Would anybody buy a car with a rotary engine?
Discussion
jamieduff1981 said:
Yes I've driven 2 different RX-8s, both 230bhp models and many years apart. I was a serial MX-5 owner and did consider a "step up". It was nice car to drive. I'm not panning the RX-8 itself - I liked it. I felt it could have been much better with a proper engine. This thread is about wankel engines. I'm saying the RX-8 was a good car despite the wankel engine; which was a quaint throwback to the RX-7 and probably ultimately killed the car.
"A BMW M3 would be so much better with a wankel engine rather than a N/A straight 6", said nobody ever except for someone at BMW who decided to put a V8 in it instead.
Horses for Courses..."A BMW M3 would be so much better with a wankel engine rather than a N/A straight 6", said nobody ever except for someone at BMW who decided to put a V8 in it instead.
The RX8 went around the top gear test track in the same time as an E46 M3.
Fair enough if you're comparing engine to engine but I disagree. The RX8 would lose its handling characteristics if it had a bigger engine in it. I found the speed quite adequate and the noise very addictive
If it's more power you after ther are supercharger kits available for more low down torque and companies out there are doing 13B conversions, etc...
They tend to appeal to those people that want something different.
I've done over 200,000miles in rotaries and never found them to be any worse vs reliabilty than any other performance engine. Issues arise from poor information given to customers regarding maintenance etc.
As has already been called out on this thread - had they progressed and developed with the same resource and funding as the otto cycle engines we would be in a different place with them.
There are a number in use in aircraft now as the primary powerplant. (see rotary aviation)
Regarding the Le Mans effort - they were not signifcantly better or worse in terms of econony vs the V12s etc, the benefit of running a rotary at the time meant you could carry a larger fuel load etc. The 787b was an evolutionary design that started in the early 80's with the 787b being the ultimate product. It included variable length induction systems etc etc (well worth watching on youtube).
Post 1991 the entry rules were modified which effectively ruled out a competitive entry by another rotary. (Look up the Mazda 792p)
Mazda have been looking at using laser ignition and a larger (wider) rotor to increase the width of the flame front and thusly get a cleaner burn. I'm not sure where they are with this, but pretty certain it has been running in the lab. (Known as the 15X which denotes the change in swept volume for the two rotor lump under development)
Mazda have been threatening a new Rx7 type car for years - Autocar tend to make something up twice a year and run with it... I suspect we might see something based on the MX5 platform in the next 5 years - but it will be produced at a lower volume than the Rx8 I think.
I've done over 200,000miles in rotaries and never found them to be any worse vs reliabilty than any other performance engine. Issues arise from poor information given to customers regarding maintenance etc.
As has already been called out on this thread - had they progressed and developed with the same resource and funding as the otto cycle engines we would be in a different place with them.
There are a number in use in aircraft now as the primary powerplant. (see rotary aviation)
Regarding the Le Mans effort - they were not signifcantly better or worse in terms of econony vs the V12s etc, the benefit of running a rotary at the time meant you could carry a larger fuel load etc. The 787b was an evolutionary design that started in the early 80's with the 787b being the ultimate product. It included variable length induction systems etc etc (well worth watching on youtube).
Post 1991 the entry rules were modified which effectively ruled out a competitive entry by another rotary. (Look up the Mazda 792p)
Mazda have been looking at using laser ignition and a larger (wider) rotor to increase the width of the flame front and thusly get a cleaner burn. I'm not sure where they are with this, but pretty certain it has been running in the lab. (Known as the 15X which denotes the change in swept volume for the two rotor lump under development)
Mazda have been threatening a new Rx7 type car for years - Autocar tend to make something up twice a year and run with it... I suspect we might see something based on the MX5 platform in the next 5 years - but it will be produced at a lower volume than the Rx8 I think.
BrettMRC said:
Regarding the Le Mans effort - they were not signifcantly better or worse in terms of econony vs the V12s etc, the benefit of running a rotary at the time meant you could carry a larger fuel load etc. The 787b was an evolutionary design that started in the early 80's with the 787b being the ultimate product. It included variable length induction systems etc etc (well worth watching on youtube).
Have you got a source for that as everything I've read said there was a fixed limit and it was more economic eg http://www.mulsannescorner.com/mazdar26b.htmlWikipedia suggests that they gave up on going slow for economy and went instead for flat out as the economy was so good.
Edited by Fastdruid on Wednesday 15th October 16:53
Given equal development, I don't think they would be likely to achieve equal fuel economy with piston engines - the surface area of the combustion chamber is relatively large, and it's difficult to implement some of the technologies used to maximise efficiency in piston engines when the combustion chamber is constantly moving and changing shape. Still, I think better materials technology could improve the thermodynamic efficiency of the thing.
Welshbeef said:
The RX8 230 bhp I really enjoyed its handling on the track - have never driven on the road.
I've no idea what MPG it did or didn't do
It appears from users that it has low MPG 20's (Very similar to the same powered Focus ST 2.5 yet those owners and others seem to generally ignore that.
I have heard that they can have hot starting problems and no idea what % it impacts but there is noise about rebuilds - the thing which is overlooked is you can buy Rx8's for £1k or that kind of money if it goes wrong scrap it and buy another its many multiples cheaper than a Focus ST.
New models though as its only Mazda pushing the technology R&D is tiny v piston engines in road cars so getting it to pass the EU regs may cost so much that they simply wouldn't make any money from the car sales. Plus hybrid/electric is the new tech so focus on that game.
Good on them for being different and not just with engines but light cars and simple fun cars like MX5
Part correct, part bI've no idea what MPG it did or didn't do
It appears from users that it has low MPG 20's (Very similar to the same powered Focus ST 2.5 yet those owners and others seem to generally ignore that.
I have heard that they can have hot starting problems and no idea what % it impacts but there is noise about rebuilds - the thing which is overlooked is you can buy Rx8's for £1k or that kind of money if it goes wrong scrap it and buy another its many multiples cheaper than a Focus ST.
New models though as its only Mazda pushing the technology R&D is tiny v piston engines in road cars so getting it to pass the EU regs may cost so much that they simply wouldn't make any money from the car sales. Plus hybrid/electric is the new tech so focus on that game.
Good on them for being different and not just with engines but light cars and simple fun cars like MX5
ks, which general consensus would have as your norm, it would seem.Low mpg in at least one of them is as much to do with can't drive for toffee or have a very punishing route as much as anything else.
Audi engine in the Ford will generally do Mars miles. Mazda won't, but if you can buy a decent one for a years depreciation, who gives a f
k if the engine might blow after 80 - 100k miles. I wouldn't shy away TBH.
BrettMRC said:
They tend to appeal to those people that want something different.
I've done over 200,000miles in rotaries and never found them to be any worse vs reliabilty than any other performance engine. Issues arise from poor information given to customers regarding maintenance etc.
As has already been called out on this thread - had they progressed and developed with the same resource and funding as the otto cycle engines we would be in a different place with them.
There are a number in use in aircraft now as the primary powerplant. (see rotary aviation)
Regarding the Le Mans effort - they were not signifcantly better or worse in terms of econony vs the V12s etc, the benefit of running a rotary at the time meant you could carry a larger fuel load etc. The 787b was an evolutionary design that started in the early 80's with the 787b being the ultimate product. It included variable length induction systems etc etc (well worth watching on youtube).
Post 1991 the entry rules were modified which effectively ruled out a competitive entry by another rotary. (Look up the Mazda 792p)
Mazda have been looking at using laser ignition and a larger (wider) rotor to increase the width of the flame front and thusly get a cleaner burn. I'm not sure where they are with this, but pretty certain it has been running in the lab. (Known as the 15X which denotes the change in swept volume for the two rotor lump under development)
Mazda have been threatening a new Rx7 type car for years - Autocar tend to make something up twice a year and run with it... I suspect we might see something based on the MX5 platform in the next 5 years - but it will be produced at a lower volume than the Rx8 I think.
That 792p Mazda is absolutely stunning. I've seen and heard a 787b and by god that was a sound never to be forgotten.I've done over 200,000miles in rotaries and never found them to be any worse vs reliabilty than any other performance engine. Issues arise from poor information given to customers regarding maintenance etc.
As has already been called out on this thread - had they progressed and developed with the same resource and funding as the otto cycle engines we would be in a different place with them.
There are a number in use in aircraft now as the primary powerplant. (see rotary aviation)
Regarding the Le Mans effort - they were not signifcantly better or worse in terms of econony vs the V12s etc, the benefit of running a rotary at the time meant you could carry a larger fuel load etc. The 787b was an evolutionary design that started in the early 80's with the 787b being the ultimate product. It included variable length induction systems etc etc (well worth watching on youtube).
Post 1991 the entry rules were modified which effectively ruled out a competitive entry by another rotary. (Look up the Mazda 792p)
Mazda have been looking at using laser ignition and a larger (wider) rotor to increase the width of the flame front and thusly get a cleaner burn. I'm not sure where they are with this, but pretty certain it has been running in the lab. (Known as the 15X which denotes the change in swept volume for the two rotor lump under development)
Mazda have been threatening a new Rx7 type car for years - Autocar tend to make something up twice a year and run with it... I suspect we might see something based on the MX5 platform in the next 5 years - but it will be produced at a lower volume than the Rx8 I think.
I was discussing this with my wife last night, there is currently nothing to touch the RX-8 in terms of being a properly designed practical sports car.
The RX-8 despite the rotary sold like hot cakes because it was a true 4 door 4 seater with a decent bit of power, decent amount of interior space, useful (although not it has to be said massive) boot and fantastic handling.
Everything else (and I do mean everything) is not as good (although they excel in other areas).
As an example:
BRZ/GT86 is too underpowered, 2-door and small inside
M135 is a 1-series, just the big engine version.
M3 is fantastic but just a hot version of a normal saloon.
6 MPS (which we have as a replacement) is fantastic but just a hot saloon.
etc etc
Loads of decent 2-seaters but they fall down on the requirement to regularly have 2 children in the car (and sometimes two adults).
As the rotary struggles to hit emissions (and is undesirable for mpg/VED reasons) in her option they should re-release the RX-8 as an "MX-8" with nothing more than a mid-life facelift to the body and with a turbo'd higher powered engine and that would sell like hot cakes.
Not sure Mazda have a suitable engine any more but they might be able to use the MPS derived 2.3Ecoboost 260-305hp, RWD, 4 seats that you could fit adults into, 4 doors, boot big enough for a reasonable amount of stuff.
The RX-8 despite the rotary sold like hot cakes because it was a true 4 door 4 seater with a decent bit of power, decent amount of interior space, useful (although not it has to be said massive) boot and fantastic handling.
Everything else (and I do mean everything) is not as good (although they excel in other areas).
As an example:
BRZ/GT86 is too underpowered, 2-door and small inside
M135 is a 1-series, just the big engine version.
M3 is fantastic but just a hot version of a normal saloon.
6 MPS (which we have as a replacement) is fantastic but just a hot saloon.
etc etc
Loads of decent 2-seaters but they fall down on the requirement to regularly have 2 children in the car (and sometimes two adults).
As the rotary struggles to hit emissions (and is undesirable for mpg/VED reasons) in her option they should re-release the RX-8 as an "MX-8" with nothing more than a mid-life facelift to the body and with a turbo'd higher powered engine and that would sell like hot cakes.
Not sure Mazda have a suitable engine any more but they might be able to use the MPS derived 2.3Ecoboost 260-305hp, RWD, 4 seats that you could fit adults into, 4 doors, boot big enough for a reasonable amount of stuff.
I'd buy another rotary in a heart beat, but only factory fresh with a 3+ year warranty! Loved both my RX8s, far more than any car before or since. A lot of nonsense written about them that I can't be bothered to counter all the points, just say that I'd have one over most piston engines and leave it at that. And no, the RX8 wouldn't have worked with a conventional engine because you'd have lost the chassis balance completely. The RX8 was truly mid engined.
Oh I think it could be made to work, just only really from the factory.
Trouble is that there isn't really much point in an engine swap unless you're going to get something better so people shove in big V8's etc and they're great but kind of miss the point of the RX-8.
If you go for the kind of engine that should be in there then it's a lot of money and time to make the same power when ~3k gets you a rebuild with a warranty for 3 years. I mean something like an S2000 engine would be great but it's only something like ~2-3mpg better (in a lighter car) and only a few HP more. Not worth it.
Trouble is that there isn't really much point in an engine swap unless you're going to get something better so people shove in big V8's etc and they're great but kind of miss the point of the RX-8.
If you go for the kind of engine that should be in there then it's a lot of money and time to make the same power when ~3k gets you a rebuild with a warranty for 3 years. I mean something like an S2000 engine would be great but it's only something like ~2-3mpg better (in a lighter car) and only a few HP more. Not worth it.
Ali_T said:
I'd buy another rotary in a heart beat, but only factory fresh with a 3+ year warranty! Loved both my RX8s, far more than any car before or since. A lot of nonsense written about them that I can't be bothered to counter all the points, just say that I'd have one over most piston engines and leave it at that. And no, the RX8 wouldn't have worked with a conventional engine because you'd have lost the chassis balance completely. The RX8 was truly mid engined.
You're speaking as though anything that isn't a wankel engine can't result in a fantastic handling car. That's utter nonsense.The RX-8 handled well, but it was nobody's benchmark of what other cars should aspire to. Therefore as-good results, if not better in some cases can be achieved with piston engines. If you really like wankels then fair enough - it's a subjective thing. It's utter rubbish to suggest that a 4 seat coupe like the RX-8 would be inferior if designed around a piston engine though.
jamieduff1981 said:
Ali_T said:
I'd buy another rotary in a heart beat, but only factory fresh with a 3+ year warranty! Loved both my RX8s, far more than any car before or since. A lot of nonsense written about them that I can't be bothered to counter all the points, just say that I'd have one over most piston engines and leave it at that. And no, the RX8 wouldn't have worked with a conventional engine because you'd have lost the chassis balance completely. The RX8 was truly mid engined.
You're speaking as though anything that isn't a wankel engine can't result in a fantastic handling car. That's utter nonsense.The RX-8 handled well, but it was nobody's benchmark of what other cars should aspire to. Therefore as-good results, if not better in some cases can be achieved with piston engines. If you really like wankels then fair enough - it's a subjective thing. It's utter rubbish to suggest that a 4 seat coupe like the RX-8 would be inferior if designed around a piston engine though.
wolves_wanderer said:
jamieduff1981 said:
Ali_T said:
I'd buy another rotary in a heart beat, but only factory fresh with a 3+ year warranty! Loved both my RX8s, far more than any car before or since. A lot of nonsense written about them that I can't be bothered to counter all the points, just say that I'd have one over most piston engines and leave it at that. And no, the RX8 wouldn't have worked with a conventional engine because you'd have lost the chassis balance completely. The RX8 was truly mid engined.
You're speaking as though anything that isn't a wankel engine can't result in a fantastic handling car. That's utter nonsense.The RX-8 handled well, but it was nobody's benchmark of what other cars should aspire to. Therefore as-good results, if not better in some cases can be achieved with piston engines. If you really like wankels then fair enough - it's a subjective thing. It's utter rubbish to suggest that a 4 seat coupe like the RX-8 would be inferior if designed around a piston engine though.
jamieduff1981 said:
wolves_wanderer said:
jamieduff1981 said:
Ali_T said:
I'd buy another rotary in a heart beat, but only factory fresh with a 3+ year warranty! Loved both my RX8s, far more than any car before or since. A lot of nonsense written about them that I can't be bothered to counter all the points, just say that I'd have one over most piston engines and leave it at that. And no, the RX8 wouldn't have worked with a conventional engine because you'd have lost the chassis balance completely. The RX8 was truly mid engined.
You're speaking as though anything that isn't a wankel engine can't result in a fantastic handling car. That's utter nonsense.The RX-8 handled well, but it was nobody's benchmark of what other cars should aspire to. Therefore as-good results, if not better in some cases can be achieved with piston engines. If you really like wankels then fair enough - it's a subjective thing. It's utter rubbish to suggest that a 4 seat coupe like the RX-8 would be inferior if designed around a piston engine though.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff