Senna

Yes, winning with a unique power plant is a great publicity boost but it would not help (IMO) in terms of dollars and cents as much as winning with a traditional power plant. In addition, what does it take to run one team in ALMS? I think the costs are astronomical aren't they? Throw in the R&D that would be required with a rotary program and you have something that is simply not feasible from an economics standpoint. Obviously a subjective point.

I think success in a corporation allows the bean counters to relax a little and not focus so much on what the costs are in running fringe programs. Lets face it, the Renesis/rotary racing program isn't Mazda's bread and butter in terms of $.

I could be wrong but I tend to think that Mazda JP/NA would be far more inclined to revisit the idea of a rotary racing program in ALMS(as well as continue development of the Renesis) if they have the financial room to breath. Success breeds interest/publicity which in turn increases revenue. I haven't heard anywhere that Mazda has decided to not further develop the Renesis.

I plan to watch as many races in person and on TV as my wife will allow-er I mean as I can afford. And if there's a Mazda running in it all the better. From Speed World Challenge to ALMS. It'll be interesting to see what SS does but I'm still interested in the Grandam ST class Rx-8's and will support their efforts even if it's not SS. Unfortunately, there aren't enough pedigree rotary racing teams on the planet that can truly develop the engine beyond just racing it.

I haven't heard Koby talk but what happens if the win Daytona. Maybe that's part of the problem is Mazda lacks the resources to go all out in whatever series they're in. It's interesting because I don't think you hear Audi or Porsche speaking in those terms. They just expect to win and plan to do it in whatever series they're involved in. I love what Mazda achieved over the years in IMSA and what they did with the 787B in 1991 but at some point it becomes old news. The challenge should be in not just doing it once but succeding over time. If been there done that is their philosophy I think it's pretty weak.

Ultimately, I'd like to see multiple Mazda teams in ALMS and in the European series including a rotary program. Oh and I'd like to be able to go down to a local dealership and buy a 3 rotor 4th gen 7 or 8.

rotarygod

Mazda's had a far longer racing history with a rotary than with a direct injected 4 cylinder. Where do you think the research development dollars for a race engine really add up? I don't buy financial reasons against a rotary as a valid excuse. It just isn't. Mazda's in a financially better position now than they ever have been in the past.

BOOSTD 7

All this talk about 'financial reasons', or 'competetive reasons' are bullshit. How do I know? Simple, because they didn't try. Fred's smoking crack if he thinks a 2 rotor could be competitive in that class running 20psi, it just wouldn't have the necessary reliability and turbo's make way too much heat on a rotary for a prototype to handle. But Carlos pushed for a supercharged 3 rotor, which would have been EXACTLY the trick. The cars speedout of corners was the area that needed adressing last 2 year, and that's exactly what they would have got - plus a supercharger is easier to cool. It would have been so simple just to try, build one and do some testing. In the amount of dollars we're talking about for a LMP2 car, those test sessions would have been a drop in the bucket.

A sorted out supercharged 3 rotor in that new Lola chassis would have been a serious threat, but Mazda sees that MZR motor as their new baby. It's pretty obvious from the fact that they're throwing it in every car.

I just hate PR bullshit like Mazda is trying to spin, but that's the way every business operates. They should just say it like it is, they want to try and compete with something they can label as MZR related, even though in reality it's not. Just like how they tried to call the 20B conglomeration a RENESIS. That's what it all boils down too. Their 'support' for SpeedSource hasn't been much for a long time, hopefully they'll back them more this year as well in their chase for a very presitgious Rolex GT championship, and ST championship to go along with it.

CERAMICSEAL

One of the other problems is the dis-connect between Mazda NAO and Mazda Corp JP. If Corporate was hungry for rotary racing success there would be development money for it. They have done close to nothing visible since the R26B in 91. A lot of the people who were involved with the competition arm of Mazda back then either are retired or no longer in the necessary engineering positions to matter. So for the Japanese I think there would be a little gap in knowledge and experience with competition rotaries and that's a problem. The same thing happened with the production car; it was obvious that some of the most experienced among the Japanese engineers were no longer on board (Fuel flooding is a prime example).

The decision to run in P2 at all is an American decision. It's more difficult for the fans to relate the prototypes with the production cars and therefore I don't find these series to be as ideal for advertising as GT. If you're going to run in a prototype series you better bring your A game, intending to win. Is this their A game? We'll see. In the meanwhile....... GO SPEEDSOURCE!!!

rotary crazy

one reason was as CERAMICSEAL stated that mazda feld theyr money could be better spend in a GT class, even today must people dont recognize the RX-8, so mazda should do as much as possible to advertice it.

GO SPEEDSOURCE!!!!!!! and the other rotary teams out there

Race Shooter

I think that a couple of you guys arent really giving Mazda the benefit if the doubt in this situation. I work closely with the team and with Mazda, though I am not privy to all the inside info (they hold it pretty close to their test), I do get a little insight into how things work. I have also talked to people and engineers that know the ACO regulations and these cars inside and out and maybe I can shed one little tidbit of info that might help you understand the decision they have made.

If you look through the ACO regulations, which are the regulations that govern the IMSA American Le Mans Series, you'll notice that the mention of the rotary and specific regulations regarding that engine are not present. You can find them at www.lemans.org if you are interested.

There are mentions of air restrictor sizes based on the current approved 3 rotor engine, but that is it. There is no mention of forced induction or other possible variations in the rotary engine.

This is due to several possible reasons. One reason is due to the way that the rotary is so different than the rest of the engine world and doesnt react the same way as a piston engine to restrictions and different engine configurations. Meaning that when using a piston engine, you can pretty much predict how it will change power output when you add an air restriction of a specific size, or allow an increase or decrease in displacement or add forced induction. These things arent quite as predictable on the rotary, at least in the eyes of the rules makers.

That is why you dont see specific options in the regs. Every different rotary configuration must be approved and an agreement reached by the ACO and the manufacturer.

So in this case, Mazda may have proposed a two or three rotor, forced induction engine and no agreement could be made that Mazda felt would lead to them being competitive. It may have been based on air restrictions, or displacement or any number of other things. I do know that they had been talking about another 4 rotor engine, but obviously that didnt come to fruition either.

Basically, the ACO, if scared about about having a 4 rotor run all over the competition again like the 787B did, could have been very conservative in what they would allow and Mazda didnt feel that what the ACO would allow, would allow them to be competitive.

The same could have happened with forced induction. When you read this statement:

Its basically saying that the rules that the ACO/IMSA would allow for their rotary, Mazda did not feel would allow them to compete.

That doesnt mean they abandoned the idea. That doesnt mean they didnt consider all the things you guys have mentioned. That doesnt mean it may never return, I was told by someone at Mazda that the "Rotary is the lifeblood of Mazda and will not be forgotten." Now I dont know if they will continue to pursue it, but it does leave the possibility open that they can continue to talk and work with the rules makers to develop and get a rotary that they think will compete.

So remember, that just because there are parts out there that can make a powerful rotary, doesnt mean that it would actually be approved by the ACO or IMSA. There is no specifics laid out for what can and cant be done like there are with rotary engines. Mazda would have to propose something and have it approved and if they dont approve it, then there is no go.

The bottom line is that no one knows exactly went down before this decision was made. Mazda may have done everything they can to get a rotary approved, but the ACO wouldnt come to an agreement with them.

Also you have other issues, such as fuel economy with the rotary. Mazda may have also come to the conclusion that, since its and endurance series and fuel economy is supremely important, that with a configuration they were allowed, that fuel economy would also come into play and not allow them to be competitive from that respect.

There is a lot more going on here than simply being able to make the engine powerful enough. They had to be able to make the engine powerful enough, in a configuration that is agreed upon and still be able to deal with the issues such as endurance, fuel economy and heat. With all those added up, they may have felt that it just wasnt worth it at this time without sinking huge amounts of money, time and running at the back of the pack to find the right answer for the rotary engine.

So I think that you guys need to understand there is more to it before condemning them to running scared from the rotary. Mazda want to win, they dont gain anything by running a rotary at the back of the pack. They will be much more successful in the grand scheme of things and the reason they race, if they can win or, at least, place respectably. When and if the rules become more appropriate for the rotary, we may see it again. Till then, I'm happy they are continuing to race.

BTW, I'm not saying that everything said here are the real reasons or the actual truth, I'm putting out other options, based on how I understand it all works, as to why this has happened.

rotarygod

What the ACO needs to do is to put a horsepower limit on each class with no restriction on what engine is used or on how to get it. That would be the most competitive thing they could do. That's the ONLY fair thing that could done.

No Ryan I'm not smoking crack. I just know what a rotary can do if done properly! A turbo or supercharged 3 rotor would have been perfect if they could have done it. If Porsche can run a piston engine for as long as they do with a 10,300 rpm limit, I'm not too sure what the issue is against a rotary with power staying at a lower rpm. A piston engine at high rpms is far more difficult to do than that.

BlueRenesis82

its just that all the governing bodies look at a rotary engine like black magic. they dont know how to make it work, so they just handicap it

Senna

[QUOTE=Race Shooter]The bottom line is that no one knows exactly went down before this decision was made. Mazda may have done everything they can to get a rotary approved, but the ACO wouldnt come to an agreement with them.

Also you have other issues, such as fuel economy with the rotary. Mazda may have also come to the conclusion that, since its and endurance series and fuel economy is supremely important, that with a configuration they were allowed, that fuel economy would also come into play and not allow them to be competitive from that respect.

There is a lot more going on here than simply being able to make the engine powerful enough. They had to be able to make the engine powerful enough, in a configuration that is agreed upon and still be able to deal with the issues such as endurance, fuel economy and heat. With all those added up, they may have felt that it just wasnt worth it at this time without sinking huge amounts of money, time and running at the back of the pack to find the right answer for the rotary engine.QUOTE]


Interesting post Raceshooter. It does make sense to me that the ACO probably had a lot more to do with this decision than we were giving them credit for. It would've have been easier to stomach if Mazda wasn't so tight lipped about it all. Too bad the ACO has to be so chicken sh*t that they can't even give the rotary a chance (assuming they excessively handicapped the rotary). It would be great to see the 2.0L kick some big dog ***.

rotarygod

Well since it's obvious the rotary is dead in ALMS there's no use talking about it anymore. It's done. Now lets speculate about how they are doing things and talk about the technology that IS going to be used.

Anyone care to speculate on how aggressive the cam profiles are? I've always been of the opinion that less cam timing is better for turbo use and mroe is better for naturally aspirated use. How agressive does anyone think these turbocharged piston engines run? do they lope at idle like a big cam engine or do they idle pretty smooth? I do have an interest in all engine technology so don't let it sound like I only care about rotaries. I heavily favor them but so many things directly apply to each type of engine so it's good to know about both. I'm just heavily against them right now since the shock is still in effect. As it wears off I'll be nicer about Mazda's effort in ALMS. What rpm limits does anyone think this engine will run at? Obviously it's speculative but it would be interesting to know as much about it as possible if it's what we need to see from now on.

Mazmart

iTrader: (12)

7-8000 rpm is likely with 2.5 bar max boost would be a good guess. AER is a VERY IMPRESSIVE company! Hopefully it all works out for Mazda.

Paul.

D-Type

1st time poster, long time rotary nut...

The bad about the Mazda ALMS announcement = no rotary (& Kuhmo tire IMHO, but time will tell.)

The good about the Mazda ALMS announcement = a true commitment from Mazda corporate to be competitive in the class. With an obvious increase in budget. NEW engine jointly developed with AER that closely matches their current performance product line. A new Mazda specific chassis from Lola based on the proven, competitive, and solid B05/40. It would appear that Mazda has a lock on these two new technologies for at least '07. All the press points to the Mazda/AER engine being available as a customer engine for '08, and that it will continue to be a Mazda, and the Lowes/Fernandez Acura has been presented as a B05/40.

As much as I loved my '85 GSL-SE, the little 13B was awful thirsty. A trait, I think, which will slowly kill our much loved, wankel, rotaries.

rotarygod

Interestingly enough I looked up the rules regarding fuel octane and it's not what I thought it was. It's limited to gasoline between 90-96 octane. That's it. I thought they could go much higher in octane than that.

I was curious about the rev limit as the current AER 4 cylinder engine is rated over 500 hp at only 6100 rpm but their V8 engine which is basically 2 of these same 4 cylinder engines in one block can rev as high as 15,000. 6100 seems a bit low for a race engine unless it's a diesel.

Race Shooter

Again, I'll reiterate that I dont know for sure the reasons behind it, I'm surmising and speculating ab possible reasons having a little insight into how the ACO and the rules work. As we get into the season and I start to see the guys face to face on a regular basis I'll see if I can get some insight into the thought process that came to this conclusion.

As for the piston engines, at least other AER engines out there, such as the ones in the Intersport Lola and Dyson Lolas, they dont really lope along at idle because they use a fairly fast idle. I dont know the rpms they idle at, but I would guess 2-3 thousand easy by the sound of them. You also dont hear them idling too often, as they have to shut them off when they pit, so they generally hit their pit box, shut it off and then start it and are taking off in practically one motion.

The link I put in my previous post to the ACO regs has information regarding general conditions it will run under, such as restrictor sizes and boost pressures.

These turbos run pretty high strung. You got a little 4 cylinder putting out 500 hp in its restricted version. So if you were to remove those, you have a 4 cyl/turbo that is capable of even more hp. Its not the 4 cyl, but I asked the guys at Audi when they were running the turbo V8 in the R8 what their motor was capable of without the air restrictors and he said 800-900hp easily, however it puts out about 600 in restricted mode.

Things such as variable length intakes and variable valve timing are NOT allowed on these engines.

For up to 3 liters, they can only use one air inlet that is 44.5 mm in size if they use 2 valves/cyl and only 43mm if running more than 2 valves/cyl. They can run a boost pressure up to 2500mbar or about 36.25 psi.

So when you really think about things, they are running a 2 liter engine producing 500hp that isnt using variable valve timing or inlet lengths, breathing through a hole that is less than 1.75 inches big and running boost up to 36 psi. Thats a pretty serious piece of gear and to think it can run at and near max rpm for up to 24 hours is pretty impressive.

I dont know that they will be running Porsche down this year, but hopefully they can give Acura and the other guys a real run for their money.

rotarygod

Their boost pressures are absolute. You need to subtract out 14.7 psi since that's what the Earth sits at at sea level (on the perfect day).

I know those engines are tough. They are amazing compared to street engines. Having a 4 cylinder engine that can produce that much power for a long time is exactly why I say a small rotary can do it too. It's not to say that the stock engine out of your car could do it but you could build one that could. It's not rocket science. I couldn't take an S2000 engine and boost it up to those levels and have it live either. We also couldn't take any standard Mazda 4 cylinder engine and make it live up there. Those race engines are designed for it. A rotary would need to be to. Increase bearing area by 50%, reduce rotational weight, etc... It's not hard. That's old news now and isn't going to happen anyways.

I forgot they had to turn the car off in the pits. Maybe that's why the rotary is going away. It probably floods during pit stops!

rotary crazy

the AER engines are really impresive

Im still mad at them but I do hope the best for them

D-Type

I think the Kuhmo tires will be the major question mark. Right now Michelin are the undisputed leader in endurance racing tires, and without the F1 commitment the endurance side will have top billing. All other things being equal, the Michelin teams are gonna have a leg up. IF Kuhmo shows up with a good tire, I see Mazda being in the top 5 in qualifing (with Devlin driving), and with shots at podiums.

rotarygod

Supposedly they are picking up a new sponsor this season but we won't know until Sebring who it is. I wonder why the delay?

Race Shooter

The Kumhos are coming along nicely. While certainly not at the level that Michelin is, they are showing to be very respectable and do last well and are consistent, though that seems to be a bi-product of them being a bit harder as well.

However, talking to two of the three teams that will be running them, they come to the teams with a good package and support for them, something that not everyone can get from Michelin. You cant necessarily just run Michelins, even if you are willing to pay for them, you must be chosen/approved to be allowed to run them. So for smaller teams, going with the Kumhos has seemed to be the answer.

They arent as good as Michelins yet, but the Kumho will be a good predictable and consistent tire for them and they should be able to use that to really make the car as good as it can be.

rotarygod

Since you're new here and seem to have some insight as to what is going on, who are you?

bern

I do have a little insight and the reasons are explained in previous post... but the short here...

The ALMS program is a Mazda North America led endeavor, and as such, needed to be reevaluated in overall terms of corporate marketing strategy (direct link to funding a dedicated budget for the new ALMS program), and engineering relevance to Mazda North America; rotary is basically a Mazda Japan only engineering endeavor. Mazda NA did/does not have the engineering resource (budget/knowledge/personnel), or even more importantly, much leeway to indulge in a RENESIS rotary racing technology development program to fit into the specific ACO rules package, without tapping or using much resource from Mazda Japan, which in my opinion was/is not available at the moment. The rotary, I'm sure, could be made to be competitive in some specific FI package (2-rotor, 3-rotor, etc..), but the development cost to find this winning combo would've been much less efficient in terms of overall returns in time, engineering innovation/knowledge and marketing to Mazda North America, then the 4-cylinder program, which does have engineering and marketing relevance here.

-Bern

AggieLuke

I vote somebody from either the ALMS or SpeedTV forums, since RS started posting right after this forum was linked on those two. There's a couple people on the ALMS forums that are photogs and know tons, but they generally aren't this friendly/forthcoming with information...

Senna

Possibly Jim Sykes??

rotary crazy

you have some very good info, can you say who you are?

Race Shooter

Bingo.

I'm a freelance professional motorsports photographer that works in the ALMS, World Challenge and Grand Am. I worked for Mazda NA shooting their ALMS, WC and to a lesser extent, the Star Mazda and MX-5 Cup programs last year and will again this year.

You can check out the links in my sig to see more about me.