S2000 vs. RX-8: whose engine revs higher?
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
From: Cincinnati
You guys are also forgetting about the belts, pulleys, and the electrical system. Rpms are not about everything as running at too high rpms will create problems with the electrical system. Sounds easy right? Optimize the electrical system for high rpms, then you'll have problems with the the accessories running too weak at low rpms.
The engine itself is almost never the limitation in terms of it's redline. A good example is the 89-95 3.0 litre Taurus SHO engine built by Yamaha. The factory rev limits the engine to 7200rpms. The engine itself is good for 8500-9000rpms, but the electrical system is not. Several of the guys I knew were running underdrive pulleys and increased the rev limiter to 8500rpms, but they also started having charging problems at idle when running the accessories.
The engine itself is almost never the limitation in terms of it's redline. A good example is the 89-95 3.0 litre Taurus SHO engine built by Yamaha. The factory rev limits the engine to 7200rpms. The engine itself is good for 8500-9000rpms, but the electrical system is not. Several of the guys I knew were running underdrive pulleys and increased the rev limiter to 8500rpms, but they also started having charging problems at idle when running the accessories.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 1
From: The Beach
This topic has been talked about before. Nothing is wrong with the rotary engine OTHER than its delicate nature. A piston engine can take a ping here and there and not suffer adverse affects too much. However, a ping in a rotary engine means new engine or apex seals or ______(fill in the blank). Many of the blown engines are from individuals who DO NOT tune their engine correctly.
The above is referring to the 3rd generation RX-7's engine. N/A rotary engines are more durable and as a general rule last longer.
The above is referring to the 3rd generation RX-7's engine. N/A rotary engines are more durable and as a general rule last longer.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
From: Cary
I drove an RX-7 convertible for ten years because there was nothing out there that I liked as well until Honda put glass in the back of the S2K (and the RX-8 doesn't look like it will be available as a roadster).
The rotary (non-turbo) was great. Most of the problems are from owners who don't realize they were designed to use a quart of oil every 1000 - 1200 miles to keep the apex seals lubricated. As long as you kept oil in it, that hummer would run forever.
I didn't redline it often, but I remember the first time I did. The only reason I knew it was because the warning buzzer went off. The engine was just humming along quite contentedly. A reciprocating engine usually sounds like it's about to come apart at that point.
And, as noted earlier, it's a totally different animal. My '88 had 140HP -- with 1.3 litres displacement. (That was the 13B engine. They bumped the HP a little in '89 and later.)
Of course, the gas mileage around town totally sucks. I got around 17 compared to 22 - 23 in my S2K. I've never been sure, but my theory is that the rotary used a lot more gas at low speed than a normal engine.
The rotary (non-turbo) was great. Most of the problems are from owners who don't realize they were designed to use a quart of oil every 1000 - 1200 miles to keep the apex seals lubricated. As long as you kept oil in it, that hummer would run forever.
I didn't redline it often, but I remember the first time I did. The only reason I knew it was because the warning buzzer went off. The engine was just humming along quite contentedly. A reciprocating engine usually sounds like it's about to come apart at that point.
And, as noted earlier, it's a totally different animal. My '88 had 140HP -- with 1.3 litres displacement. (That was the 13B engine. They bumped the HP a little in '89 and later.)
Of course, the gas mileage around town totally sucks. I got around 17 compared to 22 - 23 in my S2K. I've never been sure, but my theory is that the rotary used a lot more gas at low speed than a normal engine.
Community Organizer
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 8,646
Likes: 145
From: Chapel Hill, NC
[QUOTE]Originally posted by baritone
[B]I drove an RX-7 convertible for ten years because there was nothing out there that I liked as well until Honda put glass in the back of the S2K (and the RX-8 doesn't look like it will be available as a roadster).
The rotary (non-turbo) was great.
[B]I drove an RX-7 convertible for ten years because there was nothing out there that I liked as well until Honda put glass in the back of the S2K (and the RX-8 doesn't look like it will be available as a roadster).
The rotary (non-turbo) was great.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
From: Bakersfield
Sounds like another contendor for the S2000 much like the Nissan Z.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
From: Hilton Head Island
Originally posted by Bukwheat
............
So....what kind of problems did the last gen RX-7 have, in terms of the rotary engine?
.........
A number of 3rd gen owners reported premature engine failures. These engines could be destroyed by overheating. I personally reached 121,000 miles on mine on the original engine and turbo. If you are familiar with how to use Usenet to get newsgroups, check out rec.autos.rotary, which does have many 3rd gen horror stories.
Another area of difficulty was basic driveability. The twin turbos were staged to bring on boost sequentially, with one turbo beginning at low rpms, and the second one coming on at 4500+ rpm. The electronic controls and turbo plumbing were exceedingly complicated and difficult to adjust. If everything was not perfectly adjusted, [which required the skills of a very, very well trained mechanic] there would be loads of stumbling and fumbling at low rpm's, and a tendency to run rough and smoke upon cold weather startup.
By way of contrast, the S2000 engine is extremely drivable, with minimal problems related to smooth starting and smooth driving. The basic VTEC mechanism seems to be simple and reliable.
............
So....what kind of problems did the last gen RX-7 have, in terms of the rotary engine?
.........
A number of 3rd gen owners reported premature engine failures. These engines could be destroyed by overheating. I personally reached 121,000 miles on mine on the original engine and turbo. If you are familiar with how to use Usenet to get newsgroups, check out rec.autos.rotary, which does have many 3rd gen horror stories.
Another area of difficulty was basic driveability. The twin turbos were staged to bring on boost sequentially, with one turbo beginning at low rpms, and the second one coming on at 4500+ rpm. The electronic controls and turbo plumbing were exceedingly complicated and difficult to adjust. If everything was not perfectly adjusted, [which required the skills of a very, very well trained mechanic] there would be loads of stumbling and fumbling at low rpm's, and a tendency to run rough and smoke upon cold weather startup.
By way of contrast, the S2000 engine is extremely drivable, with minimal problems related to smooth starting and smooth driving. The basic VTEC mechanism seems to be simple and reliable.