Oh great another RX-8 comparision. It's not even the same kind of engine.

 

Yeah Tess... That's like saying that Star Wars is a much better movie then the God Father.. It's like.. What's the comparison?

 

yea, yea, the RX8 is technically 1.3L, but since it makes 6 power strokes per revolution compared to the S2000's 2 it isn't an apples/apples comparison.

I believe in the EU that it is considered a 2.6L due to this issue and to just aweful fuel economy. On average, I think the S gets 5-7mpg more.


also, is the 13B's displacement all 6 chambers or is it just 2? I know piston engines take the volume of all cylinders, but do rotaries take the volume of the single combustion chamber per rotor (but with 3 sparks per revolution)?

 

i was just saying...the size of the engine is 1.3 litres...i've seen it, and it's freakin tiny. not that any of this is on topic or anything, but it's stupid to say it shouldn't count in the comparison because it is still a combustion engine that follows the same rules as our pistons...face it, the rotary is still an interesting option that offers great power for a small footprint, at the cost of fuel economy.

 

I'm beggining to think that you don't know what a rotary engine is. The fact is that it's a different kind of engine. It doesn't belong in this kind of comparison.

 

How quickly are you trying to take off from a stop? I let the clutch out @ 1100 to 1300 rpm and I'm still the quickest car off the line, 25% throttle, shifting up at 3,500 rpm.

 

i stand corrected.

 

you might as well compare a jet engine to a car engine then as well.

to calculate the volumetric efficiency you'd essentially have to double the size of it's engine depending on the model, even triple the size.

 

whatever...i know exactly what a rotary engine is and how it works...with fewer moving parts than a piston engine it is pretty simple. i give up on your guys.

 

how does a rotary engine work?