Sport Compact Disses Mazda Motor Company
Originally Posted by Rob x-7' date='Apr 7 2003, 02:34 PM
[quote name='j9fd3s' date='Apr 7 2003, 12:30 PM'] can you imagine having to rebadge all those mustangs 2.50?
mike
mike
a 305 is a 5.0 [/quote]
lets see, 4.9/2 = 2.450
mike
ever wonder why mazda spent so much money on making a 4 rotor NA work at Le mans groupC rules?
mazda's formulae for wankel displacement has a correction factor in it, and the FIA's didnt, SO mazda went a ahead and took advantage of a loophole in the rules to make a "true" 2.6 liter motor. Under Group C rules no motor with a turbo charger can be over 1999cc of displacement, that therefore rules out the turbo 13b. The FIA said the motor was over 2 liters according to their books. So mazda took a porsche 962c tub, gearbox and suspension setup, bolted the now famous R26B motor onto the bulkhead, and put nice bodywork on it, and prayed that the porsche factory team's new electronic boost control would not last the race. Which it did..........................
the ******* 787b was a ******* porsche.......you ppl dont get it
mazda's formulae for wankel displacement has a correction factor in it, and the FIA's didnt, SO mazda went a ahead and took advantage of a loophole in the rules to make a "true" 2.6 liter motor. Under Group C rules no motor with a turbo charger can be over 1999cc of displacement, that therefore rules out the turbo 13b. The FIA said the motor was over 2 liters according to their books. So mazda took a porsche 962c tub, gearbox and suspension setup, bolted the now famous R26B motor onto the bulkhead, and put nice bodywork on it, and prayed that the porsche factory team's new electronic boost control would not last the race. Which it did..........................
the ******* 787b was a ******* porsche.......you ppl dont get it
Originally Posted by Apex13B' date='Apr 7 2003, 05:33 PM
ever wonder why mazda spent so much money on making a 4 rotor NA work at Le mans groupC rules?
mazda's formulae for wankel displacement has a correction factor in it, and the FIA's didnt, SO mazda went a ahead and took advantage of a loophole in the rules to make a "true" 2.6 liter motor. Under Group C rules no motor with a turbo charger can be over 1999cc of displacement, that therefore rules out the turbo 13b. The FIA said the motor was over 2 liters according to their books. So mazda took a porsche 962c tub, gearbox and suspension setup, bolted the now famous R26B motor onto the bulkhead, and put nice bodywork on it, and prayed that the porsche factory team's new electronic boost control would not last the race. Which it did..........................
the ******* 787b was a ******* porsche.......you ppl dont get it
mazda's formulae for wankel displacement has a correction factor in it, and the FIA's didnt, SO mazda went a ahead and took advantage of a loophole in the rules to make a "true" 2.6 liter motor. Under Group C rules no motor with a turbo charger can be over 1999cc of displacement, that therefore rules out the turbo 13b. The FIA said the motor was over 2 liters according to their books. So mazda took a porsche 962c tub, gearbox and suspension setup, bolted the now famous R26B motor onto the bulkhead, and put nice bodywork on it, and prayed that the porsche factory team's new electronic boost control would not last the race. Which it did..........................
the ******* 787b was a ******* porsche.......you ppl dont get it
basically...mazda cheated via a motor displacement rule loophole, and got away with it. The 13bt (re,rew) is still considered a 2.6 liter motor to this very day, so mazda said **** YOU.....and made a 2.6 liter motor according to their math, which has 4 rotors.
the 787b uses a porsche 962c : gearbox,aero undertray, front and rear suspension, that is why the car was so good the first time out
the 787b uses a porsche 962c : gearbox,aero undertray, front and rear suspension, that is why the car was so good the first time out
ok, cool...
now, about the article, the guy who wrote that story, dave coleman, is actually really cool...i met him once and have talked to him a few times via email.....although he is right AND wrong, i think that the jist of what he was trying to say was heard best in his office......he just likes to hear himself read. plus, that magazine has made him a god.......the first time i really paid any attention to what HE was doing in particular, was after he drove in the ONE LAP OF AMERICA race in 1999, or was it 2000???? i do not remember....however, i know that the guy CAN drive his *** off, and that, takes away some of his capriciousness....
now, about the article, the guy who wrote that story, dave coleman, is actually really cool...i met him once and have talked to him a few times via email.....although he is right AND wrong, i think that the jist of what he was trying to say was heard best in his office......he just likes to hear himself read. plus, that magazine has made him a god.......the first time i really paid any attention to what HE was doing in particular, was after he drove in the ONE LAP OF AMERICA race in 1999, or was it 2000???? i do not remember....however, i know that the guy CAN drive his *** off, and that, takes away some of his capriciousness....



