are you honestly comparing rotary displacement with piston displacement? wow... some people....h22speed wrote:
well the only thing i have to say is that fd's (93-95 us yrs) are only a 1.3 liter, and they have no problem spooling twins... man i wish i wouldve never sold my fd
not enuff turbozundercover240 wrote:has anyone herd of a twin turbo manifold for the redtop? i guess you can get one or have one made. jus wondering what ya guys think on the matter? i think it can be done? maybe, maybe not.
Yeah, I was thinking that too, but I wasn't sure so I stayed out of it. Isn't the actual physical displacement 1.3 x 3 = 3.9 litres? How do they get away with calling it a 1.3 litre engine. I have never fully understood that.cheapscheisst wrote:
are you honestly comparing rotary displacement with piston displacement? wow... some people....
oh yeah, and
i'm not sure, but it wouldn't matter anyway. rotary displacement and piston displacement are two TOTALLY separate things. i mean, even if you didn't know it, think about it logically. if they were comparable, 1.3 liter CRX's wouldn't suck (as much) and a stock 240sx would have trouble keeping it's chassis intact (an exaggeration, but you get my point). that's just stupid...bone_stock_240 wrote:
Yeah, I was thinking that too, but I wasn't sure so I stayed out of it. Isn't the actual physical displacement 1.3 x 3 = 3.9 litres? How do they get away with calling it a 1.3 litre engine. I have never fully understood that.
well, you can probably fit most rotary engines in your pocket... at least what's left of them...White Comet wrote:it almost looks like u could fit it in ur pocket.
Quitethemadscientist wrote:You really have no idea who I am do you? Quite entertaining
