Originally posted by armstrkw:
Why would I include that?? Because people like you go around saying that the engine is a 1.3 L and never really explain why this really can't be compaired to a normal engine.



Yeah, I 'go around' telling people it's a 1.3L, just like Mazda says. Just last Saturday, I strolled around my neighborhood--with a Mazda brochure in hand--telling everyone of its size and specific output. It really consumes my every waking thought.

Quote:

All that I ask that if you are going to call it a 1.3 then explain why it doesn't behave like a 1.3 when compaired to 4 stroke engines.



I'm "calling it" (as if I arbitrarily picked a number ) a 1.3 Litre engine because its displacement is derived from the very definition of engine displacement. It is engineering fact. Grade school mathematics. Refer to my previous posts if you've forgotten.

If Mazda--the leading automotive developer of Wankel engines--has been using the wrong method of deriving the displacement of its engines for so many years, then perhaps you could put your expertise to work and share with us the formula that you propose should be used, and supporting reasons behind why it should deviate from the method used to calculate displacement for 4-cycle piston engines. Might be a good idea to share it with Mazda, and any 2-cycle engine makers out there also. They've probably been doing it all wrong.

B. Riley Melbourne, FL '01 Camry LE V6/5-spd Was: '00 Black/Tan SVT Contour #560 - Sold 3/26/03 Before that: '95 Champ/Blue Contour GL V6 ATX