I've heard that same statement, and even read in a certain car mag that said that it was more like a 2.6L, but as someone that knows rotaries I still can not understand how they come up with that....displacement is measure the same way in a rotary as in a piston engine except they have rotors instead of pistons and rotor housings instead of cylinders.

I agree that rotaries and piston engines are totally different and it is not fair to compare them in regards to displacement, however my point is that I didn't believe that they would restict the power per displacement and used what I know as an example. I am in no way putting down a 2.0L turbo that puts out 271hp....I think that rocks and it's still has a lot of potential. (just don't ever say that the RX-7 is a 2.6L on the RX-7 forum...you'll be shot!)

 

as to the bumper issue i was reporting what i was told by what i thought to be a very good source, if I was wrong i am sorry i am trying to contact him for a mord detailed answer.

 

Maybe if the lancer evo gets hit from behind in traffic....and it is pushed into the car in front....both bumpers would be working in conjunction...therfore 2.5 + 2.5 = 5mph....hey can we have more than 10,000 evo's please

 

I know better then to try to "inform" any hardcore fans of a certain vehicle about certain controversial "facts." You just helped me remember that it was a 2.6L figure that I had heard. Perhaps it is because there are two rotors in the Wankel used in the RX-7. And a wild Cosmo 3 rotor would be 3.9L. Do those two rotors occupy 1.3L worth of displacement, I guess?

 

it was the equivelent of 2.3 liters.....the swept volume of the RX7 Mk1 was 1.3 litres dunno about the Mk2 or MK3 TT

 

Here is some information about the Mazda 13B the rotary that is used in the RX-7 (and Wankel rotaries in general) and why it's displacement is not directly comparable to that of a regular piston engine. Each rotor in the 13B (and 20B) have a displacement of 654cc. The 13B has 2 rotors and the 20B has 3 rotors so the displacement for the engines are in fact 1.3L (1308cc) and 2.0L (1962cc), respectively. The reason why people say that the 13B should be treated more like a 2.6L piston engine is because of the way the rotary works in comparision to a piston engine. In a piston engine, one turn of the crankshaft only results in half the cylinders firing, whereas in a rotary each rotor goes through the entire combustion cycle. In other words, while a piston engine uses only half it's displacement per revolution, the rotary is able to utilize it's full capacity. So you can either look at it from the point of view that the 13B should be called a 2.6L motor or that a 2.6L motor is better considered a 1.3L motor (in my opinion the later would seem more appropriate, since only half of the displacement is used per cycle, but that is just merely part of the design of a 4 stroke engine).

 

more fun stuff here:

http://www.mazda.com/history/rotary/e1-1.html

-K

 

well put it this way, mitsubishi is only allowed to bring in so many cars a year, and they sell more lower cost cars and suv's so thats where their cash comes from, why bring in more evos and mess up their standard buying power

 

Mitsu can bring in ANY number of cars that they want.
If they can produce 10 million cars and sell it all here, no one is stopping them.

I also call BS on that hp/litre limit.

There is however, a MPG limit that manufacturers must meet. All cars sold by Mitsu must meet an average level of Miles Per Gallon. If they exceed that amount, they pay a fine. So, Mitsu has to sell a lot of economy high MPG cars to offset the low MPG of the Evo and the SUVs.

 

I don't believe the manfacturer pays a fine, it's YOU the consumer who pays the "Gas Guzzler" tax.

In order to meet MPG and CA emissions the car is probably tuned down.

 

I think it's safe to say that either the hp/liter regulation doesn't exist, or the Evo is within the regulation.

"Sir! Look what I just found out! The US says absolutely no more than 134hp per liter!"

"Good lord! Do you mean to tell me that after all of our preparation for the release of this car, we missed that?! Well, I guess it's time to pull the plug on the whole project, Johnson. Which one of us is gonna alert the media? I call heads."

 

Not true. Corporations pay fines on overall (CAFE), individuals pay fine on specific vehicles that are gas guzzlers.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/proble...EconFY2001.pdf

Page 23.

 

ummm i do belive there are us regulations to the amount of cars an import company can bring into the US

 

That may be true, but there is an easy way around that. All the Japanese companies are building many of their cars here. Camry's, Accords, Altimas, Maximas, Galants, Eclipses, all the pickups are built here. Hell, I think some Maximas are even built to be exported back to Japan! So the engines and trannys come from Japan, to be assembled here and then the whole cars sent back. So even though there may be limits, if Mitsu ever reaches the need to produce 10 million vehicles, they'll just build more factories here.