2007 Rx-8
04-24-2006, 05:51 PM
#251
I agree with Missinmahseven. I've owned a first gen '7 for quite some time and you definitely know how to get the most out of the rotaries' power band. The best thing about these engines is the look on other peoples faces when you scream past them pulling about 8000 on the rpm with a smile on you face...The point being that driving a rotary is COMPLETELY different from driving a piston engine. You have to be a lot more careful about gear selection, and not be afraid to hear your engine scream once in a while. After all, isn't that part of the rotary allure...
04-24-2006, 06:23 PM
#252
Representin'!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 357
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TALAN7
The only option you gave that made any sense was #1, and my car is runing fine! Answering #2; I was going over 65 mph in 5th and I downshifted to 4th. I don't know what the Hyudai had in it but I was trying to pass it on the right and noticed it still on my left keeping up with me. 65 in 4th is in the upper part of the powerband. The 8 just doesn't have much torque, which helps in getting up hills. I never said the car was slow and I only gave my subjective opinion.
Option #3 doesn't deserve a response.
In regards to the 8 flying uphills? That stupid remark from you just proves you should just keep your opinions to yourself. And I wouldn't brag about passing winnebegos and 84 Cadillacs.
Option #3 doesn't deserve a response.
In regards to the 8 flying uphills? That stupid remark from you just proves you should just keep your opinions to yourself. And I wouldn't brag about passing winnebegos and 84 Cadillacs.
Put that in 3rd going 65 then say you cant pass cars. The high redline doesnt get angry at you for it.
04-25-2006, 08:37 AM
#254
FEAST!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: noneyabusiness
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by brattesani
after you master the clutch on a sports car (or any car with a really stiff clutch), you will have no problem driving all stick cars.
lol I disagree. THe clutch in the RX8 is super easy and not that stiff compared to some others. I learned on a 1987 5-speed Ford Aerostar. Now that was a tricky clutch. If you could learn on that, you would be golden on anything. You can't drive an Rx-8 and then step into an old charger that has a 90 pound clutch and feel comfortable. Now that was a stiff clutch.
04-27-2006, 01:14 PM
#255
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Manchester, TN
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Wurmfist
lol I disagree. THe clutch in the RX8 is super easy and not that stiff compared to some others. I learned on a 1987 5-speed Ford Aerostar. Now that was a tricky clutch. If you could learn on that, you would be golden on anything. You can't drive an Rx-8 and then step into an old charger that has a 90 pound clutch and feel comfortable. Now that was a stiff clutch.
I retired a heavily modified V6 Ford Probe to buy my RX8. I initially complained about the power in the RX8 compared to my previous car, but now that I have "learned" how to drive the 8, why is power such a problem? I drive it like a sportbike and have no complaints. If you drive it like a torque-happy V6 or V8, it is a dog. I'm new to rotaries, but I am hooked nonetheless. I am even making friends with all the clerks at the gas stations!
04-27-2006, 06:56 PM
#256
Originally Posted by zoom44
now imagine your doign 70-75 mph and 2.5k rpm in 6th gear. you want to pass so you put your foot down- what happens? at 4k you actually get a little acceleration at 2.5k you wouldnt get any at all. how many people would be happy about that? try it yourself . get on the highway in 6th gear at 2.5k rpm and then stick your foot to the floor,push clutch in, go to 4th gear, release clutch give it gas and take off
fixed it there for ya zoom
I'd much rather have a tall 6th "sipping" gear and downgear when I want the acceleration.
04-27-2006, 10:37 PM
#257
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO Fixes for the 07 RX-8:
1) DI (this works, the new DI VW Turbo motor picks up HP and fuel economy with the switch to this more precise method of fuel metering)
2) Larger primary and secondary injectors, smaller tertiary injector (will supply adequate fuel farther than 3750 RPM before engaging the tertiary injector, possibly out to 4200-4400 range, or whereever the downshift from 6th peaks for perceived "passing power", will allow 6th to be a "cruising gear" even with the 4.44 rear gearing.)
3) No increase in displacement (guys/gals, the side ports are maxed out for flow, how could you get more air into an N/A rotary? If you significantly increase the displacement we're going to drastically lose RPM. I don't see any of us raving about a 7,500 RPM 1.6 liter, unless it would touch 300 HP. The small increase in displacement from widening each rotor does not solve the air intake issue.)
4) No forced induction (Risky in today's market to add complexity to a system already not selling fabulously well. Yes, it's a performance bump, but at what price?)
5) Reshaping of the rotor's "face" to generate a "lean burn" area similar to Honda's lean burn cylinder heads and pistons.
6) Addition of 3rd spark plug, to aid in the attempt to maximize the lean-burn rotor design.
7) Improvements to PCM processor and timing/fueling/constantly variable intake ducting (Someone, Saab I think, was experimenting with continuously variable intake runners simply using a sliding arrangement to shorten or lengthen the tubing to the cylinders. Rather than a complex dual tube system as on the current Renesis, I could see the switch to curved tubing with twin throttlebodies at the block.
8) LESS WEIGHT
Right now, the MX-5 is looking like a winner in the market. With their healthy Turbo I-4 design, I could see where Mazda's brass might be leaning towards using that motor in an RX-7 type package, leading off in a new direction. If they don't sove the Renesis' current issues, at $4.00 per gallon, and if there isn't a revision in 2007, I think we'll never see a 2008 model. It just isn't going to happen. My best guess about Sam Mitani's earlier drive in the pre-production cars was that:
1. The final gearing was taller than 4.44:1... Probably 4.10 like the current Miata
2. The gearing in the transmisson was different, possibly better in 1,2, and 3, for acceleration with a taller final drive. This current car, with the 4.44 could only have been meant for countries with LOWER speed limits. As many have posted on here, at 75 mph, we're well into the "every injector firing, warp-speed, Mr Sulu!" range.
What I would like to see the aftermarket do is:
1. Crack the Mazda-vinchi Code
2. Install a larger 1st and 2nd injector to carry sufficient fueling out past 3750 RPM for maximum cruising efficiency, and...
3. Reconfigure the software to optimimum for this system.
This might help us "retune" the current 04-06 cars to a tolerable level of fuel economy. Either that or we all need to install 4.10 rear gears from the new MX-5!
The closer a smaller injector gets to "full duty cycle", the worse the fuel spray gets because of a lack of "rebound time" for the fuel PSI in the line. A bigger injector can still fire a sufficiently-strong pulse, close down, and have time for the PSI to rebound before the next pulse. Direct injection is one way of essentially doing the same thing, but at a much higher fuel PSI (needed to overcome compression PSI in the chamber). Direct injection during the air intake portion of the cycle would be little better than leaving the injector in the intake tract. We'd still see pre-ignition as prohibitive (not to mention downright destructive to the apex and side seals). Direct injection IMMEDIATELY before the SPARK ensures a "rich" area of mix, along with a lean-burn area around the edges, and drastically decreases the chance of pre-ignition. Our new power and fuel economy will come from higher compression, and direct injection metering, and will probably move the motor closer to a true "250 HP" for this 1.3 liter displacement. But that's it... there's just no more air available to make more power. You can't "port" a side-port Renesis like you could with the Gen 1/2/3 RX-7 N/As.
This is also why FI is tricky on the current Renesis... Pre-ignition. Mazda is pushing the compression limits as far as they dare to get to 232. I don't think, though, that it's as far as the seals will tolerate AS LONG AS pre-ignition can be eliminated. With DI, I think that's possible. As DI and compression ratios were not previously discussed in this thread, I think that might be the method Mazda is going to choose, along with some weight reductions (like to 2,800 lbs wet), if dismal 2006 sales and spiraling fuel prices don't harmonize into a resounding death knell for the RX-8.
If it does, our next Mazda "sports coupe" will have that turbo I4 in it, and really, would that be all that bad? <ducks and runs for cover>
1) DI (this works, the new DI VW Turbo motor picks up HP and fuel economy with the switch to this more precise method of fuel metering)
2) Larger primary and secondary injectors, smaller tertiary injector (will supply adequate fuel farther than 3750 RPM before engaging the tertiary injector, possibly out to 4200-4400 range, or whereever the downshift from 6th peaks for perceived "passing power", will allow 6th to be a "cruising gear" even with the 4.44 rear gearing.)
3) No increase in displacement (guys/gals, the side ports are maxed out for flow, how could you get more air into an N/A rotary? If you significantly increase the displacement we're going to drastically lose RPM. I don't see any of us raving about a 7,500 RPM 1.6 liter, unless it would touch 300 HP. The small increase in displacement from widening each rotor does not solve the air intake issue.)
4) No forced induction (Risky in today's market to add complexity to a system already not selling fabulously well. Yes, it's a performance bump, but at what price?)
5) Reshaping of the rotor's "face" to generate a "lean burn" area similar to Honda's lean burn cylinder heads and pistons.
6) Addition of 3rd spark plug, to aid in the attempt to maximize the lean-burn rotor design.
7) Improvements to PCM processor and timing/fueling/constantly variable intake ducting (Someone, Saab I think, was experimenting with continuously variable intake runners simply using a sliding arrangement to shorten or lengthen the tubing to the cylinders. Rather than a complex dual tube system as on the current Renesis, I could see the switch to curved tubing with twin throttlebodies at the block.
8) LESS WEIGHT
Right now, the MX-5 is looking like a winner in the market. With their healthy Turbo I-4 design, I could see where Mazda's brass might be leaning towards using that motor in an RX-7 type package, leading off in a new direction. If they don't sove the Renesis' current issues, at $4.00 per gallon, and if there isn't a revision in 2007, I think we'll never see a 2008 model. It just isn't going to happen. My best guess about Sam Mitani's earlier drive in the pre-production cars was that:
1. The final gearing was taller than 4.44:1... Probably 4.10 like the current Miata
2. The gearing in the transmisson was different, possibly better in 1,2, and 3, for acceleration with a taller final drive. This current car, with the 4.44 could only have been meant for countries with LOWER speed limits. As many have posted on here, at 75 mph, we're well into the "every injector firing, warp-speed, Mr Sulu!" range.
What I would like to see the aftermarket do is:
1. Crack the Mazda-vinchi Code
2. Install a larger 1st and 2nd injector to carry sufficient fueling out past 3750 RPM for maximum cruising efficiency, and...
3. Reconfigure the software to optimimum for this system.
This might help us "retune" the current 04-06 cars to a tolerable level of fuel economy. Either that or we all need to install 4.10 rear gears from the new MX-5!
The closer a smaller injector gets to "full duty cycle", the worse the fuel spray gets because of a lack of "rebound time" for the fuel PSI in the line. A bigger injector can still fire a sufficiently-strong pulse, close down, and have time for the PSI to rebound before the next pulse. Direct injection is one way of essentially doing the same thing, but at a much higher fuel PSI (needed to overcome compression PSI in the chamber). Direct injection during the air intake portion of the cycle would be little better than leaving the injector in the intake tract. We'd still see pre-ignition as prohibitive (not to mention downright destructive to the apex and side seals). Direct injection IMMEDIATELY before the SPARK ensures a "rich" area of mix, along with a lean-burn area around the edges, and drastically decreases the chance of pre-ignition. Our new power and fuel economy will come from higher compression, and direct injection metering, and will probably move the motor closer to a true "250 HP" for this 1.3 liter displacement. But that's it... there's just no more air available to make more power. You can't "port" a side-port Renesis like you could with the Gen 1/2/3 RX-7 N/As.
This is also why FI is tricky on the current Renesis... Pre-ignition. Mazda is pushing the compression limits as far as they dare to get to 232. I don't think, though, that it's as far as the seals will tolerate AS LONG AS pre-ignition can be eliminated. With DI, I think that's possible. As DI and compression ratios were not previously discussed in this thread, I think that might be the method Mazda is going to choose, along with some weight reductions (like to 2,800 lbs wet), if dismal 2006 sales and spiraling fuel prices don't harmonize into a resounding death knell for the RX-8.
If it does, our next Mazda "sports coupe" will have that turbo I4 in it, and really, would that be all that bad? <ducks and runs for cover>
04-27-2006, 11:12 PM
#258
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Drive it like a sport bike
The 8 is the only car that I ever drove like a sport bike, and that is one of the things I like best about it. I even sold my motorcycle after I got it.
04-27-2006, 11:20 PM
#259
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I forgot to add that moving the intake ports to a periphrial (sp? it's late at night here) design WOULD allow larger intake ports for a 1.6L 2-rotor design. Exhaust porting might then be an issue...
Also another thought for fuel economy is... My spreadsheet shows 72 MPH equals about 3500 RPM, given the diameter of a Bridgestone RE-040a 225/45-18 tire. A swap to a 4.30, if one is available, or a 4.10 gear would move the RPM down, relative to speed, in order to stay away from the 3rd injector initiation point (if it is at 3750 or so). This would be the cheapest solution, allbeit at a slight 0-60 performance cost. On a roll, on the track, I don't think we'd really notice a difference.
I still think the RX-8 was meant to have gone into production with a taller final drive. Clearly, someone drove the car and shouted, "IYE!", and it got 4.44 gearing for better acceleration. If it'll do 5.9 seconds to 60 now, it was probably at the 6.4-6.5 second range with the taller gearing. Just staying out of that 3750 + range on the freeway would have probably put the mileage in line with Sam Mitani's original quotes for freeway mileage, compared to the FD or FC RX-7.
Also another thought for fuel economy is... My spreadsheet shows 72 MPH equals about 3500 RPM, given the diameter of a Bridgestone RE-040a 225/45-18 tire. A swap to a 4.30, if one is available, or a 4.10 gear would move the RPM down, relative to speed, in order to stay away from the 3rd injector initiation point (if it is at 3750 or so). This would be the cheapest solution, allbeit at a slight 0-60 performance cost. On a roll, on the track, I don't think we'd really notice a difference.
I still think the RX-8 was meant to have gone into production with a taller final drive. Clearly, someone drove the car and shouted, "IYE!", and it got 4.44 gearing for better acceleration. If it'll do 5.9 seconds to 60 now, it was probably at the 6.4-6.5 second range with the taller gearing. Just staying out of that 3750 + range on the freeway would have probably put the mileage in line with Sam Mitani's original quotes for freeway mileage, compared to the FD or FC RX-7.
04-28-2006, 01:56 PM
#261
i pwn therefore i am
Originally Posted by PhotoMunkey
IMHO Fixes for the 07 RX-8:
1) DI (this works, the new DI VW Turbo motor picks up HP and fuel economy with the switch to this more precise method of fuel metering)
2) Larger primary and secondary injectors, smaller tertiary injector (will supply adequate fuel farther than 3750 RPM before engaging the tertiary injector, possibly out to 4200-4400 range, or whereever the downshift from 6th peaks for perceived "passing power", will allow 6th to be a "cruising gear" even with the 4.44 rear gearing.)
3) No increase in displacement (guys/gals, the side ports are maxed out for flow, how could you get more air into an N/A rotary? If you significantly increase the displacement we're going to drastically lose RPM. I don't see any of us raving about a 7,500 RPM 1.6 liter, unless it would touch 300 HP. The small increase in displacement from widening each rotor does not solve the air intake issue.)
4) No forced induction (Risky in today's market to add complexity to a system already not selling fabulously well. Yes, it's a performance bump, but at what price?)
.
.
<wall of text continues on for pages>
1) DI (this works, the new DI VW Turbo motor picks up HP and fuel economy with the switch to this more precise method of fuel metering)
2) Larger primary and secondary injectors, smaller tertiary injector (will supply adequate fuel farther than 3750 RPM before engaging the tertiary injector, possibly out to 4200-4400 range, or whereever the downshift from 6th peaks for perceived "passing power", will allow 6th to be a "cruising gear" even with the 4.44 rear gearing.)
3) No increase in displacement (guys/gals, the side ports are maxed out for flow, how could you get more air into an N/A rotary? If you significantly increase the displacement we're going to drastically lose RPM. I don't see any of us raving about a 7,500 RPM 1.6 liter, unless it would touch 300 HP. The small increase in displacement from widening each rotor does not solve the air intake issue.)
4) No forced induction (Risky in today's market to add complexity to a system already not selling fabulously well. Yes, it's a performance bump, but at what price?)
.
.
<wall of text continues on for pages>
You think they should put a piston engine in the RX-7? Not going to happen for lots of reasons, most notably, the "R" stands for "rotary".
How does putting in a taller final gear affect 0-60 times? Why would you be in 6th gear at 60mph when you're really trying to accelerate?
Also, you forgot the one thing the 8 really needs: more cowbell.
04-28-2006, 06:33 PM
#262
Super Moderator
PhotoMunkey...interesting post...
I think Mazda Japan have in the past and are experimenting at the moment with most of the ideas/issues you talked about, however, there is one over riding factor that prohibits many of them and thats Exhaust emmisions....Full STOP...
The feature of the RENISIS as we know (Side exhaust porting) is to burn fuel/exhaust more efficiently, improve performance (HP) and again to meet Emission Regulations.EU/US.
As far as the 2007 2008 RX-8's life, yes, high fuel prices are going to and ARE having a dramatic effect on ALL high performance car sales, V8s and even V6s and SUVs, in fact any car that uses gas in high volumes (Sales Down 45%)...we can't all drive in 4 cylinder 2.0 litre cars as they are not practical for larger families.
I was reported recently here this is the first time world-wide that every nation's economies are in Growth...and not one in Recession...since the industrial revolution!.
This is why there is such a huge demand on OIL, gold, iron ore, copper, zinc, magnesium, aluminium, natural gas, EVERY commodity that's required to manufacture ALL goods.
We will just have to learn to live with the high price of GAS/PETROL as it is World-wide.
In OZ we are paying $1.40 a litre that is $5.60AU or $4.25 US! a gallon, and our distance to travel on roads anywhere is very similar to you guys the US.
Perhaps the people of the US will allow G W Bush to mine for oil in ALASKA and take the pressure off supply and prices...maybe...
One day soon the Mining in Alaska will happen..I think it has about 50% of all your crude Oil requirements for some decades.
I think Mazda Japan have in the past and are experimenting at the moment with most of the ideas/issues you talked about, however, there is one over riding factor that prohibits many of them and thats Exhaust emmisions....Full STOP...
The feature of the RENISIS as we know (Side exhaust porting) is to burn fuel/exhaust more efficiently, improve performance (HP) and again to meet Emission Regulations.EU/US.
As far as the 2007 2008 RX-8's life, yes, high fuel prices are going to and ARE having a dramatic effect on ALL high performance car sales, V8s and even V6s and SUVs, in fact any car that uses gas in high volumes (Sales Down 45%)...we can't all drive in 4 cylinder 2.0 litre cars as they are not practical for larger families.
I was reported recently here this is the first time world-wide that every nation's economies are in Growth...and not one in Recession...since the industrial revolution!.
This is why there is such a huge demand on OIL, gold, iron ore, copper, zinc, magnesium, aluminium, natural gas, EVERY commodity that's required to manufacture ALL goods.
We will just have to learn to live with the high price of GAS/PETROL as it is World-wide.
In OZ we are paying $1.40 a litre that is $5.60AU or $4.25 US! a gallon, and our distance to travel on roads anywhere is very similar to you guys the US.
Perhaps the people of the US will allow G W Bush to mine for oil in ALASKA and take the pressure off supply and prices...maybe...
One day soon the Mining in Alaska will happen..I think it has about 50% of all your crude Oil requirements for some decades.
Last edited by ASH8; 04-28-2006 at 06:38 PM.
04-29-2006, 12:11 AM
#263
PingMobile
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ASH8
Perhaps the people of the US will allow G W Bush to mine for oil in ALASKA and take the pressure off supply and prices...maybe...
One day soon the Mining in Alaska will happen..I think it has about 50% of all your crude Oil requirements for some decades.
04-29-2006, 04:58 AM
#264
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: St. Helens, OR
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The Senku is powered by a new Rotary Engine Hybrid system which uses Mazda's next-generation, direct-injected rotary engine, combined with a hybrid system consisting of a generator, an electric motor and a battery."
Though the Senku is a concept, it does suggest that they have a direct injection motor in the works.
When I bought my car, I was being told by the dealership that a electric hybrid kit would be available in the short future....... right. But this article seems to suggest that at least they have though about it.
The rotary is so small, a bybrid makes sense.
Though the Senku is a concept, it does suggest that they have a direct injection motor in the works.
When I bought my car, I was being told by the dealership that a electric hybrid kit would be available in the short future....... right. But this article seems to suggest that at least they have though about it.
The rotary is so small, a bybrid makes sense.
04-29-2006, 08:22 AM
#265
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: atlanta ga
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Direct Injection is absolutely the way to go and is my best bet for the most sure change we will see. I still think they need to apply the separate oil metering tank that I've been talking about for years.
05-04-2006, 03:49 AM
#267
Mazda Mole
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RX8PDX
"The Senku is powered by a new Rotary Engine Hybrid system which uses Mazda's next-generation, direct-injected rotary engine, combined with a hybrid system consisting of a generator, an electric motor and a battery."
The rotary is so small, a bybrid makes sense.
The rotary is so small, a bybrid makes sense.
05-05-2006, 03:55 PM
#268
Go Texas Longhorns!
PhotoMunkey,
I like many of your ideas, injector changes, fuel maps, a better cat and gearing are certainly on the table as far as 2007 changes, but as much as I want to see a DI engine next year, I seriously doubt Mazda will have that engine out til the next revision of the Rotary Engine. Hopefully the above changes will improve mileage and power.
Getting the car lighter by 150lbs is going to be a challenge, the only areas left IMO would be exhaust, the doors, tires and powerplant frame. Changes to these might net 50-70lbs, but that wouldn't really be enough to make a fuel economy difference.
I like many of your ideas, injector changes, fuel maps, a better cat and gearing are certainly on the table as far as 2007 changes, but as much as I want to see a DI engine next year, I seriously doubt Mazda will have that engine out til the next revision of the Rotary Engine. Hopefully the above changes will improve mileage and power.
Getting the car lighter by 150lbs is going to be a challenge, the only areas left IMO would be exhaust, the doors, tires and powerplant frame. Changes to these might net 50-70lbs, but that wouldn't really be enough to make a fuel economy difference.
05-05-2006, 04:31 PM
#269
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Rohnert Park CA
Posts: 755
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In 88, Mazda had prototypes running around with the 20B in there and C&D and R&T and the other mags all claiming the the 20B was going to be the engine available in the Series 5 RX-7 (2nd version of the 2nd gen RX-7). I am sure that if the internet and boards like this were around then, you would have seen the same sort of speculations that are posted in this thread about the car needing more power and the direction, and if it didn't get it, the car was doomed.
But it all fizzeled in the real world of production automobiles. And Mazda simply re-tuned the existing rotary engine to produce a little more power (about a 10% increase).
The '07 RX-8 will be no different. And if it gets a 10% increase in power (in anything other than a Mazdaspeed version) I would be surprised.
But it all fizzeled in the real world of production automobiles. And Mazda simply re-tuned the existing rotary engine to produce a little more power (about a 10% increase).
The '07 RX-8 will be no different. And if it gets a 10% increase in power (in anything other than a Mazdaspeed version) I would be surprised.
05-05-2006, 04:34 PM
#270
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If, if they can get 100lbs off the next RX-8 and give it a little more power with direct injection, it'd get the 0-60 times and milage tolerable by the market. A lot of things we talk about here are just rumours, well not even, since Mazda keeps their secrets so well, its just things that are brought up by people, not Mazda's people.
We need to wait until next year to see the changes, maybe even 2008. The 8 came out as a 04 model, a redesign every 4 years pushes it to 2008. But we might see some cosmetic changes soon if Mazda plans to continue the 8. I have no doubts that the rotary engine will continue, but they need to put the engine in more than 1 car ASAP to continue profits with this powerplant.
________
How to roll blunts
We need to wait until next year to see the changes, maybe even 2008. The 8 came out as a 04 model, a redesign every 4 years pushes it to 2008. But we might see some cosmetic changes soon if Mazda plans to continue the 8. I have no doubts that the rotary engine will continue, but they need to put the engine in more than 1 car ASAP to continue profits with this powerplant.
________
How to roll blunts
Last edited by Renesis_8; 09-11-2011 at 08:25 AM.
05-05-2006, 04:40 PM
#271
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Icemark
In 88, Mazda had prototypes running around with the 20B in there and C&D and R&T and the other mags all claiming the the 20B was going to be the engine available in the Series 5 RX-7 (2nd version of the 2nd gen RX-7). I am sure that if the internet and boards like this were around then, you would have seen the same sort of speculations that are posted in this thread about the car needing more power and the direction, and if it didn't get it, the car was doomed.
But it all fizzeled in the real world of production automobiles. And Mazda simply re-tuned the existing rotary engine to produce a little more power (about a 10% increase).
The '07 RX-8 will be no different. And if it gets a 10% increase in power (in anything other than a Mazdaspeed version) I would be surprised.
But it all fizzeled in the real world of production automobiles. And Mazda simply re-tuned the existing rotary engine to produce a little more power (about a 10% increase).
The '07 RX-8 will be no different. And if it gets a 10% increase in power (in anything other than a Mazdaspeed version) I would be surprised.
Back on topic. Thats good to hear, no doubt a lot of people think the 8 is doomed, and the engine is maxed out, lets hope Mazda proves us wrong! or man. slap a turbo/supercharger with DI and blow us away with the existing compression! 10:1, they think 9.5:1 in MS6 is high.. haha
________
Park Royal 2 Condos
Last edited by Renesis_8; 09-11-2011 at 08:25 AM.
05-05-2006, 04:58 PM
#272
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Rohnert Park CA
Posts: 755
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Renesis_8
Hey welcome Icemark, your 1st post i notice, but join date says sept 04!! haha what kept you from posting? flame wars?
Back on topic. Thats good to hear, no doubt a lot of people think the 8 is doomed, and the engine is maxed out, lets hope Mazda proves us wrong! or man. slap a turbo/supercharger with DI and blow us away with the existing compression! 10:1, they think 9.5:1 in MS6 is high.. haha
See Mazda doesn't see the RX-8 being low on power. No more than it saw the last two gens of the Miata/MX-5 low on power. They see it all as part of the package. His only negative comments is that the engines cost a lot (when compared to piston engines) as rotary engines are still all built by hand, and that Mazda must tool every machine that is used to make one. Of course with piston engines there are probably 10 or 15 companies all over the world that build machines to make piston engine parts).
So these grandiose ideas that people keep posting in this thread about FD power beating performance from superchargers or Turbos are just pipe dreams and wishful thinking.
See Mazda knows (from years and years of sports car manufacturing) that it’s the balanced package that is the important thing. Not that the engine makes 300 HP.
05-05-2006, 06:56 PM
#274
jersey fresh
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 3,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Icemark
Nah, old timer on the RX7Club board... lurker here for a while since I don't own a RX-8
The last I heard, from my buddy at Irvine is that Mazda was happy with the sales being above projected levels, and that their were only cosmetic and minor changes slated for the S2 RX-8 (which follows normal Mazda practice).
See Mazda doesn't see the RX-8 being low on power. No more than it saw the last two gens of the Miata/MX-5 low on power. They see it all as part of the package. His only negative comments is that the engines cost a lot (when compared to piston engines) as rotary engines are still all built by hand, and that Mazda must tool every machine that is used to make one. Of course with piston engines there are probably 10 or 15 companies all over the world that build machines to make piston engine parts).
So these grandiose ideas that people keep posting in this thread about FD power beating performance from superchargers or Turbos are just pipe dreams and wishful thinking.
See Mazda knows (from years and years of sports car manufacturing) that it’s the balanced package that is the important thing. Not that the engine makes 300 HP.
The last I heard, from my buddy at Irvine is that Mazda was happy with the sales being above projected levels, and that their were only cosmetic and minor changes slated for the S2 RX-8 (which follows normal Mazda practice).
See Mazda doesn't see the RX-8 being low on power. No more than it saw the last two gens of the Miata/MX-5 low on power. They see it all as part of the package. His only negative comments is that the engines cost a lot (when compared to piston engines) as rotary engines are still all built by hand, and that Mazda must tool every machine that is used to make one. Of course with piston engines there are probably 10 or 15 companies all over the world that build machines to make piston engine parts).
So these grandiose ideas that people keep posting in this thread about FD power beating performance from superchargers or Turbos are just pipe dreams and wishful thinking.
See Mazda knows (from years and years of sports car manufacturing) that it’s the balanced package that is the important thing. Not that the engine makes 300 HP.
