I got a ride home from a mazda dealership. (car in shop) and this kid tried to tell me they made a few twin turbo models in japan that are not ever coming to the states. IS this true I thought they were building the rx7 for 2006 I mean corksport is got stuff up on their site. can amnybody confirm this or what???

corksport is crazy, its not for sure that there is gonna be a new rx7 yet, probalby yes, and about the twin turbos , im not sure

I dont know this kid or his sources but I havent heard nothing on any twin turbo rx8

wtf?

For five reasons I'm pretty sure Mazda won't go twin turbo again.

1) It's a pretty expensive solution on an engine that already has 238bhp and really doesn't need a high boost.

2) The last twin turbo Mazda (the FD) wasn't exactly known for its reliability (twin turbo related).

3) It's a pretty expensive solution to a problem that could be solved with a bigger rotor.

4) If Mazda wants to shift any cars, they need to do what they already did with the RX-8: keep performance high whilst keeping cost down.

5) It's a pretty expensive solution :D

O.k., so I was treading water there for a while, but I think you got the general idea.
I think the dude heard of the "newish" Japanese FDs and that his claim was a mere case of mistaken identity.

Cheers

Eske

the kid was probably talking out his ass to sound impressive.

Mazda will probably wont make a TURBO ROTARY for awhile... earliest 2006 (2% chance)...2008 possibly... also the RX-8 will get power some of you crave in about 2-4 years. The GT-R (NOT SKYLINE GT-R... they will just call it GT-R).. which is 100% to come to U.S. with 400HP...cost... under 45 G's...350Z and EVO is getting more power for 2005...So Mazda will make the rotors wider to get power, but no turbo will be available from mazda.... but aftermarket.

i'd really like to see the hard evidence on that last post since i do plan to buy another car in 3 years

GT-R... was said by chief of nissan.. CEO.. NO EARLIER THAN 2007 THOUGH

350Z..EVO... - EVO FOR SURE 100%... 350Z... its just plain simple they will... they add power to everycar even the Trucks... so 2-3 years down the road NIssan will add more punch to the 350Z

RX-8.. having more power... come on... it was said by mazda designers and engineers that worked on the car that they would increase the size of the rotors.. and in the Road and Track supplement the guy they interviewed.. said that people will be able to get power there custom way.. by turbo or supercharging it and mazdaspeed will also add enchancments...

-Trust me... mainly th stuff i say is like 99% true... it comes from reading and logical shyt...

EVO FOR SURE WILL HAVE MORE POWER TO COMPETE WITH STI... 100%... i read it somewhere.. and the GTR 100%... true

RX-8 & 350z .. HAVING MORE POWER WILL COME DOWN THE ROAD.

I don't think Mazda will go turbo again... The rumors I have heard are that the 2006 RX-7 that is being compromised will not be turbo and will gain performance by using wider rotors..

I also read this in this article from Australian Wheels Magazine..

Holy SMOKES...HOLY SMOKED... that looks really sweet... man i hope they make it like around 20 Grand... man its looks awesome

i read that too on the "motors" a Australian Magazine.. also talked about the mazdaspeed rx8 .

I heard a strong source of 3 for the next 7........

Maybe you know what I am talking about =)

wow thats some hardcore source u gt there
probably its true or maybe it's not...

what do you guys think about a small, single turbo? could that be a possible way to boost power up a bit w/o comprimising a great deal of reliability?

Originally posted by heylookitsian
what do you guys think about a small, single turbo? could that be a possible way to boost power up a bit w/o comprimising a great deal of reliability? Possible? Sure! Likely? I don't think so!
IMO a 1,5 Renesis is the most likely powerplant, for reasons of cost-effescience and reliability. If Mazda decides to go up market with the RX-7 (IMHO rather unlikely), I think a 3-rotor would be a better option than a turbo, offering a N/A RX-7 with around 350hp, whilst maintaining a moderate compression level on the Renesis.

Cheers

Eske

That will be mine!

I'm definitely in for more power, as long as it's safe and won't blow up.

Just build a RX-7 ... for rotary fans sake.... MAZDA... u listening... haha...
im not power hungry like crazy... 250-300 hp or so ... and around 2700 lbs is not bad.. decent power... so it can be affordable like 23 G's ...or so...

WISH LIST:

2 seats
320 hp reliable
2700 (or less) lbs
1.0g skidpad
6sp SMT with hard launch mode
No wheel hop
Fully Loaded for less than $38,000

$38,000 .. no way.... 280-320 HP... sport seats... stereo/cd...power everything(with extra cost)... man make it simple and cheap...but fast and safe... so it will 25's fully loaded... man screw luxury... all that stuff should be extra...

(...Mitsubishi is building a EVO that has no power anything... manual windows..manual locks... pretty much nohting ... only raw power... it has a crappy stereo though.. it has NO NOHTING...
NO ABS... and it cost $26,000.. its called Lancer RS... 300 HP..
0-60 in 4.3..)

Mazda needs to come out with a cheap rotary... for high schoolers...

If the next RX-7 looks like the one shown in this thread from the Australian mag they'll have a winner. The follow-up to the 3rd gen needs to be equally good looking; quite a task.

I had a guy try to tell me the engine had 3 rotors..........I think we all run into knuckleheads like this in all walks of life.

a 3 rotor renesis is not possible. I doubt they will re-design the rotary just to make a 3 rotor possible again. give it up.

A 3 rotor renesis would be wonderful although it is highly unlikely.
Why do you say it is not possible zerobanger?

I am disappointed in the torque of the 8's motor compared to my 93 RX-7 R1 (255hp/250lb ft. of torque). I would like to see the torque come back with the addition of extra rotors or turbos. I am not too worried about the price of the new 7 with turbos, since my wife's fully loaded out AT model cost comparable with my 93 more than 11 years later. Technology is a wonderful thing, BRING IT ON!
Hey Zero,
Maybe you should read the RX 8 brochure that clearly states that in the past they have built up-to 4 rotor designs. And if you look around you in everyday life you can spot technology that you couldn't possibly conceive possible, but it works, thanks to talented engineers, and deep pockets.
In my industry, Kawasaki continues to deliver the goods year after year getting considerably lighter, with higher HP's, tighter revs (16,000 redlines) on 4 cylinder engines, and yet continue to for the same or less retail price than the previous models.

Originally posted by Triangul-8

Hey Zero,
Maybe you should read the RX 8 brochure that clearly states that in the past they have built up-to 4 rotor designs. And if you look around you in everyday life you can spot technology that you couldn't possibly conceive possible, but it works, thanks to talented engineers, and deep pockets.


Triangul-8, I think what zerobanger is getting at is that the Renesis comes with a complete redesign of the exhaust ports, placing them on the sides of the rotor housings, just like the intakes. If you have a rotor crammed in the middle, it's hard to vent the exhaust coming out of the side of the housing. Then again, they obviously have had to do it for the intakes, so who knows.

Oh well, I'll leave that up to the engineers.

Triangul-8, I think what zerobanger is getting at is that the Renesis comes with a complete redesign of the exhaust ports, placing them on the sides of the rotor housings, just like the intakes. If you have a rotor crammed in the middle, it's hard to vent the exhaust coming out of the side of the housing. Then again, they obviously have had to do it for the intakes, so who knows.

I would think it would be just as easy to manufacture a 3 rotor with the new side port and other Renesis technology as it would be to make the current 13B-REW with turbo. I mean, think about it, the research has been already done as far as the changes that need to happen. Much of the tooling and other manufacturing processes may already be there, as well: Mazda has already made a 3 rotor. And we know it fits into the RX-8.

The only downside of the whole thing may be weight. I wonder how much a 3 rotor would weigh? Maybe AcostaRacing can let us in on the weight differences in the 3 rotor vs. the Renesis. If Mazda could keep the specific output about the same, we're looking at around 320's or so in the HP department.

time will tell...

I think an NA car is more respectable than a damn turbo or SC car any day. BRING ON THE 15A

As time goes on the likelyhood of a turbo goes down... why? MOre and more strict emissions that the turbo car just won't pass... not without some kinda breakthrough in cat technology.

On the other hand this makes for a difficult JDM situation, as all Japanese enthusiasts expect a rotary engine, especially the 7, to be turbocharged. To produce an N/A version might meet with a lukewarm reception. Honda has this problem with the RC211V MotoGP race bike. Honda fans see Honda and an inline 4 company, not V5.

What's likely? Come on... the 8 is rated by mazda at 238hp instead of 247hp like in Japan. I don't believe that the 350Z is the right or fair competition. The 8 has 4 seats and 4 doors. The Z does not. Same for the S2000. 2 a hardcore sports cars and the 8 is a sports sedan. The 8 is looking at cars like the G35 coupe, the BMW 3-series, Audi A4, Lexus IS300... these kinds of cars. Given that compeition... is the engine that weak? Hmmm. If Mazda really does decide to up the 8's power, I think we'll see a 1.5 N/A 13B-MSP. Which will then mean a 20B-MSP for the RX-7.

I think that's the factor everyone who keeps whining about turbos keeps forgetting about. If there will be a 7 (and if you want there to be one) the 8 cannot be more powerful than it. The 7 is the flagship car. I also believe that the 7 will be somewhat similarly priced... as some people will want 4 doors and some will want a 2 seater. Two different markets.

Just a little something for people to chew on...

Japan8,
You seem to dream some of the same dreams I do. A 20B msp would kill the competition; fuel economy is one of the only problems.
By the way I also own a Protege5,

i was hearing that HKS is in the middle of making a Twin Turbo for the RX-8 and that Blitz was working on a S/C for the RX-8 but i may be wrong. there are a ton of rumors right now but the spring/summer will be interesting for the RX-8 and the turbo and S/C packages that may be offered

Originally posted by Pablo


3) It's a pretty expensive solution to a problem that could be solved with a bigger rotor.




Question?
What would a bigger rotor do to gas milage & performance?

aren't maxda speeds out there ... like rx-8 T with 300and some HP i thought i saw something ... but they are only in japan.. too bad for us

If the next RX-7 looks like the one shown in this thread from the Australian mag they'll have a winner. The follow-up to the 3rd gen needs to be equally good looking; quite a task.


That thing looks ugly as hell, how is that going to be a winner!? It looks like a photochopped Mazda6 headlights, Pontiac Fiero Bumper on a RX8 body.

Uhhh... twin turbo RX-8 and 20b Renesis?

You people must be on crack.

I mean everyone KNOWS that the new RX-9 will have a 6-rotor engine with at least 4 turbos and NOS as standard.

I highly doubt that it will be twin-turbo charged. MAYBE a single turbo since that's what Mazda e-mailed me and said they were currently working on. I think a 15B would be a better choice though.

N/A should be a 1.5L Renesis w/ 11.0:1 compression.

A 3-rotor Renesis isn't that hard to imagine. The only differences would be the extra rotor and intermediate housings (duh), as well as making the end housings larger in order to expel the gases from the front and rear rotors. The front housing would take exhaust only from the front rotor. The front intermediate housing would carry exhaust from the front and middle rotor. The rear intermediate housing would take exhaust from the middle and rear rotors. And finally, the rear housing would take exhaust from the rear rotor only. The exhaust manifold would look like that of a four cylinder. Granted, it would take a bit of engineering, but I'm sure someone at Mazda's R&D has already thought of it. Just my $0.02

N/A should be a 1.5L Renesis w/ 11.0:1 compression.

A 3-rotor Renesis isn't that hard to imagine. The only differences would be the extra rotor and intermediate housings (duh), as well as making the end housings larger in order to expel the gases from the front and rear rotors. The front housing would take exhaust only from the front rotor. The front intermediate housing would carry exhaust from the front and middle rotor. The rear intermediate housing would take exhaust from the middle and rear rotors. And finally, the rear housing would take exhaust from the rear rotor only. The exhaust manifold would look like that of a four cylinder. Granted, it would take a bit of engineering, but I'm sure someone at Mazda's R&D has already thought of it. Just my $0.02

Making a 3-rotor 13B-MSP sounds easy doesn't it? Have you ever thought about the massive heat transfer between the middle rotor housing and its surroundings? A 2-rotor engine already has a poor thermal efficiency compared to that of a piston engine, so why take a step backwards? In addition, 3-rotor engines are notorious for its poor feul consumption. The sheer output/displacement ratio would be lessened, and the extra weight would offset the 50/50 weight distribution of the car. Mazda already tried this method in the JC Cosmo, and the Cosmo has been dead for quite some time. Stop wishing for a twin-turbo RX-8. If you wanted insane power, buy an FD3S. I hear they're pretty fast ;). As for the future of rotary engines, I see an increase in displacement and compression ratio. Forced induction, though it has come a long way since 1992, is still a liability for rotary engines that Mazda cannot afford. After the FD's demise in 1995 (United States), the rotary engine program was reduced to about 6 people. This is coupled with the fact that the rotary engine is only 30 years old. It's still pretty much a novelty, though it has a winning pedigree. It will be a while before this engine shares the benefits of a piston engine. It's not the engineering, it's time and money. That's what Mazda cares about, as does every other automaker. They're not going to cater to a few people's needs. It's good to bring these topics up, because someone might be listening :).

Making a 3-rotor 13B-MSP sounds easy doesn't it? Have you ever thought about the massive heat transfer between the middle rotor housing and its surroundings? A 2-rotor engine already has a poor thermal efficiency compared to that of a piston engine, so why take a step backwards. In addition, 3-rotor engines are notorious for its poor feul consumption. The sheer output/displacement ratio would be lessened, and the extra weight would offset the 50/50 weight distribution of the car. Mazda already tried this method in the JC Cosmo, and the Cosmo has been dead for quite some time. Stop wishing for a twin-turbo RX-8. If you wanted insane power, buy an FD3S. I hear they're pretty fast ;). As for the future of rotary engines, I see an increase in displacement and compression ratio. Forced induction, though it has come a long way since 1992, is still a liability for rotary engines that Mazda cannot afford. After the FD's demise in 1995 (United States), the rotary engine program was reduced to about 6 people. This is coupled with the fact that the rotary engine is only 30 years old. It's still pretty much a novelty, though it has a winning pedigree. It will be a while before this engine shares the benefits of a piston engine. It's not the engineering, it's time and money. That's what Mazda cares about, as does every other automaker. They're not going to cater to a few people's needs. It's good to bring these topics up, because someone might be listening :).

You definitely make some good points. However, you yourself mention the rotary is still in its infancy. Therefor, engineering improvements may allow a 3 rotor Renesis sooner than we think. One of the biggest resons the Cosmo is dead is because it was so damn expensive. You also mentioned fuel economy. That's usually the last thing going through my mind when I'm thinking about a sports car. I do agree with your point about not needing a twin turbo RX-8. A good small single would be sufficient. And I too hope someone important is reading these. :D

Sensible buyers also look at fuel economy, as does the government. Do you really want to own a sports car with a gas guzzler tax amended to it? I say let the aftermarket sort the forced induction equation. Mazda is doing too good to screw up now. BTW, 93RedRX7, do you have any idea who sells the GT3540 turbine?

I don't get the idea of a 1500 cc rotary engine. Does anyone know how to calculate rotary engine displacement? Okay, time for some math.

How do you calculate displacement in a rotary engine? It's actually a short algebraic equation. If you remember ninth grade math (hottest girl was Lydia C. ;) ), this one should be easy.

Let's define the displacement V, so that

V=(3)(3)^(1/2)wR^2(e/R)

where,

w is the rotor width
R is the rotor center-to-tip distance. Think of it as sort of a pseudo-radius.
e is the shaft eccentricity

Note: The eccentricity ratio e/R, is critical to the successful performance of the rotary engine.

This math is all fun and games, but what does this mean in terms of increasing the displacement of the current 13B? Since the relationship between the left-hand side and the right-hand side is directly proportional, changing displacement is as easy as changing one variable.

The 13B's rotor width, I believe, is 80 mm (RG help me out with this). The easiest parameter to fix is the width of the rotor, since its dimension is independent of the eccentricity and the radius. It is, after all, the width (think in terms of XYZ coordinates). Say Mazda increased the rotor width to 90 mm. Easy as cake. Piece of pie. Now, after some plugging and chugging, not to mention finding the eccentricity and the rotor center-to-tip distance (figure it out), you'll get about 1600 cc. I use metric units because cubic inches are too archaic to me. In addition, I'm not going to waste my time converting. I hope Mazda is reading this, because I need a job.

Yes the 2 rotor has poor thermal efficiancy but if Mazda makes a 1.5L 2 rotor it will only get worse. Widening the housings will make it even less efficiant than a 13b version(cumbustion chambers already large enough). I personally feel that the current 80MM wide housings are at there limit when it comes to efficiancy. IMHO if Mazda wants to increase displacement, they should go smaller and build a 1.5L 3 rotor. They could use the 10A rotors and housings. Since the older 10A was a 1.0L adding a 3rd rotor would make it a 1.5L. With a Renesis 3 rotor based off of 10A parts, the engine really wouldn't be very large. Also having a thinner housings should improve the cumbustion efficiancy because the cumbustion chamber is now reduced in size. Now even though we have an additional chamber, this doesn't mean the engine would be more of a smog monster either. Look at the 8.0L V10 Viper engine? Think how unefficiant that engine would be if it was a 8.0L 5 cylinder. I don't think the 5 cylinder version would pass smog very well. Now do you guys see my point? To save weight, Mazda could easily use aluminum side plates, because this engine wouldn't be a high volume production unit. You would also have the additional power stroke advantages 3 rotors give.


Overall what I'm saying is that it's better to have more smaller chambers to use for cumbustion than to have two really large ones.

Yes the 2 rotor has poor thermal efficiancy but if Mazda makes a 1.5L 2 rotor it will only get worse. Widening the housings will make it even less efficiant than a 13b version(cumbustion chambers already large enough). I personally feel that the current 80MM wide housings are at there limit when it comes to efficiancy. IMHO if Mazda wants to increase displacement, they should go smaller and build a 1.5L 3 rotor. They could use the 10A rotors and housings. Since the older 10A was a 1.0L adding a 3rd rotor would make it a 1.5L. With a Renesis 3 rotor based off of 10A parts, the engine really wouldn't be very large. Also having a thinner housings should improve the cumbustion efficiancy because the cumbustion chamber is now reduced in size. Now even though we have an additional chamber, this doesn't mean the engine would be more of a smog monster either. Look at the 8.0L V10 Viper engine? Think how unefficiant that engine would be if it was a 8.0L 5 cylinder. I don't think the 5 cylinder version would pass smog very well. Now do you guys see my point? To save weight, Mazda could easily use aluminum side plates, because this engine wouldn't be a high volume production unit. You would also have the additional power stroke advantages 3 rotors give.


Overall what I'm saying is that it's better to have more smaller chambers to use for cumbustion than to have two really large ones.

Not neccessarily. With 10A rotors, even 3 of them, the RPM's would have to be pretty high achieve a higher level of power than the current Renesis. That in itself, with more mass would create more heat. Mazda could use aluminum side plates, but aluminum expands under heat. They would have to plasma spray them with cermet, and that would kill the cost. Shelley's_man_06, I really couldn't tell you who sells just that turbo. If you knew the exact dimensions of it, you could probably get one from http://www.cheapturbos.com You're also right about making the rotors 90mm would create a 1.6L. There have been some really good points in this thread.

Since it's basically a GT35 turbine and a GT40 compressor, with the ball-bearing option, I think, the overall dimensions are pretty big; the GT3540R is a huge turbo. It would be a tight squeeze in the RX-8's engine bay. ATP has the wheel diameters of the GT3540R. Useful, but those are the only real dimensions I could find as of right now.

Since it's basically a GT35 turbine and a GT40 compressor, with the ball-bearing option, I think, the overall dimensions are pretty big; the GT3540R is a huge turbo. It would be a tight squeeze in the RX-8's engine bay. ATP has the wheel diameters of the GT3540R. Useful, but those are the only real dimensions I could find as of right now.

You're damn right that's a big turbo. I think I found what you're looking for. It's at the RX7Store. Here's the link- http://www.rx7store.net/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=612

I realize that it's the kit for an FD, but I hope it helps. Although, I don't think it's the R model. Sorry if I'm wrong.

93RedRX7, I believe that A-Spec, wherever they are, also sell the GT3540R. I wonder what kind of performance that would make? Yes, the turbo kit they sell at the RX-7 Store is a ball-bearing GT3540. I usually recognize the ball-bearing option when I see the R :o.

93RedRX7, I believe that A-Spec, wherever they are, also sell the GT3540R. I wonder what kind of performance that would make? Yes, the turbo kit they sell at the RX-7 Store is a ball-bearing GT3540. I usually recognize the ball-bearing option when I see the R :o.

There's a thread at RX7club about a guy that just got his dyno'd. I believe he put 450ish to the wheels at 22 psi, but everyone was saying that he should be seeing a bit more than that. Yeah, I'm a little new to the whole turbo jargon thing. :o All I used to care about were my Hitachi twins, but now that I'm going single (sooner or later) I'm trying to educate myself about turbos.

A good book to read would be Corky Bell's Maximum Boost: Designing, Testing Installing Turbocharger Systems. I am currently borrowing it from my school's library. I didn't know that the library had such good stuff :).

Thanks for the tip. I'll have to take a look once I get back home.

im looking for an NEW rx-8 not rx-7 i love every feature of the rx-8 minus power wise but is satifying.. IMO i rather them improve the rx-8 rather than comming back out wtih the rx-7 not really feeling the 2 seat... also bigger rotar 1.5L that would be a dream, FI would be nice (only cuz i absolutely LOVE the sound of blow off valves) but i would like to see it somewhere around 300hp w/o FI.

i know there is a rx8 with a rx7 FD engine in it mabe the kid was talking about that
but its not mazda its custom

whats so bad about the rx8 anyways? few pounds heaviler two more seats two more doors an extra gear and a DSC for half the price of an rx7. geess we are getting a hell of a deal already

btw greddy makes a turbo kit for the rx8, probley instead of hopeing for mazda to make a faster car lets hope for tuners to make faster parts

cheers

My wishlist for the next RX-7/MS RX-8:

1. Use as many parts as possible from th RX-8, but shorten the length to make it a 2 seater
2. Shave 200-300 lbs off the current RX-8, 2700 lbs would be good.
3. Have a solid/beefy transmission capable of handling 500hp at the minimum.
4. Excellent handling, must be on par with or better than the FD
5. Power should be somewhat of an improvement over the FD, 280-300 hp sounds about right
6. If it has sequential turbos that would be the best, single turbo is good too, if it is N/A atleast make it turbo friendly as many will make it turbo anyway. Torque numbers are important and the turbo(s) would do well to boost those numbers.
7. Price should not exceed 40k USD, 35k USD sounds about right.

Hopefully with these specs the next RX-7/MS RX-8 will give considerable grief to Evo, STi, S2k, 350Z, and start creeping up on the C6.

My opinion is why would Mazda release another rotary car to compete with a rotary car they have out now? Also, in a way if they made a new 7 it would reduce sales from the miata as well, which is one of the best all time selling cars. It just doesn't seem like a practical business move to create unnecessary compettition within the same market for themselves. But, thats just my 2 cents.

Mazda already has 2 sports cars in their line up: the miata and RX-8. Both are excellent platforms. I think the RX-7 has passed the torch the 8. The 7 was awesome but I think the 8 truly is the replacement. Disappointments of no boost, low power figures, back seats, etc. I think are the reasons why everyone is looking for a new 7. But I think the 8 has proven it's worth. It already handles better than almost anything out there.

If a 7 came out, I WOULD STILL KEEP THE 8 (aside from still owing payments). To me, the 8 is suffering the same thing the 7 did. The 7 was against the Supra TT, 300Z TT, Skyline GT-R (RB26DETT); notice the trend in TT. And at that time, 7 was lighter and had lower hp figures than those cars. The 8 has the same dellima; the STi, EVO, 350Z; two are turbo and one large displacement, but all BEST BANG FOR BUCK. The 8, rotary power and dynamics at a cheap cost (BEST BANG FOR BUCK PERFORMANCE).

Anyway that's how I feel. I know I'm going to get flamed for these comments. Where's my fire suit.

The RX8 is an amazing car. Improving the 8 is a delicate task, throwing a turbo on it is cool, but it raises the specter of decreased reliability. Mazda does not want the reputation of making unreliable cars, because one unreliable (especially the flagship) model can blemish all the manufacturers models.

I'd love to see a Limited Edition RX8 with a third rotor, the extra weight could be offset by removing the back seats, the near 50/50 weight bias could be maintained by relocating the battery and some other engine bay items to where the rear seats were. The current MazdaSpeed suspension components could be used to improve handling, and a little carbon fiber (hood, trunk lid) to drop weight. If the transmission can't handle the third rotor, it would need to be strengthened. The extra 100HP would move the car into the next performance tier, taking on cars like the Z06, Carrera, etc. without compromising reliability.

The only downsides I see would be higher cost and lower gas mileage. If the car was given a limited run, it would be considered a collectible. The gas mileage and extra cost would not be an issue, given the LE status and performance. The extra cost would probably put the car in the mid 40's, which in my opinion, is not too expensive.

This car would not take away sales from Mazda's existing models, I think it would actually increase sales because of the buzz generated by the performance.



Dare to dream,

Alex

I heard this last march from my salesman, he estimated around $50k
but im never believed him

What a thread revival...

Not much word on a possible next 7 in JDM mags. Mostly just the upcoming GTR, Evo and STi.

3 rotor Renesis? Even RG said it can't be done. The intermediate housing has siamised exhaust ports. Make it a 3 rotor and the middle rotor won't have the same flow characteristics as the front and rear rotor (all of it's exhaust ports are shared). Add to this the heat issue... it seems highly unlikely.

Wider rotors? This would seem like a more likely solution for more NA power. However it will require a bit of reengineering and retooling. New rotors, new housing, and changes in porting. This will likely also lower the engine's redline with the increased rotor mass and what effect will this have on the life of the engine bearings?

Turbos? I'd say that it is probably highly unlikely. The biggest issue is emissions... namely initial cat light off. I don't remember the specifics, but it's something like the car has to pass emissions within 5 minutes of startup... thus the cat has to be up to operating temp in that timeframe. With a turbo sapping heat from the exhaust system... it'll be a task to make this pass emissions. Let's also not forget the lack of space under the hood...

Supercharger? This seems like the most likely scenario for more power for the 8. Initial reports all say that the Renesis responds REALLY well to supercharging. Supposedly it's driving characteristics are much better than the GReddy kit... from low to high-end. Also considering how much Ford seems like to like S/C over T/C... using the parent company strength to get a deal on a twin screw S/C ala Mustang Shelby GT500 or Ford GT woudl also seem to lend weight to this possiblity.

Consider the competition... Well according to JDM mags the 350Z gets some minor costmetic changes and more power for 2006. The Supra is rumored to return... NA V8 is what they say. Pricing would be e90 M3 at worst, but I'm better on RX-8 neighborhood. Don't forget that the new GTR will be an Infinity and Lexus has their supercar coming out. Honda is definitely working on SOMETHING as a replacement for the NSX. A Mazda flagship? Well Mazda really need to work on making sales with what they have before going for a new "halo car".

We'll see what Mazda comes up with by the end of 2006.



Personally, I'd like to see more power in the 8 too.

its cool to read past threads and compare them to how things really turned out..lol

Yes it is

there was a twin-turbo RX8?!?!?!?!

and the 3 rotor Renesis has been done by a shop in the UK

The RX8 is an amazing car. Improving the 8 is a delicate task, throwing a turbo on it is cool, but it raises the specter of decreased reliability. Mazda does not want the reputation of making unreliable cars, because one unreliable (especially the flagship) model can blemish all the manufacturers models.

I'd love to see a Limited Edition RX8 with a third rotor, the extra weight could be offset by removing the back seats, the near 50/50 weight bias could be maintained by relocating the battery and some other engine bay items to where the rear seats were. The current MazdaSpeed suspension components could be used to improve handling, and a little carbon fiber (hood, trunk lid) to drop weight. If the transmission can't handle the third rotor, it would need to be strengthened. The extra 100HP would move the car into the next performance tier, taking on cars like the Z06, Carrera, etc. without compromising reliability.

The only downsides I see would be higher cost and lower gas mileage. If the car was given a limited run, it would be considered a collectible. The gas mileage and extra cost would not be an issue, given the LE status and performance. The extra cost would probably put the car in the mid 40's, which in my opinion, is not too expensive.

This car would not take away sales from Mazda's existing models, I think it would actually increase sales because of the buzz generated by the performance.



Dare to dream,

Alex





I like your mode of thinking.


For the longest time, I have been proposing in my head the thought of another RX-7 model.

Use a 3-rotor n/a motor like the renesis. Have a rotor cut for light load conditions to improve gas mileage (or "help" in this case). Use a 6-speed (or maybe a 7 speed!!??) transmission to relieve throttle input in city commuting.

Use the Rx-8 platform and suspension, but of course shorten the wheelbase and lightly increase track for more exciting feel. You could easily shed 200lbs. from what the rx-8 carries, to bring the weight back to FD specs. 6-8 piston brakes up front and 4 piston in the rear, with 13" rotors. 19" forged wheels, carbon trunk, aluminum vented hood, 2 seats.


So, 350hp, 2800lbs, 6-speed, massive brakes, 2-seater coupe. I smell a C6 and porsche circuit smasher. I myself would pinch my pennies to fork out about $40-45K for something like that. Sti's and Evo's would run and hide.... remembering that they are still just souped-up sedans, and not pure-bred sports-cars. We could see possible supercharged or turboed versions of this new RX-7 tearing the vettes and vipers a new arsh on the Speed Challenge and FIA circuits, oh yeah, and another Bathurst edition to take on the new GT-R (only with two less wheels applying power).


I truely believe that mazda has what it takes to put all other sports car in-class to shame. The Rx-8 is awesome, and is really held back in a big way, so they need to show their real cards and lay it down!

Also, to note: The FD3s RX-7 series VIII was the next best thing to the R34 GT-R over in Japan. Put them side by side on same tires, around a well laid-out track (like Suzuka or Sears Point) and the FD will be nipping at it's heels. Mazda needs to show that they can still hang.

is anyone looking at the dates this was started???

ummmm, yes





We're basically off-topic at this point, so i don't think it really matters anymore.

That ok with you buddy? HAHA



=):beer05: :Peace:

oh
My
GOD!

A TWIN TURBO RX-8!?!? YESSSSS

Oh shit, also a 3 rotor RX-7? Damn, I'm in heaven.

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll213/chanando_bucket/DTP_0017.jpg exotic speed has a twin turbo rx-8

TRIP OUT! the things that went on, on this forum, spectulation and wishful thinkin, HA! 400hp!!! i dont think so buddy....but mazda did shave off the wieght with the new r3....

I think one of Mazda's race cars had a 3-rotor engine.

I think one of Mazda's race cars had a 3-rotor engine.

http://www.speedsourceinc.com/index.cfm?template=mazdacars&section=mazda

i got my wishlist too:

the motor from the MS3/MS6

but to all seriousness, i wish mazda had the option of having piston motors in the rotary powered cars (or the other way around, depending on the way you look at it) the way they did back in the 70s with the RX-2, RX-3, RX-4.

The RX8 over heats too much now.

They will never inroduce a turbo. Maybe a SC. The SC is siting at the RD in Irvine.

The new 1.6L has over heating issues too, but they are working on it.

Everyone in those older posts didnt do anything but agree with each other about the unlikelyhood of turbo's and how they alll thought an upgrade in power would be bigger displacement. I know this is an older forum, but it wasnt that old. Turbo cars have made huge advancements these days, Audi's love of it, and have great reliability. STI's and Evo's have brought turbos out of the tuner and exotic markets, and shown car companies that turbo's are a good way to get more power while keeping weight down, and it definately appeals to the future markets. As fuel economy becomes bigger and bigger, you wont see increases in displacement purely because bigger displacement means more weight. Weight kills milage.

Except for the Rotary engine! The 1.6 is lighter than our 1.3... :P

I'd take a twin turbo 8 as long as the new engine warranty is still on it!!! I'll b first in line

Mazda will probably wont make a TURBO ROTARY for awhile..

A twin turbo setup really isn't even necessary anymore and a lot of people with twin turbo setups in the FD are switching to larger single turbos. The purpose of the FD twin turbo was to provide the best of both worlds. Mazda designed the system so the turbo would spool quickly while being able to flow lots of air in the upper RPM band.

The problem you run into with a twin turbo setup is while you might have a faster spool, you quickly run out of the efficiency range of the turbo cause of it's smaller size. This causes the turbo to heat up, thus increasing your charge temperatures and reducing your overall power.

Not to mention just being bad for the turbo.

There's already a turbo kit for the RX8 which will spool by 3,500 RPMs and produces well over 300 WHP with just a single turbo.

Mazda won't go turbo because a rotary is proven to last N/A.

There was an option for a 3 rotor turbo special order from the mazda dealer in japan..and i saw one on the streets in my hometown in japan about 5 years ago. It was nice haha.

There was an option for a 3 rotor turbo special order from the mazda dealer in japan..and i saw one on the streets in my hometown in japan about 5 years ago. It was nice haha.




HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

The problem you run into with a twin turbo setup is while you might have a faster spool, you quickly run out of the efficiency range of the turbo cause of it's smaller size. This causes the turbo to heat up, thus increasing your charge temperatures and reducing your overall power.


While I agree they wouldn't have to go twin turbo if they did it again, it sounds to me like you're describing a parallel twin turbo setup. The 3rd gen had a sequential setup to avoid the problems mentioned above at the expense of extreme complexity.

^ sequential turbo aren't really reliable, and it's hilariously complicated

however, if they did do a good TT setup, it would be like 1 turbo for each rotor

which will be like full of win

^ sequential turbo aren't really reliable, and it's hilariously complicated

however, if they did do a good TT setup, it would be like 1 turbo for each rotor

which will be like full of win

Since you supposedly sold your car, could you GTFO?

Thanks.