Mazda chose the Wankel, called it the rotary
11-13-2008, 03:55 PM
#26
Vtak just kicked in yo!!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Lake County IL
Posts: 4,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's what I'm talking about.
Mazda should chuck the Wankel OR fix it. The more pressure they feel to fix it, the more likely that is to happen. Pressure = 1/$$$, so they will be forced to listen to the market.
It is a false choice to say "1/4 monster OR curve-carver, pick one". I want a car that does both well, and gets reasonable gas mileage to boot. Anything less and we're not calling Mazda to the excellence of which it is capable.
Mazda should chuck the Wankel OR fix it. The more pressure they feel to fix it, the more likely that is to happen. Pressure = 1/$$$, so they will be forced to listen to the market.
It is a false choice to say "1/4 monster OR curve-carver, pick one". I want a car that does both well, and gets reasonable gas mileage to boot. Anything less and we're not calling Mazda to the excellence of which it is capable.
or you could come back to reality and realize that RX8s are a phenomenal sports car for sub 30K.
11-13-2008, 04:51 PM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Canada ---> Australia
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes...but with a GTR look at the maintenance costs associated. Not cheap at all....esp when there is a 'transmission warranty void' switch on the dash.
11-13-2008, 05:22 PM
#29
OMGITM!
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 3,513
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
The argument of trashing Wankel design is ridiculous. Think about how much R+D has gone into it Vs. the piston engine. You have one company working on it, with limited funds, over a much shorter time period. If you compare it to piston engine's development timeline I'd say the rotary is doing exceptionally well.
Its not as if they are not trying...
Its not as if they are not trying...
11-13-2008, 07:05 PM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Central California
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GM's president, Ed Cole, was a proponent of the Wankel. In the early 1970s, GM showed several Wankel-powered midengine Corvette design studies that would have been world-class sports cars. Car magazines said the sleek mid-engine 'Vette was a sure bet for production. Cole also planned to use the Wankel in mainstream cars.
Batten recalls that as wishful thinking. He said the accountants who held the purse strings pointed out that Chevrolet could already sell every Corvette it could build. Why was a more advanced, more expensive car needed? The logic was hard to dispute, and the Corvette would soldier on until 1984 with its 1963-vintage platform. Cole also planned to use the Wankel in mainstream cars.
And of course, GM is having the last laugh now, after decades of groundbreaking, adventurous designs and forward-thinking...Oh, wait. That's some other company. Right, GM? Hello? GM? (Will the last person please turn out the lights on your way out?)
Jeffrey
Batten recalls that as wishful thinking. He said the accountants who held the purse strings pointed out that Chevrolet could already sell every Corvette it could build. Why was a more advanced, more expensive car needed? The logic was hard to dispute, and the Corvette would soldier on until 1984 with its 1963-vintage platform. Cole also planned to use the Wankel in mainstream cars.
And of course, GM is having the last laugh now, after decades of groundbreaking, adventurous designs and forward-thinking...Oh, wait. That's some other company. Right, GM? Hello? GM? (Will the last person please turn out the lights on your way out?)
Jeffrey
Last edited by rotorhead335; 11-13-2008 at 07:10 PM. Reason: double-copy error
11-14-2008, 12:23 AM
#34
OMGITM!
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 3,513
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Easy!
The rx8 was not built entirely for sport (compare to Honda S2000, Mazda RX7 (sa/fb/fc/fd), Nissan 350Z, Lotus Elise, Etc). Imagine an rx8 with a stiffer stock suspension, lose the back seats (or make them unusably small), lose the suicide doors, lower the stock ride height/roofline, etc - this would be a more pure 'sports car' version of the rx8. The fact that the vehicle has rear doors makes it 100% clear the designers had practicality in mind rather than 100% sport.
The rx8 is a great car with sporting intentions but is not, by any means, a purebred sports car.
The rx8 was not built entirely for sport (compare to Honda S2000, Mazda RX7 (sa/fb/fc/fd), Nissan 350Z, Lotus Elise, Etc). Imagine an rx8 with a stiffer stock suspension, lose the back seats (or make them unusably small), lose the suicide doors, lower the stock ride height/roofline, etc - this would be a more pure 'sports car' version of the rx8. The fact that the vehicle has rear doors makes it 100% clear the designers had practicality in mind rather than 100% sport.
The rx8 is a great car with sporting intentions but is not, by any means, a purebred sports car.
Last edited by tiltmode43; 11-14-2008 at 01:31 AM. Reason: Spelling Error
11-14-2008, 12:25 AM
#35
Super Moderator
Rubbish
11-14-2008, 12:33 AM
#36
ಠ_ಠ
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Under the Dumbarton Bridge
Posts: 2,228
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
5 Posts
I'm kinda glad my car isn't made out of pure bread. I don't know how I'd protect it from the birds if it was; and the mold! oh god...
Last edited by Socket7; 11-14-2008 at 12:36 AM.
11-14-2008, 12:33 AM
#37
OMGITM!
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 3,513
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
GM's president, Ed Cole, was a proponent of the Wankel. In the early 1970s, GM showed several Wankel-powered midengine Corvette design studies that would have been world-class sports cars. Car magazines said the sleek mid-engine 'Vette was a sure bet for production. Cole also planned to use the Wankel in mainstream cars.
Batten recalls that as wishful thinking. He said the accountants who held the purse strings pointed out that Chevrolet could already sell every Corvette it could build. Why was a more advanced, more expensive car needed? The logic was hard to dispute, and the Corvette would soldier on until 1984 with its 1963-vintage platform. Cole also planned to use the Wankel in mainstream cars.
And of course, GM is having the last laugh now, after decades of groundbreaking, adventurous designs and forward-thinking...Oh, wait. That's some other company. Right, GM? Hello? GM? (Will the last person please turn out the lights on your way out?)
Jeffrey
Batten recalls that as wishful thinking. He said the accountants who held the purse strings pointed out that Chevrolet could already sell every Corvette it could build. Why was a more advanced, more expensive car needed? The logic was hard to dispute, and the Corvette would soldier on until 1984 with its 1963-vintage platform. Cole also planned to use the Wankel in mainstream cars.
And of course, GM is having the last laugh now, after decades of groundbreaking, adventurous designs and forward-thinking...Oh, wait. That's some other company. Right, GM? Hello? GM? (Will the last person please turn out the lights on your way out?)
Jeffrey
Many other companies explored the wankel design. It is to my understanding, however, that most were scared away by the inefficiencies of the Apex seals of the time. Essentially, other manufacturers ditched the project due to breaking apex seals (an occurance we still observe to this day!). Nissan, Toyota, Suzuki, Yamaha, AMC, Ford, GM (and quite possibly others) all purchased the rights to produce the motor. Mazda was the only one to continue on and thus owns all current technology regarding the wankel (I believe at least, correct me if I'm wrong!).
11-14-2008, 06:55 AM
#39
Concur. I classify the '8 as a sporty coupe, not a purebread sports car. The Miata I would term a sports car. I'm fine with that as the '8 is just what I wanted.
Easy!
The rx8 was not built entirely for sport (compare to Honda S2000, Mazda RX7 (sa/fb/fc/fd), Nissan 350Z, Lotus Elise, Etc). Imagine an rx8 with a stiffer stock suspension, lose the back seats (or make them unusably small), lose the suicide doors, lower the stock ride height/roofline, etc - this would be a more pure 'sports car' version of the rx8. The fact that the vehicle has rear doors makes it 100% clear the designers had practicality in mind rather than 100% sport.
The rx8 is a great car with sporting intentions but is not, by any means, a purebred sports car.
The rx8 was not built entirely for sport (compare to Honda S2000, Mazda RX7 (sa/fb/fc/fd), Nissan 350Z, Lotus Elise, Etc). Imagine an rx8 with a stiffer stock suspension, lose the back seats (or make them unusably small), lose the suicide doors, lower the stock ride height/roofline, etc - this would be a more pure 'sports car' version of the rx8. The fact that the vehicle has rear doors makes it 100% clear the designers had practicality in mind rather than 100% sport.
The rx8 is a great car with sporting intentions but is not, by any means, a purebred sports car.
11-14-2008, 07:26 AM
#40
Vtak just kicked in yo!!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Lake County IL
Posts: 4,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easy!
The rx8 was not built entirely for sport (compare to Honda S2000, Mazda RX7 (sa/fb/fc/fd), Nissan 350Z, Lotus Elise, Etc). Imagine an rx8 with a stiffer stock suspension, lose the back seats (or make them unusably small), lose the suicide doors, lower the stock ride height/roofline, etc - this would be a more pure 'sports car' version of the rx8. The fact that the vehicle has rear doors makes it 100% clear the designers had practicality in mind rather than 100% sport.
The rx8 is a great car with sporting intentions but is not, by any means, a purebred sports car.
The rx8 was not built entirely for sport (compare to Honda S2000, Mazda RX7 (sa/fb/fc/fd), Nissan 350Z, Lotus Elise, Etc). Imagine an rx8 with a stiffer stock suspension, lose the back seats (or make them unusably small), lose the suicide doors, lower the stock ride height/roofline, etc - this would be a more pure 'sports car' version of the rx8. The fact that the vehicle has rear doors makes it 100% clear the designers had practicality in mind rather than 100% sport.
The rx8 is a great car with sporting intentions but is not, by any means, a purebred sports car.
The RX8 WAS DESIGNED TO BE A LIVEABLE 4 DOOR SPORTS CAR according to the designer and according to many highly acclaimed reviews, Mazda acheived that goal.
11-14-2008, 01:33 PM
#41
OMGITM!
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 3,513
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Not entirely true, the RX8 was built to be a first ever 4 door sports car that could be used every day, and the reason they achieved the actual design and room for 4 doors and seats is with the rotary engine, thats why our cars are so bizarre shaped yet have a perfect 50/50 balance.
The RX8 WAS DESIGNED TO BE A LIVEABLE 4 DOOR SPORTS CAR according to the designer and according to many highly acclaimed reviews, Mazda acheived that goal.
The RX8 WAS DESIGNED TO BE A LIVEABLE 4 DOOR SPORTS CAR according to the designer and according to many highly acclaimed reviews, Mazda acheived that goal.
My definition of a sports car is a car in which sport was the primary intention of the car (aka the car was built to have fun in as its number one goal). Though the rx8 drives amazingly, I think the fact that 'practicality' was a part of the main design takes it out of this classification. One of the greatest allures of the rx8 is the ease of livability. The s2000 is a perfect comparison, in my opinion, to what a full fledged sports car should/would end up like in this price bracket. Compare the s2000 with the rx8 - which is more of a sports car to you? Why?
11-14-2008, 02:00 PM
#42
Vtak just kicked in yo!!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Lake County IL
Posts: 4,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I am totally aware of the rx8's front-mid engine layout with near 50/50 weight distribution.
My definition of a sports car is a car in which sport was the primary intention of the car (aka the car was built to have fun in as its number one goal). Though the rx8 drives amazingly, I think the fact that 'practicality' was a part of the main design takes it out of this classification. One of the greatest allures of the rx8 is the ease of livability. The s2000 is a perfect comparison, in my opinion, to what a full fledged sports car should/would end up like in this price bracket. Compare the s2000 with the rx8 - which is more of a sports car to you? Why?
My definition of a sports car is a car in which sport was the primary intention of the car (aka the car was built to have fun in as its number one goal). Though the rx8 drives amazingly, I think the fact that 'practicality' was a part of the main design takes it out of this classification. One of the greatest allures of the rx8 is the ease of livability. The s2000 is a perfect comparison, in my opinion, to what a full fledged sports car should/would end up like in this price bracket. Compare the s2000 with the rx8 - which is more of a sports car to you? Why?
My point is if you label a blue crayon red, what color is the crayon.
In my opinion, I feel like the RX8 is a sports car touched with practicality, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
Opinions are opinions and I see what you're saying but I think the RX8 is more SPORT than anything else, I mean what the hell else would you label it?! Sport sedan !
11-14-2008, 05:16 PM
#44
Huge hole is huge
I could only imagine Mazda CO's in the 70's....
"I think we should ditch this engine, we'll be the only ones working on it and we'll be severely out researched by the others....We'll be the laughing stock!!"
"Quiet you, think of the great arguments we will have created with this engine. It's like Christians and the Anti-Christ!"
"I think we should ditch this engine, we'll be the only ones working on it and we'll be severely out researched by the others....We'll be the laughing stock!!"
"Quiet you, think of the great arguments we will have created with this engine. It's like Christians and the Anti-Christ!"
11-14-2008, 07:39 PM
#45
Super Moderator
$20K down the drain.
Why have a VDC On/Off switch as an option and just leave the VDC permanently On with no switch?
11-14-2008, 08:48 PM
#46
OMGITM!
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 3,513
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
I appreciate you arguement but here's my point, if the sole purpose of the rx8 design was to be a sports car, and it looked as it does now, would you then consider it a sports car?
My point is if you label a blue crayon red, what color is the crayon.
In my opinion, I feel like the RX8 is a sports car touched with practicality, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
Opinions are opinions and I see what you're saying but I think the RX8 is more SPORT than anything else, I mean what the hell else would you label it?! Sport sedan !
My point is if you label a blue crayon red, what color is the crayon.
In my opinion, I feel like the RX8 is a sports car touched with practicality, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
Opinions are opinions and I see what you're saying but I think the RX8 is more SPORT than anything else, I mean what the hell else would you label it?! Sport sedan !
To generalize, I would say yes, it is a sports car with practicality thrown in - thats how I too believe they designed the platform. However, is it a flat out, pure sports car? No.
My first post said it was a compromise of a sports car, as opposed to a pure sports car. I never said otherwise
11-14-2008, 11:48 PM
#47
Super Moderator
Interesting how the RX-8 shares the same (enlarged) platform as the MX-5/Miata.
Every International write up I have read (must be at least 30) have all said it is a Sports Car, albeit with 2 extra doors.
BTW, it's passenger headroom to top windscreen brace is the required minimum height by US law, as is the hood height. So it is not possible to design any new car from 2002 with 'stock ride height/roof line', etc any sleeker or lower.
The only reason the S2000 has remained is because the car has not been redesigned...yet.
Every International write up I have read (must be at least 30) have all said it is a Sports Car, albeit with 2 extra doors.
BTW, it's passenger headroom to top windscreen brace is the required minimum height by US law, as is the hood height. So it is not possible to design any new car from 2002 with 'stock ride height/roof line', etc any sleeker or lower.
The only reason the S2000 has remained is because the car has not been redesigned...yet.
11-15-2008, 06:47 AM
#48
Vtak just kicked in yo!!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Lake County IL
Posts: 4,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The rx8 is unlabelable because what is it cross shopped with - G35? Not exactly. S2000? not likely. Etc etc
To generalize, I would say yes, it is a sports car with practicality thrown in - thats how I too believe they designed the platform. However, is it a flat out, pure sports car? No.
My first post said it was a compromise of a sports car, as opposed to a pure sports car. I never said otherwise
To generalize, I would say yes, it is a sports car with practicality thrown in - thats how I too believe they designed the platform. However, is it a flat out, pure sports car? No.
My first post said it was a compromise of a sports car, as opposed to a pure sports car. I never said otherwise
11-15-2008, 11:24 AM
#49
Huge hole is huge
Because everybody creamed their pants with the LC option! Without it, less creaming, thus less hype. At least they tell you in the book to not use it! :P
11-15-2008, 01:47 PM
#50
White is purdy...
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My definition of a sports car is a car in which sport was the primary intention of the car (aka the car was built to have fun in as its number one goal). Though the rx8 drives amazingly, I think the fact that 'practicality' was a part of the main design takes it out of this classification. One of the greatest allures of the rx8 is the ease of livability. The s2000 is a perfect comparison, in my opinion, to what a full fledged sports car should/would end up like in this price bracket. Compare the s2000 with the rx8 - which is more of a sports car to you? Why?
Every single car on earth is a compromise. Life is a compromise. The rx-8, because of its rotary engine, is a sports car, but it is more livable than an ariel atom. The entire car was built with fun driving as first on the list. The rotary engine is a complete waste in any car in which sport driving is not the primary purpose. Why rev to 9000 smooth as butter, if carting passengers around is the primary goal? The fun of revving that high, with the smooth power delivery and innumerable handling advantages makes the engine perfect for a lightweight sports car. The bad gas mileage, poor reliability, oil consumption, and general quirkiness makes it unsuitable for a non-enthusiast car. The suspension is very good, the frame is extremely good. They threw in practicality because they could. By making the wheelbase longer, they made the car much more composed on bumpy pavement.
Aside from that, I don't see what having 4 doors has to do with it. Plenty of "sports cars" have 2 doors and weigh considerably more than the rx-8.