fc3s + Renesis = :)

[sen2two]

the reason im not using the renesis front cover is for ignition. im using the FC CAS. makes it easier. and the reni front cover is hidious. but you can use anyone you like from all 13b's or 12a's. they all fit.

the reni is longer than older 13b's because the front and rear plates are thicker. they did this to make the turn in the port less abrupt for better flow. this making your only choice for oil pan a custom one. not as easy as swapping a GSLSE on there.

i dont count the 26b. it was a race only engine.

now the problem with turbo'ing the reni is the weak apex seals and the high compression. there are shops out there now who machine down the rotors to your desired compression and to fit standard type apex seals. if i had the money to go that far, i would. and i plan to in the future. just not at the moment. they already have the reni making some nice numbers in unported stock form. like i said in an earlier post. wait until the real pros get into the renesis. people will be amazed and records will be broken...

[RETed]

Originally Posted by sen2two

wait until the real pros get into the renesis. people will be amazed and records will be broken...

I highly doubt that.


-Ted

[sen2two]

Originally Posted by RETed

I highly doubt that.


-Ted

im sure thats what other auto makers thought in 92. right before the 787 destroyed them and outlawed the motor...

not arguing. just stating an opinion.

[RETed]

787?
Are you talking about the LeMans winning vehicle?
What does that have to do with the RX-8 MSP engine?
IIRC, the 787 used a 4-rotor, PP engine.

So, I really don't understand your point.
If you think your MSP engine will outdo anything PP (even the older 13B PP exhaust), then I think you're smoking crack.
Please do your research first - SAE is a good start.
http://www.sae.org/
The advantages of the PP port over a side port is thoroughly documented.

The only benefit the MSP has over a PP is the minimizing of the (port timing) overlap.
Less overlap means for better emissions.

Don't let the 200+ quoted hp ratings fool you.
It's more due to the higher redline.

Keep in mind, at BP motor with the "older" PP exhaust will produce the same if not better numbers than the MSP.


-Ted

[neit_jnf]

Originally Posted by RETed

It's more due to the higher redline.

-Ted

wrong

the renesis has higher torque and power across the whole rev range than any previous NA rotary

it probably has better low end up to about 4 or 5000rpm than pp motors too.

[RETed]

Originally Posted by neit_jnf

wrong

the renesis has higher torque and power across the whole rev range than any previous NA rotary

it probably has better low end up to about 4 or 5000rpm than pp motors too.

Pull off that fancy schmancy 3-stage intake, and I'd like to see what kinda power it makes?
That intake system does a lot to add to the power output.


-Ted

[sen2two]

Originally Posted by RETed

787?
Are you talking about the LeMans winning vehicle?
What does that have to do with the RX-8 MSP engine?
IIRC, the 787 used a 4-rotor, PP engine.

So, I really don't understand your point.
If you think your MSP engine will outdo anything PP (even the older 13B PP exhaust), then I think you're smoking crack.
Please do your research first - SAE is a good start.
http://www.sae.org/
The advantages of the PP port over a side port is thoroughly documented.

The only benefit the MSP has over a PP is the minimizing of the (port timing) overlap.
Less overlap means for better emissions.

Don't let the 200+ quoted hp ratings fool you.
It's more due to the higher redline.

Keep in mind, at BP motor with the "older" PP exhaust will produce the same if not better numbers than the MSP.


-Ted

your right, you completely misunderstood what i said. the 787 4-rotor was the only rotary engine in that class. and im sure all the other automakers didnt think it stood a chance until is destroyed all the other competitors. so calm down buddy...me no likey crack

and the redlibe has nothing to do with the power output directly. they red line is just where it makes consistent power to. you could rev all day to 15k, but if your not making power there, whats the point?

and yes, a BP or PP will put out higher numbers. but no exstensive porting has been put into the renesis yet. again, give it time. also, how reliable and how streetable is a large BP or PP? or even a small semi-PP? these motors are making in stock form almost what those make. this is my point. stop being negative. no ones trying to argue here.

and i have put a 12a, 13b/gslse, TII,13b NA, and FD front cover on the renesis. all work just fine. only one hole dosnt line up. wich is an easy fix. try it out and you'll see what i mean.

and i already stated that a custom oil pan will be needed given the renesis is longer. read the statement right below what you quoted.

jeeze... maybe i shoud not of posted this here. just trying to put it out there. cause theres so many people asking about this. but no ones done it... why do all the internet guru's nit pick. isnt this why people hate rx7club? and come to places like this

[My5ABaby]

Originally Posted by sen2two

your right, you completely misunderstood what i said. the 787 4-rotor was the only rotary engine in that class. and im sure all the other automakers didnt think it stood a chance until is destroyed all the other competitors. so calm down buddy...me no likey crack

and the redlibe has nothing to do with the power output directly. they red line is just where it makes consistent power to. you could rev all day to 15k, but if your not making power there, whats the point?

and yes, a BP or PP will put out higher numbers. but no exstensive porting has been put into the renesis yet. again, give it time. also, how reliable and how streetable is a large BP or PP? or even a small semi-PP? these motors are making in stock form almost what those make. this is my point. stop being negative. no ones trying to argue here.

and i have put a 12a, 13b/gslse, TII,13b NA, and FD front cover on the renesis. all work just fine. only one hole dosnt line up. wich is an easy fix. try it out and you'll see what i mean.

and i already stated that a custom oil pan will be needed given the renesis is longer. read the statement right below what you quoted.

jeeze... maybe i shoud not of posted this here. just trying to put it out there. cause theres so many people asking about this. but no ones done it... why do all the internet guru's nit pick. isnt this why people hate rx7club? and come to places like this

I was under the impression that you really can't do much extensive porting on a renesis due to its design. But.... I'm not anywhere near an expert.

[Phoenix7]

Originally Posted by sen2two

jeeze... maybe i shoud not of posted this here. just trying to put it out there. cause theres so many people asking about this. but no ones done it... why do all the internet guru's nit pick. isnt this why people hate rx7club? and come to places like this

it's just an opposing view....don't get upset about it. Also, nit-picking and opposing views isn't the reason why the rx7club is hated. Just leave that can of worms alone for now though.

What's the next step in your FC3R project?

[RETed]

Originally Posted by sen2two

and the redlibe has nothing to do with the power output directly. they red line is just where it makes consistent power to. you could rev all day to 15k, but if your not making power there, whats the point?

Actually, I don't believe what you just typed, but that's a whole nother tangent entirely...

and yes, a BP or PP will put out higher numbers. but no exstensive porting has been put into the renesis yet. again, give it time. also, how reliable and how streetable is a large BP or PP? or even a small semi-PP? these motors are making in stock form almost what those make. this is my point. stop being negative. no ones trying to argue here.

This is why I tend to fuck with turbo'd 13B's.
No need to mess with all this normally aspirated bullshit.

jeeze... maybe i shoud not of posted this here. just trying to put it out there. cause theres so many people asking about this. but no ones done it... why do all the internet guru's nit pick. isnt this why people hate rx7club? and come to places like this

You get mighty defensive, huh?
This is an open forum.
As much as you get to express your opinions, I do too...as long as we don't break the rules.
I did not agree with something you said in this thread, so I typed a reply and cited my references.
A lot of the numbers being thrown around are a bit...twisted.
The only thing that does matter is WHEN you finish this project and then throw up a dyno sheet.
This is why I HATE project threads that are not completed - there's too many of them, and people get really unrealistic claims of what their cars MIGHT do.
Like I said before, I'd like to see this project FINISHED; it will prove or disprove what I've been saying for a long time now.


-Ted

[Max777]

double post

[classicauto]

Originally Posted by sen2two

the reason im not using the renesis front cover is for ignition. im using the FC CAS. makes it easier. and the reni front cover is hidious. but you can use anyone you like from all 13b's or 12a's. they all fit.

Not ALL front covers are simply interchangable. ALL will bolt to the front iron yes, but not all have the same pattern on the oil pan bolts. REW front cover is different from earlier ones. I've yet to inspect a renesis front cover up clsoe for a swap, but from the picture, it looks as if its the same as the REW (oil pan bolt pattern wise) in which case if you pan to use the RENESIS oil pan, you'll have to modify one or the other.