Timbo, I think the above discussion is about the performance question based on the accord being 0.5 seconds quicker from 0 to 60 as a hybrid. I dont think anyone cares about the fuel econ. (I dont think) just FYI.

 

cant they make these systems lighter? i mean 300lbs is huge!

 

DarkMaz8. The first big problem is the battery. All high the batteries that can be used in a car (high energy dencity) are very heavy. The second is the possible use of a capacitor (Like 9 farads!) which is also somewhat heavy.

 

too bad they couldn't make smaller versions that would weigh less than 100lbs. It would definately help to have an extra 20-30lbs of torque.

 

I maybe jumping th gun a bit here.. but I think the issues of batteries being heavy and slow to charge etc etc etc.. will soon be a thing of the past..

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0503/05...sh1minbatt.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0406/04...oshibafuel.asp

the advancements in battery technology is moving along faster than we're lead to beleive..

 

I dont think this is going to affect our 0-60 times! :D

 

The real problem with hybrids is they are more a feel good factor than they are a cost saving measure. The extra cost of purchase would negate any savings at the pump. There is also the issue that with more weight everything must be reengineered to account for this extra weight. And then the last bit is what is involved with making more power from a hybrid? That does not excite me at all. I will keep my low weight low power great handling car as it is for now and find another solution.

 

What if they made the system with 2 less seats and 2 less doors?

Back to the thread, Xyntax is right. Rotary loving is sweet.

 

Like I said before. with the bigger engine, I bet you can get better mileage than with the 1.3 in the RX8 now. All it has to do with is gearing....a torquier 1.5 liter would be able to pull a 3.909 or 4.10 rear ratio. Less RPM's much better fuel economy.

 

Mileage is not the issue here! We are talking about torque. Why do folks bring up mileage whenever the hear electric. Electric cars accelerate so fast they can break your neck (literally! Instant torque! was reading about some prof that hurt his neck in a electric car.)

 

Timbo, my point was not fuel economy really, it was the torque addition of the electric motor. It is a fact that the Accord has more HP, Torque and get better Gas mileage with their hybrid system. Those are 3 positives. Yeah it costs 300lbs in weight and several thousands in cash, but if you dont think there are other weight saving measures that can make up alot of that you are crazy. I am sure they would cost alot more, but we werent really talking price before. I was just trying to point out that the system Honda puts forth is not very large and is a pretty good addition. It is almost the perfect compliment to the Rotary, if/when the technology gets better (ie lighter weight, better batteries) it may be worth looking into for mazda. Dam, cant we just have a regular discussion here without stupid comments like "if your worried about fuel mileage dont get a rotary!" I am sure nobody would complain if they could have the same rotary engine with better fuel mileage and more torque, even if they werent worried about it, which I am not.
That is a good point Navile, I have never thought of it that way but it makes sense. The question here would be, would the increased fuel usage by the larger displacement offset any gains by the lower gearing?

 

Forget the Hybrid Types for Mazda or the RX-8, as you know Mazda are working on and have Japanese Government assistance for the Hydrogen Rotary Engine in the 8. One of the head guys from GM US is in Australia for some conference and the news grab tonight was also on Hydrogen fuel cell cars, even GM says that by 2010 car makers will be producing them for sale.
The biggest problem at the moment for car makers is the cost factor of Hydrogen engines being 10 times the cost of current gas engines. This is where the rotary may dominate in the future.. with hydrogen power......don't you just love the rotary!

 

What ever happens (and nice links Little John, that stuff looks just great)...Mazda knows how to build cars with a soul and they will figure things out.

Add 300 pounds...well, maybe they can find 200 pounds to cut out making it only a 100 pound difference.

Time will tell...and yes, the more work they bring to the rotary engine the bigger smiles I get!

 

A hybrid rotary you want? A hybrid rotary you get!!!!

https://www.rx8club.com/rx-8-media-news-11/new-4-seat-mazda-concept-senku-73625/

:-)

 

^^^agreed! All I want for this car is more torque...that's it. If there's any additional HP that comes with that torque, fine, but if not, that's fine too. I'd just like to get away from the stop lights a little quicker.

 

I'm not saying that a 1.5 liter rotary couldn't happen but I don't personally think it is a feasible idea for some of the already stated reasons. Even if you widen the combustion chambers, you do some bad things. First off your intake and exhaust ports can not get larger to compensate since the total side area remains the same. This means that the engine will ultimately not rev as high due to airflow limitations. Next the combustion chamber size gets bigger. We already have efficiency issues in terms of fuel suspension. Making it bigger will make it worse.

As stated earlier a 1.5 liter 3 rotor with rotors the size of an old 10A engine would be the nicest choice for a slightly larger engine. Each rotor is lighter which is less stress on the eccentric shaft per journal and there would be an additional eccentric shaft bearing which would help with loads. The combustion chamber would be smaller and would alleviate some of the efficiency issues. The important thing though is that the total side area would still be the same which means that the total port area, even staying the same size it is now, would be effectively larger as we'd have 50% more ports of the same size for an engine that is only 15% larger. That means improved breathing capability and we all know what that can lead to. In addition, a 3rd rotor would be more firing pulses per revolution which is a much smoother running engine. Imagine that! This makes far more sense to me and would be very cool. However making sense has never been a manufacturer strong point so who knows.

I'd like to see a hybrid system done very differently form the current trend. I would like to see a hybrid electric system done just like train locomotives. I'd like to use the rotary as an apu (auxiliary power unit) to function as noting more than a generator sending power to capacitor banks and electric motors that direct drive the wheels. This would be a fully electric vehicle that would only need the gasoline engine as a generator. Electric motors are very efficient at low speeds. It wouldn't take much energy from the gas generator to get a vehicle moving very quickly with electric motors. That's the beauty of efficiency. It works on trains quite well. You'd never see those things get moving if those big diesel engines had to actually power the train. They couldn't do it. I'd like to see an ecu control the speed of the apu to supply the needed power to the motors. I'd also like to see a motor in each wheel direct driven. No transmission. Wheels don't turn terribly fast so getting an electric motor to spin at these speeds isn't that hard to do. We wouldn't even need brakes as you could run a cross current across the motors to slow down. Get an air cooled apu and now you don't even have a cooling system. The car could be so light and simple it wouldn't even be funny. I feel this is the way they will eventually go in the future as to me it makes more sense. The layout is right in front of us everytime we see a train go by. They couldn't even run as good if the electric motors tried to supplement the diesel. With 4 motors we could have 2 wheel drive, front wheel drive, rear wheel drive, all wheel drive, traction control, antilock brakes, etc all based on what the computer determines is the best scenario at that time. All of the car is now just a function of inputs in a computer. No need to worry about changing brake pads, coolant leaks, transmission failures, etc. I almost think this layout makes too much sense and that is why no one is doing it. Check out www.freedom-motors.com and see what their little air cooled rotary engine is like. All aluminum and qualifies for the ULEV emissions rating through CARB. No oil injection issues either! It'll even run on diesel! Imagine an air cooled diesel (or biodiesel) rotary with low emissions. This is the way the engine should be done and then applied as an apu. That's just the way I'd do it though. Unfortunately no one is trying it my way. I can't help but think it's because it is too complicated. I look at the marvel of engineering that is the Toyota Prius Hybrid setup and I wonder how anything could have been mroe complex to design.

 

RG
I like your thinking re:the Hybrid Idea, perhaps the only restrictions could be putting it into practice, the development costs, and the final retail price of such a beast.

Hats off to Toyota with their hybrids, I just wonder what maintenance and repair costs will be in time, let alone any computer issues once the car is 5 or more years old...or out of warranty.

I recall the 20B triple rotor had some eccentric shaft problems because of its length, or, was that the experimental 4 rotor unit.

Given that the 10A rotor width would reduce shaft length in a 3 rotor version, perhaps this will be what a "'WIDE" new rotary could be, or even a 12A (B) 3 rotor engine?

 

Brilliant analysis. Funny, I knew that there was some non-linear relationship between volume of the chamber vs surface area of the chamber that is detrimental to increasing rotor size alone but I couldn't figure it. It felt wrong but I couldn't see it. Port size is it. Thanks.

The car that you describe is definietly a better daily driver, but folks are sheep and dont like change. If you cant sell it, you cant build it. What was the name of that three-headlight car? Edsidel? At best you could slowly encorperate these changes over several iterations or generations of models (which is what toyota is doing. They wont stop at the prius. They will make something better when everyone else is just getting the hybrid right.)

 

I remember reading that there is a concept hybrid version of the Evo running individual electric motors in each rear wheel. No exactly the same, but maybe a step in the right direction.

 

My hunch is that the 13 b will remain in 2007 but will be modified to take direct injection .If so would someone like RG care to speculate on what kind of power improvement this would result in , let alone reduction in fuel consumption.

regards
rexi

 

The early multi rotor prototypes had eccentric shaft problems due to the way they were joined. Originally Mazda just tried adding another eccentric shaft to another back to back with nothing more than a keyway to hold them together. The streeses proved too much for this type of system. Then they developed taper coupling combined with a keyway. This is what is currently used and works very well with no issues. It was only the very first multirotor engines that had issues. Multi rotor engines are no longer a problem.

 

If the redesign would bring the HP up into the 270 range, what kind of torque what it produce?

Personally, I don't see it happening-a redesign for another 30 horses roughly. Doesn't make sense to me. Now releasing a MS 8 with flywheel mods etc I can possibly see. But 270 +- HP when the competition has had 300 plus HP on stock engines for almost half a decade now-or at least by time this rumored 15B hits the streets-I don't get.

A redesign of the RE that is only a few years old would warrant a HP target much closer to 300 HP. This would be a marked improvement and would justify the R&D $.

Just my take.

 

lol...
yes those exact batteries wont do much... but picture thier big brother

 

No one?

http://www.japanesecarfans.com/news....id/2050824.001

 

Mitsu and other Japanese car makers are going to start selling all electric cars in Japan soon, as there is a market for small "city cars" that don't need to go 300+ mi on a charge.
You have to remember that Japanese driving is mostly urban, and therefore, a little smart like electric car makes sense. This will begin the evolution to cars designs like RG is talking about. These small cars will help develope the new electric motor drivetrain's, give the suppliers and OEM manufacturers time to learn and ramp up production. It will be a slow evolution (like 15 years).

There is no technical reason why we couldn't power cars with an APU now, other than the sad old philosophy of "we've always done it this way, why change?" from the manufacturers. Because of the massive capital costs of building cars, automakers are usually very conservative and hesitant to change, there is just so much at stake.

In addition, so much of the relative cheapness of cars comes from the many suppliers that feed into the chain, they also have to be ready and able to product the parts efficiently at a profit, and that takes time. Automakers can't just shove a whole sale change like this down there throat. (ask Delphi what that feels like)

Fuel cells cars are essentially the same as an electric car from a drvietrain standpoint, so these new small electric cars will help with the evolution over to fuel cell vehicle.