Check this out

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/first_drive.php?sid=116&page=1

Michael

Nice read.

Anyway, hydrogen does marry well with a rotary engine but not in a sports car.

Stick a renesis dual fuel (petrol and hydrogen) in a Mazda 5 and you get something more practical and better focused.

cheers

jird20

that is a good find ,,but looking at practicality ,60 miles to a tank of hydrogen.
Then the loss of HP (197-107), No trunk. I don't know if this is working out so well.
On the plus side ,, no pollution.

Very cool article.

Mazda has done some great work but I personally doubt we will see Hydrogen replace gas anytime soon.

Keep in mind that the first versions of the current gas/electric hybrid cars were developed in the 1960s and 70s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_cars).

So while this hydrogen RX-8 might not be anything you or I might choose to drive today, give it another couple of decades, I have no doubt it will get a lot better than this early initial version.

We should definitely be very, very happy about this though. Why? This is a very compelling reason for Mazda to continue to develop and improve the rotary for many years to come. Since the petrol and hydrogen versions are so similar, Mazda's future fleet could easily include high performance rotary sports cars in addition to a line of compact, efficient hydrogen vehicles.

Who knows, if it really goes well maybe Mazda will be able to start selling rotary engines to other car manufacturers, similar to how Toyota licenses their hybrid technology to Nissan and Ford.

Booo. Give us a Gas-electric hybrid RX-8. Hydrogen, as I see it, is not the future.

I like the idea of a hybrid rotary, but not in a sportscar. Hybrid cars are simply too heavy. They would also need to sort out the issues with starting and stopping the motor periodically. The weight advantages of the rotary could make it a great option for a hybrid, though.

ya know how lots of people would like a stock factory turbo, well doesnt that hydrogen renesis have a turbo?http://www.fujiyama-trading.co.jp/04tokyo/04photo/mz_rotary2.gif

hydrogen seems like an awesome idea,
personally, i love the 8, but pollution is a big problem for it.
if every car changed to hydrogen the world would be a much cleaner place.

when everyone thinks "it's just one car's pollution" then it's not just one person.
it's all the cars combined,
i hope engineers keep developing this technology into an affordable replacement.

the rotary is an awesome combo for hydrogen.

maybe someday, almost all cars will be rotary and environmentally friendly!
Peace and love! (i feel like a hippy, but just worryin' bout the future!) :p:

Booo. Give us a Gas-electric hybrid RX-8. Hydrogen, as I see it, is not the future.


The gas/electric hybrid is not the future. It is simply a band-aid on a gushing wound. I believe hydrogen is the way to go, it will only take time to get it worked out.

Besides, the batteries take up a lot of room and weigh a lot. They would destroy the balance of the 8. Also, batteries do not last for ever and are a toxic waste in themselves. If everyone drove electric hybrid cars and batteries were replaced about every 5 to 6 years, that is a lot of batteries. You are replacing one evil with another.

... while this hydrogen RX-8 might not be anything you or I might choose to drive today, give it another couple of decades, I have no doubt it will get a lot better than this early initial version.


Remember that the development tools available, today, are orders of magnitude better than the 60's & 70's. If there is financial backing, hydrogen powered cars could be practical in a lot less than decades. Since the RX-8 is the only production rotary, its the only quick test platform.

The Honda Fit provides 109HP. With the size of the Renesis engine, it would probably fit into a Fit! HP to weight ratio does the rest!

The only way that hydrogen makes sense anytime in the forseeable future is as a supplemental fuel, mixed in with gasoline. It doesn't have much energy by itself, but it does have a teriffically fast flame speed--nearly 10x faster than gasoline, which ought to be good for those long, inefficient combustion chambers in a rotary engine. Adding hydrogen to a gasoline fuel/air mixture is like adding lighter fluid to a stack of charcoal, in order to get it to burn faster. The charcoal has more potential energy, but it burns too slow by itself. And since it improves the burnability of the fuel being used (assuming you're using 5~7% hydrogen), you can burn just about any combustible fuel so long as there's a little hydrogen in there. You just have to adjust the timing.

And since it improves the burnability of the fuel being used (assuming you're using 5~7% hydrogen), you can burn just about any combustible fuel so long as there's a little hydrogen in there. You just have to adjust the timing.

Interesting... I didn't know that. Can it be used in fuel types such as Ethanol and Diesel? Does it burn cleaner too?

I was talking to my friend about alternative fuels the other day and I brought up the hydrogen RX8 for the rotary engine. I tried mathmaticly comparing it to the new ford hydrogen engine-
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/07/ford_hydrogen_i.html

Ford Hydrogen Engine
10 Pistons + 6.5 liters of air = 235 horsepower
Broken down by piston- 1 piston, receiving .65 liters of air produces 23.5
horsepower

Rotary engine on hydrogen
2 rotors + 1.3 liters of air = 107 horsepower
That's 1 rotor using .65 liters of air to produce 53.5 horsepower.

Does that math seem right to anyone? It seemed to me that a rotor power plant was more effient at burning Hydrogen... not to mention the size/weight difference of the Renesis vs a V10. If they used a 3 or 4 rotor powerplant to burn hydrogen, would the horse power ratings go up at by the same scale? It was just a basic laymans analysis of the plants, I'm sure it's much more complicated in real life.

michael

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2006/09/03/hydrogen-economy-unnecessary-say-city-college-of-new-york-resea/

Ford Hydrogen Engine
10 Pistons + 6.5 liters of air = 235 horsepower
Broken down by piston- 1 piston, receiving .65 liters of air produces 23.5
horsepower

Rotary engine on hydrogen
2 rotors + 1.3 liters of air = 107 horsepower
That's 1 rotor using .65 liters of air to produce 53.5 horsepower.

Does that math seem right to anyone?
Remember that each rotor is essentially 3 cylinders in a piston engine. It's the faces that you count. That's only 17.83 hp per rotor face (or equivalent piston) according to your figures. The Ford engine is supercharged which really makes it pathetic as opposed to the merely embarassing performance the hydrogen rotary has.

The only way that hydrogen makes sense anytime in the forseeable future is as a supplemental fuel, mixed in with gasoline. It doesn't have much energy by itself, but it does have a teriffically fast flame speed--nearly 10x faster than gasoline, which ought to be good for those long, inefficient combustion chambers in a rotary engine. Adding hydrogen to a gasoline fuel/air mixture is like adding lighter fluid to a stack of charcoal, in order to get it to burn faster. The charcoal has more potential energy, but it burns too slow by itself. And since it improves the burnability of the fuel being used (assuming you're using 5~7% hydrogen), you can burn just about any combustible fuel so long as there's a little hydrogen in there. You just have to adjust the timing.
Actually you can also run it leaner, which might additionally increase fuel economy especially at low throttle operation.
Hydrogen boosted gasoline engines have been talked about for a while. Mostly with on-board hydrogen generators.
http://auto.consumerguide.com/Articles/index.cfm/act/featuredarticles/article/FA_HYDROGEN_BOOSTED_ENGINE.html
(However I doubt some of the claims of these on-board hydrogen generators.)
I wonder why Mazda isn't mentioning any data regarding this car (I'd be surprised if they haven't tried it).

And I thought my spare tire took up a lot of trunk space...

I'm not sure where I stand on the engine, but I really like the two tone look with the blue and white (subtle but still kinda classy).