Just because a badge is different or a suspension is different doesnt mean the car follows a route. Hummer h2 is based off a suberban so i look at it as expensive suberban. Or a jaguar xk (older) are based off ford mondeo. Or even a navigator being a more expensive expedition.i keep it simple that way its not ignorant its just simple to me. A diffefent head

 

Just because a badge is different or a suspension is different doesnt mean the car follows a Different route. Hummer h2 is based off a suberban so i look at it as expensive suberban. Or a jaguar xk (older) are based off ford mondeo. Or even a navigator being a more expensive expedition.i keep it simple that way its not ignorant its just a simple approach to looking at some vehicles.
Ford taurus 3.0 vulcan has the same block as a ford ranger 3.0 minus small differences. But either way thats a **** engine.

 

Whoops double post sorry. Thank you for calling schitty wok can i take your order prease

 

Girls, girls, stop this fighting. lol

The application argument could go on forever. Engines are engines are engines are engines. There all metal. They all convert thermal expansion to rotary motion. If you want to compare them, start comparing features, strengths and weaknesses. Beyond that, your only arguing opinions.

The type of vehicle an engine came out of means practically nothing other then tune and strength. Cars and trucks have both good and bad engine designs. Truck engines are almost always built stronger then car engines. Would a Honda Civic engine last in a pickup pulling a trailer? Hell no. Would a small truck engine last in a Civic? Yes. It's overbuilt for that application. Truck engines sometimes run higher oil pressure, have better cooling systems, and use forged internals for strength. Ford cars, for example, are using fracture-split sintered crap rods for christ sake. Put those in a truck and let me know how that works out. Trucks typically run a different cam profile then their car counterparts. This goes with the large intake manifolds with long runners to increase low-end torque. In the lifetime of a truck engine, they have to do much more work then a car engine. They lug along moving much heavier loads without breaking a sweat. They are designed that way. When placed in a vehicle that's 1300lbs lighter and will never tow, it'll last a long time. I'll trade some of that lifespan for a little more abuse in a car and wind up with an engine lasting just as long.

My limiting factor is the cast crank. I have no alternative. In the case of a SBC, if you want a forged crank for your muscle car, where do you get it? From a truck... Either that or fork out 1000s for a billet crank.

This Isuzu engine has many of the same features as any race-winning enigne. I could care less who built it or what it was used in. The proof is in the mix and it seems Isuzu did something right with this engine considering they used it for 20 years. Do I like Isuzu? Not at all. I think for the most part they suck but I'm not going to judge them by name because of their "less-then-elitist" vehicles. The potential is there for this engine. At $200-500 a pop (pun intended) I'll find out exactly what it's RPM capabilities are.

If you think I'm just rambling on and not listening, your probably right. It's most likely because you haven't posted facts to back your opinions. Opinions are not facts. Design, specifications, and numbers are facts.

I've only asked for two things in order to comment to your arguments. A list of features (or lack of) that makes an engine good or bad, and a crank dyno of a 13b-msp. Without those I'll just carry on as usual and you'll be left thinking I'm the fool. Well if I am, explain why by providing facts. Until then, see you in the rear view!

Steering update - It's the same connectors causing the problem that everyone else is having. I had to clean them up and all is well. I figured I'd check because I'd like to know I'm not selling a bad rack.

 

I gave you a crank dyno for the renny

 

....:d

 

the OP is so full of **** and misinformation that replying becomes useless.
Good luck with your abortion.

 

Still can't understand why the OP didn't just buy a 350Z or a V6 Mustang or any number of other cars with torquey V6 motors rather than bastardising an RX8 with a truck motor.

 

You guys are a riot. You claim I'm full of misinformation but comments like that provide no explanation as to why you feel that way. Your bitching just to bitch. Does it make you feel like your "one of the gang" or is there intelligence lurking around somewhere in those empty statements?

I'm all for engine discussion if you can muster up some reasoning and fact.

 

Try reading the thread.

 

I'd give you and explination of why, but I don't have all day to retype all of your posts. Why do I keep coming back to this traing wreck.

 

I don't get it. Why so much grief to the OP. He came on line wanting to do a swap and was asking information,. I guess we do feed on our young?
I have to admit the engine has possibilities and it is obvious the OP likes to tinker with stuff.
Yes I would have chosen a different engine--but I do like the thought of a v6 in this chassis. I like the rotary engine and I am keeping mine but this is, to me, an interesting swap.
Stop bickering folks, let the man do his work. It is what he wants to do.

 

Bored, he trolls us we troll back, it's all in good fun.

 

Unlike many others, I post facts to back my opinions. No one has post design reasons why the Isuzu is a bad choice. I know what's wrong with that engine such as it's "less then optimal" (for my application) cams and cast crank. Those cons are seriously outweighed by pros. Are there other reasons it's a bad choice? Do tell.

 

No VTEC

 

We already tried but you're just too stubborn or stupid to understand.
Your project is full of fail, it won't be a cheap project to turn it into a sporty engine yet you keep blabbering the usual bullshit about the low-end tq etc.
Typical american.

Go ahead, do the swap and take some lap times as a reference. You'll find many stock rx8 did better than you after all... but at least you'd have to find new excuses for that poor engine choice.

 

Torque's for tractors.

 

Why are you guys getting stuck on torque claims? It's higher then the 13b and starts at 1500rpm plain and simple. There are more reasons for doing this. Most importantly I enjoy it and I think it's a fun project.

You guys haven't provided me Renesis dyno graphs so I can calculate this engine against it. If you don't have that data, how can you back your claims? Show me the usable RPM range of the 13b. Calculate average horsepower across that range. Peak numbers are meaningless. In an NA application, there's no replacement for displacement. The only hope 2.6L has against 3.5L is if the VE and operating RPM is vastly different. Reving out to 9k might not make up for the difference. Can't calculate that without more info.

 

I think you'll find this project highly disappointing. Also there are several dyno sheets for Renesis motors on the UK RX8 Owners Club site, perhaps you've not actually bothered to search for them.

 

I'm not on that site. Google search offered little then 3000-9000rpm runs at the wheels. I'm actually looking for numbers from the stock engine on an engine dyno.

 

Good luck finding someone who'll pull their working motor to get that!

 

FFS - just take a WHP dyno and add about 16% to allow for drive line losses and be done !
How fricken accurate does it need to be to make a reasonable comparison ?

 

Measure twice cut once...maybe thats why.

 

Because an engine dyno result is more accurate and covers a wider RPM range. There are only two kinds of information. The correct information, and the rest.

+1

 

https://www.rx8club.com/major-horsep...s-88067/page4/

Post #76

Unfortunately there is no graph. Maybe elsewhere in the thread if you keep looking. I stopped there.