looks like there really will be a turbo renesis
#26
Originally posted by Hercules
The M3 engines that failed were created during a specific build date. That's why now all the engines are perfect.
And they are NOT moving towards turbos so I don't know where you read that. Their engineers, if you read Car and Driver a few months ago, despise the idea.
The M3 engines that failed were created during a specific build date. That's why now all the engines are perfect.
And they are NOT moving towards turbos so I don't know where you read that. Their engineers, if you read Car and Driver a few months ago, despise the idea.
This has been floating around on the web for a while now. I guess it is still at the unofficial, but I would say it is well past hearsay at this point. The article has a date of may 1, 2003, but i believe autoweek released it sometime before this.
September would probably provide the most definite answer.
Regardless of however unfortunate the move to inclusion of a non /M turbo engine is, it is arguably as necessary for BMW to include as would be the automatic transmission. N/A vs. Turbo will be argued well into the next millenium, but only by a select group of individuals who know better than the vast majority of auto consumers what to get. For the consumers, all that matters is available power that they can compare to and amaze themselves with in wonder, a number to which they can refer when placing themselves along an imagined linear hierarchy. But essentially the point is, the I6 cant reliably get to 380hp, and a tuned 4.4l V8 is probably too costly or heavy. It also provides just enough of a difference to the normal v8 that certain demographics might appreciate. Plus, who would do a better job of a factory turbo than BMW?
In any event, BMW's hardcore status quo is maintained by the F1-derived NA 5.0L V10 for /M. At least for me it is, even if the engine isn't actually F1-derived.
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Mt. Pleasant, SC
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Talking](https://www.rx8club.com/images/icons/icon10.gif)
Just make it reliable and perform. If they can turbo the car and make it (or close to) as reliable as a NA rotary, wouldn't that be a engineering feat in itself? Let this NA RX-8 build the publics' confidence back in the rotary and then introduce a reliable turbo rotary (if that's the path Mazda wants to take). Just my opinion.
Thank you protoconvert for finding that bit of BMW news. Hercules had me thinking I was hallucinating. (LOL):D
#28
tyranosaurus rex-8
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: los angeles
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Hercules
The M3 engines that failed were created during a specific build date. That's why now all the engines are perfect.
The M3 engines that failed were created during a specific build date. That's why now all the engines are perfect.
#29
Registered
Originally posted by rxtreme
I think the I-6's require longer connecting rods than comparable V-6's (comparable in displacement). I believe they either require extra rod bearings or beefed up rod bearings because of the travel and angles the connecting rods follow being all the cylinders are inline. Longer connecting rods, more travel for piston movement, and sharper angles during connecting rod travel all make a reliable 8 thousand RPM redline an interesting engineering project.
I think the I-6's require longer connecting rods than comparable V-6's (comparable in displacement). I believe they either require extra rod bearings or beefed up rod bearings because of the travel and angles the connecting rods follow being all the cylinders are inline. Longer connecting rods, more travel for piston movement, and sharper angles during connecting rod travel all make a reliable 8 thousand RPM redline an interesting engineering project.
Regards,
Gordon
#30
I REALLY LOVE THIS CAR!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SE Coast
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Talking](https://www.rx8club.com/images/icons/icon10.gif)
Originally posted by rxtreme
I totally agree with that. However, in the end, it's about how well the car can perform, either against its competition or in comparison to the RX-7. I hate to bring up the numbers card, but those performance values (0-60, 1/4 mi., skidpad, etc.) hang heavy with potential buyers. I don't think Mazda would add either to the Renesis this time around unless it could be done reliably. There certainly would be no issue with torque if a turbo or SC were added. I wonder what type of HP/torque figures were talking about with a bigger (2.0L) Renesis? How well would a RX-8 (or new RX-7) perform with this new bigger rotary? Then there is the question of gas mileage: Would it be acceptable or absurdly low? Whatever path Mazda takes with the Renesis, I just hope it performs and does it reliably.
I totally agree with that. However, in the end, it's about how well the car can perform, either against its competition or in comparison to the RX-7. I hate to bring up the numbers card, but those performance values (0-60, 1/4 mi., skidpad, etc.) hang heavy with potential buyers. I don't think Mazda would add either to the Renesis this time around unless it could be done reliably. There certainly would be no issue with torque if a turbo or SC were added. I wonder what type of HP/torque figures were talking about with a bigger (2.0L) Renesis? How well would a RX-8 (or new RX-7) perform with this new bigger rotary? Then there is the question of gas mileage: Would it be acceptable or absurdly low? Whatever path Mazda takes with the Renesis, I just hope it performs and does it reliably.
#31
the germans said "NEIN!" to turbos for the uhhhhhhhh 7something, whichever 7 is the lux-limo model. id like to see them go NA because the rotary is so far behind in development when compared to pistons which BMW (along with others) has almost perfected. As we all know, the true power of the rotary is yet to be discovered.
________
Magic dragon dispensary santa barbara
________
Magic dragon dispensary santa barbara
Last edited by P00Man; 04-16-2011 at 05:22 PM.
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Mt. Pleasant, SC
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Question](https://www.rx8club.com/images/icons/icon5.gif)
the germans said "NEIN!" to turbos for the uhhhhhhhh 7something, whichever 7 is the lux-limo model. id like to see them go NA because the rotary is so far behind in development when compared to pistons which BMW (along with others) has almost perfected. As we all know, the true power of the rotary is yet to be discovered.
Cheers:cheers:
#34
A. german gave up on rotary engines because its wasnt an efficient engine when it was tested. (Mbenz developed a 4rotor engine and had a car in 89' or so go 250mph 1st rotary car to do so.)
B. BMW's valve tronic is a much better system than vtech,ivtech,ivvt...bmw is yes much more complex and provides results japs could only wish.
C. European Auto industry is the LEADER in piston engine development... Take a look at F1 tech from France/Germany/Italy and also take a look at Lemans 24hour race....NO PISTON POWERED JAPANESE ENGINE HAS EVER WON THAT RACE!!! supra's tried for many years to do it but the engine kept blowing up.
D. WERD! the rotary engine is the most amazing engine and needs more $$ dumped into development because its has a bigger potential than the piston powered cars. Mazda has done an amazing job with the thing and if rx8 sales stay high like the preorders have been so far then we'll see a more power and more efficient rx engine...
C. the engine results that japanese production cars are getting is nice but compare them to what bmw shows and dont just say the engines are great bcause the power output they show...360NA hp from a 3.5v6 ok that those are nice numbers but look here BMW 3.2L i6 372HP (m3 csl engine) and this engine is #1 engine in MPG,reliability,stability according to that foundation who awards the best engine of the year per class.
B. BMW's valve tronic is a much better system than vtech,ivtech,ivvt...bmw is yes much more complex and provides results japs could only wish.
C. European Auto industry is the LEADER in piston engine development... Take a look at F1 tech from France/Germany/Italy and also take a look at Lemans 24hour race....NO PISTON POWERED JAPANESE ENGINE HAS EVER WON THAT RACE!!! supra's tried for many years to do it but the engine kept blowing up.
D. WERD! the rotary engine is the most amazing engine and needs more $$ dumped into development because its has a bigger potential than the piston powered cars. Mazda has done an amazing job with the thing and if rx8 sales stay high like the preorders have been so far then we'll see a more power and more efficient rx engine...
C. the engine results that japanese production cars are getting is nice but compare them to what bmw shows and dont just say the engines are great bcause the power output they show...360NA hp from a 3.5v6 ok that those are nice numbers but look here BMW 3.2L i6 372HP (m3 csl engine) and this engine is #1 engine in MPG,reliability,stability according to that foundation who awards the best engine of the year per class.
#35
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Louisville, CO
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I disagree somewhat...
European engines may be #1 in F1, but until this year most CART engines came from either Honda or Toyota and now they've both moved to the IRL. IMHO that's a pretty good track record right there (no pun intended.)
#36
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Hell in the desert
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wouldn't the cheapest way to add more power especially torque to the car is to slap on another rotor? You can use existing rotor housing and just requiring a new E-shaft right? But of course the added weight might not be what they wanted although they can make smaller rotors, (half the size?) with 3 of the together.. that shouldn't weigh much more although more power you'd think...
First post btw.. HI :cheers:
First post btw.. HI :cheers:
#37
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Mt. Pleasant, SC
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RacingDynamics,
A) So just give up on any further development and let the Japs carry the rotary torch right?
B) You can't say it's better because it's to new, not enough time on it to prove reliability. More advanced, yes, and don't think for a minute that the japs are boo hooing over valtronic and have given up on any further piston engine developements. This is just an age old tradition of one-upsmanship that has existed between the japs and germans for years with the japs shooting first and the germans one uping them.
C) Totally dissagree!! Honda dropped the bomb on F1 in the late 60's and early 70's with their F1 program, and don't forget what Ayerton Sena and Nigel Mansel were driving when they dominated. If we're just talking piston engines, look who dominates Moto GP. The Toyotas (GT- One's) of Lemans did NOT suffer engine failures!! They were all gear box failures of non toyota origins, and blown Michlen tires (sabatoge from the french LOL). And of course we all know what Mazda did with the R26b rotary.
D) I concur
E) First, only a hand full of people will be able to afford the CSL M3. Second, I'll say it again. The S54 engine has not proven to be reliable, stop kidding your self!! Read this again if you haven't already http://members.roadfly.org/jason/m3engines.htm. I don't care what the reasons were or the build dates are. Engine failure is engine failure period. They're reputation is tarnished and therefore no reliability awards!! I'm not spending 50k plus for any car with this reputation, sorry. The foundation that gave this engine #1 in reliability is full of crap!! If they repair this damaged reputation in the next few years by exhibiting a better engine reliability then kudos to them. I suspect that engines days in that iteration are numbered anyways. If the next M5 and M6 get crazy V10's then look for the next M3 to have a V8. There is a reason the the E46 test mules had 2 fitted with V8's. Just a prediction. Besides, Audi is starting to put the heat on BMW with the next S4 and RS6.
RACRX
A) So just give up on any further development and let the Japs carry the rotary torch right?
B) You can't say it's better because it's to new, not enough time on it to prove reliability. More advanced, yes, and don't think for a minute that the japs are boo hooing over valtronic and have given up on any further piston engine developements. This is just an age old tradition of one-upsmanship that has existed between the japs and germans for years with the japs shooting first and the germans one uping them.
C) Totally dissagree!! Honda dropped the bomb on F1 in the late 60's and early 70's with their F1 program, and don't forget what Ayerton Sena and Nigel Mansel were driving when they dominated. If we're just talking piston engines, look who dominates Moto GP. The Toyotas (GT- One's) of Lemans did NOT suffer engine failures!! They were all gear box failures of non toyota origins, and blown Michlen tires (sabatoge from the french LOL). And of course we all know what Mazda did with the R26b rotary.
D) I concur
E) First, only a hand full of people will be able to afford the CSL M3. Second, I'll say it again. The S54 engine has not proven to be reliable, stop kidding your self!! Read this again if you haven't already http://members.roadfly.org/jason/m3engines.htm. I don't care what the reasons were or the build dates are. Engine failure is engine failure period. They're reputation is tarnished and therefore no reliability awards!! I'm not spending 50k plus for any car with this reputation, sorry. The foundation that gave this engine #1 in reliability is full of crap!! If they repair this damaged reputation in the next few years by exhibiting a better engine reliability then kudos to them. I suspect that engines days in that iteration are numbered anyways. If the next M5 and M6 get crazy V10's then look for the next M3 to have a V8. There is a reason the the E46 test mules had 2 fitted with V8's. Just a prediction. Besides, Audi is starting to put the heat on BMW with the next S4 and RS6.
RACRX
#38
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not taking any sides but gotta pipe in to correct some serious b.s:
1. Toyota CART engines where designed and built in the USA by American engineers and manufacturers.
2. Honda's IRL engines are not designed or built by Honda but are totally subcontracted to a specialty race engine company. I think it is Illmor. This is not the norm for Honda.
3. Isn't the M3 CSL engine rated at 352 hp, not 372 hp?
4. VVT has been around for many decades and was first developed by Italians.
5. Valvetronic is not much more complex than Honda's iV-Tec stuff. Valvetronic does all that iV-Tec does and eliminates the weight/cost of a throttle body and cruise control actuator in addition to removing any pumping losses associated with a throttle body.
6. An ancient technology Chevy LS6 engine weighs less than the BMW S54 or a highly tuned Nissan VQ yet produces more power and more torque and is more fuel efficient than either. Hmmm?
1. Toyota CART engines where designed and built in the USA by American engineers and manufacturers.
2. Honda's IRL engines are not designed or built by Honda but are totally subcontracted to a specialty race engine company. I think it is Illmor. This is not the norm for Honda.
3. Isn't the M3 CSL engine rated at 352 hp, not 372 hp?
4. VVT has been around for many decades and was first developed by Italians.
5. Valvetronic is not much more complex than Honda's iV-Tec stuff. Valvetronic does all that iV-Tec does and eliminates the weight/cost of a throttle body and cruise control actuator in addition to removing any pumping losses associated with a throttle body.
6. An ancient technology Chevy LS6 engine weighs less than the BMW S54 or a highly tuned Nissan VQ yet produces more power and more torque and is more fuel efficient than either. Hmmm?
#39
tyranosaurus rex-8
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: los angeles
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by babylou
6. An ancient technology Chevy LS6 engine weighs less than the BMW S54 or a highly tuned Nissan VQ yet produces more power and more torque and is more fuel efficient than either. Hmmm?
6. An ancient technology Chevy LS6 engine weighs less than the BMW S54 or a highly tuned Nissan VQ yet produces more power and more torque and is more fuel efficient than either. Hmmm?
#40
THE supra's ..even with out the tranny problems they had no chance at winning the GT class.
M3 cls is rated at 352HP according to BMW magazine...sorry had a typo there...
The world has made a place where companies can come out and prove to everyone they are the leader in engine tech. We call them Lemans 24h and F1...BMW has won more Leman tittles than any other car company. And F1 is currently dominated by europeans...so this tells you right now EURO/american engine development is #1
Production engine development is also rated by that foundation...i forget their name everytime...but they look at every engine produced and pick out 10top engine for every engine size class...and so far as of 2002...1.5,2.5,3.0,3.2,4.4,4.6,5.0, (Liter )engines have been from BMW.....then a lot of the jap companies take the spots...but most of the spots are euro...
dont get me wrong here...I LOVE japanese cars and their engines because their great engines. But in the world of pro sport...
M3 cls is rated at 352HP according to BMW magazine...sorry had a typo there...
The world has made a place where companies can come out and prove to everyone they are the leader in engine tech. We call them Lemans 24h and F1...BMW has won more Leman tittles than any other car company. And F1 is currently dominated by europeans...so this tells you right now EURO/american engine development is #1
Production engine development is also rated by that foundation...i forget their name everytime...but they look at every engine produced and pick out 10top engine for every engine size class...and so far as of 2002...1.5,2.5,3.0,3.2,4.4,4.6,5.0, (Liter )engines have been from BMW.....then a lot of the jap companies take the spots...but most of the spots are euro...
dont get me wrong here...I LOVE japanese cars and their engines because their great engines. But in the world of pro sport...
#41
I REALLY LOVE THIS CAR!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SE Coast
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Exclamation](https://www.rx8club.com/images/icons/icon4.gif)
Hmmm. The great debate continues. As for the Germans, you ignore completely what MB/AMG does with superchargers. If you didn't see the latest Motor Trend on Speed, you missed a MB CL55, unrestricted chip, posting the second fastest top speed of 187mph, second only to a Lambo Muriceilago(?). Now, that's a very expensive car without doubt. But go down to the low end where the C32 AMG sits. It's a really fast car and I doubt that reliability of the engine is an issue. Sure, it doesn't have the rep of an M3, but it's a four liteluxo sedan. So, one could dismiss turbocharging by the Germans, except for Audi who does it well, but don't forget the C32, SLK32, CLK55, E55, S55, CL55, SL55 and the soon to be on sale, S600, SL600, CL600, all with twin turbo V12s. Oh, and who rules in German Touring racing? Not BMW, not Audi (lately), but for the last two years, MB CLK!:D
Having said all that, I'm still buying an RX-8:D
Having said all that, I'm still buying an RX-8:D
Last edited by TybeeRX-8; 05-09-2003 at 08:35 PM.
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Mt. Pleasant, SC
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEST ENGINE IN THE WORLD ..... ROTARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cheers!!
#44
Give Toyota a chance in F1. You have to admit they're doing remarkably well for being in their second year. I'm guessing within 3 years, they'll be a force to be recon-ed with in the F1 circuit. Look out McLaren/Ferrari/Williams....
#46
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F1 or any racing is a poor measure of auto technology. Due to rules restrictions in racing, road cars are much more technically advanced. Road cars must last much longer, need to be easily assembled, must meet stringent emissions standards, have to have muted NVH levels, be affordable, etc. This is a hell of a balancing act. If the products I made had to satisfy so many conflicting goals I would change professions and get a job at Starbucks or something.
Besides, several of the car companies competing in F1 farm out all of the engine work, engineering included. Mercedes uses Ilmor and Ford uses Cosworth.
There is no one nation or company that has a lock on good automotive engineering. I see good stuff and turds from each group.
Besides, several of the car companies competing in F1 farm out all of the engine work, engineering included. Mercedes uses Ilmor and Ford uses Cosworth.
There is no one nation or company that has a lock on good automotive engineering. I see good stuff and turds from each group.
#48
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by babylou
F1 or any racing is a poor measure of auto technology. Due to rules restrictions in racing, road cars are much more technically advanced...
F1 or any racing is a poor measure of auto technology. Due to rules restrictions in racing, road cars are much more technically advanced...
---jps
#49
donna toki mo...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: San Francisco, California
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by babylou
F1 or any racing is a poor measure of auto technology. Due to rules restrictions in racing, road cars are much more technically advanced. Road cars must last much longer, need to be easily assembled, must meet stringent emissions standards, have to have muted NVH levels, be affordable, etc. This is a hell of a balancing act.
F1 or any racing is a poor measure of auto technology. Due to rules restrictions in racing, road cars are much more technically advanced. Road cars must last much longer, need to be easily assembled, must meet stringent emissions standards, have to have muted NVH levels, be affordable, etc. This is a hell of a balancing act.
F1 pushes automotive technology to it's limit. Accelerate, brake, turn left, turn right--that's it--creature comforts disregarded. (too bad no more turbos)
#50
mostly harmless
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Greater Vancouver Area, BC
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by evel333
F1 pushes automotive technology to it's limit. Accelerate, brake, turn left, turn right--that's it--creature comforts disregarded. (too bad no more turbos)
F1 pushes automotive technology to it's limit. Accelerate, brake, turn left, turn right--that's it--creature comforts disregarded. (too bad no more turbos)
you'll find a greater number of advanced electronic systems in road cars, the usability isn't that of a disposable razor, the ergonomics conform to the user and not the user conforming to the car, comfort, aesthetic functionality, be able to protect people who're retarded when driving it in a highly un-safe driving environment (no crash-barriers, cross-traffic, lamp-posts, pedestrians, etc), and the list goes on... that's just on the consumers side.
on the manufacturer's side, the cars need to be as cheap as possible to construct (within certain boundaries: ie, the gearbox has to be mostly steel or the interior door handles must withstand yea-much torsional force) which means carry-over of existing manufacturing equipment is important, as well as ease of and speed of construction is paramount, it must be easily serviceable so that capital er-investment in mechanics is as low as possible (ie, GM won't suddenly adopt a Porsche-esque rear-engine mounting system), it must have some practical edge over its competition (why we're seeing so many "cross-over" vehicles these days) to be marketable, the company's goals, image, and philosophies ought to be reflected in all of its vehicles (otherwise those become meaningless)... there are a lot of things to consider.
on the motorsports side of things, i'd say that the engineering isn't heighted, but reduced (distilled) to its most basic of elements: it's just gotta go fast. fast is easily quantifiable, and its also easy to figure out what will make something faster. in the end, working as cheif designer in Toyota F1 in France is a far simpler thing than to be chief designer back at Toyota Corp. head office, in charge of the next Camry (well, maybe not in this example as the Camry is pretty bread-and-butter Toyota, but you get my point).
think about it this way: it takes 100-400 engineers (lower being more Minardi, the upper being more Ferrari) 10 months to design, build, and (for the most part) sort out a good F1 car, where in the auto-industry, it'll take the same number of engineers 2-3 years and 10 times the development to create an entirely new vehicle... or even longer, with more development, as is the case with the RX-8
![Wink](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/wink.gif)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
JimmyBlack
Series I Major Horsepower Upgrades
273
02-10-2020 10:23 PM