Thanks guys....then I guess I did know https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...>/rolleyes.gif Thats what I figured. Before I fell in love with the sevens I had a thing for 455's in the 76 Trans Am and the 428 in the 69 Mustang Mach1. But....due to high prices and only getting 8 MPG I bought my FD. Thank God I did!! https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...DIR#>/wink.png

I'm with Joe Flo.. LOL ..



I even read this stuff and TRY my best to understand it, and it just won't compile through the mess in my brain:( It sucks.

right. so you measure the piston engine's full displacement...

but when you do this to a rotary you only measure one "chamber" when ther are really two.

that is what i think dave coleman is saying in his article. the rotary is not a 2 stroke.

it's a 2.6 liter engine. why bother arguing against this?

if i were mazda i would have called it 1.3 liters too. also since there was no conventional way to measure the rotary's displacement mazda conviently decided on one. theie decision was based on bad logic and personal gain. that is all.

I worked a car show last week. One of the Mustang groups had a PERFECT Boss 429 on display. https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...IR#>/boink.gif Chalk marks and everything. Nice to see a $100K old car once in a while.