-18-2004, 09:53 AM
RobSVX
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
However, many of those Turbo 4 cyl's use N2O for getting up to speed.
The statement 'there is no replacment for displacement' does stand true for Low-End Torque'. Larger V motors do produce more torque...and that moves weight.

Personally, I think most are ridiculous. Most don't even work on their cars or even know how. Thinking a huge coffee can exhaust give them power, while the rest of the pipe is 1.5" ?
Or putting on a huge wing, that only causes drag...and if it does give downforce, it just pushes the front of the car up - where the drive wheels are ? ...and catches air ?
You've got to get both front and rear balanced, then do more then just 'slam' the car, to make it worthwhile in a curve.

Why not get a real car with rear wheel drive, that's starts with more HP anyway. Silly Craze that will hopefully die out.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-18-2004, 10:38 AM
TorG0d
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Rotary engines are by definition 2-cycle engines, so to compare displacement in a rotary with a 4-cycle engine you must double the rotary's displacement, so the 238bhp in the 1.5L RX-8 being compares to the ~230bhp of the EG33 is not 1.5L vs. 3.3L, it's actually 3.0L vs. 3.3L.

Or something to that affect.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
© 2001-2015 SVX World Network
(208)-906-1122