RX8 engine - 1.3 or 2.6 Litre ?

[Mustang]

Does the RX8 count as a 1.3L because when i was looking on my other forum i found this

this was the original question

Originally Posted by ORIGINAL QUESTION ON THREAD I WAS LOOKING AT

This car is the best i ever seen! And 1.3L rotary engine one of the most powerful in the world!! New Ford Mustang GT produsing only 65hp per 1 litter. Ferrari 360 Modena produsing 111hp per 1 litter. BMW M3 have 104 hp per litter. Lamborghini Gallardo- 100 horses per litter. Lamborghini Murcielago 93hp per litter. MAZDA RX8 produsing 149 horse powers per 1 litter!!!!!!! what u think about that!!!! If that engine was same size as Lamborghini Murcielago (6.2L) it will produse 923hp but Murcielago have only 580hp!!! THIS CAR IS THE BEST!!! Anybody know any car that can beat RX8 Hp per litter with out any upgrades?

and this is the answer that it recieved

Originally Posted by WWW.TREMEK.COM

they rate it at 1.3 liters but in actuallity it is more than that. Regardless of what you think the displacment is, the fact is the "measured' displacment is 1.3 liters. Both rotors (when fired) will only ignite 1.3 liters of mixture at any given time. Guess what Sherlock... the other face still has to wait its turn to produce power. It is true that the engine will consume 2.6 liter of air in "2" rotations of its eccentric shaft, there for it IS 2.6 liters. SWEET.... so since only 1/2 of a 03 cobra's pistons actually "fire" in one revolution, they have ~2.3 liters of displacement. They have 390 HP so that would be what? 169.5 HP per liter So face it your rotary sucks, the whole engine is 2.6 liters and just because the whole 2 rotors arent firing doesn't mean it is only 1.3 liters

does this really mean that the Rotary engine is a 2.6 ?

[Renesis]

http://www.rx7.com/techarticles_displacement.html

[Renesis]

and another...

"The SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) defined way of measuring the displacement of a rotary is to measure the difference in volume of the combustion chamber between when it is at its largest and smallest. Since each rotor has three of these chambers and there is one combustion event per rotation of the eccentric shaft, a 1.3 liter rotary would burn 1.3 liters of fuel and air per eccentric shaft rotation. A 2.6 liter reciprocating engine would burn this same amount. This confuses some people and makes them claim that rotary engines have twice the displacement their manufacturers claim they have. There is not right or wrong in this case. Rotary engines are different from reciprocating engines, so of course they need to be treated differently."
(http://www.louisville.edu/~asjobs01/...rd_report.html)

[Mustang]

ok thanks alot

[ThoughtlessX8]

Just tell the guy his Cobra with all 169.5hp/litre is still a Ford piece of shit and I'd much rather an RX-7/8 any day of any week of any year EVER!!! Ford Cobras are still piles of shit.

[SIMPLETON]

how does this work. Math has failed me many tomes in life, this is 1 of them

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by ThoughtlessX8

Just tell the guy his Cobra with all 169.5hp/litre is still a Ford piece of shit and I'd much rather an RX-7/8 any day of any week of any year EVER!!! Ford Cobras are still piles of shit.

hmn lets see that ford piece of "shit" also make the mustang, GT and what the hell is wrong with the cobra,

The mustang set the trend for a new era of muscle cars in the 60's and was the biggest selling car of its time in america

the GT has been designed from the GT40 which if i remember correctly won Le-mans on a number of occasions

the cobra also did that when they got the daytona version sorted, and BEAT ferrari

oh and if ford are so shit then why are they at the top of the WRC and have been for many years and this is one of the toughest challenges for cars. not many could stand what these cars go through.

Now theat they have braught these three cars back i think it is amazing and ford have done an excelent job with them.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by SIMPLETON

how does this work. Math has failed me many tomes in life, this is 1 of them

haha that has either been tinkered with no photoshop or there was a slight malfunciton with the forum for a second, it is working now

[Ferrari Tifosi]

Originally Posted by mustang123

hmn lets see that ford piece of "shit" also make the mustang, GT and what the hell is wrong with the cobra,

The mustang set the trend for a new era of muscle cars in the 60's and was the biggest selling car of its time in america

the GT has been designed from the GT40 which if i remember correctly won Le-mans on a number of occasions

the cobra also did that when they got the daytona version sorted, and BEAT ferrari

oh and if ford are so shit then why are they at the top of the WRC and have been for many years and this is one of the toughest challenges for cars. not many could stand what these cars go through.

Now theat they have braught these three cars back i think it is amazing and ford have done an excelent job with them.

I believe he was referring to the Mustang Cobra, not the Shelby Cobra which only has a Ford engine, the car in whole is NOT a Ford. Its Chassis is from AC, and it was all put together by Carroll Shelby.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by Ferrari Tifosi

I believe he was referring to the Mustang Cobra, not the Shelby Cobra which only has a Ford engine, the car in whole is NOT a Ford. Its Chassis is from AC, and it was all put together by Carroll Shelby.

still i dont think that there is anything wrong with the mustang cobra, and if you are saying that, that cobra isnt a proper ford does that mean that the new one isnt too because it was produced with Shelby.

And another thing is ford are so shit then, why is aston martin so good, the DB7 had the same chassis as the old jag x-type i think and that chassis came from the ford mondeo, sure Aston might have changed to a newly designed chassis for the DB9 but that is only because they have Ford money and they wouldnt be getting that money if ford were shit

[Egg Nog]

Most people need to realise that hp/litre is an irrelevent and technically useless statistic, unless of course there is a limit on displacement.

A more important thing to look at is power in relation to efficiency and emissions. In this respect, rotaries are nothing to get worked up about. They do have the "wow" factor, though...

[Ferrari Tifosi]

Originally Posted by Egg Nog

Most people need to realise that hp/litre is an irrelevent and technically useless statistic, unless of course there is a limit on displacement.

A more important thing to look at is power in relation to efficiency and emissions. In this respect, rotaries are nothing to get worked up about. They do have the "wow" factor, though...

Well, not really. If you can make more hp/liter, then in turn you can make a smaller engine that in turn weighs less and improves performance.

Also rotaries are great, 3 MOVING PARTS = a hell of a lot better than 100 + on a standard reciprocating piston engine. Less chance a mechanical failure.

[Renesis]

Originally Posted by Egg Nog

Most people need to realise that hp/litre is an irrelevent and technically useless statistic, unless of course there is a limit on displacement.

A more important thing to look at is power in relation to efficiency and emissions. In this respect, rotaries are nothing to get worked up about. They do have the "wow" factor, though...

uh yeah. rotaries are preeety lousy when it comes to power efficiency, and im not going to deny this.

but arent we forgetting that weight is in fact an issue?
especially when someone is a lightweight car enthusiast (and im not being critical)
the rotary creates excellent power considering its weight and size. So if you wanted a nimble car that could turn on a dime and weighs like a feather, wouldnt you maybe want a lightweight engine? like a rotary?

so when you think about rotaries, power isnt really the focus, but maybe weight and size efficiency is


i really wish someone would create an extremely lightweight rotary sportscar, not like the rx8, but maybe built with carbon and a mid-engine design. Now that would be a car meant for the backroads, and my garage.

[Ferrari Tifosi]

Originally Posted by mustang123

still i dont think that there is anything wrong with the mustang cobra, and if you are saying that, that cobra isnt a proper ford does that mean that the new one isnt too because it was produced with Shelby.

And another thing is ford are so shit then, why is aston martin so good, the DB7 had the same chassis as the old jag x-type i think and that chassis came from the ford mondeo, sure Aston might have changed to a newly designed chassis for the DB9 but that is only because they have Ford money and they wouldnt be getting that money if ford were shit

All I was saying is the with the original Cobra, the extent of Ford in it was the engine, which they didn't even develop specifically for that car. Ford deserves no credit for the ORIGINAL Shelby Cobra. Not saying I dislike ford, in fact I like them a lot.

[Renesis]

Originally Posted by Ferrari Tifosi

Well, not really. If you can make more hp/liter, then in turn you can make a smaller engine that in turn weighs less and improves performance.

Also rotaries are great, 3 MOVING PARTS = a hell of a lot better than 100 + on a standard reciprocating piston engine. Less chance a mechanical failure.

oh boy, here we go again
theory versus reality: rotaries arent as reliable as you think
(look into past threads if you dont believe)