DOMINION

Yeah CA sucks!

Icemark

Not quite right...

The rotary engine burned cleaner than most piston engines in the 60's and 70's.

In fact the crash rotary programs put in place in the late 60's and early 70's was because the piston engine was not going to pass the California and Federal emssion standards coming up.

If not for the invention of the Cat converter in a production form, everyone would be driving rotary engines. They were simply cleaner than 99% of the piston engines out there at the time. With the production cat converters, piston engines could be made to meet the emssions standards, that rotary engines already met. That is what killed other rotary programs... they didn't have to invest in the technology of making the rotary work, but rather could band-aid their existing product with the cat converter. A much cheaper route.

Only in the last 20 years has the piston engine technology and engine control tech allowed the piston engines to pass the rotary on clean air standards.

Remember no rotary powered car even had cats until the early 80's... almost 10 years after they became standard equipment on piston powered cars.

And of course the '8 meets LEV standards... something that many piston powered cars do not do even today.

Icemark

Now that is a joke.

I recently drove a 03, S2000 (been looking at cars to replace my RX-7 Convertible), and what a POS that car is.

It had more rattles than a 10 year old GM pickup, and fit and finish were just bad (well I guess if you comparied it to a Del Sol, it was about right), seating angle is bizare to say the least (I have to lean towards the middle of the car just to keep my upper arms and shoulders from bumping into the top of the door when driving).

Then toss in stupied stuff like not even a lined convertible roof and more Del Sol plastics. The only thing it had going for it that was better than my 88 RX-7 convertible was that there was not as much body flex. But power was the same, fit and finish and plastic and overall quality was much much worse.

Having owned a couple Honda products in the past, (86 CRX and 91 Accord) and how much they fell apart and had knick nack **** breaking on them, I could never imagine owning another Honda product again. The CRX started leaking oil at 26K miles and it only got worse until the engine needed to be rebuilt because so many seals were bad. The Accord had so many issues after 60K miles that my wife refused to drive it... I think the ignitor failing for the 3rd time and stranding her in the middle of an intersection did it in for good).

Honda builds crap for middle america just the same as GM... I have seen nothing from them that could be by any means considered reliable. I am convinced people that think Honda's are reliable used to own Chrysler or Nissan product before.

9291150

Bullshit, 'cept for the mileage. Otherwise, the 2.0 didn’t put out more stock power, and it produced max horsepower at 8300rpm, not 9000 RPM and didn’t have a cut-off at 9500rpm like the 8. Plus, where did you get your info. that it weighs less than 250 pounds like the renesis???????

Conveniently, you didn’t mention the inherent smoothness of the rotary, or the more compact size that enables it to be placed lower in the car. But I’d expect nothing less from a schmuck like you!

As for the original question, Honda is too conservative a company to do rotaries, or anything that wouldn't appeal to the mass.

Red Devil

The S2K has 237hp in a 2.2 liter or 107.7hp per liter.

The Renesis has 232hp in a 2.6 liter or 89.2 per liter.

While comparing the two in terms of displacement is difficult, the Renesis 13B rotary is not a 1.3 liter engine in equivalency.

zoom44

mazda has not shown an rx-9 concept. the senku is not an rx-9 concept

Ike

What the hell are you talking about? The F20C redlines at 9,000rpms just like the Renesis. It also has a fuel cut above that 9k reline, just like the Renesis... You need to learn how to understand the magazines you're getting your info from because the RX-8 produces max horsepower at 8500 vs. the S2K @8300, that's NOT the redline, nor is it a bad thing. If you weren't so blinded by your zealotry you'd see that I said it weighs "about the same" as the Renesis, not less. The F20C is about 20lbs heavier fully dressed (FYI the Renesis doesn't weigh under 250 dressed). It is also compact enough to sit entirely behind the front axle of the S2K just like the Renesis.

In addition, the F20C won its class in the International Engine of the year awards 5 years in a row. The S2K is considered one of the most reliable cars on the road by various sources, and routinely dynos about 20whp higher than the RX-8. So unless you want to claim some nonsense about massive drivetrain loss in the RX-8 it makes more horsepower. If that's not good enough for you it's even rated higher from the factory than the Renesis.

Not taking anything away from the Renesis, but the F20C is damn impressive and only a fanboi such as yourself would discount it.

Raptor2k

Rinkadink

S2k is a fantastic car. But I wish they'd make a hardtop coupe version.

Red Devil

I'll take a handful if you don't mind, but I'm pretty sure we've all seen this dog and pony show before.

Ike

Nah, I'm done unless he wants to get his facts straight and actually have an intelligent debate without the namecalling.

Paul_in_DC

Why do you call the Renesis a 2.6 liter when the auto industry calls it a 1.3 liter?

Red Devil

Who in the auto industry besides Mazda, and the magazines that simply copy Mazda's information, refer to the 13B as a 1.3 liter?

http://rx7.com/techarticles_displacement.html

There are numerous other sources that compare it likewise.

Don't get me wrong, for years I used to say it was a 1.3 liter and it does sound great for bragging rights. But really, bragging rights don't get you any more power/performance anyway. The argument to actually compare it to a 2.6 liter 4 cylinder are too overwhelming, imo.

Ledfoot

Okay, a couple of things.

One of my Hondas (98 Prelude) has had more repair issues than all my other cars combined! I don't think Honda is 100% sterling when it comes to reliability.

I think some of the statements made in this thread have stemmed more from perceived reliability, based on reputation, rather than hard facts. Facts tell a different story.

My S2000 has never had a hiccup, even after being supercharged. Not a single rattle, squeak, pop, ping, or wheeze. The same can't be said of my friend's Boxster S of the same year with the same mileage....and he even admitted to liking the look and feel of my S2000's interior over his own..which is why he traded "down" for one and has no regrets whatsoever.

After four and a half years of ownership (recently sold it along with my 'Lude to make room for the 8) I would like to think that my opinion on this matter is a little more qualified than somebody who has driven one example of the car, once.

Niether of my Hondas did much better on gas around town than the 8 does. 1 or 2 MPG tops.

The reasons why I bailed out of both of my Hondas was 1) It was costing a fortune to repair the Prelude constantly 2) I needed something with a little more practicality and 3) The absolutely horrid customer service I have gotten from every single Honda dealer I have been to, which has been no less than six. Each time I was greeted with repairs my car didn't get or need. I once paid $100 to have a tech start my car and then hand me a bill for $4000. I had them destroy my alarm fob...tell me I never gave it to them...only to have a garage hand find it smashed to pieces on the shop floor. They argued with me for half an hour, claiming I was lying to get a new one. I have never been so livid.

I loved my S2000, but when you can't trust your dealer to know what they're doing or tell it to you like it is (My father builds race engines and restores cars for a living..I'm hard to B.S. )....how are you supposed to rely on the car itself? Honda makes a great product but their customer service has been so stressful for me I can't justify shovelling more money in their direction.

I have not had a single problem mechanically or with service from Mazda. And honestly...even if I had no idea what I was walking into, I'd much rather take a leap of faith than literally walk into what I know to be a trap.

Sorry for the book but lord only knows I have a strong feeling about this issue in particular!

Paul_in_DC

Well, the Society of Automotive Engineers, for one:

"The SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) defined way of measuring the displacement of a rotary is to measure the difference in volume of the combustion chamber between when it is at its largest and smallest. Since each rotor has three of these chambers and there is one combustion event per rotation of the eccentric shaft, a 1.3 liter rotary would burn 1.3 liters of fuel and air per eccentric shaft rotation. A 2.6 liter reciprocating engine would burn this same amount. This confuses some people and makes them claim that rotary engines have twice the displacement their manufacturers claim they have. There is not right or wrong in this case. Rotary engines are different from reciprocating engines, so of course they need to be treated differently."
http://www.louisville.edu/~asjobs01/...rd_report.html

One article on a single web page is not what I would call an overwhelming argument, imo.

Red Devil

From your reference: "A 2.6 liter reciprocating engine would burn this same amount." That right there is why I'll agree more with the 2.6 liter argument than 1.3 liter. I agree it's apples to oranges, though, which is what I alluded to in a previous post in this thread.

No point in searching for other links when all the arguments will read the same as the one from Rotary Performance. The logic behind any argument is what makes it "overwhelming", not how many times someone else, or some other site, has made the same argument before or afterward. Similarly, all of the supporting arguments for you will read like the one you posted, I'd expect.

I'm content to agree to disagree. Either way my moment of inertia, power, gas mileage, and smile factor remains the same.

oreo

I believe it's more of a use vs abuse thing for both car manufacturers, i'll explain:

back in the days... I had a 87 rx7, my twin brother (who btw is on this forum and just boght himself a Shinka) had a 88 CRX. Both where used when we boght them and had been fairly abused by the previous owners but where still in good condition.

While we owned our cars, my brother drove my rx7 for 7 months while waiting for repairs on his crx, it also spent a lot more time on the shop than my rx7 for regular repairs. Granted it also spent time on the shop for upgrades.
After thet I sold my RX when I got married. after my brother left for the airforce, I kept the CRX for 3 years. In that time the car didn't go to the shop a single time exept for oil changes.

So in my experience, both makers have about the same batting average, it all depends on the use or abuse that you make of your car.

nuf said.

oreo

I have to accept, that the S2000 is a GREAT car, and I'll be the first to admit, it IS faster than the 8 period. But for some reason I just can't get as excited about the S2k as I do the 8. Mind you I have drien both (the s2k not extensively). but I'm pretty shure that leadfoot will agree with me. A 1:01 lap on the track on an s2k will not make you feel as good as a 1:06 lap on an RX8.

sunilseru

Honda makes some of the finest 4 bangers in the world. Ike got everything right! The S2000 engine is a gem...

Don't see any logical reason as to why they should invest their time and money into developing a rotary. They rather invest in making what they have even better!!!

Mazda customer service > Honda customer service? Interesting...

In my experience, Mazda's customer service is s*** I am sure several others on this board will agree.

spork

Oooh, oooh!

But wait, I live in SoCal too, maybe it's a SoCal thing.

Ike

It's a dealer by dealer thing, there are good and bad dealers for every car manufacturer.

Ledfoot

Yes Oreo, I'd have to agree with you on that one for a couple of reasons. You have to be a VERY good driver to squeeze a real hot lap out of an S2000. The 8 is much more forgiving at it's limits than my S was. It's also a matter of perceived quickness as well. When the reaction speed of the S2k, the 8, and a Z were compared in Motortrend...while all three were fairly close...The 8 showed the best reaction times even though the S2000 "felt" quicker due to it's tighter steering ratio. But it is just an illusion

The 8 is a far better everyday car. Half the reason I bought the Prelude was to offset the ability to carry things and foul weather traction in winter. The 8 handles anything I throw at it. It's 95% of what I love about my Hondas and 0% of what I don't... Even the mileage is comparable.

Ledfoot

And please understand that I'm not saying all Honda dealers are bad. But I have yet to be to one that was honest with me. Who lies about an alarm fob? basically I was getting accused of fraud. That's just stupid and unacceptable....especially after having handed them 1200 dollars for repairs and service.

I'm not saying this is strictly a Honda thing. I just haven't run into that kind of behavior anywhere else.

daisuke

I'm quoting motor trend, and the Senku was supposed to have a rotary engine so what else could it be?

Paul_in_DC