Has there ever been a worse engine layout than the meme triangle engine?

>needs 4.4L more to even compete
Kek

>Yeah but at the end of the day who gives a shit? If I wanted 500-600bhp I could do it with half the headache and a million times the reliability using an LS motor.

Because you're incompetent as a mechanic.

I usually don't care, but I'm curious what you drive. I bet it's sub-300hp.

>he hasn't heard a bridgeported 13B
Wew lad, you're seriously missing out

You bench racing faggots really are stupid.

>LS fags are stupid
Ftfy

...

nothing he said wasn't true
infact, rotary engines are actually a scam perpetuated by mazda. even in winning le mans

the rotary design is quite literally the worst ever to be put into production in all of history

>He needs double the fuel for half the power

>and none of the torque

Lol k
No

>implying LS engines get 30-40 mpgs
Spicy.

>damage control

Dude, autists will never admit their own personal faults and disgrace for buying into the rotary scam.

>qui-quick post "damage control"

now that's pathetic

u forgot the lolnotorque mate

the total energy output is worse than a bottle of diet coke and mentos

>rotary scam
Nice meme!

>rotary engines are actually a scam perpetuated by mazda
lol nigga what?

They are inherently a better engine for race applications, as they survive better at high rpm than piston engines. As street cars, not so much.

>the rotary design is quite literally the worst ever to be put into production in all of history
Except a 350 running on diesel
>GM

>>incredibly shit fuel economy for the amount of power
Fuel economy is for econoboxes, not sports cars
>>burns a lot of oil by design
And? It's not like you can't buy more oil.
>>unreliable and has shitty quirks like being easy to flood
>unreliable
>less moving parts than any piston engine
Also if you make your rotary flood it's because you're a newfag to rotaries
>>sounds like shit
better than your bus' diesel
>>no torque
this tired old meme again
>>apex seals are fucking stupid
No u

is it so hard to believe a race association (for le mans) controlled by the auto industry can bend rules or even out right drastically fix a race?
especially when billions of dollars are on the line.

rotary engines are 100% marketing and 0% engineering
billions of dollars at stake

this is the mazda scam

>unreliable and has shitty quirks like being easy to flood

They're not unreliable. They're reliable and will last as long as almost any other engine if you leave it NA. It's when you start boosting that you start having more issues.

Any one who says "LS swap!" With out understanding how it affects suspension geometry, how the suspension is now compensating for several hundred more pounds and ruining it's driving dynamics, ride, and handling. Not to mention heat and it's lack of dissipation escaping in to the cockpit.

LS isn't inherently wrong, but it Fucks up the entire point of an FD.

>post YFW the RX9 beats everything else

This.

>LS engine sits over the front axle
>perfect handling now ruined

Can't you retards find other cars to ruin? If you're not driving an RX7 for the handling and balance, get the fuck out.

Are you specifically referring to 1991?

Because a rotary was in LeMans long before that my nigga.
>The Sigma MC74 powered by a Mazda 12A engine was the first engine and only team from outside Western Europe or the United States to finish the entire 24 hours of the 24 Hours of Le Mans race, in 1974.

>rotary engines are 100% marketing and 0% engineering
You are seriously fucking retarded

...

Exactly.

>take a sports car designed around perfect balance and light weight with the rotary engine
>slap a monstrous V8 and ruin the balance
Go fuck up some other car, like a landbarge for ultimate sleeper mode.

More like 100% engineering. He's probably just seen that old rotary ad from the 70s that gets posted as a joke. I think it's fucking insane that Mazda could make the most underdeveloped engine work, and make 2 legendary cars that used it, one of those winning a race and being banned immediately after the win.

Think about that for a second. Every other cars on the market use piston engines. 0.001% are rotaries and they hold up amazingly well, hell, the only times they fail are when people like OP get their hands on them and fuck 'em up! What's not to love about a story like that?

>having to pour oil in your gas just so apex seals don't fall off

basically a lawnmower engine at this point

>one of those winning a race and being banned immediately after the win.
This makes me laugh every time I think about it

>oh fuck, that JapCrap engine blew out our high displacement miracles of piston engineering
>what do we do?
>it's simple. We ban the competition.

>burns less oil than a Honda or BMW in the process
basically really, really funny at this point

>he uses oil in his piston engine specifically to seal the combustion chamber
That's how stupid you sound

yeah, go find actual scientific studies with showcase total energy output at the crank

do you know what total energy output is?
no?

can you find any reliable sources which actually show the amount of energy is being output at the crank?

do you understand that all the engine dynamics being showcased on dyno tests and other mediums is pure unscientific bullshit?
no?

do you know what marketing fluff is?

you dont understand what kind of joke you rotary-autists are to those who actually understand what is going on

>I have zero physics knowledge but I'm going to give you my opinions on why I think the rotary engine sucks
-OP

Yeah, same.

The only reason that Mazda didn't win before was due to the fuel limits. The 26B was detuned to what, 6-700 horsepower? It could be set to 900, and that's without a turbo. 2.6 motherfucking liters. And dat fucking sound.

By the way, not sure if you know, but the engine was by far the best condition ever seen after winning LeMans. It could have raced another 24 hours or more without having any repairs done. That's amazing.

I'm going to ignore this post because you are clearly angry that people don't want your shitty generic V8 murrican strong engine. Are you a cuckold or something? Don't you want anything unique? What's the fucking point of putting the same god damn engine in every single car? Why not just buy a fucking corvette in the first place if you're not going to turn?

>NUMBERS
>GOTTA CHASE THOSE NUMBERS
>THE NUMBERS, MASON, WHAT DO THEY MEAN
You bench racers seriously need to fucking kill yourselves

more like ban rotaries before anyone can actually know what is going on.

there is been no testing done, no information to the public
people like you are fooled very easily

What did he mean by this?

Seriously what is this post trying to say? What the fuck? Have you ever driven a rotary? They're fast. What are these numbers and how are we being fooled/scammed? Mazda literally won LeMans, the FD is literally an amazing car, what are you trying to say here? Put your tinfoil hat back on, the radio waves are making you crazy again!

>Testing
For what? No information to the public? What are you even talking about?

please go back to /x/

>rotary engines are a conspiracy

>I own a rotary engine and will pretend everything in the OP is false to help me cope with my buyer's remorse
You don't need to be a senior level auto engineer to know the rotary engine fails at pretty much everything that matters.
>but it's 50kg lighter
doesn't matter at all.

>You don't need to be a senior level auto engineer to know the rotary engine fails at pretty much everything that matters.
>everything that matters
Like delivering an outstanding power/weight ratio with incredibly low displacement? Yea that doesn't matter at all, if you're a busrider

>50 KG lighter
lmfao, well I can tell you're DEFINITELY not a senior level engineer of anything

The 13B weighs 150 lbs without a turbo, and you can shave 40 lbs off if you have aluminum side housings. It's so compact it allows for a front mid-engine setup. The only thing that isn't in accordance with its 1.3 liter displacement is its fuel consumption, that's it, and that can be fixed with proper fuel mapping and ignition. Pushing 600+ horsepower, there won't be much difference in fuel consumption as you'd think, and then you have the benefit of a high revving and fun engine that gives you perfect weight distribution.

>pretty much everything
>pretty much
damage control harder. it does one or two things well and fails miserably at everything else. not good enough.

>fails at everything that matters
Except winning races like Le Mans

>being light doesn't matter
t. American highway roll racer

>3100lbs, 230hp
>outstanding

I'm talking about engines, not cars. Try to keep up, sweetie

alright retards, time to learn some basic lessons in physics

piston engines need more weight because this is how you house the detonation and energy output. if you make a piston engine lighter, it will literally explode from all that power

rotary engines solve this issue by producing less power.
there is no miraculous engine design which cheats physics and houses similar or greater power in lighter package. YOU WILL LITERALLY HAVE TO BE CHEATING THE PROPERTIES OF THE METAL AT THIS POINT. and rotaries dont use any space age metal.

the fact is, there is no actual scientific studies done on total energy output at the crank. the industry purposely throws out fluff to confuse idiots with meaningless variables. and some idiot on youtube runs a dyno test, which doesn't mean shit, and you fags will literally eat this shit up

rotaries are literally the worst engine designs in history.

We don't talk about the RX8

Much like Mustang guys don't talk about the Mustang II

230 hp from an na 1.3 is pretty good. Also 10000 rpms

>he actually got triggered by the 50kg thing
lmao
>so compact it allows for a front mid-engine setup
so just like an LSx? or countless other engines?
>Pushing 600+ horsepower, there won't be much difference in fuel consumption as you'd think,
no, because it will spend most of it's time broken. Pretty much any other modern performance engine would be a better platform for 600hp. The only way to make a rotary look good is by comparing it to modern 1.3s which is just dumb.

WHP is the only measure that really matters anyway

Is this opposite day?

Here's what it does right, for you retards out there
>puts out ridiculous power relative to displacement
>sits low and behind the front axle, meaning 1. great weight distribution and 2. great balance being in the front with the diff in the rear
>very lightweight
>fun to drive, LOVES to be abused, it literally needs redlining regularly
>easy as fuck to rebuild, and said rebuild will last a minimum of 100k KM, can go far longer than that without a turbo; a rebuild will cost you 1000 bucks in parts and you can do it while watching TV on a weekend, rather than shelling out thousands for a shop to rebuild your V8/spend all week measuring tolerances and clearances and not being able to pull the engine out by hand (fun)
>sounds wild and revs so damn freely
>is the sign of unique and clever engineering, unlike a step backwards like pushrods

what it does wrong
>burns oil (less than lots of cars, though)
>consumes a decent amount of fuel (I have NO idea why you care about this if you're american, your fuel is almost free compared to the rest of the world)--again, this can be aided, though
>doesn't make lots of torque, but then again, we aren't asking for trucks to use these engines, and revvy engines are fun and great for long periods of hooning

One day I'll get tired of replying to b8

>never mind that the car is overweight overall, just look at the engine in isolation
>engine in isolation is so hilariously terrible, RX8s regularly get PISTONED
lmfao

I see. I can tell by how butthurt this poster got.

230hp is not really impressive at all in a sports car. Quite unimpressive actually.

>posts the easy target
Good job

FD:
>2700-2800 lbs
>255-300 horsepower stock
>can remove nearly 200 lbs of weight and double the horsepower at the same time
>double wishbone suspension and low as fuck center of gravity, something muscle cars will never have

They won leman once and lost all the other races the car was entered in.

>>never mind that the car is overweight overall, just look at the engine in isolation
Well that is the thread topic. Maybe you should try lurking more considering you don't seem to know how Veeky Forums works.

You sound salty

no torque
meaning, any amount of weight will seriously cripple performance. for example, the average weight of a small car is enough to throw the rotary engine far out of its true efficiency range

to compensate, to achieve similar performance to a piston engine, more fuel is spent. in other words, more energy goes in and less goes out.

its amazing how so many people cannot grasp this simple science. literally millions of people, many of them who have positions as real engineers. very pathetic.

but the fact is, no real test of total energy output at the crank has ever been done or made public

rotary fags need to understand this

youtube.com/watch?v=1-sgSP9FGjg

>830 pound engine
>5400 hp

is this impressive?

Nobody said anything about muscle cars.

Like that's not a huge accomplishment? The only Japanese manufacturer to win. Like I said, the fuel limits had a lot to do with their losses.

You know full well that means nothing to shitposters

Doesn't that just mean it's a bad engine if it can't compete in an endurance race. Like what's even the point in using a Rotary if there's a fuel limit

>6 times the apex seals
>2 gallons per mile

230hp (210 in reality) from an massively maintanence intensive engine incapable of averaging over 18mpg is pretty fucking bad.

/thread

the swept area and rpms are irrelevant to bottom line performance like power, fuel consumption, and efficiency. In those cases even big dumb v8s beat out rotaries. That's not how technology is supposed to work, the wankel is a nazi abomination

so what you are saying is that you want an engine that doesn't burn fuel to produce power?

But its engine was in the best condition out of all of them after said race. That just proves its pedigree as a great sporty engine.

I actually agree with this because it's the truth. Here is a very big (you).

I would also like to add how rotary engines sound like pure shit. They make this buzzing noise, it totally sounds like chinese metal ass. And there is a real host of idiots out in this world who have convinced themselves this actually sounds good.

The rotary world is truly pathetic. It is packed with multiple levels of bullshit on every angle.

>needing to selectively quote a post to win an argument against yourself

3 rotors sound breddy gud
As much as i shitpost about them i'd still love an NA 3 rotor FD

Sure buddy. You 'win', now get lost

They SAID that "it could easily do another 24 hours". Which is complete speculation and FAR from factual. That doesn't prove anything you fedora wearing jabroni. It's a sporty engine alright. It's loud and smelly and small and unreliable. Those are it's factors. That is not the definition of sporty. POWER is sporty. Yes, the rotary does have more power per "swept area" and can achieve higher "revolutions" per minute, but when you realize that you have half the torque of a v6 and your 1.3 liter gets 15 mpg you kind of just want to kill yourself for buying an fc for your first car.

if the wankel was a mammal it would be a nasty little rat that gets tired and eaten by a common house cat

You seem to know a "lot" about engines. Please explain how a rotary is less reliable, then, despite being much simpler. No, rebuild intervals don't count, because the cost is ridiculously less than a piston rebuild, and is infinitely easier

>POWER is sporty
oh shit, you scared me with those caps, I'm not going to respond to the rest of your post. Because of the caps, and not because it was poorly written and wrong, I swear.

have you never driven a rotary powered car? Even a NA FC pulls nicely with a good flowing exhaust, those high RPMs are where the power is

>qoutating your own subjective opinion
It's unreliable because it breaks. Oh but it's fine it's only 300 dollars for a set of apex seals and you already have the special tools because it's the third time you've done it for this car.

>cost is ridiculously less

>infinitely easier

Do not criticize the way I write, because you have zero intention to write what you literally think. You are using this silly hyperboles and being defensive because you KNOW the rotary has problems. I'm using caps to emphasize because Veeky Forums doesn't have italics, dick.

what does a NA FC make? 160hp?

160, yeah. If that number really doesn't matter, I'll be damned, it's pretty pathetic and the one I've driven pulls pretty nicely

why not just put a motorbike engine into a full sized car

same principle as a rotary engine car, same snoflek status and possibly more reliability

one upside is simplicity and SUPER easy to tune and get power out of

they also breathe incredibly well so larger ports and freer-breathing exhaust can get you pretty good gains unless it's a renesis (which is shit anyway)

Dude don't get so mad, we're only arguing. Fuck, it's like you're having a temper tantrum because the 13B suits the FD better than a big V8.

Apex seals don't break -THAT- fast. In fact, for a lot of people it's the coolant seals that go first. And it's still a fuck of a lot better than blowing a rod. Basically, if you boost a 13B and blow something, it'll always be cheaper than blowing a piston engine (warping the head, shit breaking and destroying the engine internally, all of which are fatal). If the seals go, it's not fatal.

Yeah, I realize the rotary has problems. If every engine was a rotary and one in every 100,000 was a piston, I bet that would have even more. The rotary was tossed away during an oil crisis and then again because of emissions. For such a ridiculously uncommon engine to put out the numbers and driving experience it does, while being ridiculously mechanically simple, I think that's amazing.

>FD RX-7 made 200HP/L+

>uses twice the fuel for the same power
>"bu-but it's a 1.3 liter bro"

Motorbike engines aren't designed to cope with that much load on them all the time.
For example DAF used to sell a 7.5t truck here with a 12v cummins 5.9 turbo that made 130hp, or 150hp in the high power version.
They could have just have easily used a BMW 2.5l diesel to get that power instead, but the thermal and physical load on the internals would mean it wouldn't last long.
Despite all the gearing memes you hear on Veeky Forums there's more things to consider when you're dealing with significant changes in weight loading.

>obvious b8 thread
>97 responses
>in 2 hours

God dammit, go out and do Veeky Forums stuff on your car in the garage instead of arguing about stupid shit