Jump to content
HybridZ

Another SR20 Z-Car:)


Guest brianglawson

Recommended Posts

sweet clean looking install.

 

Lots of people dont like the fact of putting one in a Z but I think its a great Upgrade, easy power to be had out of that motor not including the immediate power increase of it in just stock form.

 

That makes two that Ive seen now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest bastaad525

you GOTTA love the amount of free room that leaves... friggin insane... must do wonders for weight biasing too... I wants *drool*

 

and there is NO reason for NOT putting one of these in your car. People say the number one downside is you lose a lot of torque... well... that's only until boost comes on right? Then the sky's the limit. And frankly, the L28ET, with stock compression levels, isn't exactly a torque monster off the boost either. And I mean... come on look at all that room! You can throw your little brother in the engine bay to help you work on it!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't put it in my car.

 

1. looks like a pin d!ck engine.

2. its 2 litres' date=' it sounds like your downgrading your engine

 

I know i'm gonna get flammed for this, but it just doens't look right!!!!![/quote']

Kind of a useless retort. Why did the regular 240z have a 150hp 2.4 liter engine, when the fairlady 432r had a 2 liter dohc inline 6? Why does the US 240sx have a 2.4 liter inline 4, when the silvia in japan (same car) has an sr20det? Why does the subaru 2.5rs have a 2.5 liter flat 4, when the wrx rated at 67more hp have a 2 liter turbo?

 

I can keep producing examples, and you're still gonna lose! And just to add insult to injury, here you go, my Z:

DSCF0005.sized.jpg

Even smaller and lighter than an sr20det. and it's 1.3 liters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest bastaad525

Dont see how it's a downgrade when stock the thing makes better power than a stock L28ET. Plus... twin cam crossflow head vs single cam... so what if it's smaller? If it makes the power and is reliable that's all that matters.

 

How much power can you push out of a stock (head, block, crank) SR20 reliably? I'm betting it's more than you can get out of a stock L28, though I wont be too surprised if I am wrong on that.

 

By that same token you could say a rotary swap into a Z is a downgrade, yet no one ever says anything about a rotary swap other than how cool it is.

 

We dont all want big honkin V8's in our Z's, and not everyone is willing to settle for the aging (yet still reliable, dont get me wrong) single cam L28. Sure the next logical suggestion might be an RB but that's a whole nuther story in regards to cost, difficulty and fit... and again... With the SR20, though it may not look fantastic to some... having that much room in your engine bay ROCKS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say to each his own. I like the detail work. The weight distribution would be further back than stock. The power is probably good, although I don't know for sure how much power is available. Would I put one in my car? maybe. Ive seen 510's with them and they do look good in there. Just my 2 cents. :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sr20s can be built to 400HP relatively cheap and be reliable. for a bigger chunk of cash you can get 600-700. a 400 hp sr20 will kill a 400 L or v-8. The long block can be picked up by a relatively beefy guy...a rotary long block is only slightly lighter. there is a fd rx7 on this board that is running 10.7s with a sr20 swap. the fd is quite a bit heavier then the Z also.

 

My 2 cents. Its not a downgrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even smaller and lighter than an sr20det. and it's 1.3 liters.

 

Thats what its rated at but thats only 1 side of each rotor. if you add them all up its a 3.9 and thats more in line with the kind of power it makes...also fuel it consumes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stony are you saying that when a 13b is moving its a/f requirements and displacement is equal to a 3.9? If so does that mean at 1bar it inhales 7.8 (almost 500 cubes) worth of air and using that much fuel? That would explain why the turbo upgrades for them run such big exhaust housings to me. Ive heard the 3.9 discussion before, and it makes sense to me, its just hard to grasp im still a piston, pushrod and cam guy :roll:

Sr20 isnt a downgrade, and its an easy swap, has to be, it fits in there good from the sides and front/back. I would still go RB over it anyday though, just to outrule the possibility of a 510/roadster type being able to get you in the straight with his SR swapped car. Zcar should always be top of the food chain :twisted:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, a 13b has an intake, compression, and cumbustion action for each side of the rotor (3 sides, 2 rotors). Im not a pro.... this is just the basic undserstanding that i have of the rotary. when you displace a piston motor you measure each piston. I guess mazda got away with measuring one side of the rotor because there was only one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Displacement is measured by the amount of air moved per cycle set, right? So, it's not a 3.9 liter, since per 1 rotor revolution, only 1 side of the rotor is used to move air, compress it, then combust it, and expel it. But one could theoretically argue that it's a 2.6 liter, if you compensate for the extra emptry stroke cycles done by the piston engines. For every up/down stroke, the crankshaft in a piston engine moves twice. Wankel motor completes its combustion cycle in a circle.

 

if you guys have a LOT of time to kill:

 

http://www.rx7club.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=165579

 

there's a thread dedicated to discussing the displacement of the wankel engine. I'm just going by what the inventor, Felix Wankel, rated the engine at. Which is 654cc per rotor chamber (3 per rotor, only 1 used at a time) x 2 rotors, at 1308cc total.

 

On a side note, you can't measure the rotary by the crank rotation, because for 1 rotor revolution, the rotary makes 3 eccentric [crank] shaft revolutions. So when the tachometer on a rotary is showing 6k rpm, that's the speed of the crank shaft, the actual rotors are moving at 2k rpm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok without reading all 15 plus pages of people arguing back and forth about what the displacement is (I have already heard it all). I understand the theory of why it’s a 1.3. I just feel the way it’s measured is bogus. Do this If you are only going to count the one side of the rotor take the spark away from the other two side and see how it runs. Don’t get me wrong I love rotaries but to say a 1.3-L motor can produce 6-800 HP is not right. You have to measure each side of the rotor to get a "true" displacement. A 1.3 does not move enough air to spool a turbine with a 1.05 exhaust housing.

 

Aux I’m not trying to get in a pissing match. In my opinion you can not compare the piston engine with the rotary to get displacement it is a totally different design. This is just my honest opinion on the rotary. The are allot of people that agree and disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...