A New wave of Mazda engines coming up
04-13-2009, 10:36 AM
#1
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A New wave of Mazda engines coming up
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/04/13/m...ngine-tech-to/
When Mr. Yamanouchi says "Our new gasoline engines..." I wonder if they will include a Rotary powered engine?
When Mr. Yamanouchi says "Our new gasoline engines..." I wonder if they will include a Rotary powered engine?
04-13-2009, 11:58 AM
#4
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I sure hope so. I would think that if Mazda will present a new line of engines this October that the rotary will be mentioned somewhere in there. That, along with the mx-5, are Mazda's flagships.
It may be too much to speculate, but who knows, Mazda might present a new car by then.
It may be too much to speculate, but who knows, Mazda might present a new car by then.
04-13-2009, 12:14 PM
#5
Momentum Keeps Me Going
Doesn't sound like any type of rotary pre-announce to me. The current engine would needs ..oh..say...a 50% efficiency boost to put it even close to being called "green" or "economical". I'd speculate they are talking their weight reduction goal of 220 lb/vehicle combined with DI, electric assist, tires, etc., for common piston engines.
Weight is truly the enemy of a car's everyday economy. There is just no getting around the physics of mass. Other things mask or shift a car's true energy cost (electric for example), but in the end ... more mass = more energy.
Doubtful the rotary can play that game... seeing how it has so far to catch up... it'd need a miracle.
Weight is truly the enemy of a car's everyday economy. There is just no getting around the physics of mass. Other things mask or shift a car's true energy cost (electric for example), but in the end ... more mass = more energy.
Doubtful the rotary can play that game... seeing how it has so far to catch up... it'd need a miracle.
04-13-2009, 12:56 PM
#7
Registered
If the 16X is in fact 20% more fuel efficient than the Renesis and it can go in a lighter car, it shouldn't be bad at all. Consider that if the Renesis was in the last (or any) RX-7, with it's lighter weight, it would average around 20/30 mpg. At 20% more fuel efficient it would be around 24/36 or so. I don't think anyone would complain about that.
04-13-2009, 01:22 PM
#8
If the 16X is in fact 20% more fuel efficient than the Renesis and it can go in a lighter car, it shouldn't be bad at all. Consider that if the Renesis was in the last (or any) RX-7, with it's lighter weight, it would average around 20/30 mpg. At 20% more fuel efficient it would be around 24/36 or so. I don't think anyone would complain about that.
AMEN!
It's definitely possible.
Paul.
04-13-2009, 02:03 PM
#11
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the 16X is in fact 20% more fuel efficient than the Renesis and it can go in a lighter car, it shouldn't be bad at all. Consider that if the Renesis was in the last (or any) RX-7, with it's lighter weight, it would average around 20/30 mpg. At 20% more fuel efficient it would be around 24/36 or so. I don't think anyone would complain about that.
Concerning the Tokyo Auto Show. I personally don't expect a brand new car showing. But if Mazda is going to be showing all these supposedly new and better efficient engines, the rotary or a hint of the new rotary should be mentioned by then.
Common.. it's the pink elephant in the room that everyone wants to address.
04-13-2009, 06:15 PM
#15
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 3,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Case in point would be a miata can barely get 30mph highway... drop a renesis in that and down goes mileage by at least 10-20%
04-13-2009, 06:44 PM
#16
I can't go along with that... highway cruising is all about engine efficiency, gearing, rolling resistance, and aerodynamics... and RX-7 with a renny would not have a significant advantage in any category.
Case in point would be a miata can barely get 30mph highway... drop a renesis in that and down goes mileage by at least 10-20%
Case in point would be a miata can barely get 30mph highway... drop a renesis in that and down goes mileage by at least 10-20%
Paul.
04-13-2009, 08:26 PM
#17
Registered
Damn you're a smart guy Paul! That's it exactly. The RX-8 had a 4.44 and now 4.77 rear end because it's heavy *** needs it!!! The RX-7's had 4.10's and 5 speed transmissions and were no slouches in performance. Go back to that rear end with the 6 speed and you'll get the 20/30 mpg figures. Consider that those cars when driven reasonably (what is reasonable in a fun to drive fast car?) can get 18/26 and I don't see why 20/30 is so unbelievable. I currently get 21 mpg average in a 2nd gen RX-7 in normal driving situations which is about 2/3 stop and go city driving. I know many people that couldn't get those numbers of course but I also know plenty of rotary owners who accelerate much harder than necessary and shift much higher in the rpm range than necessary. Just remember, fun may cost mileage but it doesn't mean the engine can't do it and keep up with traffic in the process.
04-13-2009, 10:35 PM
#18
Registered
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Montreal,QC
Posts: 2,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Damn you're a smart guy Paul! That's it exactly. The RX-8 had a 4.44 and now 4.77 rear end because it's heavy *** needs it!!! The RX-7's had 4.10's and 5 speed transmissions and were no slouches in performance. Go back to that rear end with the 6 speed and you'll get the 20/30 mpg figures. Consider that those cars when driven reasonably (what is reasonable in a fun to drive fast car?) can get 18/26 and I don't see why 20/30 is so unbelievable. I currently get 21 mpg average in a 2nd gen RX-7 in normal driving situations which is about 2/3 stop and go city driving. I know many people that couldn't get those numbers of course but I also know plenty of rotary owners who accelerate much harder than necessary and shift much higher in the rpm range than necessary. Just remember, fun may cost mileage but it doesn't mean the engine can't do it and keep up with traffic in the process.
No one likes a bragger...
I was getting to what Paul said,but he said it too quickly...
Honestly I would loved to get the FC as a project car. Looks like so much fun and awesome attention. And gets the same gas mileage as my fat *** car
. What if I gut the back seats and everything there and the 2 back doors, how much better will my mileage be? I'm guessing there's atleast a 100-200 pounds worth of stuff to take out.
04-14-2009, 05:21 AM
#20
Super Moderator
And this is 'RX-8 media news' ? 
...
...
04-14-2009, 10:42 AM
#21
Jacksonville, NC
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was going to ask why would you put a Renesis in a 7. But on second thought that is not a bad idea. Plenty of room, lighter car, a TII rear end is strong. Renesis puts out 5hp less that the FD motor. Hmmmm, I have a 91 FC shell that is ready to go. The only problem would be the electrical/electronics aspects.
04-14-2009, 12:39 PM
#24
Life begins @ 30 psi
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 1,745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An even marginally more efficient rotary engine in a light (2500 lbish) 2 door/2 seat coupe with proper gearing would be a phenominal car. The technology advancements of the Renesis and hopefully the 16X with a car sized like an MX-5 that looks like an FD... *drool*
04-14-2009, 12:53 PM
#25
Yep, purtty darn purrfect!
An even marginally more efficient rotary engine in a light (2500 lbish) 2 door/2 seat coupe with proper gearing would be a phenominal car. The technology advancements of the Renesis and hopefully the 16X with a car sized like an MX-5 that looks like an FD... *drool*