I remember when the rotary was 100 hp (crank!), was installed in a 2400 lb car, and still only returned 16 mpg in normal driving. If you think the current one can't be improved upon significantly, you're delusional! People probably said the same thing 30 years ago.

 

Most of the improvements (displacement notwithstanding) came from the auto industry itself. Port fuel injection and electronic ignition come to mind.
I remember when the Chevy 350 barely made 200 HP and that was only 30 years ago.
But piston motors haven't been standing still over that time either and their advancements in power and economy have far outstripped the rotary.
Now the gains in specific output from piston motors are incremental at a time where the rotary's gains would have to be an order of magnitude.

If you believe Mazda has some magic, then fine.

Just realize that the rotary motor hasn't seen really any advancements over the last 30 years that were uniquely specific to its design that are responsible for anything other than its reliability. Even the side-port isn't a new idea.

 

It really is pointless comparing a 90's designed RX-7 to a 00's designed RX-8.

YES we know the FD had a Turbo..

Trying to make a RX- with ALL the regulatory requirement for the 2010-2020's IS the issue.

The FD just simply would not pass ANY..I am sure the press would LOVE a 3 star rated Sports Car, as this is what it would rate today if around, even lower.

As we know the continuing requirements of safety and technology (black boxes, computers, wiring) all adds weight and cost.

But YES, they can do it, but IMO forget a massive HP rotary, I just can't see that happening.

 

http://www.autoweek.com/article/2010...NEWS/101029989

In fact, the 16X so far performs slightly better than Mazda's standard two-liter gasoline engine, said Mitsuo Hitomi, general manager of the Japanese carmaker's powertrain division.


But the engine is at least one model year behind schedule because of problems hitting emissions reduction targets. And Hitomi concedes it's still not ready for production.


“Maybe within two years we can tell you when we will introduce it to the market,” he said.

Said Hitomi: “We will never give up.”

 

Then why bother?

If the motor is meant to be the heart of a sports car, then it needs to be at least on-par with the current crop of sports cars from the other manufacturers. (Which will make it behind the curve of the next crop which it will be competing with - something of which that Mazda has always been a victim.)

Awesome. So a 3.2 liter motor performs slightly better than a 2.0 liter. That is good to know.

 

From what I've read, Mazda had the engine on shelves ready for a body. Now apparently they are abandoning the engine completely for various reasons. I'm not just pulling this out of my ***. It could be libel, but who knows. It is the internet after all.

If you don't like my posts, ignore them. I've seen plenty of ludicrous and arrogant posts from you and have never said anything. And since you're not a moderator, don't tell me not to post. I'm sure you've got another cute and audacious comment lined up but don't bother. This is my last post in this thread.

 

think about how many companies work on piston engines, and how many work on rotaries.

it's like comparing apple's iphone to the android phones out there. even though there is a fan following for the iphone, with the rate of technology going for the majority of android phones, it will be left behind, and will need to try really hard to catch up.

who knows, maybe mazda will surprise us.

 

^^^ Id say we are the Microsoft Mobile software and pistons are Apple iOS software...

 

I believe this to be an error in translation. Either he means fuel efficiency wise (Performance) vs the non sky 2.0 or he meant to say 3.0 if they are talking about power. That would make more sense.

Paul.

 

I've been saying that for years. Mazda and a select few others companies are working on the rotary, most working on Mazda's own motors and few are actually reinventing the triangle.

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...2577970012273A

 

There is an abundance of good reasoning for this.
Being Don Quixote is not inherently a good thing.

 

who?

 

What makes you think they are abandoning the engine completely?

Did they abandon the RX-7 engine completely when they designed it's successor the Renesis? Hardly.

They advanced beyond the basic 16X that was much discussed over the past several years. They learned from it, and are moving past it to a better design, building on what they learned. Just because it never made it to market doesn't mean that it was wasted or worthless.

 

While a rather ambitious statement, I'm not surprised that Mazda would be shooting for the moon on all this. The aspect of Mazda putting out an only slightly better performing motor and hoping it sells is simply silly. Mazda understands marketing and also they have a good view of the automotive market.

Remember that the first concept of the RX8 was back in 2001...we're talking about nearly 10 years ago. The automotive playing field was much different back then than it is today. In the 7 years of RX8 production we've seen the emergence of piston powered cars that can provide both staggering performance in terms of power as well as fuel mileage nearly double of what the RX8 can provide.

As such, Mazda really only has two choices....(this one is for you Jeff).

Fix it or get a new one.

 

he was talking specifically about fuel consumption Paul. Here is the quote includign the paragraph before

So he's saying the 16x 's 30% improvment over the renny is actually slightly better than the fuel consumption of their standard current production 2.0 liter

 

Why give up..we are ALL experts!..meh..

Non Mazda onwers/drivers just do not appreciate how good they are for the money.

99.9% of Journalists do..those that drive and test cars for a living.

IMO the only reason Mazda is such a crap performer market and size wise in the USA is because of their "Ford" CEO and Management and more importantly their very poor Marketing and Advertising I hear you all complain about.

Lets see how MNAO new Advertising Account goes....

I always have blind faith in Mazda Japan and their Japanese made cars, they are one of the few Car Companies that are DIFFERENT to the other mainstream **** called an Automobile.

I have faith Mazda will again PULL another magic motor and drive out of the hat, they have done it before and will do it again.

 

Which would mean that they are getting close in the fuel consumption area and have not as yet overcome the emissions hurdles. Sounds good to me.

For those that are confused on this issue; the engine is still called 16X and is still being worked on every day by dozens of sharp engineers.

Paul.

 

they will design a better cat system---i bet.
OD

 

Taking the CAT completely out of the equation only improves performance slightly.
They already introduced a better CAT, anyway.

The problem as I see it is that the non-Mazda-owning crowd sees Mazdas as "cute", cheap (as in not-well-built or equipped) and cheesy.
Most of the general public throws Mazda in the same lump as Kia, Hyundai and Daewoo.

Right now, all they seemed to accomplish is a push for the Mazda 2 with a weird, ambiguous cartoon. Complete failure. Again.

 

So what you are saying is that as a result, the rotary can't be improved upon significantly. Um, yeah...

Keep in mind that a rotary hit a bsfc of .27 over 25 years ago! There are many reasons why we aren't seeing this today but most center around technical wording on emissions laws. The engine can actually be made quite efficient and many strides have been made since then. It will ultimately end up as a generator to a full electrical system of course but then again the days of the internal combustion engine being the prime mover are slowly coming to an end. It'll just take a few decades to completely phase out. The rotary has a very bright future ahead of it!

 

Well, you would need to qualify the word "significantly" (as Mark Twain gave it to us: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."), but in a nut shell - yes. It cannot be improved upon in a fashion that will make it a piston motor's equivalent.

I'd love to be wrong about that. Seriously.

I'll go one further - if Mazda does manage to get another rotary-powered car out the door somehow, it will be an equal or greater disappointment than the the RX-8 in that it will lag far behind its competition in efficiency, power and general reliability.

 

We will never give up!

Seems to me I remember that from 1945.

Except on Sept 2nd they surrendered on the Mighty Moe.

To believe the Japanese will never give up is a fallacy........

 

Maybe new materials will be significant in the rotary's appeal? Things are happening all the time--especially with forced induction and smaller engines.
OD

 

If the current Sky Rotary prototype already outperforms Mazda's 2.0 in terms of specific fuel consumption, then they are probably getting gas mileage in the range of the current MX-5 at least. The MX-5 has a direct injected 2.0 and the EPA rates the 5 speed model as 22 mpg city and 28 mpg highway.

 

the rotary is all about packaging . Mazda don't need to match what piston engines can do - they just need to get close , then the packaging advantages become worthwhile exploiting .