The reason is that the 12A is a somewhat smaller engine. Of course, being basically race only, it's looking at a 5000 mile life span, at most, before all the seals and bearings need to be replaced.
Actually, the twin turbo 13b easily hit 280hp with power to spare. The renesis's modifications are all external to the engine; a new intake manifold design, new port injection design, etc. The only change to the engine itself really is the enlargement of the intake ports (something tuners have been doing with stock rx7s since they came out). The tradeoff is the bigger the ports, the better high end performance you have, the worse low-end.
The engine is exactly the same as it was, otherwise. It is even classified as a 13B rotary in the shop manuals, so it's not the engine, it's the supporting hardware that makes the difference. As I said earlier in another post, I have a non-turbo 1.1 liter 12A rotary (the 13B is 1.3 liters) that makes 400 hp with no change to the engine design itself. It has extreme port work done and a free-flowing intake/exhaust setup. The larger 13b could easily make 500hp in this setup. Let me reitterate; this is a non-turbo setup.
Also, as far as the twin-turbo setup on the later model RX-7s, they pushed 270hp to the ground, and were boost controlled to stay there so as not to violate japanese law.
's
The RX-8 isn't any more efficient than the rotary used in later generation RX-7's... it's a non-turbo powered 13B rotary engine. The 92 to 95 RX-7's featured a twin turbo 13B, and the 86 to 91 RX's had either non-turbo 13Bs or single turbo 13Bs. The engine itself hasn't really changed since 1985 when they stopped using the 12A. Actually Mazda has been using the Rotary, with minor gaps between models, non-stop for a long time. The RX-3 was the first car they released here with it, in the 70's, I believe? They had a rotary engine car available until 1995 in the US, when they stopped exporting the third generation RX-7. In Japan, I believe they kept making it until 1999 or 2000. Then they went back to the drawing board for a new car; not atypical for any car manufacturer. It has nothing to do with the design or faults of the engine.
Also, there really isn't a sealing problem persay, any more than you would say that a piston engine has a sealing problem. Once mazda developed their current seal technology (first put in the 12A, I believe, which was use din the RX-3 and later cars), they've had no real trouble. An unmaintained rotary is a little more vulnerable than a piston engine, but they share similar parts in concept; the seals on a rotary seal the rotor against the side housings, much the way piston rings seal the piston against the cylinder bore. Both are parts that will wear out if the car isn't maintained.
Besides, hydrogen isn't going to be any different than gasoline as far as the seals are concerned.. the the seals leaked, the engine would be unable to compress the air/fuel mix, and therefore wouldn't gain any usable power from it's detonation.
That's one of the huge cases for them; no valves, valve springs, cam shafts, pistons or rods to deal with. They are commonly used in planes due to their small size and light weight per horsepower they can produce.
Specifically, my RX-7 runs 400 horsepower out of a 2 rotor 1.1 liter 350lb engine... Granted it's race only, because the intake ports are huge; it doesn't start making power until around 9000 RPM, but maintains it until around 14,000 RPM. (That's the other thing; since the rotors themselves are only spinning at 1/3 rotation per crank rotation, you can get them to rev all to high hell.)
Their negatives are that they tend towards low gas milage, because of the long narrow combustion chamber (hence why then generally run with two spark plugs per rotor).
Did you bother to -read- the post? I happen to know lisp (so many parens... ), I said this is something you can't -realistically- do in -many- other languages. Sure it's possible in some other languages, and it's even easy in some. Hell you could do it in C with libs if you really wanted to. That's not the point. Hell that was a side note, and had nothing to do with the actual post.
I find it really funny that your world view is so small you feel the desire to make assumptions about what I think or don't think and then ridicule me based on them.
This is actual honest to god code the same way I wrote it in the source file. Not totally unreadable, but it does make a decent argument for perl being ugly. =cP
Keep in mind I'm a huge fan of Perl, and there are some things you can do in perl that you just can't realisticly impliment in many other languages. For instance, a modular framework that I'm using for a game server that lets you reload every line of code in the entire program without losing state or dropping a single client connection. Generally the user never realizes anything happened.
Great for debugging. Test something, tweak, kill -s HUP, repeat.
From the site: SIS 55x processor (x86 compatible) 3 USB ports 2 Serial (RS-232) / 1 Parallel port Built in AC97 audio - Audio in/out 2 VGA out ports ATA-33/66/100 support 1 or 2 RJ45 for 10/100 MBit Lan PS/2 Keyboard/Mouse connector
Single 5 Volts DC @ 1.8 A support
128 MB RAM 20 GB 2.5" hard disk
1 NTSC or PAL video in (frame grabber) 1 NTSC or PAL TV out Support for two VGA displays
I've been looking at doing a project like this for a while now, so I'd be interested to see how you go about some things.
One might assume that many of the big distros (Red Hat, for instance) would want to focus on this aspect; As you said, Linux needs these features to stand up to the commercial unix variants, and Red Hat targets businesses over consumers. Businesses have more money, after all.
Actually, I work at a Radio Shack, and AFAIK (don't hold me to this, though), they've asked for names and addresses for as long as they've been Radio Shack.
On a tangent, though, you should have heard the cheering at our saturday morning meeting when they announced this... It was just as much of a pain for us as for you guys. Ever try to take down an accurate name/address for a hispanic guy with a thick accent who doesn't seem interested in saying it clearly?
When you turn on the multithreaded version (sv_mp 1 or something similar in console) on my duel P3 1ghz Linux box (1GB SDRAM, Geforce 4 MX), I get 350FPS... I don't get that on my windows machine (AMD 1900, 768MB DDR2700, Radeon 8500), which rates at about 150FPS. And it's my gaming box.
IBM could make some good money charging people to use their machines to play quake =c)
"The slow operation of the gates -- some required seconds to settle -- underscores the fact that the work was part of a research project."
You pretty much have your choice of one chip that does something 250,000 times in a second, or 250,000 chips that do one thing each a second... Until they can speed these things up, they're more of a curiosity than a useful technology.
The man has a point. 99% of my CDs I own because I downloaded a few MP3s and liked the band, and I imagine most people work this way.
As for DVDs, take this for example:
I downloaded Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back when it was in theaters, but still went and bought it the day it came out. Why? Partially quality, partially for the director's commentary (Ever hear Kevin Smith's commentary tracks? Funnier than anything in the movies), and partially for the deleted scenes. I use downloaded movies to hold me over until they become available on DVD, because I'm sure as hell not paying $8.50 every time I feel like watching it.
People either aren't understanding, or aren't reading properly. All the computers wouldn't be spread out everywhere, only what people choose to put on the net. Your operating system, files, programs, etc. are still on your hard drive, but you can choose to sell extra space on your drive in exchange for some cash, and vice-versa. You can buy a gig of space spread out over the net to store some extra files on, and your files end up in tiny fragments on hundreds or thousands of other computers like yours.
Slashdot Mirror
The reason is that the 12A is a somewhat smaller engine. Of course, being basically race only, it's looking at a 5000 mile life span, at most, before all the seals and bearings need to be replaced.
The engine is exactly the same as it was, otherwise. It is even classified as a 13B rotary in the shop manuals, so it's not the engine, it's the supporting hardware that makes the difference. As I said earlier in another post, I have a non-turbo 1.1 liter 12A rotary (the 13B is 1.3 liters) that makes 400 hp with no change to the engine design itself. It has extreme port work done and a free-flowing intake/exhaust setup. The larger 13b could easily make 500hp in this setup. Let me reitterate; this is a non-turbo setup.
Also, as far as the twin-turbo setup on the later model RX-7s, they pushed 270hp to the ground, and were boost controlled to stay there so as not to violate japanese law. 's
Also, there really isn't a sealing problem persay, any more than you would say that a piston engine has a sealing problem. Once mazda developed their current seal technology (first put in the 12A, I believe, which was use din the RX-3 and later cars), they've had no real trouble. An unmaintained rotary is a little more vulnerable than a piston engine, but they share similar parts in concept; the seals on a rotary seal the rotor against the side housings, much the way piston rings seal the piston against the cylinder bore. Both are parts that will wear out if the car isn't maintained.
Besides, hydrogen isn't going to be any different than gasoline as far as the seals are concerned.. the the seals leaked, the engine would be unable to compress the air/fuel mix, and therefore wouldn't gain any usable power from it's detonation.
That's one of the huge cases for them; no valves, valve springs, cam shafts, pistons or rods to deal with. They are commonly used in planes due to their small size and light weight per horsepower they can produce. Specifically, my RX-7 runs 400 horsepower out of a 2 rotor 1.1 liter 350lb engine... Granted it's race only, because the intake ports are huge; it doesn't start making power until around 9000 RPM, but maintains it until around 14,000 RPM. (That's the other thing; since the rotors themselves are only spinning at 1/3 rotation per crank rotation, you can get them to rev all to high hell.) Their negatives are that they tend towards low gas milage, because of the long narrow combustion chamber (hence why then generally run with two spark plugs per rotor).
Did you bother to -read- the post? I happen to know lisp (so many parens... ), I said this is something you can't -realistically- do in -many- other languages. Sure it's possible in some other languages, and it's even easy in some. Hell you could do it in C with libs if you really wanted to. That's not the point. Hell that was a side note, and had nothing to do with the actual post. I find it really funny that your world view is so small you feel the desire to make assumptions about what I think or don't think and then ridicule me based on them.
This is actual honest to god code the same way I wrote it in the source file. Not totally unreadable, but it does make a decent argument for perl being ugly. =cP
while(@_) {
push @{ $bots{[ sort { @{ $bots{$a}{'Queue'} } <=> @{ $bots{$b}{'Queue'} } } ( $master, grep { $bots{$master}{'memory'}{'slaves'}{$_}{'type'} eq 'Secondary' && $bots{$master}{'memory'}{'slaves'}{$_}{'status'} eq 'running' } (keys %{ $bots{$master}{'memory'}{'slaves'} })) ]->[0]}{'Queue'} }, shift(@_);
}
Keep in mind I'm a huge fan of Perl, and there are some things you can do in perl that you just can't realisticly impliment in many other languages. For instance, a modular framework that I'm using for a game server that lets you reload every line of code in the entire program without losing state or dropping a single client connection. Generally the user never realizes anything happened.
Great for debugging. Test something, tweak, kill -s HUP, repeat.
You might consider one of these
From the site:
SIS 55x processor (x86 compatible)
3 USB ports
2 Serial (RS-232) / 1 Parallel port
Built in AC97 audio - Audio in/out
2 VGA out ports
ATA-33/66/100 support
1 or 2 RJ45 for 10/100 MBit Lan
PS/2 Keyboard/Mouse connector
Single 5 Volts DC @ 1.8 A support
128 MB RAM
20 GB 2.5" hard disk
1 NTSC or PAL video in (frame grabber)
1 NTSC or PAL TV out
Support for two VGA displays
I've been looking at doing a project like this for a while now, so I'd be interested to see how you go about some things.
One might assume that many of the big distros (Red Hat, for instance) would want to focus on this aspect; As you said, Linux needs these features to stand up to the commercial unix variants, and Red Hat targets businesses over consumers. Businesses have more money, after all.
Actually, I work at a Radio Shack, and AFAIK (don't hold me to this, though), they've asked for names and addresses for as long as they've been Radio Shack. On a tangent, though, you should have heard the cheering at our saturday morning meeting when they announced this... It was just as much of a pain for us as for you guys. Ever try to take down an accurate name/address for a hispanic guy with a thick accent who doesn't seem interested in saying it clearly?
When you turn on the multithreaded version (sv_mp 1 or something similar in console) on my duel P3 1ghz Linux box (1GB SDRAM, Geforce 4 MX), I get 350FPS... I don't get that on my windows machine (AMD 1900, 768MB DDR2700, Radeon 8500), which rates at about 150FPS. And it's my gaming box.
IBM could make some good money charging people to use their machines to play quake =c)
"The slow operation of the gates -- some required seconds to settle -- underscores the fact that the work was part of a research project."
You pretty much have your choice of one chip that does something 250,000 times in a second, or 250,000 chips that do one thing each a second... Until they can speed these things up, they're more of a curiosity than a useful technology.
As for DVDs, take this for example: I downloaded Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back when it was in theaters, but still went and bought it the day it came out. Why? Partially quality, partially for the director's commentary (Ever hear Kevin Smith's commentary tracks? Funnier than anything in the movies), and partially for the deleted scenes. I use downloaded movies to hold me over until they become available on DVD, because I'm sure as hell not paying $8.50 every time I feel like watching it.
People either aren't understanding, or aren't reading properly. All the computers wouldn't be spread out everywhere, only what people choose to put on the net. Your operating system, files, programs, etc. are still on your hard drive, but you can choose to sell extra space on your drive in exchange for some cash, and vice-versa. You can buy a gig of space spread out over the net to store some extra files on, and your files end up in tiny fragments on hundreds or thousands of other computers like yours.