SolMiester
Diamond Member
- Dec 19, 2004
- 5,330
- 17
- 76
I voted 6, but bias as i recently bought a supercharged V6...Its a little modified from factory fit with increased rocker gauges, double SC psi, a better cool air intake and extractors.
What about 1, 2, 3, and 5? 2, 3, and 5 are at least common engine configs (2 in bikes and stuff, 3 in Geo Metros and bikes, 5 in tons of diesels) - 1 isn't as common, but I'm sure someone out there prefers their moped.
newParadigm
Diamond Member
- Jul 30, 2003
- 3,667
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by: Vic
The most common form of rotary engine, the twin-rotor, is equivalent to a piston engine V-12 insofar as they both fire 6 times per revolution with virtually no unbalancing forces. The rotary also has the advantage of an extremely compact package. Unfortunately, they are very inefficient and unreliable.Originally posted by: ultimatebob
What if I like rotary engines? What do I choose then?
Yes, yes, I know wankel fans think their rotaries are efficient. They are not. For example, Mazda rotaries are not really 1.3 liters. That's cheating to say so, because it uses total displacement like a piston engine while forgetting that the same volume is simultaneously in use by the 3 sides of each rotor, which makes the effective size is actually 3.9 liters.
No. It doesn't use all three sides simultaneously, more like an average or RMS calculation would be needed. I'd put it in at around 2.8 effective litre's. But at 240HP, the fact that you're downtalking claims of effiency (which mazda doesn't make) is rediculous. MPQ ratings are standard for the power of the engine.
Someone shoudl tell that to the viper driver I was stuck behind the other day. 35 in a 55. ANNOYINGGGGGGGGGGGGG. Hot blonde, though.
DivideBYZero
Lifer
- May 18, 2001
- 24,117
- 2
- 0
Originally posted by: Vic
The most common form of rotary engine, the twin-rotor, is equivalent to a piston engine V-12 insofar as they both fire 6 times per revolution with virtually no unbalancing forces. The rotary also has the advantage of an extremely compact package. Unfortunately, they are very inefficient and unreliable.Originally posted by: ultimatebob
What if I like rotary engines? What do I choose then?
Yes, yes, I know wankel fans think their rotaries are efficient. They are not. For example, Mazda rotaries are not really 1.3 liters. That's cheating to say so, because it uses total displacement like a piston engine while forgetting that the same volume is simultaneously in use by the 3 sides of each rotor, which makes the effective size is actually 3.9 liters.
You're on the right track, but don't forget that the output shaft rotates at 3x the rotor speed. So for each rotation of the rotor, you've turned the crank 3 times.
A 1.3 liter rotary is equivalent to a 2.6 liter 4 stroke piston engine.
The RB26 has a fairly low displacement and will take more time to produce good torque. The fact that it's a straight six means nothing (aside from smoothness). It's the displacement and camming that matters.
Voted for 6, much prefer a car that handles well round corners over pure straight line accleration.
Lithium381
Lifer
- May 12, 2001
- 12,452
- 2
- 0
- Mar 20, 2000
- 102,395
- 8,558
- 126
BMW's 6s are bigger and weigh more than a much larger displacement pushrod V8. if they go around the corner better than something with a larger displacement pushrod V8, it isn't the engine's fault.
and this is about engine preference, not car preference.
some of you people seem to have little to no imagination. turbo'd inline 4s? pussies.
- Mar 20, 2000
- 102,395
- 8,558
- 126
Originally posted by: Fritzo
Straight 6. More power than a 4, but doesn't use as much gas as an 8.
If I could find one of those drop top Mitsubishi Spyders for cheap, I'd buy one in a minute. The 6's in those things cranked
the only reason it wouldn't use as much gas as an 8 is because it doesn't make as much power and the car it's in doesn't weigh as much. it's not like an M3 is a marvel of gas mileage at 16/23. a vette makes more a lot more power, 1/3 more torque, and gets better mileage, out of a much larger displacement V8.
Well, I have a 6TT, 8, and a 10. Engine wise though, I think the 8 is a great size/performance compromise. Lots of power potential, smooth, and can be packed as light and small as many V6 engines (and way smaller than i6).
Overall I have to say 8, nothing beats the sound and torque of a V8....
I'm quite fond of Supercharged 6's though, lots of power when you need it, and good gas milage at the same time (if you can stay out of the boost)
I'm quite fond of Supercharged 6's though, lots of power when you need it, and good gas milage at the same time (if you can stay out of the boost)
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter