Who Did It - Rotary 968?

This was clearly not plug and play:

http://www.cardomain.com/ride/646433/1984-mazda-rx-7/page-7/

and why didn't they post their build log!?!

I actually approve of that.....good job on it too.

Why move the engine forward?

Also, does a 968 really handle and stop better than a 2nd gen?

The rear suspension looks VERY similar. I think they are both mac strut cars as well.

Overall, cool that they saved the 968. However, I think you could have a Mint 2nd gen vert for WAY less.

Rob R.

He has some other really cool builds including convertible 1st gen Rx-7s and three wheelers.

But, but, but, eeerrrrrr.........

OK it's well executed, but why swap a rotary into a car with a better more powerfull engine that uses less gas already, unless it's for crapo can racing where rotaries live for ever and run all day on fairy farts?!?!?!?!?

I was thinking the same as Adrian but...

Cool builds indeed...

In reply to Adrian_Thompson:

It probably makes sense if you have the parts in the garage already. 968 engines and transmissions aren't cheap, if you can find them.

BoxheadTim wrote: In reply to Adrian_Thompson: It probably makes sense if you have the parts in the garage already. 968 engines and transmissions aren't cheap, if you can find them.

Yes yes and we climbed Everest becuase it was there, not because it was a good idea!

That's true also.

wvumtnbkr wrote: Why move the engine forward? Also, does a 968 really handle and stop better than a 2nd gen? The rear suspension looks VERY similar. I think they are both mac strut cars as well. Overall, cool that they saved the 968. However, I think you could have a Mint 2nd gen vert for WAY less. Rob R.

968/944/924 handle better due to better weight balance (nearly 50/50) with slightly better geometry.

With that said, moving the engine forward was probably to help the balance and clear things.

I like the air box!

My Google foo is on the fritz, but wasn't the FC's weight about 50-50 f-r anyway?

Unless you had the parts lying around , time to burn, and no money to do otherwise, I don't see putting in an engine with less HP and more consumption.

I like it!

In reply to Hungary Bill:

I know! how rude!

I owned this one.

wvumtnbkr wrote: Why move the engine forward?

I'm sure it was to keep from having to cut the floor of the 968. Since they're rear transaxle cars there's no room for a transmission in the tunnel. They used the RX7 transmission and rear end so they had to make room somehow. I'm glad they didn't cut the 968, that makes it easier for someone to put a good engine in later.

Adrian_Thompson wrote: But, but, but, eeerrrrrr......... OK it's well executed, but why swap a rotary into a car with a better more powerfull engine that uses less gas already, unless it's for crapo can racing where rotaries live for ever and run all day on fairy farts?!?!?!?!?

I mean if it was a turbo rotary it would make more sense to me but maybe that was the eventual plan who knows?

If I read it rite one of the reasons the engine was moved forward was to allow fitment of the trans. It looks like they used the RX trans not the 968 trans

I think that i would have adapted the Porsche transaxle to the rotary. Seems less work.

I want to say "Kudos! Better than sitting on the couch!"

But I just can't get over the fact that at least in my mind, it was a huge amount of work for a serious downgrade.

I'm not a giant rotary nut, but when you combine that with moving to the forward transmission and all... There was so much work involved, I just don't see "I had the parts lying around" being a good enough reason not to acquire a more suitable engine and adapt it to the Porsche transaxle.

You know, keep the unique and really good aspects of the host car, and swap in an engine which is actually meaningfully better in some way than the original...

But that's just me (and a few other people in this thread). If they're happy with the result they've achieved, then it was a success.

Wankel haterz!

I like it, yes a bit biased but still.

Saying that I think not only the rotary should have a better home, the Porsche needs more on an engine to lug around the bit more heft that comes along with a euro car.

I don't get this swap... the 3.0 i4 is just better. I would have rather of spent the money on a cratered engine FD and then swap another rotary into that lol.

the only part I don't like is the fact that it's a convertable. and i'm practically a purist when talking about engine swaps! still, 968's are my favorite porsche ever so it's cool in my book.