• Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' and react to posts.

rotary engines?!


Yung ICY

New Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
2
City
Hell, Utah
Vehicle Year
01
Transmission
Manual
hey im new on here.

ive been thinking about putting a rotary engine into my 01 xl ranger 5spd.

i read up on another thread and they were sayin that a rotary doesnt have much low end torque. my truck is my dd so i dont think it would be too much of a prob for everyday driving but i also use mine in the sand dunes alot where i need to keep the weight down as much as possible and i need a strong high revving engine.

please help me out and give me any advice you may have,

thanks,
Yung I.C.Y
 
Just something to think about; A ranger weighs a hell of alot mroe than something like at RX7, or 8.
Smaller cars need horsepower more than torque. Big cars need torque more than hp.

That being said, a Rotory is a high revving engine and they make alot of power for their size, but in my opinion, you would be better off with a 302 V8. A 302 makes power that is more suitable for a Ranger, even one that is being run in the sand.

That's just my 2 cents worth.
 
thanks guys :) also with a 302 will that bolt up to the stock tranny with an adapter plate and will that trans be able to handle the power?
 
You could always build up a 289 (302 with an even shorter stroke), plenty of high revs with that engine.
 
With the later trucks running OBDII, might really be hard to put anything other than a small block Ford in there and keep it as a DD. Easy to build for torque or rpm's.
DAve
 
The only rotary engine worth thinking about swapping into any vehicle is the 13b-rew out of the 3rd generation RX-7 (FD). stock it has about 250-260hp in us trim depending on transmission. The non turbo and single turbo 13b's out of second gen (FC) RX-7's are anemic, turbo's only making 190-200hp and non turbo's only making 140-160hp.

The 13b-rew is a 1.3 liter twin sequential turbo rotary(effectively a 2.6 liter twin turbo 4/6 cylinder for comparrison purpouses). It's turbo switchover components are very complex (read: vacuum lines, vacuum lines, and more vacuum lines) and for simplicities sake you'd want to mod it to be non-sequential or just run an aftermarket single turbo setup. Rotaries have sever reliability problems, especially turbo rotaries. The typical 13b-rew see's about 60,000 miles before it's ready for a rebuild on average. They are extremely sensitive to heat and a:f ratio's. If the engine gets too hot the housings can warp and separate, which blows out the water jackets leading to coolant leaking into the combustion chamber (much like a blown head gasket on a piston engine), this requires a rebuild. If the engine runs too lean, gets a bad tank of gas, or if its a particularly hot day and your charge air temps are too high, you can see detonation. Detonation on a rotary is almost a sure fire way to blow apex seals. Blow apex seals mean your combustion chambers are no longer effectively separated. The blown seals (made of cast iron) are known to scar up the housing and blow out the exhaust port and fly through the turbo(s) when they blow. In this case you need a rebuild, new housing(s), and new turbo(s).

In fact, a stock 13b-rew needs about $2-3000 in "reliability mods" to be considered reliable in comparison with modern piston engines. It is simply a fragile motor and a fragile design.

In regards to its weight, a 13b-rew (with turbo components and tranny) weighs 547lbs. For comparison purposes, an LS1 with T-56 6 speed weighs 572lbs. Just 25lbs more, and that's a 5.7 liter 325-350hp V8 that is extremely reliable, and makes more torque than a rotary could dream of. Even more interesting is that the LS2 (400hp 6.0 liter V8) weighs about 20-30lbs less than the LS1 and the LS3 and LS7 (6.3, 425hp and 7.0, 505hp) engines weigh 30-40lbs less than the LS1. As you can see there is no real weight advantage to a rotary when compared to modern aluminum V8's, and the rotary is outclasses in power, torque, and reliability in every way.

The non-turbo rotaries are quite a bit lighter and more reliable, but aren't nearly as powerful and have very little potential. You're looking at a shade over 200hp with a pretty highly modified street motor. And for the money and time invested you'd be better off with an LS swap anyway, weight penalty or not.
 
I want a Mazda RX-7 or 8...I love those cars!!!!

I would put a rotary motor in my truck if I could.
 
therotaryengine.jpg
 
...........Thats what they said about bottled water and look how far its come now......not supporting communism.
 
I want a Mazda RX-7 or 8...I love those cars!!!!

I would put a rotary motor in my truck if I could.

For the same amount of time, money, sweat, and tears you could have a 400hp LS2 and one of the best 6 speeds ever produced. and near limitless street performance potential for reletivly cheap. And the LS2 will last more than 20k miles @400hp, won't require premix, and will actually make torque.:icon_hornsup:
 
Rotary engines are freakin cool, but I also would second the 302 for reasons above. Or the LS2.
 
Was just pooping around on YouTube, and came across this. It's 1/8 mile track, but apparently he got up to 148mph in his rotary B3000 in 4.62 seconds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTrAnA2g--8



And I also agree that the small block 302 is the easier way to go for power and convenience. Adapter plates and certain information is readily available, and the power gains (mainly torque to move your ranger in the first place) would suffer. The dreaded Apex seals, hot ambient temperatures, stress, and a correctly built rotary that won't die to ignite prematurely are a challenge given the circumstances. Granted, they do have less parts and more efficient, but if you are not well-versed on the 70-ish year old design it may prove too much for the wiring and plumbing. No offense, but if you are asking for advice about how to do this, then it may not be for you.

I personally think it's a novel design and a great base to mod, but in a 4000# vehicle for offroad use in the sunny/hot Great Basin Desert is not its place (2500# street cars and airplanes it is). The piston conception was already half a century ahead of the rotary, too. In my opinion, it just hasn't been perfected yet. I've rebuilt the same ragged-on motor of a friend's...twice.

However, if you really want the challenge and have the money, go for it. Great contraptions and people arose from failure and adversity, and better designs have been produced as a result. Besides, what other "piston" in a motor can move/spin once and have the crank move 3 times?

Wankel_Cycle_anim_en.gif









Inspiration:

Radial_engine.gif

Qt-Flash-Final.gif
 
Last edited:

Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

TRS Events

Member & Vendor Upgrades

For a small yearly donation, you can support this forum and receive a 'Supporting Member' banner, or become a 'Supporting Vendor' and promote your products here. Click the banner to find out how.

Recently Featured

Want to see your truck here? Share your photos and details in the forum.

Ranger Adventure Video

TRS Merchandise

Follow TRS On Instagram

TRS Sponsors


Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad


Amazon Deals

Sponsored Ad

Back
Top