I like the way this car looks. How about you?

http://www.autoweek.com/classifiedsItem.cm...cms?itemId=1717

What rear tail is that?

Not a bad price, IMO. I don't know what it would normally go for or anything, or the condition of the car, but ya know.

I like how you can just see the ground. Make dropping sockets a little bit better.

Rotory engines are fun. I think that rear spoiler is just those stansard 914 rear deck spoilers.

Old VW and Porsche Feature car back in the day, nice to see it's still alive. I all ways liked that car, nicely done, and my kind of conversion fast and lite!

Nope, its not. I have one and I like the one on that teen better.

The contact phone number has a 702 area code. That is Las Vegas.
If anybody here needs a PPI let me know.
(I may just go and look at it for fun anyway)

From what I've heard, the only problem with the rotarys is, at startup they lack lubrication causing excessive wear. Supposed to be a weak point.

So do piston engines. Rotary enthusiasts will point out that the rotary has only 7 moving parts that don't change directions like in a piston engine and thus should last longer at high rpm than a piston engine.

It's amazing how many theories appear because people don't understand the rotary engine. The other interesting one is when people complain that the rotary uses oil. What they don't understand is that the car is designed to use oil in that they have oil injectors which mix oil in the combustion chamber. If the car didn't use oil you have a problem with the lubrication system.

Here is one of the most true statements ever made about the rotary engine and probably the cause of the majority of reported reliability problems with the engine. It comes from a stand alone EMS company explaining why they do NOT make one for a rotary application:

Mazda Rotary Engines Link has provided many systems for the 12a 13b and 20b Mazda Rotary engine. Currently we choose not to supply systems for these applications for three reasons. Firstly the rotary engine will not survive incorrect tuning particularly ignition. In a conventional (piston) engine as you get closer to the optimal tune the engine responds accordingly, performing better as the tune progresses. Feedback when tuning a rotary is harder to interpret for the tuner. Worst case the engine makes full power when under fuelled or over advanced and detonates. This is not a problem with conventional engines due to the feedback you get as a tuner. The result is a very unhappy customer even though it was out of our control. Secondly, the rotary market is full of "back yarders" and DIY's forwarding themselves as "experts". While there are some very competent, qualified rotary engine builders in the market they are the exception. Thirdly most rotary customers don't want to do the whole job properly either due to a lack of dollars or attitude. For these reasons we have been happy to let other suppliers struggle with this relatively small market. We do supply systems to selected dealers who are very happy with the results that they get but in general we don't promote the systems. I have to finish by saying that the Mazda rotary engine is absolutely fantastic when properly set up and installed and I hope that they keep producing them as they provide interest and variety in an increasingly homogenous market. When I see a good rotary application I appreciate that they are one of the finest power plants available. Currently we are not looking to openly distribute engine management systems for rotary engines because we choose not to.

and they have no torque.

It's true that normally aspirated models make lower torque readings. The turbo cars improve in that catagory signifigantly but I suspect that is true of turbo cars in piston engines as well. For example my 944 turbo makes 280 rwhp and 307 ft-lbs torque whereas my friends RX7 makes 370 rwhp and 309 ft-lbs torque. I would think that if I were making the same rwhp as him my torque would be closer to 400 ft-lbs. His RX7 is a two rotor engine. If you go with a 3 rotor car all the low torque talk is out the window. A stock twin turbo 3 rotor makes 300 hp / 300 ft-lbs of torque.

However, for our "torque" sensitive 901 and 915 transmissions is having lower overall torque and peak torque at high rpms such a bad thing? Sounds to me like a rotary and 914 were meant to be together. So come on guys, follow my lead and drop a rotary in your engine bay.

What is the fuel economy like? I have heard they are tres thirsty.

I've always liked the rotary conversion for the 914. It just makes sense to me.

One of my favorite powerplants in my most favorite car.

I'm quite familiar with the Wankel engine. My buddy bought one of the first ones made. Their first problem was burning the points off their rotors. So, they made the rotor points replaceable in their better design. What I was refering to was what a mechanic told me recently. He said they'd made some progress, but, still had an inadequate lubrication system. He said that it took way too long for lubrication to occur at startup. He's worked on a lot of mazda engines. He too, likes the concept. But, says he's seen too many engines fail due to the poor design of the lubrication system. I have no idea how many miles you can get out of a mazda rotary. Has there been any statistics on how long the average one lasts? And, if it's so great, why isn't mazda using it in all their cars? It's been around for a long time. Even they went back to piston engines in everything but their top of the line sports car. I think they still haven't gotten all the bugs out of the design. If they had you'd see a lot more of them.

the consensus in the racing works when they were The Hot Shitte in IMSA was that they'll last pretty much forever - but in time they develop so much internal friction that the power output goes way down.

they aren't more popular because despite their lightness, simplicity, and legendary mechanical efficiency, they have horrible thermal efficiency due to the very large surface area of the combustion chamber. this results in relatively poor fuel economy, problems making emissions numbers, and challenges for the cooling system to reject the heat.

they also tend to be loud, and noise standards the world over are getting more and more strict. (to the point where no new air-cooled Porsche could be sold into Switzerland -- this is one big factor with the water cooling in the 986 and 996.)

i drove an RX-2 for a while, primitive 4-link + Panhard rod rear suspension, dead shocks, balky transmission. would rev all day long if you could ever get it started. it eventually got T-boned in traffic and i no longer had a reason to follow them closely...

My 1st race car was a RX-7. It was a fun, reliable, wind-up toy. The motor had over 100K miles when I converted it to a race car. After 4 full race seasons it was still pulling strong Like a 914 it is a low torque momentum machine. The gas mileage was poor when you ran it at or above redline constantly. (if the shift buzzer was not going off - I was in the wrong gear) We found that the car ran best on the cheapest gas we could get.

Don't forget the rotary or Wankle engine was a German design. I like the 13B's and a guy here at work is really into RX7's. Pretty neat to keep tabs on what he is doing. But if I was going to go through the trouble of plumbing a cooling system in a 914, I would probably grab one of the newer aluminum blocked vett engines. Light V8 conversion. But since I like Porsche parts in Porsche's, I will stick with my 914-6.

This one is a nice car though....

Artechnica: Bang on the money. Couldn't have said it better myself. Emissions was what killed the RX7 for sale in the states. Obviously they improved the design with the new Renesis motor.

Bob: Wrong again. First, "the points" you refer to are apex seals. They act like rings in a piston engine. They don't wear any different than rings in a piston engine. Detonation is what kills apex seals which is what usually is the problem when you have blown apex seals. To the best of my knowledge the apex seals have always been in a rotary engine. They were never "non replaceable" or fixed. The reason is that when the rotor rotates in the housing the edges (or points as you call them) have to move in and out in a groove on the edge of the rotor to keep contact with the surface of the housing. If they were fixed the rotor would bind. As for the lubrication, since oil is injected at the same time as fuel you should be getting lubrication right away. If you are really worried about lubrication just run pre-mix. I know people who do that because they don't always trust the oil injector system (mechanical failure). No disrespect but I think your mechanic friend is feeding you a line of BS. Like the statement I posted earlier there are a lot of "mechanics" that think they know what they are doing when it comes to rotaries but very few of them actually do.

Most rotary failures are due to overheating or detonation. Overheat a piston engine and you may have to replace a head gasket. Overheat a rotary and you are rebuilding the engine due to the engine design. Turbo rotaries are really risky when it comes to detonation and must be tuned by someone who knows what they are doing if you want it to be reliable. A normally aspirated rotary though will last and last until something else fails (cooling, etc.)

As for why Mazda isn't using it for all their cars just refer to Artechinca's response. Fuel economy and emissions pretty much killed it.

Hey,,,,I can just see...."HEY"....I just bought anudder 914.....

Holy crap does that engine look tiny in the engine bay

Hmmmmmmm, I haven't bought a new 914 in almost 4 months now either,. . . . Hey honey. . . . . DOH

A DKM or KKM? Ohh, you mean the first MAZDA rotary engine.

I would knock a rotary clean off my list because they sound annoying. Im sorry, but to have a cool car it has to sound like a monster.

Have you ever heard a 3 rotor? It sounds like a V12. Pretty cool if you ask me. Just listen to this clip:

http://www.members.shaw.ca/erikdumas/3Roto...augesOnClip.avi

I had never heard a three rotor. It sounds pretty nice, but it doesnt top my list.

and a 2056 type 4 does?

....type IV sounds like someone letting air out of a ballon...fffpptptpptptpttttt

I like the type 4 sound

thats why i want to put one in both my cars.