Speaking of HP per liter...

Joined
24 January 2002
Messages
1,183
Location
Republic of Texas
The new <a href="http://www.mazdausa.com/rx8/gallery/default.asp?sniffer=1">Mazda RX-8</a> is quite impressive at almost 200hp per liter NA, producing 250HP at 8,500rpm with only 1.3L.

Edit: oops, used []'s instead of <>'s on the HTML code...

[This message has been edited by Zuerst (edited 27 November 2002).]
 
I dont think rotary engines count in hp/l. Totally different. --at least that is my opinion. But that is impressive nonetheless. However, I bet that thing makes no torque.

[This message has been edited by NetViper (edited 27 November 2002).]
 
The HP/displacement measurement is a different for rotary engines vs Otto engines.

Perhaps a better metric would be HP per pound of engine weight?

-Jim

------------------
1992 NSX Red/Blk 5 spd #0330
1991 NSX Blk/Blk Auto #3070 (Sold)
1974 Vette 454 4 spd Wht/Blk
1976 Honda Accord 5 spd, 3 door Blue/Blue
1977 Honda Accord - Custom - Under Construction
1986 Chevy Suburban
http://homepage.mac.com/jimanders/PhotoAlbum1.html
 
I have always heard rotaries are multiplied by 2 to get a comparative displacement in a piston (Otto) engine. So that would be a 2.6 liter (roughly), and still very efficient but not Honda/Ferrari efficient.

------------------
Gary Yates
1995 Red/Tan
1992 White/Black
2002 Red and White Cooper S
 
Gary!!!

You got a Cooper S?!

Cool. I've been debating this purchase for awhile now.

What do you think so far?

-Jim

Hmmm... Gary Cooper. Has a nice ring to it.

PS: I've heard similar numbers for Rotary-Otto comparison. I don't know if it's that high. In some ways a rotary is like a 2-stroke engine.

A correction factor that took into account the weight and size (kind of like density) with HP would be an interesting thing to look at.

------------------
1992 NSX Red/Blk 5 spd #0330
1991 NSX Blk/Blk Auto #3070 (Sold)
1974 Vette 454 4 spd Wht/Blk
1976 Honda Accord 5 spd, 3 door Blue/Blue
1977 Honda Accord - Custom - Under Construction
1986 Chevy Suburban
http://homepage.mac.com/jimanders/PhotoAlbum1.html

[This message has been edited by Jimbo (edited 27 November 2002).]
 
Hmmm... I didn't know much about rotary vs otto engines. So I guess it's more like around 100HP per liter on a non-rotary engine then.

But it would be awesome if the next NSX can produce near 200HP per liter though.
 
If the Next NSX can make 120/L with a 4L V8 (read 2 S2000 engines stuck together) then I think we would all be VERY happy.
 
If the next NSX can make 200 hp per liter, I bet we'd all be happy with another 3.0-liter V6.
biggrin.gif
 
That would be an engineering milestone! If the the next NSX had 600 hp, i.e. 200hp/ltr, I don't think anyone would care how many cylinders it has. Perhaps an 11k redline would help squeeze some of those extra ponies : )

[This message has been edited by Sig (edited 28 November 2002).]
 
Originally posted by Jimbo:

A correction factor that took into account the weight and size (kind of like density) with HP would be an interesting thing to look at.

Considering rotaries are both small and light, they would probably do even better in that comparison than in hp/L.
 
Originally posted by ncdogdoc:
I have always heard rotaries are multiplied by 2 to get a comparative displacement in a piston

Each rotor fires twice as often when compared to a piston engine, so it does twice the work for a given number of rotations.

If you want all out NA power, you should check out this baby --
eng-picco-01bp.jpg
http://www.ofna.com/eng-picco-01bp.html

This 2-stroke revs to 35,000RPM and puts out the equivalent of 784HP / liter. (Earplugs not included.)



[This message has been edited by JoeSchmoe (edited 29 November 2002).]
 
Do you have RC's?

I have a few a OS .21RG myself, as long as other .15's and hand modified tuned .12's.
wink.gif


Even the OS .26 4 stroke as well for thumping power.

[This message has been edited by Dan H (edited 30 November 2002).]
 
Back
Top