now I am going to get flamed alot for this but....

2 things

1: What logically and understandably do to the RX-8...for example, Titanium Apex Seals, a light weight strong metal or composite rotors (hehe). Heat resistant plating for housings. or even new housings... SHOPS WHERE ARE YOUR CNC MACHINES.

2: Why arent they doing this ( we are only talking about 4 parts, to change or fortify for FI... even if forged this shouldnt cost much considering prices for forged pistons... Maybe 1000 for both Rotors and that should get at least 50 horses going on just NA... Not to mention that with a stronger apex seals on top of that FI should be able to run even 1 full bar of boost.!

instead of vacuum powered solenoids to control the valves in the intake manifold...use electronic stepper motors. that's it for me

Decrease allowable manufacturing tolerances.

One more rotor!!!

I'd do a lot more work on fuel remapping. I'd get rid of the computer controlled oil injection system. I would change it back to a mechanical pump lever style. May use a bit more oil all together but I I'd feel a lot better about it. I really don't like the valve/side port style. The other engines didn't flood near as easy cause they would sweep out the fuel on the exhaust stroke. I still think the Rensis is a great engine. I have just had repeatable reliability with the older style motors so I tend to think of the good old days.

well done the calculations and (in theory) I should get 35 more horsepower with the weight loss on the rotors and some kind of heat reduction, and a 9500-10000 maybe more redline.

man looking at that many zeros makes my mouth water!

Get rid of the cast iron side housings for AL. Could cut a lot of weight right there.

I believe the valve/side port style is what allows this rotary to meet emission requirements

^^^

I meant to use aluminum in exchange for cast iron, not to do without the parts. A change of materials, not architecture.

Direct fuel injection

A leaner/safer fuel mixture that would run clean and eliminate the need for a catalytic converter...and of course give me power.

I agree with some of the above suggestions. Use all aluminum housings and direct injection. I'd give the exhaust port shape a serious revision but would still keep the all side port configuration. I'd lose the siamesed center exhaust port.

I would NOT use stronger apex seals. The problem with seals like that is that all you did was to move the weakpoint to somewhere else in the motor. If you don't break an apex seal you'll break something else such as denting a rotor. If the engine doesn't blow up, assuming you are running boost, the stronger apex seals will tear up the housings sooner and you'll lose engine life.

One more rotor!!!
:iamwithst

I agree with some of the above suggestions. Use all aluminum housings and direct injection. I'd give the exhaust port shape a serious revision but would still keep the all side port configuration. I'd lose the siamesed center exhaust port.

I would NOT use stronger apex seals. The problem with seals like that is that all you did was to move the weakpoint to somewhere else in the motor. If you don't break an apex seal you'll break something else such as denting a rotor. If the engine doesn't blow up, assuming you are running boost, the stronger apex seals will tear up the housings sooner and you'll lose engine life.
How about increasing the "diameter" of the engine by a couple of inches? My (probably amateurish) thinking is that if you move the centre of the rotor's rotation further out from the centre of rotation of the eccentric shaft you would increase the mechanical advantage of the rotor on the eccentric shaft. Essentially it would increase the "stroke" of the engine and thereby the torque (for a given capacity).

This would need a larger housing and larger rotors and thus it would need serious retooling to manufacture. Equally it would increase the available area for side ports, so the breathing wouldn't be such a problem But I figure it might also improve the engine's efficiency, possibly at the expense of a bit of responsivness (but not by much).

What do you think?

This may not quite apply, but I would change the order in which the electro-nannies are turned off. Instead of pressing once to shut off the DSC, I would say that should be the traction control, and then hold for 7 seconds to remove DSC. I hate the traction control far more than the DSC.

This may not quite apply, but I would change the order in which the electro-nannies are turned off. Instead of pressing once to shut off the DSC, I would say that should be the traction control, and then hold for 7 seconds to remove DSC. I hate the traction control far more than the DSC.
:offtopic:

To keep good reliability and still be NA, I will:
1.) change the exhaust,but remove the cat,
2.) a lighter flywheel,
3.) revi cold air intake(if after more guys are using it and prooving the performance change).
4.) a software change on the fuel / ignition side.
...and that is it, the HP change will be very good,or good enough, it will sound nice and still be reliable.and as we saw here in SA even better fuel economy when driven the same.
other add ons will purely be for the looks etc such as rear wing, lowering kit etc.
mine is going for 50 000km (31000miles) service (and except for the previous fuel pump problem and now also taillight water,to be checked tomorrow) tomorrow and I am very happy with my 8,I think it draws more eyes than a porsche or so

This thread isn't what would you do to your car. It's what would you like Mazda to change to better the engine?