Obviously you have no idea what Rotary is all about. I cant say I know everything about it since this is my first Rotary powered car.

When I was shopping for cars, Handling and style are the most important factor, Price came to last. I could've got myself an IS or GS or S2K. but the moment I saw the 8 I was like *Hmm, you're mine*

Seriously I know very little about Rotary back then, all I knew was that Rotary engine is something like a triangle thinggy spinning inside a Sphere like thing called housing. After I put my deposit down I start thinking hmm I have to know more about my car. but didnt had a chance until like a month later.

I start reading(this forum, other sources, books,etc), I was like w0w ..... ok ...

I think this engine, for its size, it can match some of the V6s out there. You can tell Mazda spent alot of time trying to refine this Rotary concept. its simple just compare the 12A, 13B-REW to our engine. and I was even more impressed by the newest direct injection Rotary concept. IT seems that the sucker might be able to put 300hp.

(In my opinion)the reason that they put so much crap into the ECU is that, first of all, they just want to make sure average joe not going to fuxk this engine up, well theres no problem with the engine design, but Rotary does required the end-users to take a tiny bit of extra care. Second is that they want to put MORE restriction to the engine because they want to monitor how the engine is going to work under a controllable environment. So they can use these information to fine tune their next design. You can tell they're doing something like that by looking at the next rotary engine concept, it has alot of stuff that looks the same in our engine, except for spark plug location (like an X), the injector location(direct fuel injection), and some other stuff.

Rotary is great, but most mechanic have no idea wtf is Rotary engine, I dont think ASE cover Rotary engine much(or at all), its a fact that most younger ASE graduate have no idea how to deal with Rotary engine. When they have no idea what is wrong, they just gonna say its *broken*, and will just replace them.

I have no idea whats the fuss is about with Covette, wait in I think what Dec of BM? the z06 got her *** kicked by an STi by a BIG margin. I dont like muscle cars at all. I prefer cars with overall balance all the time (thats why I kept laughing about my bro's choice ... SE-R)

Sigh .....

 

ASE has nothing for rotaries. If it were more common I could see them making a separate category for them. However, I believe that Mazda should take the initiative and start up special rotary training resulting in rotary specialists. I'm sure I'm not the first person to suggest it either. I just hope it happens

 

You didn't care if it had a rotary or not. You shouldn't have bought one.

You think the engine is the weakest part of the car. In my opinion, and in the opinion of almost anyone who has ever tracked an RX8, they know that the engine is one of the strongest points in the car (only being beaten by the suspension, which wouldn't be the same without the engine being positioned where it is).

The Corvette has better gas mileage, but whats it matter? It has better gas mileage when you are in CLOSED LOOP (that is, when you are barely on the gas -- hence, cruise control, or VERY VERY slight throttle), because the ECU shuts down 4 of the cylinders. Anyone who owns a Corvette should not be driving it like that, or else, THEY bought the wrong car. Also, have you ever riden in a Corvette? It is the most uncomfortable car to drive, sit in, take on a 2-mile drive, etc, EVER MADE. It is HORRIFYINGLY BAD.


4-cylinders are pumping out more horsepower...so? The rotary engine has been around for about 33% of the years the piston engine has. The piston engine has been mass-produced and manufactured/R&D'd by over 100 individual companies. The rotary engine has been manufactured/R&D'd by...I can only think of 5. Only ONE of these companies was successful in getting it to run reliably, MAZDA, and now they are the only ones to be producing them for vehicular use at all.

So, let's recap. The Rotary engine is currently being researched by 1 major auto brand, and the piston engine is being researched and produced by..well over 30 major auto brands.

If you think that just be cause the Commodore has a 50/50 weight balance means it will handle as exceptionally well as the RX8..you need to pull your head out of your anus. That is "blasphemy".

FAIL.

 

Thats what Im thinking, ASE cant do **** for Rotary. Mazda should get some ppl to train Techs so they can work on it better .... but I guess its hard because seriously Only Mazda Japan knows Rotary Engine .....(I dont really mean ONLY Mazda knows how to work on the Engine but I dont think MNAO knows jack about the Engine nor does Ford ... )

 

You guys are funny. God forbid anyone anywhere say anything bad about your precious engine.

First of all, no I didn't care if the car had a rotary or not. Now I do, and I wish it didn't. It was the handling and not the engine that sold me, it was the engine that made me give it back. Yup, enjoyed it for 3 years and now it was time to move on.

The engine IS the weakest part of the car. Every other car that is in the RX8 catagory out performs it. And your precious track times, which should be the RX8's strongest showing, gets beat by every other car in it's catagory. How many vids have we seen the 8 get beat by 350z's, Evo's, sti's, s2000 and even RSX's. How many mags. The strongest part of the car is the suspension that allows it to somewhat keep up with the rest of it's group. It is the slowest car of the mid range sports group, with several in the entry sports group giving it a run ( some of these are even FWD).

I used the corvette as an example that more powerfull engines are getting better gas milage. Now I know that gas milage on a sports car is not a real important priority, but with many here getting 9-12 mpg, that is rediculous.

I know the 1.3 producing 228hp is really a great acheivement in engineering...for the 80's and 90's when it took a piston engine 2.5 liters to get 100 hp, but there is no longer a need for a rotary, where common 2.0's are producing more hp then the rotary. Time has passed it by. So the big bang from the little block is no longer there.

I know, back in the day you could say that the small size/weight of the rotary allowed it to sit further back and give the car excellent balance (which the 8 does have), but again time have moved on. Today, many piston engine car have just as good, the same, or better handling then the 8. The 350, evo, sti, s2000, almost all porsches, almost all bmw's, the miata, and RSX. Many of these have the 50/50 balance with thier piston engines. So, the idea of the engine being a plus for handling is no longer valid.

50/50 balance does not make it a great handling car, but if it didn't come close to it, you will never get a great handling car from less, which allows a car as big as a bimmer, which is 50/50, to handle excellent even if it weighs more. My previous car was a porsche 944 (also 50/50), and it handled better then the 8. Before that was a mitsu eclipse GSX trubo, also great handling, so the rotary is not that big of a plus in the cornering dept over it's rivals.

And I don't care how long it been researched ( that seems to be the fall back for all the fan boys), maybe you can wait around for 60 more years for them to catch up to the rest of us today, but I'll pass...

So, lets recap: there is no real reason to even have a rotary car today...

 

But there IS a reason!

Aside from EVERYTHING you mentioned, there are the PEOPLE! PEOPLE love rotary engines, sure, it's a small niche, but they are DIE HARDS! Mazda can't turn its back on them, they would have nothing special anymore. None of Mazda's other cars are "Omfg WHAT is that?!"..ya know?


But no, I disagree with most of the things you said. "Classes" are really stupid, when it comes to cars. You can't class a 4-cylinder turbo car with an RX8, that just doesn't work. I think the only car in the RX8's "class"...uh, wait, there are none.

4-seater car, that has enough punch to get you grinning wide in the twisties, and yet you will be perfectly in place when you take it out for a night on the town, or to a classy restaurant, or an official outing? I can't think of one other. For 4-seaters in the price range, you have the EVO and the STI/WRX..neither of which are exactly "classy" ..I know I would feel uncomfortable parking one next to a line of BMW's and Mercedes, with my park-bench wing and square-ish body. Not to say those cars don't look good, they just aren't the same.

I saw a picture of an RX8 parked next to a Modena, and I have to say, it didn't look out of place. I could be biased, but I doubt it. I really didn't like RX8's much before I bought mine..

 

and we should never enjoy art, or a sunset. or a tasty adult beverage... the world is black or white....

thanks for fixing the worlds problems... i can sleep now, or can i??????

beers

 

ok, don't get me wrong. If you think I was ragging on the 8, I wasn't. I owned mine for 3 years had no problems with it, and I loved it. It was one of the best handling car I ever owned and a bargain for what I paid for it ( I got my 04 6sp touring/appearence for 24K).

I just recognize it limitations, which all cars have, but some people can't take even a little negativity about the rotary. It was an amazing engine that gave me 0 problems in the time I owned it. I just wish it was a little more then what it was, and I wish it didn't have the issue's it has. Now I understood the "special" needs of the rotary, but I'm sure none of us expected the problems some of us have run into.

Yes, there is no REAL need for a rotary, as there is no REAL need for art, a sunset, but I disagree with the adult beverages...how else would ugly guys get gorgeous women. Just because there isn't a need doesn't mean there shouldn't be one. Many people are diehards, I know, and love things for what they are. I just didn't, but recognize that not all taste are the same (thank god). I could live with the mpg, which never was a consideration, the power, which it was faster then my 944, but the reliability was just not there for me.

I hope mazda continues to make this engine, I just wish it was an option.

Adrock, I agree with you, the looks of the 8 leaves the evo/sti far behind. Actually, I think it's one of the best looking car on the market. The closest real competitors IMO are the BMW 3 series for the high end and the RSX-s for the low (not on looks, but for seating, handling, balance, and price). The 8 is an excellent car for the 24K range, but not so much in the 34K range...

 

Every single car has their own engine problems. but you are making it a big thing which is something totally not-true. and dont forget we got the *de-tuned* version of the ECU to meet emission regulations.

What kind of reliablity are you talking about? This is my first Rotary but I've seen FC Rotary with over 200K on their engine. 13B-REW had a short life because Mazda *forgot* to add enough cooling. Dont forget Boosted engine will ALWAYS have a shorter life compare to their non-boosted brothers. (There was no non-boosted 13b-rew, but Im just stating a fact) and in Fact thousand and thousands of people have no problems some already hit the 100K mark on their Renesis. Is that what you mean by Reliability ? oh let me bring this up again, do you even know how many piston engine failed out there?

Lets talk about Nissan's Altima 2.5 (again), Nissan replaced I dont even know how many engines. and lets not forget there are TONS of Dead VQ35 out there. Why is it ok and no one really gives a crap about dead-faultly piston engine but whenever Rotary fails, even the numbers are WAY low people still gotta make it such a big thing ? Is it because its *unique*? I dont think Rotary deserves this kind of *treatment*.

The only problem with this engine was the lack of Torque, its not really a problem is more like something to do with science. seriously speaking if you ever read about Rotary's history (I just did that not long ago) .... you'll think differently.

For that ......... I think I'll have to agree with you.

 

Mazda has their own training facilities to teach the dealer techs on the repair of their product. There is one in the NW suburbs of Chicago. The problem is does the dealer send their techs to training? Does Mazda require dealer techs to be trained in rotary engine repair? Does it allow a dealer to send one tech to be trained to get that dealership certified and then the dealer expect that tech to teach the remaining techs when they have a problem?

 

G-35 couple.

 

Very good questions.

It is funny that the very same company that champions the rotary is killing it. Through poor service, lack of training, and a desire to cut corner rather then bringing the rotary to it's full potential.

The rotary is cool and unique but as engines go it really can't compete with pistons. It's only advantages are lightweight and small size. On the down side it has no torque, is very inefficient for it's out put and has proven unpredictable in terms of reliability. The reliability issue maybe Mazda's fault but the ability to produce engines constantly with out issues seems elusive.

I really like this car but I to wonder if Mazda can continue to draw knew customers to the car when when they have demonstrated a history of poor support for this cars engine.

 

Ask the guy who started this thread...ask the guys who are on thier 4th engine if there are reliability problems. One engine ok, two...suspicious but ok, 4...c'mon.
Mazda's starting pool for replacement engines was 3000 engines, and then it would recycle the bad one's after a rebuild. Just how many engines were replaced? of course mazda will never tell us, but considering how many RX8's were sold to how big the pool started at doesn't seem like a positive ratio...

I wouldn't buy a nissan 2.5 either...

 

Use some Common sense people, yes u're right 1 engine died, fine, 2nd, Hmm, 3rd ? should they start thinking it might be *Something* else that causes it. but its sad that most dealerships are loaded with dumbasses who cant even get a GED. So they just replace it with the 4th one and just hope that the problem will go away.

And most of the *failed* engines came with the following condition
- The user has an AT 4 port engine
- Has 1 oil cooler
- The user BABY it all the time
- They're not using Synthetic Oil (This one is my own opinion)

I wouldnt buy a Nissan 2.5 cuz its a waste of money, now Im trying to get my bro to sell his SE-R. Cuz it seems like its going to be a costly ride (when his warranty and **** are up)

 

Why the heck would you say that? I'm willing to bet that most people who bought the 8 didn't buy it because it had a rotary engine.

 

I got it because it has a Rotary Engine, Even tho I never had one before.

 

You guys need to take it easy

 

[nitpick] No it doesn't. The Corvette's don't have cylinder deactivation (whatever GM calls it) because, according to the Corvette engineers, adding it would cause the engine to rev more sluggishly and may have decreased the redline. [/nitpick] A friend of my father's has a C6, and he says he gets right around 30 mpg if he's cruising down the highway at 70-75.

The Corvette is currently something of a gold standard for fuel economy in the world of high powered sports cars. If you compare the RX8 to something closer to its speed, such as the 238hp, 2.2L S2000 (20/26 city/hwy IIRC), you'd see that its rated gas mileage is only a few mpg worse. In real life, the spread might be a little more than that for most people (there are always the poor souls who can't break 15mpg in their RX8s, unfortunately), but that's the price you pay going with a rotary rather than a piston engine.

The rotary is a neat engine design. It is fairly lightweight, but is considerably more compact than piston engine designs that put out the same amount of power. Unfortunately, it's also horribly inefficient when it comes to fuel economy and emissions. Hopefully further development (DI?) will help resolve some of these issues, because as gas prices increase and emissions laws tighten, the rotary's future as a mass-produced engine becomes uncertain. I think it would be a shame if the engine went off the commercial market, but if Mazda can't continue to make it competitive then I think the company won't have much of a choice.

 

I think you're not giving the Renesis its due. My wife's car is a Mazdaspeed 6, a 2.3l I4 with 274hp and 280ft lbs of torque. The MZR is in the same class as the EVO and STi engines. It is a great engine, I enjoy it quite a bit when I drive it. However, to get that kind of power these I4's have to be turbo'd. I'm not familiar with an NA 250hp I4. So the rotary is producing quite a bit of hp for its displacement, more so than the piston engines out there, great as they are.

Furthermore, lets say that the turbo-4's weigh the same as a Reneis (I believe they're heavier, but for the sake of argument...) They're definitly much larger. The renesis is about the size of a decent beach ball. You can put that weight lower down and further back. The 944 had a 50/50 weight balance, but to do that they had to put the transmission in the back. So the 944 was balanced, but the weight was concentrated at both ends. The Rx8 is balanced with the weight concentrated in the middle. When the weight is in the middle, the car is more nimble, there is less resistance to rotation. This is the same reason why most mid-engined road cars (and race cars for that matter) handle well despite a weight distribution that is typically 40/60 or worse.

Also the power delivery of a turbo-4 is typically a lot less linear than the rotary. I really enjoy unleashing the 280 ft lbs on the speed 6, but as soon as you feel that nice surge of accelleration it's time to shift. A good turbo-4 may have half of its rpm range usable, wheras the rotary has a fairly flat torque curve for more than 2/3 of its rev range.

I'm personnaly leaning towards giving up my Rx8 at the end of its lease, as I'm on my 2nd engine, and there wont be enough data to determine if Mazda fixed the blown engine problem by that time. If I do give it up, my next car will have more power than the Rx8, but probably won't handle as well.
--R.

 

[nitpick]S2000 2.2L 4. [/nitpick]

215hp out of an 'effective' 2.6L isn't that great.

Even with a non-linear powerband, rpm for rpm a GOOD turbo four will have more power. Frankly, the RX8 doesn't have much usable power for 2/3rd of it's powerband, IMO.

 

Yeah, I remembered the VTEC just after I posted. It's got power, but the last one I drove had a worse torque curve than a turbo. I don't have the energy to rehash the arguments about whether or not it's 230hp out of 1.3l, and it's not that relevant anyway.

I believe I said it had a flat torque curve for 2/3 of its range. I wouldn't recommend using 3000-9000 for quick accelleration, but 5000-9000 on the Renesis is better than the 4500-6000 you would use on an MZR. If you're cruising in the Renesis, and want to scoot, you need to downshift, in the speed 6, you'll scoot without that downshift. However if you mess up and find yourself at 2800rpm coming out of a corner with the MZR it seems like forever until you get to the power (3200 or so), come out of that corner at 4500 instead of 5000 in a Renesis and you're fine.

The MZR (or Sti or EVO) is a great engine. So's the Renesis. They do different things really well.
--R.

 

Now - if we could just get the Renesis (and I'd argue the S2000 engine has an as-friendly a power-band as the Rx8) to a solid, reliable 250hp...it'd be pretty slick. Where are we going to find 35hp, though?

C'mon Pettit!

 

Already been done. TeamRX8 made 215whp (on a Mustang Dyno -- thats around 225whp on a DynoJet) WITH a Catalytic convertor.

Thats roughly 265bhp, which would be S2000-stomping territory, and, in my opinion, would PROBABLY be a top-end STI/EVO-stomper. Those cars take a terrible toll on the top-end with their AWD.

 

Yeah, I guess thats true. How are those rear seats?


Hmm..


The G35 coupe costs a bit more than the RX8..

RX8 starts at $27k, G35 = $33.5k

Fully loaded RX8 = $37k
Fully loaded G35 = $41.5k


But I suppose you could "class" them together. I dunno, the G35 Coupe seems like a bit more of a compromise, to me. Having to struggle into the backseat, and all :-P

I'm biased!