Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

One for the admins,

why is it that the same people can post absolute crap in this thread yet nothing gets done ?

i thought there was a section made for these types of rubbish comments that seem to be common amongst the same users.

Agree. Move thread to Wasteland?

look out, its the same troll back again trying to troll the trolls.

Troll elsewhere kta

:D

lol you're just pissy that SK keeps rolling you Marc, awesome thread would read again! (now for someone to link this thread to a rotor forum ha ha ha)

lol interesting reading apart from the tl;dr posts about physics etc. Most of the rotor forum invaders have done nothing to help their cause, they are nearly as bad as the muzza's from Calais Turbo lol.

IMO rotaries suck pure and simply because they are impractical as a street car or a daily in any form. That and the insane fuel consumption.

just FYI fuel consumption above 15L/100km is shithouse.

Funny how everyone I know with rotary powered cars never seems to have them on the road for more than a month or two at a time, and are getting fuel consumption skywards of 15L/100km. (AFAIK the R32 GT-R is quoted at around 16L/100, and GTS-T at 10L) Thats why I mentioned reliability, and fuel consumption, from my own experiences. The OP asked why they suck (and if they were any good they would be in mainstream use), and apart form epic thread diversions and invasions from RX-7 owners, is being told opinions why.

Rb30s are stronger than local motors - 500 000km on an unopened RB30S FTW
I can't wait to meet another rotary owner and inform them all about the 'mazda lies' which have been uncovered in this thread :D
I think the main problem is your continuing acceptance of the Mazda lies Birds :)
good point about the turbo sizes, all that air has to fit in somewhere! (even with the rotary's lower inherent compression ratio).

After reading this thread, I can't look at an RX-7 the same way because I'm constantly thinking theres a 3.9 litre motor in there, and my boner goes down just that little bit more :P

I think we're all forgetting that this is a thread about why rotaries suck, rather than an existential discussion about what "is" a 2 stroke a 4 stroke or a rotary engine etc etc. Nor is it an RX-7 appreciation thread. Therefore anyone who wasn't bashing Mazda's or rotaries in general is wrong, and should gtfo :D
so the other main reason why rotaries suck is their relative inefficiency compared to modern piston engines?
well now we all agree that the RX-7 sucks due to the Mazda lies since it is a 3.9l rotary cycle motor with characteristics of both 2 and 4 stroke piston engines!
This thread is starting to die off a bit, so before someone takes it and collates it into their university thesis, is the wrong side willing to concede to the Mazda lies?

I cannot be stuffed anymore, but I think this one sums your contribution to this thread perfectly,

What you call fact I say subjective opinion...the length of this thread is evidence of that. But really, shut up man. The debate finished a long time ago...we all got sick of it, even the most argumentative of us. You had your chance for input back then, of which I didn't see much besides you saying who is right and who is wrong. Why try to reignite the fire when the thread is long enough as is? It sure sounds like trolling to me.

um I think you have the wrong quote there, my name isn't marc, and I haven't tried to argue anything with SK? I appreciate the trouble you went to to quote nearly every post I've made in this thread, you must get bored!

If you don't like it, hit report and continue on your way.

most of the posts in this thread are opinion based, does that make them all trolls?

A mate got a Series 5 FC a few months ago, and it's completely stock, it actually has decent fuel consumption and hasn't had any problems yet, though it's been looked after by its Aussie owners well.

so you don't even remember what you've posted in this thread?

people shouldn't have to hit the report button, how come you just couldn't stfu and keep your school yard comments to yourself?

most of these what you say 'opinion based' comments actually come from people that have some kind of first hand experience with the rotary engine and not what they heard from an uncles mates brother who has a cousins sisters boyfriend that owned one.

i just don't get it one bit. but i am sure you will make up another bull shit comment in an attempt to justify your reasoning.

thanks for the laugh though, you really are dumb :P

IMO rotaries suck pure and simply because they are impractical as a street car or a daily in any form. That and the insane fuel consumption.

Funny how everyone I know with rotary powered cars never seems to have them on the road for more than a month or two at a time, and are getting fuel consumption skywards of 15L/100km. (AFAIK the R32 GT-R is quoted at around 16L/100, and GTS-T at 10L) Thats why I mentioned reliability, and fuel consumption, from my own experiences. The OP asked why they suck (and if they were any good they would be in mainstream use), and apart form epic thread diversions and invasions from RX-7 owners, is being told opinions why.

Care to elaborate on why they dont make a perfectly good daily driver? as i beg to differ

Being the owner of 4 rotaries so far i can tell you that my old R100, a 13BT that ran mid 12 all day long, was driven a good 30klms in peak hour traffic on a daily basis and was never an issue. I drove it to work for a good 18 months and it was trouble free.

No personal attack on your mates but clearly they need to find a decent mechanic as the ones they are using sound pretty useless. Reliablity is not an issue if they are put together properly and BLOJOE is a perfect example of this. A car that if set up properly ie slicks, rollcage etc would run high 8's and it cops it every time the car gets started up. Joe has raped this car and it always comes back for more. I have also seen an FD with its original engine and 250,000klms....

If people wanna pick on engine parts ie seals, lets not go near the RB26 oil pump lol

i think you should remember that this is a public discussion forum, not the Forced Induction section that is more aimed at factual and objective posts. I do like how you've posted about 1 comment that was actually OT and have continually tried to attack me.

As they say, "haters gonna hate"

thanks for dropping docs you top bloke, feel better now? I think it tells a lot about you that you would go to THAT much trouble.

this is a through and through case of trolls trolling trolls like I said

Edited by bozodos
  • 11 months later...

so some good stuff on here.....and the usual E-peen comparison rubbish. i feel like im in a PS3 Vs Xbox thread all over again.

Rotors are great at what they do, and if they were bad they wouldn't have kept them alive so long. i know a 13B will be the engine of choice for my silly little VW bug......even in standard untouched form, a hell of alot faster than any beetle motor for the money....and other than a sardine canned WRX engine..the only thing that fits

That hyper car on this forum, that's what I was originally talking about in very first post on this stupidly long thread.

http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/worlds-greatest-hypercar-hoax-20110829-1jhw3.html

The RSC website states the car will be powered by a 5.2-litre, quad-turbocharged, eight-rotor rotary engine producing 2089kW of power and 3494Nm of torque – or roughly five times the power and torque of a 911 Turbo S.

Rotors are great at what they do.

Amen to that. They are brilliant at turning petrol into noise. The old ones also turn some of the oil dumped through them into noise and stinky fumes aswell. Bonus.

As for the rest of this thread it was stuffed when SK posted a bunch of half arguable "facts". But then people should never let the facts get in the way of a good internet trolling.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • LOL.... a good amount of people (not all) on that continent seem to know everything and like to measure things in bananas, football fields, statue of liberties instead of the metric system lol.
    • I assume the modules are similar enough, so if you've had no issues I don't see why I would. I have tried to find a wiring diagram for the FPCM / fuel pump circuit, but I can't find it anywhere. Otherwise, I would just do some wire cutting and joining at the FPCM and give the 12 V supplied to the FPCM directly to the pump instead. If you know anyone that could help with wiring diagrams, I'd be very happy  
    • If it dies, then bypass. The task isn't difficult. I have one running on a standard R32 FPCM. That's after nearly 20 years of it running an 040, which pull substantially more current than the Walbro. They're not the same module, but I'd hope it indicates that the R33 one should be man enough for the job. I think people kill them when putting proper sized pumps on them, not these little toy pumps we're talking about here.
    • Silicone spray won't hurt anything. And if it does, that's an opportunity to put some solid steel spherical bushings in, so you can really learn what suspension noise sounds like, If you're going to try it, just spray one bush at a time, so you can work out which one is actually noisy. My best guess is that if the noise started only since putting the coilovers in, then it is just noise being transmitted up through the top mounts of the struts, and not necessarily "new" noise from bushes. But it's almost impossible to know.
    • Are you saying the 34 is SUV height, and not that we're talking about an SUV here? (because if we're talking about an SUV, you don't fix them. You just replace them when something breaks. Not worth establishing sufficient emotional connection with an SUV to warrant doing any work on one). I wouldn't jack my car up on a short little loop of 10mm steel rod poking out through a hole in the bumper bar, front or rear end. I realise that we're probably not talking about that type of loop at the front, being the one under/behind the bar on a Skyline.... but even for that one, trying to jack up on what amounts to a thin piece of steel, designed purely for withstanding a horizontal tension force, not a vertical compressive force (and so would be prone to buckling/crushing) and, my most particular bitch about it - located RIGHT AT THE EXTREME FRONT OF THE CAR, applying a load up through the radiator support panel, etc, with almost the entire mass of the car cantilevered between there and the rear wheels? Nope. Not doing that. Not on the regular. That structure out there in front of the front crossmember is not designed to carry load in the vertical direction. Not really designed to carry any load at all, really. The chassis rail that the tow point is connected to would be fine loaded in tension, as per towing. Not intended to carry the mass of the whole car, especially loaded all on one rail, with twisting and all sorts of shitty load distribution going on. No, I will happily drive up on some pieces of wood, thanks. That can only happen on driven wheels, and they are at the other end of the car, and this problem does not exist at that end of the car. And even then, I have been known to drive up on at least 1x piece of 2x8 each side at the rear, simply to reduce the amount of jack pumping necessary to get the car up high enough for the jack stands. What really really shits me about Skylines is the lack of decent places for chassis stands at either end of the car. You'd think they'd be designed into the crossmembers.
×
×
  • Create New...