Sport Compact Car has come out with a test of the RX8 and some interesting information regarding the numbers produced by numerous U.S. based magazines. Apparently, the high speed power port (6250 switch point) was getting stuck on all of the media test mules, essentially limiting the engine to the "standard" hp numbers, about 40hp down on where it should be. They expect acceleration numbers to improve dramatically. Once the stuck valves were discovered, all the U.S test cars were pulled and returned to Japan for diagnosis.

Dave Coleman also had an "interesting" article where theories regarding the next RX7 are sprouted. 16B, direct injection, 300+ hp with more torque than the Renesis. Just his "theory" however.

Now, would that not be just too cool if it is indeed correct? To think, all the driving at Laguna Seca, and the test drives by Car & Driver were done with a detuned RENESIS.

Could it be true? Anyone else heard of this possibility?

That is very interesting and good news, if true. :)

BTW..has anyone seen so many pre-production models of one car be tested this much?

I smell rumour.

If you can email me the article... I'll post it up.

shayaanf@mazdaworld.org

while I do think it would be cool if that were true, I find it hard to believe that both c/d and automobile magazine got the RX-8 to 60 in 5.9 seconds on a car with 210 hp ... but then again ... the SRT-4 can do it in about 5.6 with 215 ... ;). Still, the Neon has more torque than the RX-8. Maybe the valve problem was fixed before those two magazines tested it.

we need to read the article!! The wording of the article has to be taken into account. Personally, I think 0-60 at 5.9 sounds about right, but you never know. Anyways, to qoute the thread starter:

"Sport Compact Car has come out with a test of the RX8 and some interesting information regarding the numbers produced by numerous U.S. based magazines."

From this, I take it that all the mags were using the detuned RX8. Again, from the numbers I find that hard to believe, but you never know....;)

Interesting- think I'll be stopping by Borders tomorrow morning...

Originally posted by Elara
Interesting- think I'll be stopping by Borders tomorrow morning... Ditto :)

I'll say this much at least... Sport Compact Car is one of the few mag's that puts a Dyno in a lot of their reviews...

So maybe it's a good sign? I don't care one way or another really... the RX-8's fast enough for me right now, faster for the same money? I wouldn't complain :)

But I'm not prayin for it either.

WHAT?

stuck 5th/6th ports? AGAIN???

this is like deja vu all over again!!!!

my FC's 5th/6th ports were stuck, got it fixed and now the bastard PULLS like a mutha 6000rpm+ :D

damn Mazda and their stuck 5th/6th ports!!! :mad:






J/K of course :D

Originally posted by ZoomZoomH
my FC's 5th/6th ports were stuck, got it fixed and now the bastard PULLS like a mutha 6000rpm+ :D


:D word.

... seriously though, i'd be suspicious of SCC uncovering something like this, then ALL the cars get SHIPPED BACK TO JAPAN for analysis?? wtf is that?? american engineers "too stupid" to know what's going on?? only SCC... *rolleyes*

... not to mention that the tertiary (5+6th ports) aren't JUST rpm activated, or at any rate shouldn't be... makes no sense...

Originally posted by rx7tt95
Dave Coleman also had an "interesting" article where theories regarding the next RX7 are sprouted. 16B, direct injection, 300+ hp with more torque than the Renesis. Just his "theory" however.
1.6L renesis would produce about 200tq and 310hp, which should be just about right for a 2600-2700lb RX-7. I highly doubt a direct injection version would be available here, as no other DI car has been able to meet US emmissions so far.

They're (SCC) the only ones that threw it on a dynamometer. That's how it was discovered. Most of the U.S.-based magazines do not dyno test cars on a constant basis. Without seeing the power output via a dyno plot, one would have never known!

The engineers who built the cars are from Japan (I know, I have a knack for the obvious!) and thus, they're the ones that need to solve the problem. From a logistics and production standpoint, it makes sense.

And yes, I do have to agree, SCC likes to float their own boat and often gets/does things wrong. One reader blasts them for their project Civic, having spent thousands on performance, and of late, nothing but cosmetic upgrades. Only to get 157 wheel hp (if I remembered the number correctly). Their response was that's where the market lies and eventually this Civic would spank Porsche's around Willow Springs. It kills me. Kids buy stickers and huge rear wings (for their front drive cars no less!) because they can't afford the real power upgrades and because their friend did it. As we all know, speed costs LOTS of money. So they regulate themselves into making the car look fast or for the show scene. I was involved in providing a bit of assistance with one of their past project vehicles. They were doing EVERYTHING wrong and couldn't get any power out of the engine. Meanwhile, every joe public tuner was pulling 20-30hp on them. Their excuse? We don't want to do what everyone else is doing. We want to try something new....whatever fits, right? That's pretty much SCC's motto. They never seem to be wrong nor have any bias.

Media is media though. On occasion, I do like to read SCC, especially concerning anything rotary. :D

which issue of SCC is the review in?

dang it I have to go to the bookstore to pick up mags again (just picked up 3 last weekend :mad: )

LOL, it's the newest issue...can't remember what's on the front cover...yellow car maybe? Dunno...I'm a frequent "reader" at Barnes & Noble/Borders/Books a Million, they're all blurry after a while. See, the trick is to go there and just read the mags. That way you don't have to pay for them. But those $4 Cafe Mocha's really add up:)

Assuming this is true, it begs the question: how would an owner diagnose this problem if it were to happen to him? If C&D did their comparo with an RX-8 with this problem and were presumably satisified with the power, how would an owner ever notice?

The one I saw recently is the one with some sort of three car comparo on the cover, with a White Skyline GTR within that group.

Is that the one your were talking about ?

Originally posted by confucious
Assuming this is true, it begs the question: how would an owner diagnose this problem if it were to happen to him? If C&D did their comparo with an RX-8 with this problem and were presumably satisified with the power, how would an owner ever notice? I'm amazed that the OBDII didn't throw a Check Engine light.

Sports Comact Car (http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/toc/)

It would have to be the one after the issue with the yellow car and "Skyline" on the cover.

Originally posted by rx7tt95
SCC likes to float their own boat and often gets/does things wrong.Wasn't it SCC who threw the Cobb WRX into a water tanker, inflicting $multi-thousands damage, only a few weeks before the car was due to compete at the Solo II Nationals?

Originally posted by DonG35Miata
Sports Comact Car (http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/toc/)

It would have to be the one after the issue with the yellow car and "Skyline" on the cover.

it is definetly not in the issue in don's link. he's right, i went thru that issue when i was picking up sports car international. nothing in that one.

I think the whole story is TREMENDOUSLY fishy. #1, I don't think an RX-8 with the top end of the powerband missing could hit 60 in 5.9 seconds. #2, if either of my cars was 15% down on power I'd sure notice. You don't think the engineers/testers/Mazda people in the USA and Japan know what an RX-8 should feel like when all the ponies are present and accounted for? I can tell the difference in my Miata when the A/C compressor is turned on, and that is probably a 10 hp drain at the absolute max. It's probably more like 5 hp. 40hp is a world-changing amount.

What's more, if the car wasn't opening up all the way, I doubt their would be the rush of power over 6,000 rpm that the magazines described.

Originally posted by DonG35Miata
I think the whole story is TREMENDOUSLY fishy. #1, I don't think an RX-8 with the top end of the powerband missing could hit 60 in 5.9 seconds. #2, if either of my cars was 15% down on power I'd sure notice. You don't think the engineers/testers/Mazda people in the USA and Japan know what an RX-8 should feel like when all the ponies are present and accounted for? I can tell the difference in my Miata when the A/C compressor is turned on, and that is probably a 10 hp drain at the absolute max. It's probably more like 5 hp. 40hp is a world-changing amount.

What's more, if the car wasn't opening up all the way, I doubt their would be the rush of power over 6,000 rpm that the magazines described. I agree..

However I will wait for results... I am happy with what the RX-8 is doing now, any added power or speed is just icing :)

Just went and looked at it again. It has a feature on Japanese street racing with a white S15 in the middle of two other vehicles.

Originally posted by zoom44


it is definetly not in the issue in don's link. he's right, i went thru that issue when i was picking up sports car international. nothing in that one.

And that's the April issue- I just went to Barnes and Noble and dug through the car mags- that's apparently the only one that came out.

rx7tt95, are you SURE it was Sport Compact Car?

this better not be a hoax :mad: ....:p

I'm positive it was SCC. Dave Coleman writes ONLY for SCC. I'm running over to Borders now. I'll scan in a few pages. You guys owe me:D

I haven't seen the article yet, but does it give any indication if the high output port was stuck open or closed. As others have stated, I find it hard to believe they would miss it if it was stuck closed. The high end power would have suffered and should have been obvious. But if the port was stuck open...
Then low rpm torque would suffer. (Tuning effect of low rpm port would be nullified.) It would be harder to notice since after leaving 1st gear, you probably are keeping the revs up in the higher rpm range where the port should be open.

That could explain some reviews that have stated there was a lack of low end torque. It would also explain why dropping the cluch at 8K rpms was needed to get a sub 6 second 0-60.

Just a thought.

~Robert

Here's the cover. May issue.

MORE!!!!......please :p

Let's start with the Dave Coleman article...They're B&W to make the files as small as possible yet large enough that you can easily read the words. I've cut the story up into columns as well.

.

The forum appears to be screwing with me....not posting articles in order even though I submit them in order. Let's try again.

next page

page 3

p. 4

Now a few passages from the RX8 article...

wa? Did I miss something or is the detuned Renesis part missing? Or is it in another article?

EDIT: nm, you just posted it while I was typing

the b*stards copied a published RX-7 image I took for their opening shot:confused:

Thanks rx7tt95 :)

I can't tell if something happened with the RX-8 part or my computer is just being weird, I'm not seeing it. But I believe you now. What issue is that? I swear I dug through that entire car section and only saw the April issue....


Edit: nevermind, you're still posting- I'm just impatient. Sorry!

p2

In response to the Dave Coleman article (edit: the article about rotary displacement):

Many, MANY people have argued that the 13B/Renesis really has 2.6 liters of displacement. Personally, I think it has 1.3 liters (it makes the Renesis sound that much more incredible! ;) ) but in my opinion, it doesn't really matter if the engine is 1.3 or 2.6 liters. What matters is power to weight ratio (and power to size ratio), and in that department rotaries are king. Period. Sports Car International said "Including rotors, housings and eccentric shaft, the basic engine wieghs only 121 pounds. With all ancillaries attached, running weight totals 273 pounds. That's about half the size and weight of an equivalent piston powerplant. In fact, the Wankel equals its transmission in size and weight" (page 28-29, May 2003). I'd like to see any naturally aspirated boinger that small produce 247 hp.
The reason I don't think displacement really matters is that you can get a real tiny engine to produce a ton of horsepower, but at an incredible cost. For example, in a piston engine, you can change the compression ratio, add camshafts, add more valves, use forced induction, make a more open exhaust, the list goes on, but most if not all of these factors add weight, not to mention a decrease in reliability and fuel economy. The wankel gets loads of power for its size while remaining decently economical (at least the Renesis) and N/A rotaries are famously reliable (rotary racers can go 1 or 2 seasons without changing an engine, something unheard of for conventional engines). After all, how many cars other than the RX-8 with full sized rear seats (and 4 doors) weigh only ~3050 lbs without extensive use of aluminum or carbon fiber?
Finally, the RX-8 is really fun to drive (according to its reviews) - because of it's engine. The Renesis is 5.5 inches behind the front axle in a front engine car! That causes an "extremely low polar moment of inertia" (SCI again), in other words, handling to die for. :D

here's my take:

yes it BREATHES like a 2.6, because its combusts the 1.3L from the 2 rotors EVERY REVOLUTION, whereas a 2.0L piston only combusts all 4 cylinders' air every TWO REVOLUTION

but there lies another BIG advantage of the rotary engine: being able to use all of its 'displacement' (aka full air intake volume for a single chamber from each rotor) EVERY REVOLUTION, whereas the piston engine only uses HALF of its full 'displacement' volume every revolution. Would you rather have your engine breathing and firing at full volume ALL THE TIME, or only HALF of its total capacity all the time? :D

I still consider the Renesis to have a 'displacement' of 1.3L, that just works twice as efficient in turning air/fuel into power than a comparatively sized piston engine :)

ah the beauty of maximum space usage (inside the engine that is :D )

p3

P4...it'd be a good idea to wait til I'm posting the entire article to comment. Just an idea :-)

p5

P6

P4...it'd be a good idea to wait til I'm posting the entire article to comment. Just an idea :-)
Sorry. I was responding to the other article by Dave Coleman about how the Renesis is really 2.6 liters. Nonetheless, thanks for posting it! :)

P7...last one...feel free to comment now:D

Sorry I couldn't get all the pics in with the text...forum only let's me post images that are so big :-) Enjoy and sorry it took me so long!

good read nonetheless! thanks!

Wow...

Well I'm suprised.. I'll wait up till Mazda decides to re-release the car and booyah maybe we'll get some more power out of that puppy yet! :)

Either way though... I'm a happy camper.

I seriously doubt that the RX-8 is going to test any faster than it already has. I just can't see it. I'd like it to be true, but it's not likely.

Originally posted by confucious
Assuming this is true, it begs the question: how would an owner diagnose this problem if it were to happen to him? If C&D did their comparo with an RX-8 with this problem and were presumably satisified with the power, how would an owner ever notice?

Question #1:
Same question: How would anyone know if the power port valves are stuck shut ? besides actually feeling the lack of power would this be indicated by some kind of light on the instrument panel?

Question #2:
Would this be harmful for the engine if you keep running it, port stuck, for a long time?

Originally posted by rx7tt95
p3

What does this say!?!

Originally posted by Maximus


Question #1:
Same question: How would anyone know if the power port valves are stuck shut ? besides actually feeling the lack of power would this be indicated by some kind of light on the instrument panel?

Question #2:
Would this be harmful for the engine if you keep running it, port stuck, for a long time? It's answered in the article... the dyno showed no horsepower gain after 6250 (when the port should open) and thus it's stuck.

Originally posted by DonG35Miata
I think the whole story is TREMENDOUSLY fishy. #1, I don't think an RX-8 with the top end of the powerband missing could hit 60 in 5.9 seconds. #2, if either of my cars was 15% down on power I'd sure notice. You don't think the engineers/testers/Mazda people in the USA and Japan know what an RX-8 should feel like when all the ponies are present and accounted for? I can tell the difference in my Miata when the A/C compressor is turned on, and that is probably a 10 hp drain at the absolute max. It's probably more like 5 hp. 40hp is a world-changing amount.

What's more, if the car wasn't opening up all the way, I doubt their would be the rush of power over 6,000 rpm that the magazines described.


That's true. Mazda engineers should have calculated the power-to-weight ratio before releasing the vehicle.

Could the missing horsepower come from the transmission?

You got to understand that this article was written before the R&T or C&D articles saying 5.9 was possible.

However, the lack of power would explain why some of the reports from a couple months ago had RX-8 in the 6.3 area.

I think 0-60 will stay at 5.9

-Mr. Wigggles

I am believing that SCC is right actually..

If you re-read the C&D article, they said the G35 beats the RX-8 to 100mph and has better top end power. However given the nature of the torque and horsepower curves it always seemed unlikely to me yet I just looked past it. Passing power is generally better on rotary powered cars, and thus I had a little curiosity as to why the RX-8 would be any different in this regard.

That said, we'll give it some time and see... it's only a few months until the car is released and then we will see for certain whether it was running fine, or did signifigantly change.

It would have been nice for SCC to have done a straight line test because if they recieved the same numbers as C&D and R&T, and THEN dyno'ed it... the point would be proven already.

Originally posted by Elara
Thanks rx7tt95 :)

What issue is that? I swear I dug through that entire car section and only saw the April issue....


Edit: nevermind, you're still posting- I'm just impatient. Sorry!

i went thru the rack again last night at barnes and noble too. i noticed on the cover of the april issue that it said "display until march 25th" so we have to wait a couple of more days:)

is the dyno graph in the article?

I think it may be posible to see a small increase in performance.


there is some thin that I found strange I dit some cheking and the numbers i get tell me that the RX-8 does have a better power to weiht ratio compare to the infiniti G35 yet the infiniti have beter 0-60 time.

g35 3,435lbs divided by 280 =12.26lbs for each hp

RX-8 3,000lbs divided by 247=12.14lbs for each hp

am I right?

I dunno, it kinda makes some sense. In Road & Track, the RX-8 starts to die at higher speeds. Considering the horsepower is pretty much located at the top end, a pause in power in 5th gear would explain why it's such a dog after 100mph. My $0.02, maybe I'm wrong. I certainly hope it's a little faster than the mags are saying.

Yeah I agree...I was checking out the power to weight ratios, as well as the gearing ratios...the RX8 should be able to keep up (with just a driver but not four passengers!). They did not include the dyno graph in the article unfortunately. From what I understand, other magazines had tested this car BEFORE SCC got it. I really hope there was another 40hp worth of acceleration to be had...that'll take .3-.4 seconds off the 1/4 mile time using the same launch techniques.

If they're wrong...we need to start a letter writing campain :D

Does this mean that all magazines like R&T, C&D, MT, have been using the same car (the one with the ports stuck shut) for their reviews ???

Originally posted by Maximus
Does this mean that all magazines like R&T, C&D, MT, have been using the same car (the one with the ports stuck shut) for their reviews ??? This is essentially the case... I only believe it because R&T couldn't get the top end of the RX-8 to produce any sufficient results... something the rotary has a strongpoint for.

This was great information to have been discovered, and I had also noticed the same thing about the top end accelleration falling off at 100mph (if not a little before) in the auto mags.

One question...are any of you guys in the first allocation getting nervous about the possibility of this materializing in your production cars?

Considering when this article was written in order to be published in next month's SCC, chances are Mazda has already identified and rectified the problem for all the production vehicles, but it does make me feel a little better knowing that I'm in the third allocation.

:o

There are actually 2 6-port sleeves - one for each chamber. If one or both are stuck open, the engine won't idle smoothly. If one or both are stuck closed, high-rpm breathing will suffer, but it'll be difficult to detect unless you know what the car felt like before. If only one was stuck closed, that would make it all the more difficult to tell.

On my '91 Coupe (Zoom-ZoomH, where'd you get the picture of MY car :)) you can definitely feel the power rush when the 6-port sleeves open up and I would feel it if something wasn't right.

When I first bought the car (about 5 years ago), the rear sleeve was stuck open and I didn't notice it for a couple of years. I'm sure I could have fixed SCC's test car in 30 minutes. If only I had known :)

It bugs me only from the standpoint that:
1) There is possibly no electronic detection system
2) The RX-8 shows up after traveling for 1+ month, and sticking before I get it, hence no way to know it is stuck.

If it sticks after having it, I would think the loss of power would be evident.

Well the article says that the ports got stuck cuz of some hard driving (i.e. around laguna). So I don't think you will get them stuck driving normally. By then you should be able to get a feel for it and notice any power changes. :)

Originally posted by JohnnyG
I could have fixed SCC's test car in 30 minutes. If only I had known :)

sticking or not, it's not a big deal: it would fall under warranty.

I wonder how much of this (if it is true) could be due to the hard driving right off the line; without a break-in period.

Originally posted by jonalan
I wonder how much of this (if it is true) could be due to the hard driving right off the line; without a break-in period. Dunno... will be bad for me as I'm not too keen on breaking in the car. Maybe for the first 250 miles, then an oil change.

After that I'll be hearing a lot of buzzers! :)

Originally posted by Hercules
Dunno... will be bad for me as I'm not too keen on breaking in the car. Maybe for the first 250 miles, then an oil change.

After that I'll be hearing a lot of buzzers! :)

ahaha. I feel sorry for the poor guy getting ur car after the lease.:p

Originally posted by chenpin


ahaha. I feel sorry for the poor guy getting ur car after the lease.:p
Nah, I'm gonna baby it. Revving up a rotary is a good thing :)

Uhmmm, call me cynical if you will, but surely if ALL the pre-production Renesis engines had a sticky port then it must be a generic design fault. If it's a design fault then all the engines produced thus far in Hiroshima will have to be disassembled and modified. Will this not affect the first delivery schedule?

...i'm still not sure if they've all had this problem, and that the problem is that big a deal... i want proof dammit!! ;)
but obviously Mazda ain't gonna come forward and say "oh yeah, we, uh, screwed up on the tertiary ports, and they stick closed" no matter how big a deal it is... so we may never know...??

Since most of us won't even experience the opening of the 6250 rpm power ports for a while after taking ownership during break-in, sounds like we may need to dyno our cars, as a baseline for future mods AND as a precaution to sticking power ports.....

I also agree with you Wakeech about needing more information and proof on the power port "allegations". SCC should have posted their dyno.

Sorry made it sound like I needed more proof that it actually happened to SCC. Actually I was questioning that it happened to all the test vehicles used so far, but if it did, it just means more power for us when we finally get it in a couple of months...

:D

Everybody needs to remember that these were pre production, hand-assembled cars. I guess the proof would be that Mazda pulled ALL of the test vehicles to diagnose the problem. If the power valve looks similar to powervalves found on other Mazda cars, it's simply a brass butterfly on a shaft. No big tech there. I'm sure it's just something minor. I'm just glad they caught it!

Originally posted by rx7tt95
If the power valve looks similar to powervalves found on other Mazda cars, it's simply a brass butterfly on a shaft. No big tech there. I'm sure it's just something minor.

... i know you're an FD owner, but the last NA wankel Mazda produced has a rotating "sleeve" valve for the tertiary port...

but yes, certainly (as i keep saying) it's no big deal... and i've STILL not heard of anything pertaining to Mazda pulling all their cars to try and fix some phantom problem...:confused:

Yeah, I'm aware...most of the newer cars produced that use tuned runners and valves switched to a simple butterfly controlled by a solenoid which supplied vacuum to open/close the valve as needed. Best example is the KL series engine found in the MX6, PGT, and Millenia. Yamaha has used a similar valve (to the 2nd gen n/a) since 87 or so...those freeze up over time (not all though) as well.

I'm estimating that the events in the article appeared over a month ago, giving them time to solve and fix the problem. The first cars aren't expected here in the states, at least locally for me, until late April. Local dealer is getting four cars.

Personally, I would expect a few niggling problems with the first cars to come off the line. This isn't a "Mazda" thing, it's an automotive thing. Just ask E46 M3 owners, 03 Cobra owners, 350Z owners, etc....Just a fact of modern design and production.
Michel

I believed that SCC did experienced the stuck valves problem. But I think the problem is unique to their test car. I don't see how it would be possible for R&T and C&D to achieved 5.9/14.5 with 40hp deficit.

I simulated 40 less ponies in CarTest and the best I got was 6.2/14.8 and 0-100 at 17.1 sec. With the correct power curve, CarTest gave me 6.0/14.5 and 0-100 at 15.7 sec. This is very similar result to R&T and C&D. Plus the stuck valves would have affected all gears not just the high speed ones.

Good Duck-

Is CarTest taking into account dropping the clutch at 8,000 RPM?

I think I remember at least one article stating a more "realistic" launch resulted in numbers closer to your "40-less ponies" results.

~Robert

Originally posted by Good Duck
I believed that SCC did experienced the stuck valves problem. But I think the problem is unique to their test car. I don't see how it would be possible for R&T and C&D to achieved 5.9/14.5 with 40hp deficit.

I simulated 40 less ponies in CarTest and the best I got was 6.2/14.8 and 0-100 at 17.1 sec. With the correct power curve, CarTest gave me 6.0/14.5 and 0-100 at 15.7 sec. This is very similar result to R&T and C&D. Plus the stuck valves would have affected all gears not just the high speed ones. Yes it would, but I'm not concerned about the off the line power... I was more concerned with the power at the top end, where rotaries are great.

Road and Track reported the RX-8 being sluggish at the top end which is unlikely... which would lead me to believe they also had a similar problem.

However until it's confirmed by Mazda, I will reserve judgement. I'm happy with the speed of this car right now, any extra power is just icing.

well...i think so too, but i think japan already have RX8 in production.....so if there is any problems with it japanese ppl will be more likely to find out whats going on, so by the time our cars get here it's going to be solved...:D

What happen to the scc article? Did they clarify what the actual times are yet? I read a post about someone asking the scc article's author to join the rx8 forum to answer questions, what ever happen to that?

nope we dont have any "final times" yet. Just have to wait. Anyways, here's a little something for you (found in another thread):

Originally posted by gazita123
So, I just got back from the Rev It Up, and have some good news. The tuning for the US was just finalized not too long ago, and it improved on what everyone had been previously testing. The tech guy at the event was pretty connected with the development here. He said that the tuning that the press drove around had around 240hp vs a final 247-250hp.

So if this is true and the SCC article is true, then media mules were tuned to 240hp AND had problems with high end power. Hmmmmmm, wonder how much performance will improve once everything is finished. :)

In Japan, there is no offical comments on this from Mazda.
And there is no rumors about this on BBS in Japan as far as I know. I think this is because this article is in English.

My dealer also said that currently there is no official comments on this matter. He was also not sure.

Hmmmmmm, wonder how much performance will improve once everything is finished.

I think a more apt question is whether or not we early adopters will be seeing the service bays for stuck ports or othere teething issues with the Renesis. :( Little stuff is OK... my G35 had two minor recalls... but potentially chronic and widespread engine problems are another story. I'd hate for the motor to get a bad rep early on.


"Hmmmmmm" is appropriate for a rotary forum... "the Mazda goes Hmmmmmm!"