Let's all just admit it we want 3 rotors
#28
Spin Triangles! Spin!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Texas, US
Posts: 827
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I vote for a MazdaSpeed 4 rotor Turbo Nitorus RX-8 from the factory. With 30mpg highway and 23mpg city.
________
Montana cannabis dispensaries
________
Montana cannabis dispensaries
Last edited by dmorales; 09-09-2011 at 03:02 AM.
#29
![Eyecrazy](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/Eyecrazy.gif)
And really, what's the technical difficulty in producing a three rotor? I'd always heard that the ecentric shaft was too complicated/expensive to mass produce effectively once you went from two to three rotors? Any truth to this? If so why not do like a lot of GP bikes and mate two smaller two rotor motors together? (Like two mini renesis motors tied together
![Rock](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/rock.gif)
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Millburn, NJ
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteC
Holy CRAP!!!! er, ah, so when is that technology going to trickle down to the street? I'd love to drive to work in that every day.
![Eyecrazy](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/Eyecrazy.gif)
And really, what's the technical difficulty in producing a three rotor? I'd always heard that the ecentric shaft was too complicated/expensive to mass produce effectively once you went from two to three rotors? Any truth to this? If so why not do like a lot of GP bikes and mate two smaller two rotor motors together? (Like two mini renesis motors tied together
)
![Eyecrazy](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/Eyecrazy.gif)
And really, what's the technical difficulty in producing a three rotor? I'd always heard that the ecentric shaft was too complicated/expensive to mass produce effectively once you went from two to three rotors? Any truth to this? If so why not do like a lot of GP bikes and mate two smaller two rotor motors together? (Like two mini renesis motors tied together
![Rock](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/rock.gif)
#34
'03 Dodge Viper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: University of Maryland
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I want 4 rotors. They put down huge numbers, and sound AMAZING.
Here's a vid of a 4 rotor rx-7 at the drag strip. Just wow.
Click here to see Video
Here's a vid of a 4 rotor rx-7 at the drag strip. Just wow.
![](http://thumbs.vidiac.com/29ecb862-75bd-4aae-8ec3-3b8028c68809.jpg)
#35
For me the best would be a factory made turbo. The rotors should be lower compression 8:1, and use a veritable vain turbo (same advantages of a twin sequential with out the complexity). You may also want to increase the width of the engines center section which separates the two rotors to allow a larger shared exhaust port. You end up with a turbo which should surpass the RX-7 3rd gen in horse power and reliability. You don't get the weight penalty of a 3 or 4 rotor and you get a factory warranty.
#36
Mentalhealth is overrated
Originally Posted by SlayerRX8
I want 4 rotors. They put down huge numbers, and sound AMAZING.
Here's a vid of a 4 rotor rx-7 at the drag strip. Just wow.
Click here to see Video
Here's a vid of a 4 rotor rx-7 at the drag strip. Just wow.
![](http://thumbs.vidiac.com/29ecb862-75bd-4aae-8ec3-3b8028c68809.jpg)
That thing sounds awesome!!!
#37
Spin Triangles! Spin!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Texas, US
Posts: 827
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The more rotors the more high-pitched smooth sound. My friends are amazed at how my Rx-8 sounds, and I'm all stock. I just wish it was a little louder, but the exact same sound.
________
condo for sale in Pattaya
________
condo for sale in Pattaya
Last edited by dmorales; 09-09-2011 at 03:02 AM.
#38
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgetown
Posts: 1,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rotarygod
Suzuki and Norton both made them. I know there were a few others as well.
But what is this thread asking? If people want the 3 rotor or who would say no to more power? Everyone likes power, but I'd pass if it severely compromised the reason I like the renesis, like smoothness, high RPM's, a linear power delivery, light weight, reliability...
As for a 3 rotary renesis, it would likely provide even worse fuel economy and emissions that wouldn't pass strict emissions testing up here at plate renewal time.
#39
Registered
Originally Posted by dmorales
The more rotors the more high-pitched smooth sound. My friends are amazed at how my Rx-8 sounds, and I'm all stock. I just wish it was a little louder, but the exact same sound.
![Big Grin](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
#40
Spin Triangles! Spin!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Texas, US
Posts: 827
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SilverEIGHT
Racing Beat CatBack! ![Big Grin](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Big Grin](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
________
1Sexydoll4U
Last edited by dmorales; 09-09-2011 at 03:02 AM.
#42
Originally Posted by 9291150
But what is this thread asking? If people want the 3 rotor or who would say no to more power? Everyone likes power, but I'd pass if it severely compromised the reason I like the renesis, like smoothness, high RPM's, a linear power delivery, light weight, reliability...
Originally Posted by 9291150
As for a 3 rotary renesis, it would likely provide even worse fuel economy and emissions that wouldn't pass strict emissions testing up here at plate renewal time.
#43
I remember reading a post where the poster said (Zoom44 perhaps?) that the 13B was maxed out for rotor size because the size of the ports couldn't be increased due to physical room restrictions, hence the limited N/A power.
With forced induction couldn't the rotor size (width) be increased, even if it meant that we'd have to run 4 spark plugs per rotor to help with the flame front speed? Can you imagine the increase in torque AND horsepower from a 16B or 18B with light forced induction?
Something wicked this way comes...
With forced induction couldn't the rotor size (width) be increased, even if it meant that we'd have to run 4 spark plugs per rotor to help with the flame front speed? Can you imagine the increase in torque AND horsepower from a 16B or 18B with light forced induction?
Something wicked this way comes...
#44
Spin Triangles! Spin!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Texas, US
Posts: 827
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RX26b
I'll bet if there was enough demand that the engineers could make a 3 rotor turbo pass emissions. I mean, if Bugatti can have a 16 cylinder monster do it, why can't Mazda with a 2 liter?
![Mdrmed](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/mdrmed.gif)
________
condo for sale in Pattaya
Last edited by dmorales; 09-09-2011 at 03:03 AM.
#45
Originally Posted by PhotoMunkey
Can you imagine the increase in torque AND horsepower from a 16B or 18B with light forced induction?
I'd be willing to bet the weight penalty would be negligible comapred to the 13B.
Originally Posted by dmorales
Because it's a rotary...it just is...
Of course, today's standards are stricter, but that's something left to the engineers at R&D to solve.
People are just too content with the anemic power (relative to other high performance cars in its price range) of the Renesis, and don't seem receptive to the idea mentioned in my first paragraph. I say if you're gonna burn up a gallon of fuel every 16 to 20 miles, why not get 12 to 15 but have 400 horses at your disposal. Who's with me?
#46
Registered Lunatic
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by TKE
You say you care about MPG but then you want a turbo? Turbo would burn at least as much if not more fuel than a 3 spinner.
However with a NA 3-rotor, you're guaranteed to burn more fuel - and will have probably worse emissions than with the 2-rotor, be it turbo or NA.
#47
Registered
iTrader: (2)
Originally Posted by PhotoMunkey
I remember reading a post where the poster said (Zoom44 perhaps?) that the 13B was maxed out for rotor size because the size of the ports couldn't be increased due to physical room restrictions, hence the limited N/A power.
With forced induction couldn't the rotor size (width) be increased, even if it meant that we'd have to run 4 spark plugs per rotor to help with the flame front speed? Can you imagine the increase in torque AND horsepower from a 16B or 18B with light forced induction?
Something wicked this way comes...
With forced induction couldn't the rotor size (width) be increased, even if it meant that we'd have to run 4 spark plugs per rotor to help with the flame front speed? Can you imagine the increase in torque AND horsepower from a 16B or 18B with light forced induction?
Something wicked this way comes...
This is when the side intake ports are blocked off and an intake port (65mm ID) is created directly in the rotor housing. Racing Beat did this with their Bonneville Record try. I believe it was a Third gen. RX-7 with a 900HP Periphrial Port 20B.
I had an NA 13B Periphrial Port that had a little under 300hp.
Just think Racing Beat had three turbos on their engine.
Here is a pic of the rotor housing and a pic of RB's engine.
Just think how much fuel and air you could push through a pair of 65mm intake ports. Is your brain spinning now.
Note the intake and exhaust ports in the rotor housing, no side ports.
#49
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: El Paso Texas
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Tamas
Good for you since you're made of money, obviously.
Personally, I don't want a 3-rotor wankel. Call me middle aged whatever you want.
Personally, I don't want a 3-rotor wankel. Call me middle aged whatever you want.
Hey man...I'm 50!
#50
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by PhotoMunkey
I remember reading a post where the poster said (Zoom44 perhaps?) that the 13B was maxed out for rotor size because the size of the ports couldn't be increased due to physical room restrictions, hence the limited N/A power.
With forced induction couldn't the rotor size (width) be increased, even if it meant that we'd have to run 4 spark plugs per rotor to help with the flame front speed? Can you imagine the increase in torque AND horsepower from a 16B or 18B with light forced induction?
Something wicked this way comes...
With forced induction couldn't the rotor size (width) be increased, even if it meant that we'd have to run 4 spark plugs per rotor to help with the flame front speed? Can you imagine the increase in torque AND horsepower from a 16B or 18B with light forced induction?
Something wicked this way comes...
I think a 3 rotor engine base on a 12a renesis can be a killer engine a lot of hp and torque combine with hi rpms capability.
there are a lot of ways to make a 3 rotor as fuel eficient as a 13b as long as you dont step on it
and remember that a bigger engine moving the same weight around will always be less stress
A 3 rotor engine in stock trim is much more smooth than a 13b
imagine a 2500lbs kabura type car with a 12a based renesis 3 rotor (or should I say a 1.8 lt 3 rotor), 280hp 220 lbft of torque with a 9000 rpm red line
![Eyecrazy](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/Eyecrazy.gif)
Last edited by rotary crazy; 08-22-2006 at 07:56 AM.