Interesting read. It appears as though they are still using the same dimensions, with the added 300cc coming from a different e-shaft. Unless the rotors are fatter? Almost every other car maker has taken this path of bigger displacement, more torque with a lower redline.
That would make the RE more practical. I'm still very interested how Mazda plans on overcoming the not so cool aspects of the RE.

They have previously stated the differences elsewhere years ago. The 16x has narrower rotors (because the 13b is already too wide, the flame front isn't reaching the corners), more eccentric e-shaft. There is less material in the walls, so the extra space is still found within the same size of the total block of the 13b.

The advantages are numerous. A bigger lobe for greater eccentricity means a bigger lever that each combustion is acting on, so more torque. The narrower rotors means less waste in each combustion, which is more torque, better efficiency, and lower emissions. The greater eccentricity also means less RPM probably, 8,000rpm at a guess, but since the 13b has it's power peak there anyway, it might not have a cost in power from the rpm drop vs a theoretical 9,000rpm 16x.


But, don't forget that the 16x was shelved long ago. The Sky-R is the name of what they are working on now, and while I bet that it does use a lot of what they learned and applied with the 16x, and likely has the same 16x dimensions, i'd be it is also far advanced from the 16x from layering in the applicable Sky-G and Sky-D technology/advancements.

greater compression ratio (different rotor faces? their Sky pistons aren't smooth any more) for even more torque and lower emissions
all aluminum blocks for an improved thermal management (better for efficiency)
alternate/improved ignition
better sealing method


Every existing problem is one that they have a solution for that they have talked about.

The next rotary will have it's own set of problems :D:

21A was a narrower long lobe/larger rotor too (38 years ago), nothing really new there.

That's an interesting piece of news. I assume that such a change would also require several other minor changes in the engine. For example, just turning the block 180° would mean that the oil injectors would end up being inside the oil pan, which doesn't sound like an ideal situation. So I assume that they would need to be moved closer to the intake ports.
And also the top (now bottom) mounted fuel injector, as seen in the 16X, would be much more complicated with this arrangement.

Meanwhile there's another patent filed in Japan by Mazda for a rotor with a double recess: 2015-190377

That's very interesting info!
I understood the rennys shortcomings and the mad scientist in me tried to tackle some of the issues. I found out that a division of Mazda was experimenting with hydrogen.
I too experimented with hydrogen. And to some degree
( the best of my abilities) it seem to work. Back when the emission tests were still using the sniffer to read toxic PPM,
I was surprised at the numbers.
I can't find that print out anymore but I still remember that all contaminants registered 0.00
With the exception of NOX which read 0.01 PPM. I'm not sure what the stock 8 blow, but I'm sure they don't blow goose eggs right across the board.
Of course at higher rpm the HHO was less concentrated but at the rpms they test at, it was enough to eliminate almost all emissions. HHO expands about 10x faster then gasoline, which I thought was perfect for the short combustion cycle of the RE. I guess Mazda might take a different approach by making the rotors more narrow. That totally makes sense too.

Don't jinx it man :Eyecrazy:

"HHO" pseudo-science is not even in the same ballpark as Mazda's legitimate experiments with actual hydrogen-powered rotaries.

"HHO" lingers around because some adults still believe in Santa Claus (and failed physics in high school).

Debunked as useless and fraudulent over and over and over (and over) again.
Burning water and other myths : Nature News
Water Car Test - HHO Shows Why You Can't Run Cars on Water
Why Water Won't Improve Your MPG: A PM and Dateline NBC Investigation
Scientific proof debunking the "run your car on water" scams
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/consumer/420f11036.pdf
Exhaust emissions of a H2-enriched heavy-duty diesel engine equipped with cooled EGR and variable geometry turbocharger
Gas Crisis Fuels Dubious Online Offers | PCWorld

I didn't say I was replicating mazdas experiments, I just stated that even in small quantities, emission reduction was significant. Hydrogen through electrolysis is a slow and unusable process in the combustion engines full rpm range. I did not state once that it saved fuel so don't get your panties in a knot.
Stan Meyer was the only successful person to Run a car on water but you'll need to GOOGLE THAT and find out what happened there.
I don't need to look at your links because I had first hand experience with the results.
But thanks anyhow!

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...e98fac1cff.jpg
your definitely on the naughty list!

they're using pseudo water injection (cooled egr is mostly water) for the CX-9 so they could add it to a new rotary...

Pseudo water injection is not even in the same ball park as Santa clause.

Unscientific results with a single vehicle and single emissions test mean bupkis.
Your anecdote just confirms you don't understand science. :dunno:

But I liked your Santa Claus joke. :wink2: :lol:

O contrare, the results are purely scientific, what you fail to understand is why every study shows it inapplicable. Here's another big word for ya
"Cognitive disenence"
Omg I had a good laugh reading one of your links. Where they said that the NOX increased because of "unburnt hydrogen"
I highly doubt they even conducted a study. Once brissence occurs hydrogen is the first thing to ignite and is long gone before the flame front is done. Did you see my numbers? That is an unbiased unmolested report of my tailpipe emissions. The auto attendant was not informed of what I had in the trunk. Also to consider, my engine had about 60,000+ miles on it STILL on original plugs and coils. The only thing I changed were the wires to MSD because that's how I roll. Unless YOU can explain how I defied the laws of not just physics, but rotary physics, because apparently they are big polluters which is one of the reasons they pulled the plug on the rx8, then I suggest you use your plethora of science knowledge to do that.
Go ahead take your time.

first of all it's "dissonance" . second off all rx-8s are actually pretty clean tail pipe wise. my old sniffer tests from 10 years or so ago look pretty close to yours. I remember posting at the time how clean the numbers were. yours aren't very different. there's no defying physics or rotaries here just a nice clean running engine .

lastly knock off the hho debate. it's bunk. it's always been bunk. take it somewhere else. (that's official, with my admin hat on and everything)

I forget what magazine I was looking at already but there was a list of 20 cars worth waiting for and the RX-9 made the list. But...according to the article, a target of 400hp and likely 50+k? For everyone's sake, let's hope that is nowhere near accurate.

Sounds about right, but at 50K+ new I think my plan is to get a low mileage pre owned one if they do end up building it. Let the value tank a bit.

That's why I said I hope that little article was wrong. Nobody is going to pay 50k for a Mazda...end of story. Do these automakers realize that when you try to go upscale (where competition is already fierce), you are dramatically shrinking your potential pool of customers? A new lightweight rotary car doesn't need anywhere near 400hp anyway. I'd say 300 tops. As much as I want a new rotary car, if I'm going to shell out 50k it's gonna be for a Cayman. I just don't think Mazda has the reputation or prestige to demand that much money for one of their cars, rotary or not. Just come up with something good enough to put the Toyobaru twins out of their misery and I'll be happy. It shouldn't be that hard.

If that's true, I don't think it's a good attitude for Mazda to take. Well, we may or may not have a new rotary powered sports car in the future, but for now could we interest you in a Mazda 3? There is just no way Mazda is going to convince someone who wants a higher performance car to settle for something in their current lineup instead.

No RX-7 or MS?? Wow.

They seem to think that the Miata covers all people in the market for a sporty car..

The latest round of Mazda rumors are letdown after letdown. I realize these are just rumors but most rumors are based on a grain of truth. Right when Mazda starts making some money they abandon what makes them Mazda.

I think this all started when they dropped the Zoom Zoom.

Nobody in the bottom end of the market is going to pay $50k for a Mazda.
But, people will pay that kind of money in the middle and upper tiers of the market.

If you asked someone 5 years ago if anyone would pay $70k for a Dodge Challenger or Charger, without huge changes in the interior or suspension, what would you have said back then?

Well, guess what's been happening for several years now.

The great thing is that you have choices.
If you have $50k in your pockets right now, why don't you satisfy that Cayman desire? If the Mazda comes out in the next few years, you can pull the trigger on it then.

They already have, it's called the MX-5.
It already beats those two cars in just about every regard.
Maybe you haven't heard of it?

And get this, it's cheaper than both of those cars you mentioned.

BC.

Have no fear, the 'brand with passion' won't let you down. There is a lot going on at Mazda to make all of us enthusiasts happy.

Paul.

You have to stop thinking that "it's a mazda so people won't buy it" and start thinking, it's a hi end halo car. Nissan GTRs sell, Dodge hellcats sell, GT350s, ZL1s sell. If it has the performance people will buy it. Hyundai and Kia sell luxury cars for over 50 grand. 50 grand isn't seen as a lot of money for car manufacturers these days for some reason. To think that Mazda isn't as good as Chevy or Dodge or Nissan is shortchanging them. Yeah, I'd love to see the next rotary car start at less than 40 grand but Mazda already tried to make the accessible rotary for all people and it didn't take off. A halo car might be what they need. The Miata is only sort of a halo car.

More rotors? :)

wasnt the fd more the 50k?

It was around $31,000-$34,000 new during the early 90's. Considering inflation, it would be around $50,000 in 2016.

Would people pay $50,000 for a Mazda? Of course. Look at the CX-9, those things are $50,000 fully loaded (granted it's a different market). It's the matter of getting the content for $50,000.