fmzambon

Fixed. His "answers" are the usual "I can neither confirm nor deny" answers.

The last time he mentioned that number was in 2013 (link). Any more recent source?

Fairly obvious and nothing to say here. They have to do whatever it takes to get rid of the "gas guzzler" connotation to the rotary.

This just means it won't be hybrid, as Fujiwara has been saying at least since the 2015 Tokyo Motor Show.

Agree, some improvement is necessary. But that CO2 limit is a weighted average limit. I already did the calculations here and it is almost a non-problem.
100g/km of CO2 correspond to about 54.6mpg (for gas engines). And the 20mpg that I used in those calculations correspond to 273g/km for the record. Basically ZERO improvement over the Rx-8. If even with these conditions that I described in the linked post (which seem fairly worst-case to me) the effect on the averages are so small, even modest improvements to the rotary would take care of the CO2 problem entirely.
If anything, this could push Mazda to build a high-price, limited sales number rotary powered car. The lower sales numbers would mean that its effect on the fleet averages would be negligible. And the higher price would allow Mazda to use the brute force approach of increasing the precious metals loading of the catalyst to clean up the exhaust. Not the most elegant solution, but it should work.

Then there is the whole HCCI thing...

Agree.

There was no business case for many other cars too. Think Veyron or LFA, just to cite the two most prominent ones. Car manufacturers sometimes decide to embark in a project that they know they'll lose money on for the non financial return it offers.
A rotary sports car would be much less expensive than either the Veyron or the LFA, obviously, but since Mazda is also much smaller than Volkswagen or Toyota, in proportion it could be a similar proposition.

If Mazda's only goal with the Vision was to create a beautiful concept, then why bother with the rotary references? They could have built the exact same concept, called it, say, "Skyactiv Vision", replaced the "Skyactiv R" badges with "Skyactiv G" ones, lowered the redline on the tacho, change the rear lights and do some other tweaks to remove any rotary reference from it. I'm fairly convinced that such a non-rotary concept would have won the same awards as the Rx Vision.

But no, they decided to strongly link the Rx Vision to the rotary, starting from the name. There has to be a reson for this.
If you are going to reply "it's just because this way it generates more buzz and hype", then this is would be a fairly short-sighted strategy. It may gain them more exposure in the short term, but teasing can backfire at them if they never deliver. Especially if other manufacturers manage to succesfully bring back other iconic, long lost cars. Think Gt-R R35, new NSX, Supra MkV. Also the long-awaited mid-engined Corvette. And maybe even a new S2000. That would leave Mazda as the only manufacturer that cannot deliver after promising. Not good for their image. Especially if they want to move upmarket.
If Mazda knew that they could not get a rotary to the market in a reasonable time frame, then it would have been better for them to stay silent altogether or just continue with the "we can neither confirm nor deny" answers. But no, they chose to show the Rx Vision and, more importantly, to strongly link it with the rotary.
As I see it, as a minimum the Rx Vision was an attempt at "probing" the market, to see what kind of reception could be expected for a new rotary sports car. And in that respect I think the reaction was decidedly positive.

Finally there is this. Why spend the money and time to test a 13 year old, discontinued, car at the Nurburgring? Ok, is just 7 years old as it an S2 Rx-8, but still... Especially if Mazda was also comparing it to a McLaren 570S, as that article says.
It can't be development work for the Miata because they'd use a Miata for that. And the other vehicles currently in Mazda's lineup are even less likely, as the FR layout and the suspension geometry of the Rx-8 do not match anything else in Mazda's lineup.
The only reason I can find is that it must be some kind of development work for a new platform, and the Rx-8 is the most relevant past Mazda car for this new platform, at least as far as handling goes.

Now, if Mazda is doing chassis development work for this new platform (and thus car), they must be realtively sure they can find a way to power it, otherwise they'd spend time & money for an engineless chassis.

To sum it up, I think Mazda is still working hard on the rotary (and the patents that regularly pop up show this). What they did in the last year leaves strong hints toward the fact that they are confident that they can get an engine ready IMHO. I'd be surprised if nothing new rotary related is shown at the next Tokyo Motor Show. It may be the first peek at the Skyactiv R, or maybe something else, but I think that something will be shown at the next TMS.

10.5 more months to go...

9krpmrx8

iTrader: (46)

They made the Furai and never had any intent to make that either. And Patents get filed for stuff that never gets made all the time.

fmzambon

Patents don't write themselves. Even if you want to patent something that will never make it to production, you have to spend time and money inventing that thing and then file the patent. It's not like an engineer woke up one morning and said "yeah, let's flip the engine over" or "let's add a restrictor to the water passages to improve cooling".
So if Mazda keeps pushing out rotary-related patents, it means that it's still spending time and money on the rotary. And that was my point in the previous post.

The Furai was way too extreme from the outset to be anything other than a race car. Just like the Taiki was way over the top to be anything other than a concept car. No road going version of either could be reasonably expected, at least not without MAJOR changes to the shape of the car. And at that point it would not have been a road-legal Furai (or Taiki) any longer, it would have been something completely new.

The Rx-vision, on the other hand, is much closer to a road legal car than the Furai or Taiki ever were. That's why it's significant.

pure speculation mode: ON
One might even reason that the Rx-vision is the next evolutive step after the Furai and Taiki ("translated" from the Nagare design language to Kodo and, as I said, much more "reasonable" in production terms). In that sense, the Taiki and Furai would not have been dead ends, as the Rx vision would be the next step after them.
But I concede that this interpretation is REALLY pushing it
pure speculation mode: OFF

By the way, I still think that Mazda would have liked to bring out a new rotary much sooner, perhaps immediately after the Rx-8 was discontinued. They had already managed to bring the 16X to a better fuel consumption level than the non-Skyactiv 2.0 engine in 2010 (link).

But the combined effect of Ford leaving and the global financial crisis forced them to put everything on hold. Again IMHO.

ASH8

... la la land..

links that are 7 years old..

As for fuel efficiency, that the 16X is 30% more fuel efficient than RX-8,
16x performs better than 2.0 litre old Mazda banger engine, well I hope so..

Whenever Mazda says 30% more fuel efficient in RE's they are talking AT IDLE, not in real world on road conditions, even the Renisis (from memory) was 25%+ more efficient than REW, and that was at idle, the real world reality was.....?

And yep, I will repeat what I said before Mazda patent a Manual fully retractable HARDTOP for the ND about 2.5 years ago, it did not work, it did not happen, so then came the RF abortion which is just a retractable targa top come fastback thing.

The 10 year old (almost) 16X turned 180 degree Engine Patent is interesting, but nothing more yet.... it is not a reality.

The Furai actually raced/worked, the Taiki had a RE (16X) and was also self powered, even the Evolv was self powered, the Vision has no engine has to be winched and pushed everywhere and is a Mazda 'dream' which is a long way from reality.

TMS 2017 may be interesting, or may not.

fmzambon

Only one link is 7 (6?) years old, the one about the 16X being more efficient than the 2.0 piston engine.
If anything, this means that they've had 7 (sic) years to further improve on that and work on the emissions problem.

There's a simple explanation for that: a running concept can leak information about the engine in it, and most likely Mazda doesn't want to risk that.

The Taiki was filmed at least twice with its engine running ( and ). So even if Mazda had not shown the 16X, one might have actually guessed the general engine architecture (number of rotors and maybe even NA vs turbo) from the exhaust sound. Not easy but doable.
If a concept car can run, then one can be sure that sooner or later one will take a video of it running. For the Taiki it was not a problem, as the general structure of the engine had already been disclosed (same with the Rx evolv), but most likely Mazda wants to keep its cards close to the chest with the Skyactiv R. Just like they did with the styling of the ND Miata: it was not spotted in camo until weeks (or was it days?) before the unveil.
Maybe Mazda is (was?) still undecided about some major technical choice (NA vs turbo maybe) for the Skyactiv R and didn't want to unintentionally tease something that might not actually happen as expected in production.

As an example, what if Mazda is trying to bring a 3 rotor to the market (I know, I know, emissions. It's just an example)? They'd most likely have a "plan B" in the form of a 2 rotor engine, so if they can't get the 3 rotor working as required, they can switch to plan B and still have something to sell. If no one outside Mazda knows about the 3 rotor, then the switch to plan B is simple and relatively painless. But if the 3 rotor effort has been leaked, then it becomes a marketing failure.

This is actually what happened over 25 years ago with the Jaguar XJ220: it was to be an all wheel drive NA V12 supercar, many people put deposits for it, but then when it came out it was a rear wheel drive twin turbo V6. As a result meny people who had put down deposits for the V12 version stepped back.

This is what happens when one teases and then not delivers, and Mazda doesn't want to do that. Better safe than sorry.

Bladecutter

BC.

zoom44

i hadnt seen 'link 2' before or at least i don't remember. how embarrassing is that park job? is it the driver or the guy directing? put the car in the tent already. if it's not right have a few of those guys standing around pick it up and put it where you want it. the directing and driving team have just shown they simply can't do it.

I love the Taiki. It's a great concept car and I can see what an eventual production model would look like. or at least what i'd like it to look like. what a kodo version would look like. as was said above i can see the lineage between successive rotary concepts that are leading toward an eventual production car. i hope they really have the guts and the engineering prowess i think they have.

i really want a panoramic roof too. I know it's going to effect the handling some but if anyone can manage it and still make it handle great it's Mazda. They show concepts with large glass in the roof but never offer it in production.

fmzambon

I found the second video by chance some time ago and then I saved it. Yeah, that parking job is really embarassing...
On their side thy have the fact that trying to park a car that has a minimum turning radius of around 200 feet is not that easy, but still...

ASH8

Another nail...
http://europe.autonews.com/article/2...autonews-blast

If the new rules are approved, they will also regulate cold engine starts in a bid to reduce pollution from short city trips and require carmakers to make emissions performance information available to consumers

moldyviolinist

iTrader: (1)

They're just going to ban all gasoline cars soon enough, or they'll ban people driving completely.

ASH8

T-von

I don't know why people keep bringing up the Furai. There was nothing special about that project. The chassis was one of Mazda's race car chassis but the body was just a fiberglass shell designed to showcase the design language on an existing race car platform. Not sure if that project had any patents either.

9krpmrx8

iTrader: (46)

Yeah there is nothing special about a 4 rotor Renesis race car. A non running RX Vision is much more interesting.

CelestialGryphon

iTrader: (1)

This thread never ceases to entertain me, and as bitchin' as it would be to have another rotary back in the field, you know we won't. It's dead. Move on. Remember the Rotary as a star that shone brightly and was extinguished without it's full potential being realized at a factory level, in production at best. Something that should still inspire people to engineer silly designs to find solutions to questions no one asked.

Long live the rotary, and may the triangles keep spinning.

T-von

In your imaginary world it was a 4 rotor. The reality is it wasn't. It was a basic PP 20B installed in a Mazda racing chassis with fancy body work. Mazda wasn't trying to reinvent the wheel with that project that's why I said it wasn't nothing special. Look it up! Like I said, it was just a showcase of design language on an existing race car chassis. Mazda was never intending to build something like that for production. The vision is also just design language but the engine isn't ready. We were told to wait till 2017 before any engine details would be revealed so that's why nothing is in the Vision. I still fully expect to see a running Rx concept at the 2017 Tokyo Auto Show just like they said before.

9krpmrx8

iTrader: (46)

3 rotor, 4 rotor, it was still cool as hell. If you don't think it was special but do think the Vision is special, then you should get your head checked or go buy a Prius.

And you can fully expect all you want, the RX Vision is a pipe dream.

tgaffner

I don't know why Mazda would even think about making a new RX-Whatever. It doesnt stand a chance. Out of all the people that would like it, like us, how many of them actually have the money to go out and buy it? I'll tell you, not very many. A regular person that buys a car to drive to work and wherever else, won't give a **** if it has a rotary or not. They will see bad ratings on fuel, lower power, and think the bad reputation is true. They won't research the hell out of it to decide if it's for them. They'll go buy their BMW, Infiniti, or Audi and be completely happy.

This car wouldn't sell at all

reddozen

iTrader: (1)

http://www.racingbeat.com/mazda/perf...zda-furai.html

No clue why Franz von Holzhausen called it a "Renesis based R20b"... I suppose it could have renesis rotors in it. It was a 450HP PPort E100 Ethanol 20b. Internal configuration unknown. Not sure that Racing Beat would tell you.

BecauseRaceCar

True story, perceived reputations are hard to reverse...but they are awful on gas, and that is a huge portion of people's criteria these days...my 6700 lb 500hp diesel truck gets the same mpg

9krpmrx8

iTrader: (46)

And the reputation is earned. Had they come out with the S2 Renesis in 2003, things could have been different. I remember back in the day when we were convinced that the Renesis would be far better than the largely unreliable 13BREW. We were also told it made as much HP as the FD too,

Razz1

Too bad no updates.........

NotAPreppie

I'm guessing we'll all look like this long before any real details of a new dorito of doom are announced.

http://residencestyle.com/wp-content...ecorations.jpg

Bladecutter

Well, I have been meaning to lose a few pounds.

BC.

T-von

Now why would I wanna do something like that when I've been a die hard rotary guy since 1991?

Anyways, we obviously have two points of views when it comes to deeming what makes something special. Too me a PP 3 rotor race car from Mazda is typical. That same chassis with prettier skin doesn't make it special. It just nicer looking. To me SPECIAL is pushing the envelope on engineering. The Furai didn't do that as it was simply eye candy.

My Fd has a 20b in it that I've done all the work on myself since 2007. After owning a 20b for all these years, I guess over time, the SPECIAL kinda goes away when you take into account the cost and fuel these engine burn.

9krpmrx8

iTrader: (46)

Well, there is no pushing the envelope on engineering going on with a non running concept car. So what envelope is Mazda pushing exactly with the RX Vision?

I also would not call a 3 rotor (Renesis hybrid?) race/show car that actually ran laps, typical either. But yeah, opinions vary I guess.