The acceleration in the tuned AP1 was crazy!!


Lets face it guys...pound for pound...(meaning price,looks, value etc....) the S2000 is the best thing smoking when it comes to roadsters.

 

I love how every one says the ap1 has more raw power and is more for a driver to handle, when almost all of them have these cars as daily drivers and will almost never see track time.

 

autox is cheap and fun... some people like me want to be able just to have it... why not?

 

Off-topic but, here's why it's considered a 2.6L.

http://www.rx7.com/techarticles_displacement.html

 

no reason not to have it, but hy ran about it those qualities if you never experience them first hand.

 

I understand why people want to call it a 2.6L for the 13b engines but I don't agree with it and here is my argument why: The ability of the rotary engine to have twice as many power strokes per 720 degree revolutions (the 4 stroke piston engine) is inherent to the design. It is one of its advantages. Two stroke piston engines also have twice as many power strokes per 720 degrees but we don't double their displacement when we measure them.

There could be 4G63 running 20psi of boost on a large turbo making 500hp (250hp per liter), yes we dont say its running 2.3x atm of pressure as apposed to our 1 atm so its really a 4.7 liter engine.

The 13b takes in 1.3 liters of air (assuming a simple 100% VE for this argument) adds fuel, burns it and turns it into mechanical energy. When we measure displacement we measure how much air it takes in, uses, and exhausts for a full cycle. In this case the 13b rotary is 1.3L. If we measure how much air it takes in every 720 degree's then it would be a 2.6L and two strokes should be measured the same way too. Mostly I really like the rotary fuel hog so I'm sticking up for it

 

Good response, and an example of why you shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet.

In MX, the AMA allowed 4 strokes a displacement advantage to compensate for having 1/2 as many combustion cycles as 2 strokes, as opposed to trying to make up some BS that the 2 strokes' displacement was really twice as big as has been commonly accepted for ages.

 

Since when is math hypothetical?

The only change required is to the rear-end gear to optimize the RPM advantage of the AP1. That's not particularly difficult.

The curious thing is why Honda gave the AP2 better gearing with less ability to use it????

So, if the gearing were optimized, the AP1 is faster. Straight from the factory, the AP2 is faster due to Honda's bizarre reasoning in utilizing such poor gearing in the AP1.

Just weird. I guess they were hypersensitive to everyone's "no torque" argument?

 

why are you saying unfortunately? in later years the small things like gearing was improved...or in most people's eyes improved. this is so common in every automaker.
look at the gto when it came out - the first year it had single exhaust with a smaller engine with less styling. there were plenty of people lining up to buy them. then the next year they come out with an improved version that has more hp, hood scoop and dual exhaust...clearly items that most buyers would want. they're all out to make some money and keep the appeal of the new models.

the auto critics compained about lack of torque - for good reason i think. those of you that are using your cars for track only cars i could understand liking the twitchyness of the ap1 but for anyone driving this car on a daily basis i couldn't imagine not wanting a little more torque and slight increase in cabin room for the daily commute to work.

whether on purpose or through more time and engineering cars are improved throughout their production run - the same thing happens with new tv's or computers: it's never a good time to buy one because the next model is going be sleeker, faster and "better". in retrospect i wish i would have waited a couple of years so i could get the vsa (which can be turned off), updated steering wheel and seats, etc.

the facts to me are that the ap2 engine generally dynos a little higher in torque and hp figures. the tradeoff is a lower redline...my take on this is if you started out with an ap1 you'll always have a love for it...an ap2 will never have that special feeling. for someone like me i just bought a new one in '04 and am happy with it. i couldn't imagine driving a sports car with less torque than this to be honest...of course i'm a converted muscle car driver in all fairness.

 

I just meant it's unfortunate the cars have different gears so the engines can't be compared on a true "apples to apples" basis, not that it's a bad thing at all. Clearly, better gearing is good.