Japan's rotary or America's V8 [Archive] - Ultimatecarpage.com forums

SLoppYJeeP

03-08-2006, 12:46 PM

Well look at the displacement, im not sure of the numbers here, but the GTO's v8 does have 4 if not 5 times the displacement of the rx-8. Ive driven an rx-8, and once those rotars get over 5000, the power they make is incredible, not to mention the sound and smoothness. As for reliability, i would regard any japanese car produced these days, regardless of engine type, as more reliable and better built then any american car.

rev440

03-08-2006, 01:13 PM

Slicks

03-08-2006, 01:25 PM

Rockefella

03-08-2006, 01:26 PM

The 8 in the GTO is a great motor, especially for the 30+k bargain the GTO's at anyway.

The Rotary is a descent motor, with some great power in hidden places, but there are just too many downfalls.

6speed

03-08-2006, 01:28 PM

Rotary all the way. It sounds like a Turbo without and engine at high speed, and it's compact size gives it an edge.

Slicks

03-08-2006, 01:45 PM

Zing! -> http://www.ponycars.net/rx7.htm

NSXType-R

03-08-2006, 01:54 PM

I'd go for the rotary because I'm a technology person. I like the fact that it uses a unique way to solve the problems of a normal engine. It might just be used on one or two of Mazda's lineup, but I like it much more than the V-8. If the V-8 requires brute strength and displacement to create its power. Any large displacement engine can produce power. If the V-8 was the same displacement as the rotary, I doubt it would produce as much power.

NSXType-R

03-08-2006, 01:55 PM

Just a quick suggestion- you can create a poll if you wanted to as well.

PBB

03-08-2006, 02:06 PM

Zing! -> http://www.ponycars.net/rx7.htm
I'm going to build an LS7 powered FD RX-7 after I get an STi. :D

Look at the weight distribution: 53% Front/47% Rear with the rotary and 50.5% Front/ 49.5% Rear with the LS1 and the LS1 powered car only weighed 15 pounds more! So much for the SBC haters... :p

SupraMan22

03-08-2006, 02:18 PM

Lmao Yeah american cars arent reliable at all thats why they sell 700k F150 a year vs a est 100k tacomas or less. The numbers speak for them selves
I beg to differ.

The v8 is better than the rotary basically as many have listed already. But just because i like the design and the tech in the RX8 im going to go with the rotary on this. Just cause i like the car. :p

SLoppYJeeP

03-08-2006, 02:43 PM

Of course the v8 is going to have more torque and hp then the rotary, a better comparison would be to compare a v6 engine to the rotary, or the v8 to the twin turbo rotary from the late rx-7. Just because more F150's are sold then tacomas doesnt mean that the fords are any more reliable then the toyotas. Infact, toyota's and honda's regulary have milage over 150,000k and still run perfectly. Ride in a ford with 150,000 recently? If your lucky enough you would propobly see alot of blue smoke, hear alot of rattles, and feel alot of vibrations.

PBB

03-08-2006, 02:49 PM

Ride in a ford with 150,000 recently? If your lucky enough you would propobly see alot of blue smoke, hear alot of rattles, and feel alot of vibrations.
Hah! I've ridden in a Ford with 750,000 miles on the stock longblock. Reliable as a crowbar. :p

SLoppYJeeP

03-08-2006, 03:05 PM

theres always an exception.

Slicks

03-08-2006, 03:14 PM

I'm going to build an LS7 powered FD RX-7 after I get an STi. :D

:eek: I love you!

PBB

03-08-2006, 03:16 PM

There are lots of exceptions actually...

Slicks

03-08-2006, 03:16 PM

PerfAdv

03-08-2006, 03:16 PM

Hi, Members! I was wondering if you guys could give you opinions on if a Mazda rx 8 rotary engine or a Pontiac GTO V8 was better in terms of power and speed? Which one cost less in maintenance? Thanks for reading.
Very interesting comparison. On one hand, the backbone of the American auto industry, the Chevy small-block. The other, the very obscure Wankel, which only Mazda was able to make viable. The Mazda rotary displaces 1.3 liters whereas the SBC displaces 5.7 or in the latest GTO, 6.0 liters.

The V8 makes more power and more torque as lower RPMs. The GTO engine doesn't burn oil as part of it's lubrication/sealing process, therefore you don't need to top off every couple of fill-ups. The SBC is now all aluminum so even if it is heavier it isn't a lug of rusting cast iron. The LS2 probably has a life expectancy of more than 200,000 miles without any top or bottom-end work.

The latest iteration of the venerable 13b rotary, the Renesis with side port technology is no slouch. Able to spin to 8,500 RPM with nothing more noticeable than a whir. It's greatest asset is its uniqueness, only one company makes an automotive non-IC engine and the rotary is it. The rotary burns oil, plan on topping off with a quart every other or third fill-up. The rotary is very compact and sits entirely behind the front axle. Life expectancy of the Renesis is supposed to be better than older rotaries, still it would be a miracle if it broke 200K.

Conclusion: GTO V8 is better but the Renesis is in a league of its own. Really. The best American engine is better than the least reliable Japanese engine. The real reason for the rotary continuing existence that it displays Japanese engineering mastery. No one could make the Wankel feasible except Mazda.

Juggs

03-08-2006, 03:35 PM

my dads 80's f250 has over 300k on the odo and still being driven every day. our box truck has over 200k on a 5.4 ford and is still running really strong! i didnt believe it had over 200k on it when we bought it. my friends chevy suburban is goin on 130k still runnin strong and being driven hard every day. our chrysler town and country has 240k on it and still runs good. the only car i listed there that has proper maintenence done to it is that suburban....

clutch-monkey

03-08-2006, 03:38 PM

crisis

03-08-2006, 04:00 PM

Lmao Yeah american cars arent reliable at all thats why they sell 700k F150 a year vs a est 100k tacomas or less. The numbers speak for them selves
They also sell plenty of Exploders too but no one outside America would touch them. They had to replace them in Australia with this!
http://www.ford.co.nz/futuretense_cs/ccurl/territory_NZ_hero.jpg

rev440

03-08-2006, 04:40 PM

Blitz_

03-08-2006, 05:19 PM

They also sell plenty of Exploders too but no one outside America would touch them. They had to replace them in Australia with this!
http://www.ford.co.nz/futuretense_cs/ccurl/territory_NZ_hero.jpg

hah! that so called car opens up a can of woop ass on any American Equivalent, far better than the Explorer in a vast range of aspects. Should be in America to be honest, SUV's there are shockingly ugly.

PrevlingPushrod

03-08-2006, 06:28 PM

The V8 will win in every way. They say the RX-8 will reach 9000 rpms. Well it will cost 9,000(around their) dollors to repalce the engine after you blow that dam thing up.

Matra et Alpine

03-08-2006, 06:34 PM

The V8 will win in every way. They say the RX-8 will reach 9000 rpms. Well it will cost 9,000(around their) dollors to repalce the engine after you blow that dam thing up.
But revs in a rotary aren't the same. It's not even THINKING abotu stressing anything at those revs, whereas the V8 is bouncing valve springs, stretching valve stems and bending gudgeon pins.

What is THE most reliable Le Mans engine EVER built with the highest percentage of finishes ?? :)

Blitz_

03-08-2006, 06:53 PM

the 2.0L Toyota engine that's used in my corona of course :D

win Le Mans any day of the week.....

hec16

03-08-2006, 07:35 PM

I'd go with the rotatory its more original in my opinion
________
FaeKitty (http://camslivesexy.com/cam/FaeKitty)

fpv_gtho

03-08-2006, 07:53 PM

I'd take the rotary as far as the whole package is concerned.

The RX-8's easily lighter and nimbler compared to the GTO, not to mention purpose built

PBB

03-08-2006, 08:08 PM

What is THE most reliable Le Mans engine EVER built with the highest percentage of finishes ?? :)
The 20B. :)

The rotary is a fantastic racing engine but it never has to last for longer than 24 hours. For highpower street applications, the rotary is almost worthless.

fpv_gtho

03-08-2006, 08:13 PM

Didnt they race the 26B :p

The rotary is only worthless because too many people are ignorant. Look outside the US and tuned rotaries are revered like GTR's

SupraMan22

03-08-2006, 08:16 PM

I have a chevy blazer that has 135k on the odo. A toyota supra that has roughly 100k on the odo and they both run perfect. For all the "jap cars dont run for a long time" you probably haven't owned one. I know they are reliable cars because my mom drove a Honda Accord and nothing was ever wrong with it. They are becoming popular and people dont like it. Just because toyota is selling more, just as much, or a little less as ford and gm. My family owns both a Ford F150 and also a Toyota Tacoma X-Runner. The X-runner doesnt rattle at all, even with a Xtant Subwoofer blasting constantly in it. My dads truck is silent as a mouse also. Ride is smooth as hell and very nice. My supra on the other hand rattles some, its mostly in the glove compartment and the hatch though. Which is most likely metal to metal or plastic to plastic vibration. Fixable, but most things more than 15 years old need some work. And as for the rotary thing like i said its all about power these days. And with the GTO having alot, its pretty obvious. But style and technology goes to the rotary. With out a doubt. Plus how many other cars are running rotary engines these days? Not tooooo many. :D Maybe cause replacement parts are quite a pocket burner.

SupraMan22

03-08-2006, 08:17 PM

The 20B. :)

The rotary is a fantastic racing engine but it never has to last for longer than 24 hours. For highpower street applications, the rotary is almost worthless.

lol the truest statement i've seen in this thread yet. :p

Spastik_Roach

03-08-2006, 08:19 PM

japanese cars last until ~120,000km's, and then they're on borrowed time. this is fact.
simpler, not as stressed V8's will last a lot longer.

What?

You're just talking about Rotarys right.

Our Corona is at 230,000kms and never skipped a beat ever. I've seen Coronas with almost twice that that are fine.

Pull yer head in Clutch! :D

Viper007

03-08-2006, 09:04 PM

V8 there is no question about it, I love the feeling of sitting behind a gigantic inefficient engine as opposed to the little power developed from the rx-8's rotary, but i preferably would like a bigger engine to add mods to

clutch-monkey

03-08-2006, 09:15 PM

What?

You're just talking about Rotarys right.

Our Corona is at 230,000kms and never skipped a beat ever. I've seen Coronas with almost twice that that are fine.

Pull yer head in Clutch! :D
yeah, rotaries and honda's :D:D

SLoppYJeeP

03-08-2006, 09:35 PM

If were comparing the GTO to the rx-8, what about breaking and handeling? Theres no doubt the GTO would win on the drag strip, but i think the lighter, nimpler rx would do laps around that beast on the track.
Again, although the GTO puts out 400hp compared to the RX-8's 232, the GTO does displace 6.0L, compared to the mazda's 1.3L. The per liter out put of this engine is staggering, mazda should consider producing a 3 or 4 rotor version that would out gun almost anything we Americans could throw at it.

Rockefella

03-08-2006, 10:04 PM

the GTO puts out 400hp compared to the RX-8's 232, the GTO does displace 6.0L, compared to the mazda's 1.3L. The per liter out put of this engine is staggering, mazda should consider producing a 3 or 4 rotor version that would out gun almost anything we Americans could throw at it.
Comparing power/displacement with the sbc v8 and wankel rotary is like comparing an apple and an orange. The two engines serve different purposes, and rotaries aren't known to displace 2+ liters. 3+ would be overkill in a street-legal car.

clutch-monkey

03-08-2006, 10:08 PM

eyebrows

03-09-2006, 12:24 AM

japanese cars last until ~120,000km's, and then they're on borrowed time. this is fact.
simpler, not as stressed V8's will last a lot longer.

hate to break this to you but i got a mistu L300 1990 model, with 400,000 kms on the clock and its still going stong. so much for 120,000 :D

Fleet 500

03-09-2006, 12:24 AM

The per liter out put of this engine is staggering, mazda should consider producing a 3 or 4 rotor version that would out gun almost anything we Americans could throw at it.
And have about 1/10th the longevity as the American cars. ;)

clutch-monkey

03-09-2006, 12:36 AM

hate to break this to you but i got a mistu L300 1990 model, with 400,000 kms on the clock and its still going stong. so much for 120,000 :D
fine! FINE! i admit it. i was talking out my ass :D:D
i still say rotaries and 4-bangers will die sooner than a V8 will :D

Blue Supra

03-09-2006, 12:38 AM

twin turbo the rotar and youre laughing :D

charged

03-09-2006, 12:41 AM

The LS2 shits all over the Rotary. It has a great torque curve, sounds so much better, and is not heavy by any means (385lbs dry).
The Rotary eats oil like it does gas, and form what Ive heard are not very reliable. Eat oil, where are these facts coming from Slick, sounds like a massive generalization again. A guy I know races a 13b and its heaps more reliable than some high stressed V8's that he always beats:eek: . He freshened up his motor before the Nationals, before it had raced for 4 seasons, 6 races a season of 15-20 laps plus probably 12 prcatice days . You do the math slicks. The other pic of Torana with a 650 hp 350 Chev gets freshen twice a season and it costs more to freshen a V8 than it does a rotor.

As the old saying goes V8 for towing a rotor for going:p
P.S Check out the lap times the V8 gets smoked:D
http://www.iprasa.mx.com.au/cars/sutton.htm
http://www.iprasa.mx.com.au/images/sutt%2035.jpg

http://www.iprasa.mx.com.au/cars/eldridge.htm
http://www.iprasa.mx.com.au/images/19-IMG_9157.jpg

NuclearCrap

03-09-2006, 01:01 AM

Rotary engines are only reliable and long-lasting in terms of racing. American V8s are just loud and packs a shitload of power and torque that ultimately result in unstability, most of the time. Of course an American V8 can beat a regular rotary engine, but it cannot beat a twin-turbo'ed rotary engines because those are always the real performers, RX-7 Spirit-R and 787B for example. :)

nota

03-09-2006, 02:25 AM

The GTO engine doesn't burn oil as part of it's lubrication/sealing process, therefore you don't need to top off every couple of fill-ups.
Not from what I've seen (and heard) of piston slapper oil-gobbling LS-1s, not unknown for LS-2 either. Eg 1.5 litres of Mobil 1 every 1000 miles :rolleyes:

The LS2 probably has a life expectancy of more than 200,000 miles without any top or bottom-end work.
See above, plenty of defective-quality but supposedly 'world class' LS-1s in Holdens have needed 3 rebuilds within 60k miles :eek:

Conclusion: GTO V8 is better but the Renesis is in a league of its own. Really. The best American engine is better than the least reliable Japanese engine.
See above. Conclusion: if that's the best engine America can come up with, you guys are in trouble :(

Niko_Fx

03-09-2006, 08:16 AM

Overall the V8 is better. More power/torque and more reliable without a doubt.... Yet for some reason, I would take the RX8 over the GTO :o

Slicks

03-09-2006, 08:48 AM

Eat oil, where are these facts coming from Slick, sounds like a massive generalization again. A guy I know races a 13b and its heaps more reliable than some high stressed V8's that he always beats:eek: . He freshened up his motor before the Nationals, before it had raced for 4 seasons, 6 races a season of 15-20 laps plus probably 12 prcatice days . You do the math slicks. The other pic of Torana with a 650 hp 350 Chev gets freshen twice a season and it costs more to freshen a V8 than it does a rotor.

Go to any RX7 message board and look around. Its the PCV system, and like in most performance cars oil gets through it and into the intake. In the Rotaries case, lots of oil.

As the old saying goes V8 for towing a rotor for going:p
P.S Check out the lap times the V8 gets smoked:D
http://www.iprasa.mx.com.au/cars/sutton.htm
http://www.iprasa.mx.com.au/images/sutt%2035.jpg

http://www.iprasa.mx.com.au/cars/eldridge.htm
http://www.iprasa.mx.com.au/images/19-IMG_9157.jpg
One example like this really shows nothing.

Slicks

03-09-2006, 08:49 AM

Slicks

03-09-2006, 08:55 AM

Not from what I've seen (and heard) of piston slapper oil-gobbling LS-1s, not unknown for LS-2 either. Eg 1.5 litres of Mobil 1 every 1000 miles :rolleyes:

Piston slap only occurs on cold start ups, I even get a little but its nothing to worry about, no one has ever had any problems due to this.
And my LS1 will "gobble" a quart of oil every 3000 miles if I run the piss out of it, otherwise oil consumption is literally no exsistant.

See above, plenty of defective-quality but supposedly 'world class' LS-1s in Holdens have needed 3 rebuilds within 60k miles :eek:

What the hell does Holden to to your engines???
There are guys on LS1tech with 150,000 miles and counting and losing no power, and replaceing nothing out of normal wear.
I have yet to see any LSx engine need a rebuild due to milage.

See above. Conclusion: if that's the best engine America can come up with, you guys are in trouble :(
Best engine? Have you forgotten the S7s 7.0L? Fords 5.4?
Maybe next time you post you can compare non-Holden LSx engines and see what comes up.

rgibbs205

03-09-2006, 09:19 AM

Hi, Members! All of your replies, comments and oppinions have help me a lot. I hope that the replies have helped each of you in some way, too. I don't know how, but a lot seemed to know that I was comparing the Madza Rx 8 rotary engine against the Pontiac GTO V8 engine. My friends have been riding my butt about "real man's" car and they want me to get something with a V8. They laugh when said I would like to get a Mazda rx 8. It doesn't matter to me about which car I choose because they both look great. I'm in love with the body style of the Mazda and the power of a V8 engine. So, I've been reading your replies to help me make a decision. Thanks reading and replying.

kingofthering

03-09-2006, 09:37 AM

Uhhh, the RX7 TT is "only" making 280ish hp, if were comparing engines alone, its still not enough.
the 280 is bs, they are making 300+

Slicks

03-09-2006, 10:29 AM

the 280 is bs, they are making 300+
The RX7 seems to be one of the few performance Japanese cars that actually not underrated in power. The times add up, low 13s in a 2800lbs/280ish hp car with agressive gearing. I would believe 300hp at the most, got any stock dyno sheets?

PerfAdv

03-09-2006, 10:36 AM

Not from what I've seen (and heard) of piston slapper oil-gobbling LS-1s, not unknown for LS-2 either. Eg 1.5 litres of Mobil 1 every 1000 miles :rolleyes:
This has to be an exception. Although I can't say that I've had personal experience with the LS- engines. There is no reason for a properly broken-in IC engine to burn oil, unless it's heavily modified. Whereas, the rotary like two stroke engines needs oil to lube it's apex seals, which consumes by design.

See above, plenty of defective-quality but supposedly 'world class' LS-1s in Holdens have needed 3 rebuilds within 60k miles :eek:
Again, this is due to defective quality parts and not a design issue. I don't know how widespread this problem was but even a handful of bad engines can ruin reputations.

See above. Conclusion: if that's the best engine America can come up with, you guys are in trouble :(
The SBC has been in development for about have a century. They were revered for being powerful, torquey, light, and long-lived, why should that not hold true now? A V8 engine, purely from a design perspective, is a very stable platform. Granted American build technology is lagging behind Japanese and German, the V8 is still superior to the rotary. Only one company has R&D-ed the rotary, whereas the V8 has been developed by almost every car maker. If the same amount of money was put into developing rotaries, perhaps rotaries would own...

The way I see it, rotary is more of a engineering exercise than viable option to IC. Wankel engines lack torque, consume oil, have bad gas mileage, don't have very long life expectancy.... Having said that, they're still awesome engines.

SLoppYJeeP

03-09-2006, 11:05 AM

PBB

03-09-2006, 12:27 PM

rev440

03-09-2006, 01:18 PM

"Clevor" Angel

03-09-2006, 01:31 PM

Another thing to consider is the age of both engines. The v-8 has been around 60 years or more, while the wankel rotary is relatively brand new technology. The fact that the v-8 still has some problems with reliability, and still doesn't match the per liter output of rotors after an extra 50 or so years of tuning, testing, and development by ford, chrysler, and gm says wonders about the engineering abilities of mazda, who have turned a relativly unheard of engine into a profitable vehical.

The wankel was designed by a german and has been a running engine since '54. Variations have been used in concepts and even a few production cars by companies like GM, Ford, Mercedes-Benz and Citroen but they had a problem with the engines fuel consumption since all the developement by these companies took place in the late 60's to late 70's and were also said to be incapable of meeting many US emissions standards.
The rotary engine has far fewer moving parts than a comparable four-stroke piston engine. A two-rotor rotary engine has three main moving parts: the two rotors and the output shaft. Even the simplest four-cylinder piston engine has at least 40 moving parts, including pistons, connecting rods, camshaft, valves, valve springs, rockers, timing belt, timing gears and crankshaft. All the parts in a rotary engine spin continuously in one direction, rather than violently changing directions like the pistons in a conventional engine do. Rotary engines are internally balanced with spinning counterweights that are phased to cancel out any vibrations. The rotors spin at one-third the speed of the output shaft, the main moving parts of the engine move slower than the parts in a piston engine, this means better reliability and possibly longer engine life.

ps. I have a 71 mach 1 mustang with a 351 cleveland and 170,000miles on it and it still runs great, still very torquey and very healthy.

aNOBLEman

03-09-2006, 01:49 PM

The wankel was designed by a german and has been a running engine since '54. Variations have been used in concepts and even a few production cars by companies like GM, Ford, Mercedes-Benz and Citroen but they had a problem with the engines fuel consumption since all the developement by these companies took place in the late 60's to late 70's and were also said to be incapable of meeting many US emissions standards.
The rotary engine has far fewer moving parts than a comparable four-stroke piston engine. A two-rotor rotary engine has three main moving parts: the two rotors and the output shaft. Even the simplest four-cylinder piston engine has at least 40 moving parts, including pistons, connecting rods, camshaft, valves, valve springs, rockers, timing belt, timing gears and crankshaft. All the parts in a rotary engine spin continuously in one direction, rather than violently changing directions like the pistons in a conventional engine do. Rotary engines are internally balanced with spinning counterweights that are phased to cancel out any vibrations. The rotors spin at one-third the speed of the output shaft, the main moving parts of the engine move slower than the parts in a piston engine, this means better reliability and possibly longer engine life.

ps. I have a 71 mach 1 mustang with a 351 cleveland and 170,000miles on it and it still runs great, still very torquey and very healthy.

Yea Chevy put a Wankel engine in a 60s Corvette concept car. That car was also mid engined. I can't remember what it was called though.

Slicks

03-09-2006, 02:37 PM

charged

03-09-2006, 03:05 PM

Go to any RX7 message board and look around. Its the PCV system, and like in most performance cars oil gets through it and into the intake. In the Rotaries case, lots of oil.

One example like this really shows nothing. True there slicks in this class of racing theirs restrictions on rotaries and turbo's- no PP only BP on rotors and 36 mill restrictor 50mm away from compressor wheel in turbo's. The V8 are restriction free except for max capacity of 6000cc,Why is it when V8 race in different classes there always restrictions on turbo's, rotories etc, but never V8, if the mighty V8 is so SUPERIOR why doesnt it run certain performance restrictions ? . If the engine is a turbo rotor there will be some oil in the catch can, thats only natural. By the way my nephews car runs a 36 mill restrictor and makes 374hp@ 6570rpm and 450 ft lb of torque@ 3800rpm, not bad for a 2 litre Jap buzz box and we get roughly 100-200 ml of oil in the catch can over a race weekend.

charged

03-09-2006, 03:11 PM

hp/l is just about the most meaningless figure in the automotive world. You may as well compare hp to color of the engine.
Try hp to weight of the engine or physical size.
Slicks if you have a 30 litre motor making 500 hp or a 2litre motor making 50, which one is more efficent?. It is important, any engine builder I talk too always talks about, bhp/cu or kw/l. Its the All Imporrtant figure. An engine builder I know only talks in this figure and probably builds 30-40 high hp engines a year. I'll go tell him he knows nothing and should shut down shop:p

Slicks

03-09-2006, 04:46 PM

True there slicks in this class of racing theirs restrictions on rotaries and turbo's- no PP only BP on rotors and 36 mill restrictor 50mm away from compressor wheel in turbo's. The V8 are restriction free except for max capacity of 6000cc,Why is it when V8 race in different classes there always restrictions on turbo's, rotories etc, but never V8, if the mighty V8 is so SUPERIOR why doesnt it run certain performance restrictions ? . If the engine is a turbo rotor there will be some oil in the catch can, thats only natural. By the way my nephews car runs a 36 mill restrictor and makes 374hp@ 6570rpm and 450 ft lb of torque@ 3800rpm, not bad for a 2 litre Jap buzz box and we get roughly 100-200 ml of oil in the catch can over a race weekend.
I couldnt tell you why V8s dont have more restrictions, I dont know what class, or even racing series your talking about.

If you dont already know this, engines dont come with a catch can...

Slicks

03-09-2006, 04:50 PM

Slicks if you have a 30 litre motor making 500 hp or a 2litre motor making 50, which one is more efficent?.

The one with the best power to WEIGHT. Or better yet, powerband to weight/physical size.
Given the choice of a 5L 500hp, 500lbs engine, and a 7L 500hp, 400lbs engine, which would you take?

It is important, any engine builder I talk too always talks about, bhp/cu or kw/l. Its the All Imporrtant figure. An engine builder I know only talks in this figure and probably builds 30-40 high hp engines a year. I'll go tell him he knows nothing and should shut down shop:p
LMFAO at "all important" figure...
Quote:

"For those that evaluate an engine based on mass, packaging volume, and fuel efficiency, OHV designs are very attractive, for stuffing a pair of cams into the cylinder heads adds volume and mass at just about the worst possible place on a V-configuration engine. Add in some roller followers and tall valve springs, and all of a sudden we’ve got V6s that are larger than V8s, and “small” V8s that are larger than the big-blocks of the 60s. During an SAE presentation that I attended, Chevy’s Dave Hill stated that the Nissan VQ35 DOHC V6 was benchmarked during the development of the C5 Corvette, and was clearly found to provide significantly less power per unit mass and unit volume than the GM’s GenIII V8. Peak-power-per-unit-displacement is strictly an amateurish way to compare two engines."

I think we can give Dave hill more credit than your "friend".

PBB

03-09-2006, 05:39 PM

Didnt they race the 26B :p
Mazda raced both the 20B and the 26B. :p
You're correct though, in that the 26B did all the winning.

Matra et Alpine

03-09-2006, 06:05 PM

hp/l is just about the most meaningless figure in the automotive world.
Remember we went over this before you are WRONG.
hp/l is an important guidleine for designers and lubrication engineers.

Try hp to weight of the engine or physical size.
Definately more useful for the buyer :)

Matra et Alpine

03-09-2006, 06:08 PM

Chevy’s Dave Hill stated that the Nissan VQ35 DOHC V6 was benchmarked during the development of the C5 Corvette, and was clearly found to provide significantly less power per unit mass and unit volume than the GM’s GenIII V8. Peak-power-per-unit-displacement is strictly an amateurish way to compare two engines."

I think we can give Dave hill more credit than your "friend".
erm, not really if you consider WHO he represents and that their engine wins on the power per unit mass and volume and LOSES on the power per displacement :)

Old story, you're WRONG. hp/l is important to designers and lubrication engineers.

SLoppYJeeP

03-09-2006, 06:25 PM

Although the DOHC set up may add mass to the top of the engine, it also elimiantes the need for push rods and rocker arms. This frees up alot of reciprocating mass from the valve train. This allows the engine to rev higher. And horse power is an important figure, being a function of torque and rpm. Torque is the twisting force an engine can produce, and the more times this torque can be delivered, the more power the engine can make. All and all the extra revs allowed by the DOHC set up produce enough extra power to more then make up for the wieght they add to the engine.

As for the fact that chevy experimented with rotarys in the 50s, ive heard of ford and other manufactures experimenting with gas turbines in cars. An engine in a concept car and an engine in a production car are very different things. By looking at it this way the mass produced push rod v-8 has been around much longer then the wankel rotary.

Slicks

03-09-2006, 06:32 PM

Remember we went over this before you are WRONG.
hp/l is an important guidleine for designers and lubrication engineers.

Dont remember being wrong. Peak power really doesnt show anything, nor does displacement. Real world figures such as weight, and physical size do though.
Sure if displacement is restricted its somewhat significant, but weight would still be more so.
Conclusion, comparing engines hp/l is useless.

Definately more useful for the buyer :)
Lighter engine, lighter car.

Slicks

03-09-2006, 06:33 PM

erm, not really if you consider WHO he represents and that their engine wins on the power per unit mass and volume and LOSES on the power per displacement :)

Old story, you're WRONG. hp/l is important to designers and lubrication engineers.
[sarcasm]Clearly Dave Hill is not a designer.

Slicks

03-09-2006, 06:35 PM

Although the DOHC set up may add mass to the top of the engine, it also elimiantes the need for push rods and rocker arms. This frees up alot of reciprocating mass from the valve train. This allows the engine to rev higher. And horse power is an important figure, being a function of torque and rpm. Torque is the twisting force an engine can produce, and the more times this torque can be delivered, the more power the engine can make. All and all the extra revs allowed by the DOHC set up produce enough extra power to more then make up for the wieght they add to the engine.

When it comes to street cars your really not going to be revving past the limit OHV can take.

PBB

03-09-2006, 06:51 PM

When it comes to street cars your really not going to be revving past the limit OHV can take.
Redline in the 7.0L LS7 is 7000 RPM, 500 more than the 2.5L DOHC WRX STi.

Remember we went over this before you are WRONG.
hp/l is an important guidleine for designers and lubrication engineers.:)
"Most overrated basis for comparison" would be an appropriate description. The whole HP/L infatuation comes simply from the lack of other data about production engines. I'm still trying to find the dressed weight of the 13B, and it's a 20 year old engine!

SLoppYJeeP

03-09-2006, 06:52 PM

NSXType-R

03-09-2006, 06:57 PM

My friends have been riding my butt about "real man's" car and they want me to get something with a V8. They laugh when said I would like to get a Mazda rx 8. It doesn't matter to me about which car I choose because they both look great. I'm in love with the body style of the Mazda and the power of a V8 engine. So, I've been reading your replies to help me make a decision.

NP. I'm happy we helped your decision. I'd go for the RX-8 as well. I prefer Japanese cars over American any day. :D

PBB

03-09-2006, 06:59 PM

What kind of driver are you? i cant get enof of that high rpm acceleration.
But, be honest, how high to you need to rev your engine?

7.0L LS7 = 7000 RPM Redline
2.2L F20C = 8200 RPM Redline
1.3L 13B = 9000 RPM Redline

Matra et Alpine

03-09-2006, 07:06 PM

Dont remember being wrong. Peak power really doesnt show anything, nor does displacement. Real world figures such as weight, and physical size do though.
Sure if displacement is restricted its somewhat significant, but weight would still be more so.
Conclusion, comparing engines hp/l is useless.

Lighter engine, lighter car.
My apologies SLicks, it was a long-winded "discussion" with Fleet.

Bascially hp/l gives the designer insight into how much he.she is stressing the components and castings adn the lubrication engineer can caluclate the necessary bearing fluid pressures and flows. It's why hp/l is THE MOST IMPORTANT during design. If you feel you want a further detailed explanation then go search for those older posts --- best not too as they ARE painful to peruse :D

SOrry again for the poster-mixup --- no offence :D

Matra et Alpine

03-09-2006, 07:10 PM

When it comes to street cars your really not going to be revving past the limit OHV can take.
I think you're assuming your style of driving ( ie most US ) and that is more torque and dont "buzz" the engine. If you are used to usign revs and gears to get motive force then you often get there. I popped the CVH valves on the family Orion Ghia when new on a drive home from work !!

I often hit valve bounce at times on most cars I've driven as I use the REVS to get the necessary motive forces at the tyres :D Course then I usually end up putting in double springs :D

Matra et Alpine

03-09-2006, 07:14 PM

"Most overrated basis for comparison" would be an appropriate description.
"Most abused" is how I usually describe it as most who DO cite it dont' understand WHY it's a very important factor.

The whole HP/L infatuation comes simply from the lack of other data about production engines.
Well that and the marketing guys selling on their strengths.
THEN the noobs picking it up and repeating it in some kind of mantra :D

It's not over-rated as it's a useful indicator of stresses.
You dont' get "lazy V8s" ( it's NOT a negative term ) worrying about hp/l coz they run forever with no smarts. High hp/l typically have to have better oilways, higher pressure pumps, closer tolerances and better bearings.

SupraMan22

03-09-2006, 07:23 PM

But, be honest, how high to you need to rev your engine?

7.0L LS7 = 7000 RPM Redline
2.2L F20C = 8200 RPM Redline
1.3L 13B = 9000 RPM Redline

For real. I'm sure if you (sloppyjeep) keep accelerating at high rpms your going to be changing some things as your car life progresses. Not saying punching it isn't fun but when is it time to grow up and drive normal? I see kids drive like that everyday, sucking down gas that they don't pay for. Shifting a automatic tranny from 1-2-D-OD. Absolutly rediculious, and its all for the "thrill" :rolleyes:

Slicks

03-09-2006, 07:24 PM

What kind of driver are you? i cant get enof of that high rpm acceleration. and lets be honest, it only really takes 30 or so hp to move a car down the highway and around town, but who would drive a car with 30 hp?
Im the kind of driver that likes to hit the gas off idle and feel the front wheels want to lift off the ground. I want an instant kick, I dont want to have to whind the engine out, or wait for VVT (like in VTEC engines) to switch to the bigger lobe. I enjoy hitting the gas at any RPM and being kicked in the ass by the torque of the car.

Slicks

03-09-2006, 07:26 PM

My apologies SLicks, it was a long-winded "discussion" with Fleet.

Bascially hp/l gives the designer insight into how much he.she is stressing the components and castings adn the lubrication engineer can caluclate the necessary bearing fluid pressures and flows. It's why hp/l is THE MOST IMPORTANT during design. If you feel you want a further detailed explanation then go search for those older posts --- best not too as they ARE painful to peruse :D

SOrry again for the poster-mixup --- no offence :D
NP, it happens.
I see what you saying, but im talking about comparing engine X to engine Y, and claiming engine X is 'better' because its makes more hp/l, which is a load of crap.

Matra et Alpine

03-09-2006, 07:28 PM

when is it time to grow up and drive normal?
Define "normal" ?

I use the revs in the engines of all the cars I've got, be it on the road or the track. The car is designed to be operated that way and foir many peoples and nations THAT is "normal" :D

There isnt' really any right/wrong/normal, there *is* "different" !!

Slicks

03-09-2006, 07:31 PM

I think you're assuming your style of driving ( ie most US ) and that is more torque and dont "buzz" the engine. If you are used to usign revs and gears to get motive force then you often get there. I popped the CVH valves on the family Orion Ghia when new on a drive home from work !!

I often hit valve bounce at times on most cars I've driven as I use the REVS to get the necessary motive forces at the tyres :D Course then I usually end up putting in double springs :D
No im talking about the actual limit an OHV type of engine can take (I remember something like 12,000RPMs?).
Not necessary for a street car, hell, not necessary for race cars either (C6R, S7R Mosler MT900R, NASCAR, etc.)

Matra et Alpine

03-09-2006, 07:35 PM

Im the kind of driver that likes to hit the gas off idle and feel the front wheels want to lift off the ground. I want an instant kick, I dont want to have to whind the engine out, or wait for VVT (like in VTEC engines) to switch to the bigger lobe. I enjoy hitting the gas at any RPM and being kicked in the ass by the torque of the car.
Slicks, by saying "wind the engine out" I think you are applying the rev buidl up experience you have from "lazxy V8s" ( remember it is NOT a negative term ) a decent engine will rev up VERY fast -- like not really noticable. That's what comes of shorter stroke ( and hence lower torque ).

Also, in the concept of "wait" then how many times have you EVER needed to accelerate quickly when You've nod had tiem to think and plan in advance ?
So knwoing you WANT ot accelerate it is second nature to for example drop a gear and punch. The "punch" happens about the same time as it's dependant on a light change or a corner openening out etc. All things that you know in advance 0.5=1s ahead of them happening :D So I think you're mixing operational modes and missing the lack of disctinction between the results. The DISTINCTION is that in a big stroke torquey engine you dont' neeed to change gears, so less "work" --- but for many that is the enjoyabl epart of driving, planning ande xecuting to be in the right gear, right weight balance, right attitude.

aNOBLEman

03-09-2006, 07:48 PM

Define "normal" ?

I use the revs in the engines of all the cars I've got, be it on the road or the track. The car is designed to be operated that way and foir many peoples and nations THAT is "normal" :D

There isnt' really any right/wrong/normal, there *is* "different" !!

Ah but the real question is: Do you do burnouts at every stoplight?

Another one: Do you cut people off, causing them to stomp on the brakes while going 75mph, just to pass your friends?

I know some kids that do these all the time and that is not normal driving. I like to accelerate quickly and take apexes of turns faster than I should but I don't waste gas by doing burnouts all the time and I don't put my life and others lives by cutting people off at 75mph. :)

Slicks

03-09-2006, 09:57 PM

Slicks, by saying "wind the engine out" I think you are applying the rev buidl up experience you have from "lazxy V8s" ( remember it is NOT a negative term ) a decent engine will rev up VERY fast -- like not really noticable. That's what comes of shorter stroke ( and hence lower torque ).

I guess Hondas dont have decent engines.

Also, in the concept of "wait" then how many times have you EVER needed to accelerate quickly when You've nod had tiem to think and plan in advance ?

The only time I can think of is when trying to make a yellow light.

So knwoing you WANT ot accelerate it is second nature to for example drop a gear and punch. The "punch" happens about the same time as it's dependant on a light change or a corner openening out etc. All things that you know in advance 0.5=1s ahead of them happening :D So I think you're mixing operational modes and missing the lack of disctinction between the results. The DISTINCTION is that in a big stroke torquey engine you dont' neeed to change gears, so less "work" --- but for many that is the enjoyabl epart of driving, planning ande xecuting to be in the right gear, right weight balance, right attitude.
Thing is, I dont have to 'work' if I dont want to, and still blast by the peaky engine'd cars while they're trying (has happened before).
Then if I want to work I have the whole rev range to work with, not just over 6000RPMs.

nota

03-10-2006, 12:25 AM

Piston slap only occurs on cold start ups, I even get a little but its nothing to worry about, no one has ever had any problems due to this. And my LS1 will "gobble" a quart of oil every 3000 miles if I run the piss out of it, otherwise oil consumption is literally no exsistant.
Try pistonslap.com

What the hell does Holden to to your engines???
There are guys on LS1tech with 150,000 miles and counting and losing no power, and replaceing nothing out of normal wear.
I have yet to see any LSx engine need a rebuild due to milage.

Lets play websites :D

Was it rebuilt because of Piston Slap? ... 16.27%
Was it rebuilt because of excessive oil usage? ... 8.43%
Was it rebuilt for both the reasons in Option 1 & Option 2? ... 10.24%
Was it rebuilt for another reason? ... 1.20%
No rebuild required ... 66.87%

So as it stands 29.83% of members on this forum alone have had their [LS1] engine rebuilt, I would love to know what the pecentage across Australia is. In general I would think accross the Board it would be less then 29% but I would love to know till today what percentage and how much it has cost Holden or the Manufacturer of these Engines for this monumental stuff up.

Best engine? Have you forgotten the S7s 7.0L? Fords 5.4?I thought this topic was about RX8 & LS-engined Holden/Pontiac, not irrelevant S7. :confused: Btw Ford AU is now into their 4th year of building 5.4 DOHC Falcons, so more familiar than you might think. By wide consensus, Falcon's turbo-6cyl is considered a superior engine to porky 5.4 V8

Maybe next time you post you can compare non-Holden LSx engines and see what comes up.
Can't see why it matters because IIRC all LS1s (whether for Holden or GM-NA) were manufactured in the same Canadian factory. LS1s in wider use here than USA, eg: sedan, coupe, sports, ute, limo, AWD, wagon, tray truck - AFAIK well over 30% of total Holden production through 2000-06 was LS1-equipped

henk4

03-10-2006, 12:52 AM

isn't it a glorious world were max BHP sets in at 4000 and max torque at 1750?:D

SLoppYJeeP

03-10-2006, 01:06 AM

Matra et Alpine

03-10-2006, 03:34 AM

Ah but the real question is: Do you do burnouts at every stoplight?

Another one: Do you cut people off, causing them to stomp on the brakes while going 75mph, just to pass your friends?
Yeah but you dont' need power or torque to do any of that.
In the UK you only have to witness all the Peugeot 106 and Saxo VTis doign all of the above :D

I know some kids that do these all the time and that is not normal driving. I like to accelerate quickly and take apexes of turns faster than I should but I don't waste gas by doing burnouts all the time and I don't put my life and others lives by cutting people off at 75mph. :)
Agreed.

BUT none of that has to do with using the rev range of an engine :D

Matra et Alpine

03-10-2006, 03:38 AM

I guess Hondas dont have decent engines.
Or you are uncomfortable USING the engine because you prefer to have torque and low revs ?

The only time I can think of is when trying to make a yellow light.
You live in Boston ?
Yellow means STOP btw, NOT go faster before it goes red>
There are plenty of vids on the web where we see triucks take out "amber gamblers". I pray you never become one. Not clever :( Usually acceleration that you are NOT prepared for is a bad idea :D

Thing is, I dont have to 'work' if I dont want to, and still blast by the peaky engine'd cars while they're trying (has happened before).
Then if I want to work I have the whole rev range to work with, not just over 6000RPMs.
So do you consider movign the steering wheel "work" ? No because it is second nature.
To everyoen used to driving small powerful engines changing gears is jsut like the steering wheel. It doesn't take CONSCIOUS thought and car choice has nice gearchange as part of the buying decision making :D
When comparing it helps to try to BE the alternative in totality and not retain some of the mindset of the "safe" one.

Slicks

03-10-2006, 09:02 AM

Try pistonslap.com

Seen it, still havent seen an LSx take damage due to piston slap.

Lets play websites :D

???

I thought this topic was about RX8 & LS-engined Holden/Pontiac, not irrelevant S7. :confused: Btw Ford AU is now into their 4th year of building 5.4 DOHC Falcons, so more familiar than you might think. By wide consensus, Falcon's turbo-6cyl is considered a superior engine to porky 5.4 V8

Did you not say America's best engine? That would include all of those, the LSx certainly isnt alone.

Can't see why it matters because IIRC all LS1s (whether for Holden or GM-NA) were manufactured in the same Canadian factory. LS1s in wider use here than USA, eg: sedan, coupe, sports, ute, limo, AWD, wagon, tray truck - AFAIK well over 30% of total Holden production through 2000-06 was LS1-equipped
Apperently Holden does something to the LSx though, otherwise it wouldnt matter.

Slicks

03-10-2006, 09:03 AM

Slicks

03-10-2006, 09:10 AM

Or you are uncomfortable USING the engine because you prefer to have torque and low revs ?

Too predictable...
Really I was not refering to my own personal experience with Hondas, but rather magazine reviews, in which I have yet to see one not put under the "lows": lack of torque, or lack of power under 6000RPMs etc.
Take a look at any S2K review. The new Civic Si, I remember specifically got the same reaction.

You live in Boston ?
Yellow means STOP btw, NOT go faster before it goes red>
There are plenty of vids on the web where we see triucks take out "amber gamblers". I pray you never become one. Not clever :( Usually acceleration that you are NOT prepared for is a bad idea :D

Nope, Missouri.
When the white dotted lines become solid before the light, that tells you that you can make the light. Its not like I do it in heavy traffic, or when I know I cant make it. Usually just when no one is around.

So do you consider movign the steering wheel "work" ? No because it is second nature.

No because ALL cars have steering wheels, NOT all cars have a good powerband.

Matra et Alpine

03-10-2006, 10:55 AM

Too predictable...
Really I was not refering to my own personal experience with Hondas, but rather magazine reviews, in which I have yet to see one not put under the "lows": lack of torque, or lack of power under 6000RPMs etc.
Take a look at any S2K review. The new Civic Si, I remember specifically got the same reaction.
My error .... In my response replace "you" with "magazine journalists" :D

Nope, Missouri.
When the white dotted lines become solid before the light, that tells you that you can make the light. Its not like I do it in heavy traffic, or when I know I cant make it. Usually just when no one is around.
Sorry, but do you know the statistics for the number of drivers who cross junctions coz they "knew" no one was coming ? :( Please don't. It's not just your life you risk, it's the mom , dad, grandparents and kids in the other car :( Amber is about preparing to STOP, NOT about preparing to get across before red !!

No because ALL cars have steering wheels, NOT all cars have a good powerband.
Fighting too hard and to obviously to avoid the analogy.
"good powerband" depends on how much of it you want to use :D

Said it a long time ago in a "similar" discussion with someone else ---- when I first started riding the bike again I was forever changing gear at 10K coz it just started to sound wrong. Now I happily stick in their till the power dips :D It's worth not undersestimating that "conmfort zone" of our subconscious :D

Slicks

03-10-2006, 11:08 AM

My error .... In my response replace "you" with "magazine journalists" :D

Still no, the journalists drive numerous cars, peaky and not, and still complain. Why do you think Honda increased displacement on the S2000 for the US? S2K owners were embarassed that they couldnt keep up with minivans without dropping down 2 gears :p

Sorry, but do you know the statistics for the number of drivers who cross junctions coz they "knew" no one was coming ? :( Please don't. It's not just your life you risk, it's the mom , dad, grandparents and kids in the other car :( Amber is about preparing to STOP, NOT about preparing to get across before red !!
Yes mom :rolleyes: j/k
But really your blowing this out of proportion, I dont run red lights, and if I choose to run yellows I make sure that Im past the solid line 'zone'. And 90% of the time I do it no one is around anyway.

Fighting too hard and to obviously to avoid the analogy.
"good powerband" depends on how much of it you want to use :D

Said it a long time ago in a "similar" discussion with someone else ---- when I first started riding the bike again I was forever changing gear at 10K coz it just started to sound wrong. Now I happily stick in their till the power dips :D It's worth not undersestimating that "conmfort zone" of our subconscious :D
Apples to oranges Matra.

Matra et Alpine

03-10-2006, 01:11 PM

Still no, the journalists drive numerous cars, peaky and not, and still complain. Why do you think Honda increased displacement on the S2000 for the US? S2K owners were embarassed that they couldnt keep up with minivans without dropping down 2 gears :p
There you have it .... driving around at 30 mph in top and not used to usign gears so complaining about dropping down.

Ohh ... and crappy octane fuel :D

I've raced an S2000 at Knockhill track. It has AMPLE to keep up when used. YES, you need to "use the gears". American market drivers dont' like that, teh rest of the world is OK with it. As I said, it's about the psychology of the driving experience, not the car :D

Yes mom :rolleyes: j/k
But really your blowing this out of proportion, I dont run red lights, and if I choose to run yellows I make sure that Im past the solid line 'zone'. And 90% of the time I do it no one is around anyway.
Deliberately jumping yellow lights is right up there with street racing.
It's plain D-U-M-B and will always get a negative response.
So what are you going to tell the mom who's one of those 10% when her kid is killed when bouncing aroudn inside her 4x4 when you hit them because you a) didnt' see them b) misjudged speed ?

Apples to oranges Matra.
That was the point it's is not the "car" that is bad it is the expectation based on "normal" car usage and experience.
It's more like comparing BIG Florida grown peaches with the golf ball sized things we manage here in Scotland. There's nothing wrong with either of them as long as you "use" them properly -- I eat peaches here in 2s and 3s :D

Fleet 500

03-10-2006, 01:15 PM

Yes mom :rolleyes: j/k
But really your blowing this out of proportion, I dont run red lights, and if I choose to run yellows I make sure that Im past the solid line 'zone'. And 90% of the time I do it no one is around anyway.

Out here (California), the law defines a yellow light at "caution." Meaning continuing through the intersection is allowed if the front end of the car has passed the first white line at the intersection.
The oppossing lights are also slightly delayed... the lights both ways are red for a few moments before the other one turns green. This prevents someone who enters the intersection when he shouldn't (when the light has turned red before the first white line is crossed) from hitting any cross traffic.

Slicks

03-10-2006, 02:46 PM

There you have it .... driving around at 30 mph in top and not used to usign gears so complaining about dropping down.

Ohh ... and crappy octane fuel :D

Didnt we figure out that US had just as good fuel (rated different obveously) I dont remeber? But either way the S2K is making 240ish hp here.
Its not about being "used" to using gears, its the fact that you dont HAVE to in some cars which is a plus.

I've raced an S2000 at Knockhill track. It has AMPLE to keep up when used. YES, you need to "use the gears". American market drivers dont' like that, teh rest of the world is OK with it. As I said, it's about the psychology of the driving experience, not the car :D

We just like feeling like were driving a car, not a golf cart.

Deliberately jumping yellow lights is right up there with street racing.
It's plain D-U-M-B and will always get a negative response.
So what are you going to tell the mom who's one of those 10% when her kid is killed when bouncing aroudn inside her 4x4 when you hit them because you a) didnt' see them b) misjudged speed ?

I give up with you.

That was the point it's is not the "car" that is bad it is the expectation based on "normal" car usage and experience.
It's more like comparing BIG Florida grown peaches with the golf ball sized things we manage here in Scotland. There's nothing wrong with either of them as long as you "use" them properly -- I eat peaches here in 2s and 3s :D
Thats right up there with saying "its not that American cars cant handle, its just Europeans arnt used to it".

Matra et Alpine

03-10-2006, 05:33 PM

Didnt we figure out that US had just as good fuel (rated different obveously) I dont remeber? But either way the S2K is making 240ish hp here.
Its not about being "used" to using gears, its the fact that you dont HAVE to in some cars which is a plus.
I've explained it multipel times in multiple ways.
Either your are deliberately trygin to act dumb or your not acting :)
Dropped

We just like feeling like were driving a car, not a golf cart.

I give up with you.
The difference is *I* will NEVER "give up" on anytone who thinks putting others at risk by bad driving is acceptable.
Dropped (for now)
rather than "give up" you might hasve tried DEFENDING the perceived lunacy of ACCELERATING across an opening that has timings assumign cars slow down. I asked if you had the stats for the accidents ? Have you checked ?? Do you jump on bungee cords withouth checking the length too :D

Thats right up there with saying "its not that American cars cant handle, its just Europeans arnt used to it".
Well that 's NOT quite the same is it. You cant' MAKE a bad handling car handle well. Unless you'd liek to explain how ?? :D

You need to work harder on your analogies to make them appropraite and part of the learning experience :D

See mine was, yours wasn't.

Better was to cover one raised before --- if you're going to drive for 500 miles at 55 mph then you will wnat a V8 and not a buzzy high revving 4.
So it's not that Eureopan cars can't cruise, it's that American cars cruise further longer more comfortably.

2ndclasscitizen

03-10-2006, 11:14 PM

Did you not say America's best engine? That would include all of those, the LSx certainly isnt alone
it is an American engine, it's the 5.4 BOSS V8, as seen in the GT and Lightning, but minus the supercharger in the falcons.

Just to add this to the threads original topic, a 13B Rotary isn't actually 1.3 litres, it's actually 2.6. When rotaries where originally introduced, the companies pushing them lobbied for them to be measured in one way, which gave 1.3 litres, instead of another way (i'm not 100% sure but i think it should've been considered a two stroke rather than 4 and that changes displacemnet, but i'm not sure) which would've given 2.6. It was for tax reasons, as in Japan where you get a tax break for owning/buying a 2litre and under car

nota

03-11-2006, 12:31 AM

it is an American engine, it's the 5.4 BOSS V8, as seen in the GT and Lightning, but minus the supercharger in the falcons.
To simply call it an American engine only tells half the story, because it's worth noting that Boss 5.4 quadcams have been produced right here on Australia's only V8 production line .. since September 2002 .. which is years before America saw any multicam 5.4s in US Fords. When Ford Australia created the Boss it was unique in the 'Ford world' and incorporated a not-insignificant amount of unique local design, engineering and componentry to turn what was basically a low performance US truck motor into a high performance DOHC passenger car engine

Schmallz

03-11-2006, 07:43 PM

Slicks if you have a 30 litre motor making 500 hp or a 2litre motor making 50, which one is more efficent?. It is important, any engine builder I talk too always talks about, bhp/cu or kw/l. Its the All Imporrtant figure. An engine builder I know only talks in this figure and probably builds 30-40 high hp engines a year. I'll go tell him he knows nothing and should shut down shop:p

You forget about torque, Torque is Streangth, Horse Power is how much work it can do, when i look for a car, the HP must be larger than the C.I. (Cubic Inches) and the Torque must be greater or equal to the Horsepower.
Remeber 61 cubic inches in a Liter.

Now one last Thing, some one said a Twin Turbo Rotary engine would wipe the floor with a LS2 V8, well what you do to one side you must do to the other so if the V8 was Twin Turbo......
Remember we are comparing one variable, not one variable with two variables of its own.

RX-8 great looking car would pick one up in a heart beat, but not over a 400 hp GTO.

Matra et Alpine

03-12-2006, 04:54 AM

You forget about torque, Torque is Streangth, Horse Power is how much work it can do, when i look for a car, the HP must be larger than the C.I. (Cubic Inches) and the Torque must be greater or equal to the Horsepower.
I think we need the following to be included in the UCP banner so we dont' have to keep repeating it :(

GEARBOX.

Torque multiplier :D

charged

03-13-2006, 05:20 PM

You forget about torque, Torque is Streangth, Horse Power is how much work it can do, when i look for a car, the HP must be larger than the C.I. (Cubic Inches) and the Torque must be greater or equal to the Horsepower.
Remeber 61 cubic inches in a Liter.

Now one last Thing, some one said a Twin Turbo Rotary engine would wipe the floor with a LS2 V8, well what you do to one side you must do to the other so if the V8 was Twin Turbo......
Remember we are comparing one variable, not one variable with two variables of its own.

RX-8 great looking car would pick one up in a heart beat, but not over a 400 hp GTO.

Do some research on the post before that, I state the figure of torque from my nephews 2 litre turbo race car, his car ha better torque down low than V8's due to the 36mill restrictor in the turbo, the car actually runs out of puff up high, as the turbo cant feed the motor enough air. Cut the restrictor off and it will make 500hp at the fly and a similar amount of torque.
Here is the quote from my other post
My nephews car runs a 36 mill restrictor and makes 374hp@ 6570rpm and 450 ft lb of torque@ 3800rpm, not bad for a 2 litre Jap buzz box and we get roughly 100-200 ml of oil in the catch can over a race weekend.

charged

03-13-2006, 05:23 PM

I couldnt tell you why V8s dont have more restrictions, I dont know what class, or even racing series your talking about.

If you dont already know this, engines dont come with a catch can...

There's more to racing than NASCAR and NHRA slicks, if you dont run catch cans on race cars , you cant pass scrutineering, which means no racing. That would be no fun would it.:D It's similar to your improved touring series in the States

Most high performance race and street cars run catch cans, even V8's

Schmallz

03-13-2006, 05:47 PM

Do some research on the post before that, I state the figure of torque from my nephews 2 litre turbo race car, his car ha better torque down low than V8's due to the 36mill restrictor in the turbo, the car actually runs out of puff up high, as the turbo cant feed the motor enough air. Cut the restrictor off and it will make 500hp at the fly and a similar amount of torque.
Here is the quote from my other post
My nephews car runs a 36 mill restrictor and makes 374hp@ 6570rpm and 450 ft lb of torque@ 3800rpm, not bad for a 2 litre Jap buzz box and we get roughly 100-200 ml of oil in the catch can over a race weekend.

Quite frankly, i don't care, but that is impressive, but it is irelevant, we are comparing two stock engines.
We aren't comparing a full-blown race car, i bet the only stock piece in the engine conmpartment is the block. If its not, don't bite my head of, i was just interpeting what info you gave me.
So if i suped up and RX-8 or GTO, i could give them so much horse power and more torque than you can shake a stick at as well (well not me, but my neighbor would)

ll
ll
ll //
ll//
l /
l l
l l
l l
\/
you all have just been hit by the stick:D
no get back to the subject before i hit you all again

charged

03-13-2006, 07:14 PM

Most of the internals are stock, bar pistons and rings, they are'nt even forged just are a better quality than stock. Have modified the sump and pick up also due to high G's in corners, acceleration and braking.

P.S Im from the Aussie forums, we can never stay on topic, due to our short attention spans:D

sunk

03-14-2006, 06:06 AM

1. Rotary, except compact size, really have no advantage AT ALL.
2. On performance, v8 are better.
3. Enough of Japan vs US.

Slicks

03-14-2006, 10:52 AM

There's more to racing than NASCAR and NHRA slicks, if you dont run catch cans on race cars , you cant pass scrutineering, which means no racing. That would be no fun would it.:D It's similar to your improved touring series in the States
Way to steriotype. Sorry but im not a fan of NASCAR.
My point of the catch can is FACTORY cars dont come with them.

Most high performance race and street cars run catch cans, even V8's
Yes, I know, I even run a catch can. BUT again they dont come from the factory with one.

pAinTrAin

03-16-2006, 01:31 PM

The rx-8 i drove was manual, and the rotars build power all the way to the redline. Its not about using the automatic overdrive to "cheat" the engine into reving higher, its about the stock engine making power at higher revs and taking advantage of this high rpm power.

I raced a RX-8 the other day(yes it was street racing) with my 81' Malibu and it was manual and I kicked his ass, he tried to keep up but 350HP and 320 torque seemed to be unbeatable, but who knows maybe he doesn't know how to shift:D

Matra et Alpine

03-16-2006, 02:06 PM

I raced a RX-8 the other day(yes it was street racing) with my 81' Malibu and it was manual and I kicked his ass, he tried to keep up but 350HP and 320 torque seemed to be unbeatable, but who knows maybe he doesn't know how to shift:D

my diagnosis would differ .....

He has a brain.

Street racing is for idiots. Do it on the track with the grown up men.

pAinTrAin

03-16-2006, 07:06 PM

my diagnosis would differ .....

He has a brain.

Street racing is for idiots. Do it on the track with the grown up men.

He was bugging me to go! I'm not the type of guy to say no to a drag race when no one else is around.

clutch-monkey

03-16-2006, 07:22 PM

last time i was challenged to drag race, it was by two chicks in a RWD skyline:) i sat back and watched as they spun out...before they had cleared the intersection :D

livedead

03-16-2006, 08:27 PM

They also sell plenty of Exploders too but no one outside America would touch them. They had to replace them in Australia with this!
http://www.ford.co.nz/futuretense_cs/ccurl/territory_NZ_hero.jpg

Didn't you see the video that showed the people lighting the explorer on fire and putting holes in the gas tank "for effect?" :)

I had an RX-7 once. That was enough of the rotary wankel for me. Gimme a 351 Cleveland any day of the week.

STi here I come!

Fleet 500

03-16-2006, 09:55 PM

I had an RX-7 once. That was enough of the rotary wankel for me. Gimme a 351 Cleveland any day of the week.

A nice engine, that 351 Cleveland. One of my high school friends had a '67 Mustang with a built 351-C. He ran 4.11 gears and used to street race for money. It ran around 13.0 in the 1/4 mile. This was in the late '70s.

Matra et Alpine

03-17-2006, 03:51 PM

He was bugging me to go! I'm not the type of guy to say no to a drag race when no one else is around.
So not got a brain then :(

Street racing is dangerous and liked by those with little brains and dicks to match.

Next time the bad man "bugs" you then invite him to a track. Except that there their will be lots of guys who can drive circles round you and show how poor a driver you are .... good drivers KNOW they dont' need to do street racing and know the dangers and have respect.

charged

03-17-2006, 04:13 PM

So not got a brain then :(

Street racing is dangerous and liked by those with little brains and dicks to match.

Priceless:D :D :D

pAinTrAin

03-17-2006, 04:56 PM

So not got a brain then :(

Street racing is dangerous and liked by those with little brains and dicks to match.

Next time the bad man "bugs" you then invite him to a track. Except that there their will be lots of guys who can drive circles round you and show how poor a driver you are .... good drivers KNOW they dont' need to do street racing and know the dangers and have respect.

Me and my dad both used to drag race every weekend so I think I could take most!, just im not up for the 4 hour drive to the strip, the one in town is shut down:(

Fleet 500

03-18-2006, 12:24 AM

Me and my dad both used to drag race every weekend so I think I could take most!, just im not up for the 4 hour drive to the strip, the one in town is shut down:(
Yeah, that's why many guys would street race... especially back in the '60s. Drag strips too far away and sometimes because of the rules, you couldn't even race the other guy you wanted to! (Because he would be in a different class).
Obviously, most street racers wouldn't race under dangerous conditions- they wanted to stay alive, too.
Races were on wide roads, in the early morning hours (between midnight and 2:00 AM) and on a street with no intersections or cross traffic.
They used roads that would be deserted at night like in industrial areas or long straight roads leading to a former airport.

I would rather have hung out with them than some drunk driver or one on drugs.

pAinTrAin

03-18-2006, 12:54 AM

Yeah, that's why many guys would street race... especially back in the '60s. Drag strips too far away and sometimes because of the rules, you couldn't even race the other guy you wanted to! (Because he would be in a different class).
Obviously, most street racers wouldn't race under dangerous conditions- they wanted to stay alive, too.
Races were on wide roads, in the early morning hours (between midnight and 2:00 AM) and on a street with no intersections or cross traffic.
They used roads that would be deserted at night like in industrial areas or long straight roads leading to a former airport.

I would rather have hung out with them than some drunk driver or one on drugs.

Well ya there are some nice back roads where you could do it anytime....becuase there just out of the city limits, and the out of town cops are lazy:p and I can out run them(but not the best method)

charged

03-19-2006, 06:46 PM

Its not about being "used" to using gears, its the fact that you dont HAVE to in some cars which is a plus.

Thats personal opinion again Slicks, some people are more than capable of using a manual gearbox properly. Some people who dont have the skill should stick to auto's:p . There is no better feeling than the perfect up change or down change( heel and toeing), using the gearbox, brakes etc to get the car balanced for a corner is a joy.

charged

03-19-2006, 07:11 PM

Seen it, still havent seen an LSx take damage due to piston slap. Here's the LS1 forums fom Australia, some very interesting reading Slicks. Maybe we drive our cars harder than you pussy Americans j/k:D

http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/search.php?searchid=1307939

About 14 pages of various problems with LS1,:p

Slicks

03-19-2006, 09:22 PM

Thats personal opinion again Slicks, some people are more than capable of using a manual gearbox properly. Some people who dont have the skill should stick to auto's:p . There is no better feeling than the perfect up change or down change( heel and toeing), using the gearbox, brakes etc to get the car balanced for a corner is a joy.
I completely agree its great fun, but I rather not HAVE to switch down two gears to climb a hill or something like that.
Every driven a VTEC car? They're horrifically peaky (plus you dont want to rev to hear that buzzy/farty exhaust note :p) .

Slicks

03-19-2006, 09:23 PM

Here's the LS1 forums fom Australia, some very interesting reading Slicks. Maybe we drive our cars harder than you pussy Americans j/k:D

http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/search.php?searchid=1307939

About 14 pages of various problems with LS1,:p
Bah, I have to log in. Got a user ID?

2ndclasscitizen

03-19-2006, 10:11 PM

charged

03-19-2006, 11:59 PM

Bah, I have to log in. Got a user ID? Sign up then all you V8 fanboys can worship the mighty LS1:p . Seriously though, its a very imformative website in regards to unlocking power from the LS1. Turbos, edits etc.:D

Cyco

03-20-2006, 12:13 AM

Every driven a VTEC car?
Yes

They're horrifically peaky
Like when they are set to produce a dead fflat torque curve from 1500-6000rpm?

plus you dont want to rev to hear that buzzy/farty exhaust note:p ) .
Note is more of an exhaust tuning exercise, but I love cars that rev and do so freely (and often)

2ndclasscitizen

03-20-2006, 03:00 AM

Note is more of an exhaust tuning exercise, but I love cars that rev and do so freely (and often) drive an LS1, they love to bash the needle on the stop

Matra et Alpine

03-20-2006, 05:26 AM

Every driven a VTEC car? They're horrifically peaky (plus you dont want to rev to hear that buzzy/farty exhaust note :p) .
So you clearly haven't !!
"peaky" ? no !!

Unless you mean that it struggles to pull from 1000 rpm. But that would be like comlpaining that a V8 blows up ever time you rev it to 10,000 :) Just stupid :(

Slicks

03-20-2006, 09:09 AM

Luckily for us, the LS1 in my dad's Calais hasn't suffered any problems like other people have. The only problem Dad's had was when he got it, he was constantly getting engine warnings on the dash, but without any actually problems. It took holden ages to find the problem which turned out be a hole in the mesh in the MAF sensor
Yeah those MAFs are really sensitive. Does Holden alter it over the US version do you know? Because most people completely descreen their MAF with no problems (mine is descreened from the previous owner).

Slicks

03-20-2006, 09:11 AM

Sign up then all you V8 fanboys can worship the mighty LS1:p . Seriously though, its a very imformative website in regards to unlocking power from the LS1. Turbos, edits etc.:D
Im already on LS1tech, there would really be no point in me joining an aussie specific board. If you want me to view the threads either copy and paste them (not the search resaults) or give me a user ID (i promise you can trust me :D )

Slicks

03-20-2006, 09:20 AM

Like when they are set to produce a dead fflat torque curve from 1500-6000rpm?

Yet they dont. Heres an S2K:
http://www.aempower.com/pdf/dyno/24-6104%202004%20Honda%20S2000%20Dyno%20Numbers.pdf

There is a surge of power when VTEC switches to the high lift cam. Generally under 6000RPMs the car doesnt even feel like its moving (this is from driving a RSX, numerous civics, and a Prelude Si). All horribly peaky, like turbo lag with no turbo power.
Ive driven numerous other 4 bangers before non of which were near as peaky.

Note is more of an exhaust tuning exercise, but I love cars that rev and do so freely (and often)
I have yet to hear a Honda I4 that doesnt sound like a weedwaker. FYI our V8s rev very freely.

Slicks

03-20-2006, 09:22 AM

So you clearly haven't !!
"peaky" ? no !!

Unless you mean that it struggles to pull from 1000 rpm. But that would be like comlpaining that a V8 blows up ever time you rev it to 10,000 :) Just stupid :(
Refer to the above post, I have.
It struggles to pull under 6000RPMs.
That last remark doesnt even make sense, every V8 will blow up at 10,000 RPMs? No.

Coventrysucks

03-20-2006, 09:46 AM

Have you forgotten the S7s 7.0L? .

Great example > 100 built? :rolleyes:

nota

03-20-2006, 10:32 AM

Piston slap only occurs on cold start ups, I even get a little but its nothing to worry about, no one has ever had any problems due to this.
years of LS1 problems in AU

still havent seen an LSx take damage due to piston slap.
if you won't look you can't see

Im already on LS1tech, there would really be no point in me joining an aussie specific board. If you want me to view the threads either copy and paste them (not the search resaults) or give me a user ID (i promise you can trust me
You've used more keystrokes saying you can't be bothered joining than it takes to join!

No wonder you can still claim ignorance about LS1 problems :rolleyes: Hear no evil, see no evil

Btw I already provided you this C&P teaser in post #88

Originally Posted by LS1.com.au

Was it rebuilt because of Piston Slap? ... 16.27%
Was it rebuilt because of excessive oil usage? ... 8.43%
Was it rebuilt for both the reasons in Option 1 & Option 2? ... 10.24%
Was it rebuilt for another reason? ... 1.20%
No rebuild required ... 66.87%

So as it stands 29.83% of members on this forum alone have had their [LS1] engine rebuilt

Matra et Alpine

03-20-2006, 10:58 AM

Refer to the above post, I have.
It struggles to pull under 6000RPMs.
You know the answer -- gears :D
I've driven this on track. It doesn't STRUGGLE below 6,000 revs, far from it. BUT there is more power as you wind it out for sure !!
We're jsut hearing your old gripes about having to actually DRIVE a car rather than "cruise around"!!
That chart you posted has a MUCH longer plateau and sharper rise than the S2000 I drove at Knockhill. I'll try to find out why, I'll be meeting the owner in the next couple of weeks at the track. Can you confirm if that was stock S2000 ?

That last remark doesnt even make sense, every V8 will blow up at 10,000 RPMs? No.
Of course it does make sense, you jsut have to think "outside the box" jsut a little fraction :D, because every 4-potter will struggle to pull from 1000rpm. Get the point now ?
:D

Slicks

03-20-2006, 11:06 AM

Great example > 100 built? :rolleyes:
Im pretty sure there are over 100 S7s built since 2001...
Either way its considered a production car.

Slicks

03-20-2006, 11:12 AM

years of LS1 problems in AU

Please some one provide some hard evidence of problems other than that pistonslap site. I want to see an LS1 with something wrong due to piston slap.

if you won't look you can't see

Ive looked, there are racers out there with over 100,000 miles and piston slap is not a problem.

You've used more keystrokes saying you can't be bothered joining than it takes to join!

No wonder you can still claim ignorance about LS1 problems :rolleyes: Hear no evil, see no evil

Btw I already provided you this C&P teaser in post #88
After I register Ill still have to wait for an email to beable to actually join. But since this is such a big deal apparently Ill do it.
Now why dont you go to LS1tech and ask in the LSx forum "Is pistion slap something to worry about?" And see what everyone says.
EDIT: This is great, they dont allow yahoo,hotmailmsn etc. (free email) accounts. Im not going to pay to get an email account to register for this site. Just give me a login in name or a thread (not a search).

Slicks

03-20-2006, 11:32 AM

You know the answer -- gears :D
I've driven this on track. It doesn't STRUGGLE below 6,000 revs, far from it. BUT there is more power as you wind it out for sure !!
We're jsut hearing your old gripes about having to actually DRIVE a car rather than "cruise around"!!
That chart you posted has a MUCH longer plateau and sharper rise than the S2000 I drove at Knockhill. I'll try to find out why, I'll be meeting the owner in the next couple of weeks at the track. Can you confirm if that was stock S2000 ?
It was in the lowest gear possible, dont play dumb.
I love to "drive" a car, I just want go at any RPM.

Of course it does make sense, you jsut have to think "outside the box" jsut a little fraction :D, because every 4-potter will struggle to pull from 1000rpm. Get the point now ?
:D
No because not every V8 is unable to rev past 10,000RPMs.

nota

03-20-2006, 11:58 AM

http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=31992 (the short)

http://www.ls2.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=36764 (the long - 5 pages)

Slicks

03-20-2006, 12:21 PM

http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=31992 (the short)

http://www.ls2.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=36764 (the long - 5 pages)
Did a search on LS1tech, 84 threads showed up with "piston slap" almost all of which went like this:
noob:"I have a slight knocking noise when the engine is cold, it goes away when warmed up though, is this normal?"
numerous memebers: "Its perfectly fine, my car has xxx,xxx miles and has some piston slap and no problems."
I couldnt find 1 thread that said piston slap hurt their engine at all. I actually found a few members with over 100,00 miles that claimed to still have the original cross hatch on the cylinder bores...

I aslo made a poll which is basically the same as the 2nd thread, ill keep you updated.
Also what kind of oil are these guys using? The recomended 10W30?

Matra et Alpine

03-20-2006, 03:15 PM

It was in the lowest gear possible, dont play dumb.
FIRST GEAR ? AND IT DIDN@T PULL ???
Who's playing dumb now :D

I love to "drive" a car, I just want go at any RPM.
No because not every V8 is unable to rev past 10,000RPMs.
Let me spell it out again .... NO 4-potter ( cept diesel) will pull the skin off a rice pudding from 1000 revs in top !!!!
Trying to hard to avoid the point that's obvious there slick :D

Slicks

03-20-2006, 03:33 PM

FIRST GEAR ? AND IT DIDN@T PULL ???
Who's playing dumb now :D

It felt like it was barley moving up until 6000RPMs when it started to feel like a grocery getter :p

Let me spell it out again .... NO 4-potter ( cept diesel) will pull the skin off a rice pudding from 1000 revs in top !!!!
Trying to hard to avoid the point that's obvious there slick :D
Point has been taken, I was pointing out your V8 comparison was stupid though.

Matra et Alpine

03-20-2006, 04:28 PM

Point has been taken, I was pointing out your V8 comparison was stupid though.
that was the intent, just as trying to pull in top at 1000 revs.
I forgot that sophisticated humour misses during the transaltlantic journey :)
I'll usee MOnty Python next time :D

PS: Any idea on that engine spec you quoted the sheet for ?

Coventrysucks

03-21-2006, 02:11 AM

Im pretty sure there are over 100 S7s built since 2001...
Either way its considered a production car.

Try 75.

Slicks

03-21-2006, 10:30 AM

that was the intent, just as trying to pull in top at 1000 revs.
I forgot that sophisticated humour misses during the transaltlantic journey :)
I'll usee MOnty Python next time :D

Or maybe next time try using some logic :p

PS: Any idea on that engine spec you quoted the sheet for ?
No it was just the first thing that poped up on google.

Slicks

03-21-2006, 10:31 AM

Try 75.
Proof?

Fiorano

03-21-2006, 10:31 AM

"What is THE most reliable Le Mans engine EVER built with the highest percentage of finishes ??"

Corvette C5R/C6R?
Audi (V8TT) R8?

2 for v8's and one for rotary...
bad example.

seriously this topic is apples and oranges... GM developed a Rotary for the corvette way back when, and it didn't do the same thing a Corvette was for.
and MercedesBenz C111 had a triple rotor engine i believe and they said humph.. is anyone going to argue that Piston engines don't do the job...
everything has a problem at 100K and sportscars are rebuilt far before this anyway if you are going to use it rightbe it rotary or V8..
and why compare american V8 to the Rotary?
why not V8's in general? the SBC V8 is the most produced motor in the History of the world (thanks to crate engine programs i think.) this is for a reason. Cheap power, mega power, easily worked on and reliability. the rotary as compact and powerful as it can be is not really a good comparison to the V8
it should be Rotary vs. Flat (h opposed/boxer) engine (like porsche flat 4 or 6s and subaru flat fours or 6's )

QuattroMan

03-27-2006, 07:54 PM

Rotary=fire,most rotary engines catch-on fire, I it is a fun engine to have but, I don't trust rotary it-all!!!!

Matra et Alpine

03-28-2006, 02:01 AM

"What is THE most reliable Le Mans engine EVER built with the highest percentage of finishes ??"

Corvette C5R/C6R?
Audi (V8TT) R8?
Good point, the Mazda claim is an old one :)

So how many starts and finishes at Le Mans for the Vette and the R8 ?

The Mazda ratio is 2/3rds finished.
Deutsch et Bonnet came next with 55%.

You got the numbers for the two above ?

Matra et Alpine

03-28-2006, 02:09 AM

Rotary=fire,most rotary engines catch-on fire, I it is a fun engine to have but, I don't trust rotary it-all!!!!
BS alert :D

I will conclude that when a race Wankel lets go it will do so in "flames" rather than bits flying everywhere ---- but that's only because it's not trying to control pistons moving up and down 100 feet/sec :D

nota

03-28-2006, 02:19 AM

the SBC V8 is the most produced motor in the History of the world (thanks to crate engine programs i think.)
That's a big statement. Possibly true but I thought this honour would belong to a small motorcycle and/or industrial engine

For example as far as 'History of the world' status goes, some years ago I saw an industry claim that cumulative sales of Honda step-through motorcycles had far exceeded GM's SBC total, and Honda's single-cylinder motor was by then the most produced engine series, worldwide

Fiorano

03-28-2006, 09:16 AM

yes i looked it up- honda single cylinders-or small displacement motors are the most produced ever...

true. but he most produced auto engine is the SBC...
the
Audi R8 made its race debut at the 12-hour race in Sebring in March 2000. The R8 won the 24 Hours of Le Mans five-times, and all three titles in the American Le Mans Series (ALMS) six times in succession. In 77 races to date, the Audi sportscar celebrated 61 wins. An R8 started 49 times from pole position, the most successful Le Mans-Prototype ever is credited with 59 fastest laps. In 2005, its sixth and final full season of competition, the R8 won nine of its 15 races.

that is a freaking record- 61 of 77 =92%
holymother that is a great car

Corvette C5 era with a notable 35 victories in 55 races. Corvette won every single American Le Mans Series event in 2004 as well as the 24 Hours of Le Mans.

not to mention daytona 24 overall once. and its class a few times
63% wins

ofcourse the dodge viper by oreca comes to mind as well- that was bullet proof. Viper Team ORECA's race-winning tally to 16 wins
from 18 starts in the ALMS. overall win in the 24 Hours of Daytona, 1-2 finsh at lemans 1999 and on and on...
the rotary as cool as it is has only the 787B from mazda to its credit successfully (and what a car!)
but I don't think it can compare to the V8's and even if one is TT and German

Matra et Alpine

03-28-2006, 09:42 AM

that is a freaking record- 61 of 77 =92%
holymother that is a great car
To be comaprable it has to take into account ALL car start and ALL car retirements.
There is no taking away that the R8 is the most successful at wins :D

Corvette C5 era with a notable 35 victories in 55 races. Corvette won every single American Le Mans Series event in 2004 as well as the 24 Hours of Le Mans.
Again NOT the same figures as the original Mazda quote is about.

It's like the much-acclaimed Ford GT40 "domination" at Le Mans.
In 1967 when they finished 1st and 4th ( the only TWO GT40s to finish ) ... there were 12 GT40s entered !! ( and no Ferrari's in the top class either !! )
In 66 with the "glorious 1-2-3" 13 entered and ONLY those 1-2-3 finishing.

not to mention daytona 24 overall once. and its class a few times
63% wins
Again you're counting races entered and wins ( I think ).
Not cars entered.

Forreliability I think that number of entries is crucial -- or it's not RELIABILITY that's being compared.

ofcourse the dodge viper by oreca comes to mind as well- that was bullet proof. Viper Team ORECA's race-winning tally to 16 wins
from 18 starts in the ALMS. overall win in the 24 Hours of Daytona, 1-2 finsh at lemans 1999 and on and on...
the rotary as cool as it is has only the 787B from mazda to its credit successfully (and what a car!)
but I don't think it can compare to the V8's and even if one is TT and German
Any chance you would have the numbers for RELIABILTY comparisons -- which is where the Mazda was good ( of course it was really only great because they didnt' enter many races :) -- and that the engine was reputedly good for another 1,000 revs and 100hp !!!! The 24h engine was stripped and declared good for anotehr 24 by the engineers. )

Fiorano

03-28-2006, 02:56 PM

QuattroMan

03-28-2006, 04:37 PM

BS alert :D

I will conclude that when a race Wankel lets go it will do so in "flames" rather than bits flying everywhere ---- but that's only because it's not trying to control pistons moving up and down 100 feet/sec :D
lol!!!!!! I'm not saying that rotary is not fun to drive,,,,I've several of them on fire,not a good feeling I say,,,,hey I thought "Rotary" WAS invented by a German,???! Japan's rotary LOL!!!:)

Matra et Alpine

03-29-2006, 02:55 AM

well the corvettes always entered as factory. so this is the best comparo. to mazda rotary and it is a V8
"Corvette C5 era with a notable 35 victories in 55 races. Corvette won every single American Le Mans Series event in 2004 as well as the 24 Hours of Le Mans."
in these cases i think they had 2 retirements from guest driven cars. in leman it was only the factory 2... so that is wuite an achievment.
Ah I see the confusion.... there is only ONE "Le Mans" ... the American stealing of the title in the hope to make it sound international isn't "Le Mans" :D
AND AGAIN you're citing races entered and wins and NOT Cars entered and finishes :(
Let me say it VERY slowly .... to measure reliability you have to take the number of CARS finished and divide it by the number of CARS ENTERED.

as far as audi goes- how many retirements has the R8 had- in Toto?
lets see. JOest, Champion, Goh, Velox... i can only think of 3 from champion audi....oh and 1 from a joest audi when Biela ran out of gas at le mans was it?
Le Mans RACE only not the piddly "Le Mans Series" :D
Yeah I was trying NOT to be guessing and hence asked for the real numbers.
Hmmm, also complicated a little in that the Mazda-defenders will claim it's the same car. Whereas the R8 went through chassis and engine developments.

Matra et Alpine

03-29-2006, 02:58 AM

lol!!!!!! I'm not saying that rotary is not fun to drive,,,,I've several of them on fire,not a good feeling I say,,,,hey I thought "Rotary" WAS invented by a German,???! Japan's rotary LOL!!!:)
The English is correct.
By asking to compare "Japan's Rotary" then it is the rotary belongng to Japan -- which is the Mazda .... Other companies made Wankel engines ( ie Mercedes and NSU ) and those would be "Germany's rotary".
:) Complain to your English teacher :)

Evil Ewok

03-29-2006, 05:53 AM

Slicks

03-29-2006, 09:01 AM

First thing I noticed about this thread Matra, thank you for fixing it :P.
But yea, get a good 20B TT and see how the GTO's LS2 sticks up to it. He wasn't asking specifically for an RX8 engine, which is the woman's version of the rotary.
Or you could compare a production engine to a production engine, because that would make sense.
EDIT: and the original poster was asking about the RX8's rotary.

Matra et Alpine

03-29-2006, 09:21 AM

Or you could compare a production engine to a production engine, because that would make sense.
EDIT: and the original poster was asking about the RX8's rotary.
Good point, S.

Also it seems to be 2 specific vehicles too.
RX-8 v GTO

Fiorano

03-29-2006, 10:22 AM

Matra the entries for the Corvette was specifiacally Lemans- they only entered 2 cars every time and finished evry time (i think in 2001 one car finished.)
so the Vette record is astounding in its reliablity
I included American Lemans Series (as piddly as the LMES-ahem:confused: ) as this is total races it entered and won.. the 787 did not race as often at LeMans- of course it did win. so did the corvettes-

QuattroMan

03-29-2006, 11:16 AM

The English is correct.
By asking to compare "Japan's Rotary" then it is the rotary belongng to Japan -- which is the Mazda .... Other companies made Wankel engines ( ie Mercedes and NSU ) and those would be "Germany's rotary".
:) Complain to your English teacher :)

no way I would complain to my English teacher,she was the best English and sex teacher ever!!:D what is the deferent's between jap rotary and German rotary?

Slicks

03-29-2006, 11:46 AM

no way I would complain to my English teacher,she was the best English and sex teacher ever!!:D what is the deferent's between jap rotary and German rotary?
The jap rotary is in Mazda cars :p

Matra et Alpine

03-29-2006, 03:33 PM

no way I would complain to my English teacher,she was the best English and sex teacher ever!!:D what is the deferent's between jap rotary and German rotary?
The German companies stopped developing the roatary so it languishes in '80s technology. The Japanese rotary continued development and investment and works :D

Matra et Alpine

03-29-2006, 03:58 PM

Matra the entries for the Corvette was specifiacally Lemans- they only entered 2 cars every time and finished evry time (i think in 2001 one car finished.)
so the Vette record is astounding in its reliablity
See the table at the end of the post to see "astoudnign" for reliability :D

I included American Lemans Series (as piddly as the LMES-ahem:confused: ) as this is total races it entered and won.. the 787 did not race as often at LeMans- of course it did win. so did the corvettes-
:) erm, Corvettes were entered in Le Mans as far back as 1960 and you I think are forgetting that ( or weren't aware ).

I searched the CLub L'Ouest site and found it .....
CHEVROLET (USA) 40 16 40%

The full table is at http://www.lemans.org/24heuresdumans/live/pages/retro/p_marques_9_gb.html

and the table confirms Audi now wins over Mazda, so the Mazda-acolites can't make the Rotary claim any more :) ( But Mazda have done 50% more cars, wonder if Audi coudl have maintained with more cars ?? We'll never know :D )
AUDI (D) 22 17 77%

MAZDA (J) 34 24 71%

Sadly this isn't the full story as it doens't seperate out the different models :D I concur that the the new cars that have only competed for a couple of races will have higher ratio - ie DBA are 100%, but only competing in 1 makes hte statistics invalid !!

There are some interesting stats their for the nerds like me who love trivia ... eg ...

Best marque performances in a single race

JAGUAR in 1957
5 Cars entered
5 Cars at the finish (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th et 6th)

PORSCHE in 1982
3 Official cars
3 Cars at the finish (1st, 2nd, 3rd)

PEUGEOT in 1993
3 voitures officielles
3 Cars at the finish (1st, 2nd, 3rd)

AUDI in 2000 et 2002
3 Official cars
3 Cars at the finish (1st, 2nd, 3rd)

AUDI in 2004
4 Privat cars
4 Cars at the finish (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th)

Slicks

03-29-2006, 04:50 PM

See the table at the end of the post to see "astoudnign" for reliability :D

:) erm, Corvettes were entered in Le Mans as far back as 1960 and you I think are forgetting that ( or weren't aware ).

I searched the CLub L'Ouest site and found it .....
CHEVROLET (USA) 40 16 40%

The full table is at http://www.lemans.org/24heuresdumans/live/pages/retro/p_marques_9_gb.html

and the table confirms Audi now wins over Mazda, so the Mazda-acolites can't make the Rotary claim any more :) ( But Mazda have done 50% more cars, wonder if Audi coudl have maintained with more cars ?? We'll never know :D )
AUDI (D) 22 17 77%

MAZDA (J) 34 24 71%

Sadly this isn't the full story as it doens't seperate out the different models :D I concur that the the new cars that have only competed for a couple of races will have higher ratio - ie DBA are 100%, but only competing in 1 makes hte statistics invalid !!

There are some interesting stats their for the nerds like me who love trivia ... eg ...

Best marque performances in a single race

JAGUAR in 1957
5 Cars entered
5 Cars at the finish (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th et 6th)

PORSCHE in 1982
3 Official cars
3 Cars at the finish (1st, 2nd, 3rd)

PEUGEOT in 1993
3 voitures officielles
3 Cars at the finish (1st, 2nd, 3rd)

AUDI in 2000 et 2002
3 Official cars
3 Cars at the finish (1st, 2nd, 3rd)

AUDI in 2004
4 Privat cars
4 Cars at the finish (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th)

Yes Corvettes have been racing in LeMans for a long time, but its the LSx C5 Corvettes were talking about isnt it? (LSx vs rotary)

Matra et Alpine

03-29-2006, 05:30 PM

Yes Corvettes have been racing in LeMans for a long time, but its the LSx C5 Corvettes were talking about isnt it?
Well not really in this side-track.
I posted the much cited Mazda are the most reliable Le Mans race car.
The Corvette got named. Well the problem is it has been entered a lot mroe times than youngster may realise.
If it comes down to only the C5 then you get into the is it statistically valid given how few entries there have been of that car -- so hence DBA and Luchini can claim that as they both are at 100% !!!!
(LSx vs rotary)
No, not really as was reminded in #163, rgibbs actually wanted the Rx-8 rotary and the GTO V8. it's LS2 isnt' it and the vette is LS1,2 and 7 ?? ( we're getting as bad as the Aussies :D )