View Poll Results: Renesis or 2.3 Turbo?
Renesis! Weight distribution is key, and I love the feel and sound of 9000rpm!
67
67.68%
2.3 Turbo! Power, torque, and modability!
32
32.32%
Voters: 99. You may not vote on this poll
Better engine for RX-8: Renesis or 2.3 Turbo?
09-01-2006, 12:14 PM
#51
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 3,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by New Yorker
I sense a lot of people here don't understand that if you were to replace the Renesis with a heavier, higher, more forward sitting piston engine, the RX-8 just wouldn't feel like an 8 anymore.
09-01-2006, 12:34 PM
#52
the Doctor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bryn Mawr, PA
Posts: 1,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by zoom44
it also amzes me that people post "some members have to much of a"hard on" for the rotary" when they are on a rotary forum. and no one on ever says that about people who like to throw out things like "4g63" because they think they sound cool
the rx8 is cool but itslacking in a bunch of categories and im likely gonna replace it with a better car at some point (there always is a better car...unless you somehow get that new ferrari enzo replacement)...im not gonna leave the site though when that happens.
Btw the 4G63 is a tested and tried power plant and i'd totally swap for it
09-01-2006, 12:42 PM
#53
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by r0tor
Good idea in theory, except for the many LS1 swaps in FD's and FC's which show no weight gain and actually a slightly better weight distribution...
dont compare non stock cars to stock cars.
The rotary engine out perform the 2.3 dizi engine in the ms6 and ms3 7 years ago, so imagine what a factory turbo 13b resnesis with DI would be today
09-01-2006, 12:48 PM
#54
the Doctor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bryn Mawr, PA
Posts: 1,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well if we're not comparing non stock cars to tstock cars a factory turbo renesis isnt available either...nor was it conceived as such...the renesis was designed as an NA powerplant, while the 13B was from the ground up a turbo power plant as you more than well know (btw love the work you've done to your rides).
09-01-2006, 12:58 PM
#55
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thanks for the compliments on my rides, I just think is not really fair to compare a FI engine to a NA engine if we do this then the engine on the mustang is a pice of sh..t because a 3 litter turbo engine from 14 years ago had 20 hp more and todays 2 litter engines are making as much power, and so on.
I think the renesis is one hell of an engine, and it is smaller in fisical size to the 2.3, I would really like to weight a 2.3 with turbo and intercooler.
I think the renesis is one hell of an engine, and it is smaller in fisical size to the 2.3, I would really like to weight a 2.3 with turbo and intercooler.
09-01-2006, 01:15 PM
#57
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MazdaspeedFeras
that was actually gonna be my next question...if anyone knows what the DIZI weighs. i know its top heavy with a Top mounted IC but FMICs can help that.
09-01-2006, 01:16 PM
#58
Administrator
feras i dont believe its the best engine to ever come along either. im justr saying you shouldnt act so suprised that on a forum about arotary powered cars you would find rotary supporters/ fans. and disregarding/belittling their opinions because of that is ridiculous
09-01-2006, 01:25 PM
#60
Registered
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SEPA
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by saturn
Not to hijack, but for all the people that said they went towards this car because of the rotary engine would you have bought a Honda Accord if it was the only rotary powered car on the market? What about if there were an sedan (like an Evo) as the only rotary powered car on the market?
My point is that most people go for the 8 because of its looks and handling capabilities. The rotary is a just a side-benefit that certainly gives the car a unique feel, but wouldn't be enough on its own. If it were then every complaint about Evo's or 350Z's would be "it doesn't have a rotary" as opposed to what you really hear which is "they're ugly" or "they're not unique enough".
My point is that most people go for the 8 because of its looks and handling capabilities. The rotary is a just a side-benefit that certainly gives the car a unique feel, but wouldn't be enough on its own. If it were then every complaint about Evo's or 350Z's would be "it doesn't have a rotary" as opposed to what you really hear which is "they're ugly" or "they're not unique enough".
A big selling point to me regarding the 8 is the look of it. It really is a beautiful car. Another big selling point is performance. This car handles like it runs on rails. The power curve is smooth, and it's pretty quick despite not having gobs of torque. I really do love this car.
However, had you asked me two weeks ago about my 8 I would have cursed its name and Mazda's too. Difference? It's 65 degrees in PA today. It's been under 80 degrees for the past week. This car does not like the heat and it shows. I've mentioned the sweet spot here before. It seems that under 75 degrees, this car runs flawlessly. It still handles well, but in the extreme heat of summer it does not run well at all (at least for me).
I thought I bought this car because of the unique-ness of its engine. But in reality, I bought it because of what I remember best from my RX-7 - handling. Mazda makes cars that handle really well. The rotary makes little difference to me.
Sure it's cool to be different, but if Mazda sold an MX-8 that had the same great looks and the excellent handling of the RX-8 along with better gas mileage and power, I'd trade-up in a heartbeat.
09-01-2006, 01:35 PM
#61
Flame Thrower
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Long Island
Posts: 873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bottom line is this; if you are wanting to put something else other than a rotary in the RX8 go for it, that's your taste, and that is fine I think that any engine modifications, and swapping is interesting. But, you have to expect to be flamed or critized for not sticking with the rotary. For me I would never put anything other than a rotary in my car or any RX car for that matter. The whole point of the RX is that it contains a rotary engine, to the die hard "rotor-heads" this is key, so you can understand why you would be "attacked" on a forum like this.
09-01-2006, 01:44 PM
#62
Hey devious. Great post buddy. However, I think you posted in the wrong thread. This thread isn't about engine swaps, it's about a hypothetical situation in which mazda offered, from factory, two engine choices (piston, rotary) as they have done in the past.
It was pretty clear to me the point of the thread. The OP even went so far as to remove the R from the piston version so that people like you wouldn't oh so cleverly point out "R means rotary". Good catch though.
I guess maybe it's too much to ask for rotary lovers to just say, "I'd pick the rotary" maybe add in for "XXX" reasons instead of failing to read, or comprehend, the original post and jsut going off on rotary purity blah blah.
I guess the bottom line is this: you might work harder on your reading comprehension.
It was pretty clear to me the point of the thread. The OP even went so far as to remove the R from the piston version so that people like you wouldn't oh so cleverly point out "R means rotary". Good catch though.
I guess maybe it's too much to ask for rotary lovers to just say, "I'd pick the rotary" maybe add in for "XXX" reasons instead of failing to read, or comprehend, the original post and jsut going off on rotary purity blah blah.
I guess the bottom line is this: you might work harder on your reading comprehension.
09-01-2006, 01:57 PM
#63
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 3,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rotary crazy
one thing I always point out to the people that say this, is that the v8 swap is a kit design by a performance shop and such it is not stock, if I want I can put the 13b-rew engine on an fd 4.5 to 5 inches more to the rear and 3 inches lower ( i have done this to several cars) imagine what this does to handling at the same time moving the battery to the rear to keep the 50/50.
dont compare non stock cars to stock cars.
The rotary engine out perform the 2.3 dizi engine in the ms6 and ms3 7 years ago, so imagine what a factory turbo 13b resnesis with DI would be today
dont compare non stock cars to stock cars.
The rotary engine out perform the 2.3 dizi engine in the ms6 and ms3 7 years ago, so imagine what a factory turbo 13b resnesis with DI would be today
09-01-2006, 02:00 PM
#64
Purveyor of fine bass
Originally Posted by New Yorker
I sense a lot of people here don't understand that if you were to replace the Renesis with a heavier, higher, more forward sitting piston engine, the RX-8 just wouldn't feel like an 8 anymore. .... It's hard to believe that someone who loves the 8—who really "gets it"—would want a Mustang or a Pontiac. If that's you, you simply bought the wrong car. An RX-8 with a piston engine is not an 8 anymore—and not just because the engine is no longer a rotary.
Say you did put the 2.3L into the car. Now, you just may have shifted the weight distro and got a 55%/45% car or something like that. But you didn't change the direct transmission feel, the powerplant frame, the carbon fiber driveshaft, the steering feel or most of the suspension. I think that much of the "feel" would remain.
09-01-2006, 02:09 PM
#65
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by r0tor
so i guess its ok to compare stock engines to imaginary ones... interesting
I think a more fair question is if you would replace the renesis for the engine on the s2000?
they are about the same size and waight and are NA
Last edited by rotary crazy; 09-01-2006 at 02:13 PM.
09-01-2006, 02:17 PM
#66
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BlueEyes
Hey devious. Great post buddy. However, I think you posted in the wrong thread. This thread isn't about engine swaps, it's about a hypothetical situation in which mazda offered, from factory, two engine choices (piston, rotary) as they have done in the past.
It was pretty clear to me the point of the thread. The OP even went so far as to remove the R from the piston version so that people like you wouldn't oh so cleverly point out "R means rotary". Good catch though.
I guess maybe it's too much to ask for rotary lovers to just say, "I'd pick the rotary" maybe add in for "XXX" reasons instead of failing to read, or comprehend, the original post and jsut going off on rotary purity blah blah.
I guess the bottom line is this: you might work harder on your reading comprehension.
It was pretty clear to me the point of the thread. The OP even went so far as to remove the R from the piston version so that people like you wouldn't oh so cleverly point out "R means rotary". Good catch though.
I guess maybe it's too much to ask for rotary lovers to just say, "I'd pick the rotary" maybe add in for "XXX" reasons instead of failing to read, or comprehend, the original post and jsut going off on rotary purity blah blah.
I guess the bottom line is this: you might work harder on your reading comprehension.
09-01-2006, 02:24 PM
#68
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BlueEyes
Cool, that's still not the bottom line of this thread.
09-01-2006, 02:28 PM
#69
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BlueEyes
Cool, that's still not the bottom line of this thread.
09-01-2006, 02:56 PM
#72
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 3,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the bottom line in my mind is based on the MS3 and MS6 performance, we could have a mid 13 sec car that gets 30mpg and retains the 50/50 weight balance and handling for no additional money and still have a 7k redline and with less maintenance and more aftermarket potential.
Last edited by r0tor; 09-01-2006 at 03:02 PM.
09-01-2006, 03:06 PM
#74
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by r0tor
the bottom line in my mind is based on the MS3 and MS6 performance, we could have a mid 13 sec car that gets 30mpg and retains the 50/50 weight balance and handling for no additional money and still have a 7k redline and with less maintenance and more aftermarket potential.
09-01-2006, 03:11 PM
#75
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rotary crazy
the bottom line is that 50 out of 70 people prefer the rotary, even as a less powerfull engine
I haven't voted because I have mixed feelings on the issue. If it were a 4G63 or another well established turbo 4 I might be swayed. In short, I just don't trust Mazda with turbo charged engines and I like the fact that there is still a rotary powered car even if I probably won't ever own it.