LOL how would you describe a rotary engine
05-29-2007, 05:50 PM
#52
You do realize that all the other car companies dropped developpement because of the thermal inefficiency as opposed to the piston engine. In simpler terms the piston engine was able to provided the same performance for less gas. This was a simple economic decision by the other car manufactures. Look at the volume of rotaries Mazda sells as opposed to pistons. They to understand this fact but use the rotary as a differentiator from the other manufactures. It is more of a sales tool then a technical advantage. Hell they had to hobble the MS3 so it wouldn't out run the RX in 0-60mph.
I like the rotary and it is unique but lets face reality. A piston engine is simply more efficient and no amount of development into a rotary will change that fact of physics. Enjoy your car but be realistic.
I like the rotary and it is unique but lets face reality. A piston engine is simply more efficient and no amount of development into a rotary will change that fact of physics. Enjoy your car but be realistic.
I don't know about that ... but think about it this way:
Mazda is the ONLY car company with the skills / and the ballz to continue production / development on a totally unique engine .. All the other car companies simply feed off all the engine developments that have been made for the piston engine over time!!!
Simple example : variable valve timing- Started by Honda ( i think) as Vtech" - now (in one form or another) in tons of cars.
Imagine how kick *** the rotary could possibly be if not one , but several companies were engineering for it!!!!!!
So what if there's been a few bad renesis engines .. perhaps you should buy Chevy's rotary engine sports car.
As long as Mazda continues to build rotary engine cars ,and stays unique I'll continue to own nothing but Mazda vehicles. ( Haven't bought another brand in 8 years)
Mazda is the ONLY car company with the skills / and the ballz to continue production / development on a totally unique engine .. All the other car companies simply feed off all the engine developments that have been made for the piston engine over time!!!
Simple example : variable valve timing- Started by Honda ( i think) as Vtech" - now (in one form or another) in tons of cars.
Imagine how kick *** the rotary could possibly be if not one , but several companies were engineering for it!!!!!!
So what if there's been a few bad renesis engines .. perhaps you should buy Chevy's rotary engine sports car.
As long as Mazda continues to build rotary engine cars ,and stays unique I'll continue to own nothing but Mazda vehicles. ( Haven't bought another brand in 8 years)
Last edited by Raptor75; 05-30-2007 at 12:01 PM.
05-30-2007, 01:40 AM
#53
Evolution Theory
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You do realize that all the other car companies dropped developpement because of the thermal inefficiency as opposed to the piston engine. In simpler terms the piston engine was able to provided the same performance for less gas. This was a simple economic decision by the other car manufactures. Look at the volume of rotaries Mazda sells as opposed to pistons. They to understand this fact but use the rotary as a differentiator from the other manufactures. It is more of a sales tool then a technical advantage. Hell they had to hobble the MS3 so it would out run the RX in 0-60mph.
I like the rotary and it is unique but lets face reality. A piston engine is simply more efficient and no amount of development into a rotary will change that fact of physics. Enjoy your car but be realistic.
I like the rotary and it is unique but lets face reality. A piston engine is simply more efficient and no amount of development into a rotary will change that fact of physics. Enjoy your car but be realistic.
05-30-2007, 08:22 AM
#56
Registered
The rotary is a very reliable engine when taken care of. Many have gone hundreds of thousands of miles until they literally wear out. You only hear about the bad stories online. You never hear people start threads that say "hey my engine didn't blow up today". You get a skewed outlook on reliability if you only look at forums.
It is thermally inefficient. That is it's downfall. Fortunately the fact that it is compact and lightweight for it's output gives it advantages that piston engines don't have. This along with the fact that it can be made to run on almost any fuel with very liitle and sometimes no work and now you've really got an engine that has potential compared to piston engines. If gas mileage is your issue than you probably aren't going to buy a big engine that has lots of torque so pick one. Which is more important.
Each engine has it's advantages and disadvantages but when people spout out complete and utter ignorant horsecrap like this, it really pisses me off. Rant over.
05-30-2007, 09:47 AM
#59
05-31-2007, 06:14 PM
#62
Registered
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Milan, Michigan
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You do realize that all the other car companies dropped developpement because of the thermal inefficiency as opposed to the piston engine. In simpler terms the piston engine was able to provided the same performance for less gas. This was a simple economic decision by the other car manufactures. Look at the volume of rotaries Mazda sells as opposed to pistons. They to understand this fact but use the rotary as a differentiator from the other manufactures. It is more of a sales tool then a technical advantage. Hell they had to hobble the MS3 so it wouldn't out run the RX in 0-60mph.
I like the rotary and it is unique but lets face reality. A piston engine is simply more efficient and no amount of development into a rotary will change that fact of physics. Enjoy your car but be realistic.
I like the rotary and it is unique but lets face reality. A piston engine is simply more efficient and no amount of development into a rotary will change that fact of physics. Enjoy your car but be realistic.
05-31-2007, 06:28 PM
#63
Registered
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Milan, Michigan
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rant mode on. Too bad you are blatantly wrong on 2 out of 3. I keep having to tell people this over and over again but they never seem to comprehend this. The rotary is not torqueless. It is SMALL!!!! ANY small engine has relatively low torque compared to a larger engine! What is so hard for people to comprehend about this??? It's a simple concept. If we had a 5.7 liter rotary, it would have tons of torque. You don't buy a small engine and then complain about lack of torque. That's plain dumb. For it's size it is no worse than anything else therefore it isn't low in torque it is right where it should be.
The rotary is a very reliable engine when taken care of. Many have gone hundreds of thousands of miles until they literally wear out. You only hear about the bad stories online. You never hear people start threads that say "hey my engine didn't blow up today". You get a skewed outlook on reliability if you only look at forums.
It is thermally inefficient. That is it's downfall. Fortunately the fact that it is compact and lightweight for it's output gives it advantages that piston engines don't have. This along with the fact that it can be made to run on almost any fuel with very liitle and sometimes no work and now you've really got an engine that has potential compared to piston engines. If gas mileage is your issue than you probably aren't going to buy a big engine that has lots of torque so pick one. Which is more important.
Each engine has it's advantages and disadvantages but when people spout out complete and utter ignorant horsecrap like this, it really pisses me off. Rant over.
The rotary is a very reliable engine when taken care of. Many have gone hundreds of thousands of miles until they literally wear out. You only hear about the bad stories online. You never hear people start threads that say "hey my engine didn't blow up today". You get a skewed outlook on reliability if you only look at forums.
It is thermally inefficient. That is it's downfall. Fortunately the fact that it is compact and lightweight for it's output gives it advantages that piston engines don't have. This along with the fact that it can be made to run on almost any fuel with very liitle and sometimes no work and now you've really got an engine that has potential compared to piston engines. If gas mileage is your issue than you probably aren't going to buy a big engine that has lots of torque so pick one. Which is more important.
Each engine has it's advantages and disadvantages but when people spout out complete and utter ignorant horsecrap like this, it really pisses me off. Rant over.
Please don't get me wrong. I am not complaining... I am just stating what everybody knows... I love my Rx8, and I LOVE MY ROTARY!. It gives me a completely different driving joy that I have never experienced before!. I am a first time rotary owner, and if I'm able to buy more rotary cars in the future, I probably will.
..........................
Yes, it is ovious that the rotary engine is small, therefore they are low in torque...
So no, I'm not wrong 2 out of 3. I think it might be 1 out of 3, because it might actually be reliable.
Last edited by puch96; 05-31-2007 at 06:35 PM.
05-31-2007, 09:05 PM
#64
Damn this sounds familar. Didn't I read this after the first "gas crisis", in 1975? And again in 1996?? In fact, wasn't 2005 gonna be the last year of the RX-8?? Oh no, wait—it was 2006. No… 2007. I read it right here! Gee, guess it was—what's the word?—oh yeah… wrong!
Last edited by New Yorker; 05-31-2007 at 09:08 PM.
06-01-2007, 01:01 PM
#65
mildly unexcited
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: CT
Posts: 444
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, and you spelled 'light' wrong.
06-01-2007, 01:19 PM
#66
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rosemead, CA
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know what car has a 1.3L piston engine? My old Geo Metro and I can assure you THIS car is much much MUCH faster, although it does eat gas like a V-8; but for me the former outweighs the latter. In my opinion if the engine doesn't suit you then modify your engine, put in another engine, or buy another car.
Last edited by Thejax; 06-01-2007 at 01:25 PM.
06-01-2007, 03:34 PM
#67
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Feel free to spell check, I didn't.
06-01-2007, 04:27 PM
#68
Registered
I still don't think you understand so I'll disagree and hold the number at 2. By stating you are wrong on one account it is still an admission of being wrong though so I'm happy with that.
06-01-2007, 06:16 PM
#71
You know what car has a 1.3L piston engine? My old Geo Metro and I can assure you THIS car is much much MUCH faster, although it does eat gas like a V-8; but for me the former outweighs the latter. In my opinion if the engine doesn't suit you then modify your engine, put in another engine, or buy another car.
I use the Metro to explain the difference in power efficiency compared to a piston engine. Granted it is the upgraded Metro engine. 1L (55hp;58tq)vs 1.3L (70hp;74tq) Renesis High power (238hp; 124tq)...
How do I describe the rotary --- Smooth (Rev the engine and the car does not jerk to one side like a piston engine)
06-02-2007, 01:56 AM
#74
mildly unexcited
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: CT
Posts: 444
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Little rotary engine allows for a balanced sports car. Little piston engine allows for a floundering econobox. The major competition from a big V8 is a rumbling slob with a low rent interior.
It has nothing to do with a 5 year old.
Spell-check would not have picked up the word "lite" as it is spelled correctly. It is just not the right word.
06-02-2007, 06:19 AM
#75
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
232 bhp is not weak. And if the 5 year old could fit far enough back in my engine bay to give my car 50/50 balance then fine. I don't know what the hell that means so here's the point:
Little rotary engine allows for a balanced sports car. Little piston engine allows for a floundering econobox. The major competition from a big V8 is a rumbling slob with a low rent interior.
It has nothing to do with a 5 year old.
Spell-check would not have picked up the word "lite" as it is spelled correctly. It is just not the right word.
Little rotary engine allows for a balanced sports car. Little piston engine allows for a floundering econobox. The major competition from a big V8 is a rumbling slob with a low rent interior.
It has nothing to do with a 5 year old.
Spell-check would not have picked up the word "lite" as it is spelled correctly. It is just not the right word.
I don't think the child labor laws would allow you to put a five year old in your engine bay but go for it if you want. I wouldn't do it though as the deflooding procedure is really nasty.
The thread asked how would "you" describe the rotary not how would "Shinka - Dona" describe the rotary.