Gaz6002 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 The s2000 engine and gearbox wouldmake for a great conversion on an RX7 Slowest FD3S on earth? Well, apart from all the ones with blown-up engines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swampy442 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 even when the two cars weight the same ? 1270kg A Supra isnt 1270, try nearer 1600kgs. You can put anything in anything if you have the cash, one of the Top Secret Supras had a 3S GTE in it. Just have to ask whu. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathWraith Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 The Supra NA has 213 ft/lb so about 290 NM! Considerably more than the S2000. yeah thats what I was thinking an earlier post says 169lb ft! LOLz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathWraith Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 A Supra isnt 1270, try nearer 1600kgs. You can put anything in anything if you have the cash, one of the Top Secret Supras had a 3S GTE in it. Just have to ask whu. Isn't a stock NA manual 1430KG and an NA auto 1480KG with the TT equivilants being around the 1550KG scale depending on trasmission? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Wilson Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 It's the RPM at which peak torque is made, not a good engine choice for a very heavy car. A mid size diesel would be better. I am toying what small and economical engine would slot easily into a mint FD I have with a blown engine. I like the look of the FD, but can't do with rotary engine unreliability. I would like to make a pretty, but slow and economical car out of it, when I get time. If it was an auto it would be even nicer, to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kill1308 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 It's the RPM at which peak torque is made, not a good engine choice for a very heavy car. A mid size diesel would be better. I am toying what small and economical engine would slot easily into a mint FD I have with a blown engine. I like the look of the FD, but can't do with rotary engine unreliability. I would like to make a pretty, but slow and economical car out of it, when I get time. If it was an auto it would be even nicer, to me. I remember reading a while back about some guy that put a VAG 1.9TDI in an RX7 I'll dig out a link later when on computer if I get chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Wilson Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 Oooh, yes please, sounds interesting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyb10supra Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 Please go easy on me. i really want to get back in a supra but i can't afford a turbo and it will be my daily drive and i do quite a few miles a week so i need something economical, which a supra isn't ive had to give up on a kit car ive been building and as a result im left with an engine and gearbox would it be wrong to put a f20c S2000 engine in a supra For the money you would spend, you are better off getting a turbo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kill1308 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 Oooh, yes please, sounds interesting! I had a quick look but couldn't find the build thread, so for now here's the youtube video of it. Will have another gander for you later.... it wasn't an FD3 though as I recalled it to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 Surely a BMW 2.0 diesel would be better, having readily available RWD setups (in manual and auto), and loads of donor engines from BMWs and Rover 75s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 Slowest FD3S on earth? Well, apart from all the ones with blown-up engines. Would still be fairly quick, while being at least twice as good on fuel as the rotary, and many hundreds of times more reliable. Similar characteristics as the Rotary too (ie, high revving and torque less ) they take well o turbo and supercharging too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 Would still be fairly quick, while being at least twice as good on fuel as the rotary, and many hundreds of times more reliable. Similar characteristics as the Rotary too (ie, high revving and torque less ) they take well o turbo and supercharging too I think if I had to have one (not a huge fan myself) it would have to be an LS-powered one. For me that makes the most sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aero-M Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 The S2000 isn't exactly that economical either, why go to all the hassle and expense of fitting an S2000 engine into a Supra only to save a few pence? I'll go easy on you though, as you obviously have mental issues... Lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 I think if I had to have one (not a huge fan myself) it would have to be an LS-powered one. For me that makes the most sense. I'd agree, although a Toyota v8 with an r154 box would make a cheaper alternative Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_jza80 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 This looks like an ideal recipient for this engine and box: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/nissan-200sx-s14a-rolling-shell-/170661572538?pt=UK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM&hash=item27bc38efba#ht_500wt_922 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.