this sucks - Mazda says 1 qt of oil consumed/ 600 miles
10-27-2004, 04:46 PM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's jumping the gun to state the rensesis is crap because it uses potentially that much oil. You bought the car, you should have done your homework and accepted what its maintenance requirements were. You sound like the people that buy BMW's, and think because they just bought a 80K car that it doesn't need oil changes or any general maintenance.
And this car is better on burning oil than my previous two rotarys, but not by much. Either way, like near everyone else, I could care less.
And this car is better on burning oil than my previous two rotarys, but not by much. Either way, like near everyone else, I could care less.
10-27-2004, 05:11 PM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The more accepted the rotary becomes the more vehicles we may see useing it. Wouldn't it be great if there were more companies doing development on it besides just Mazda? If the Renesis had just a small percentage of the development that the piston engines have had over the last years who knows what performance, gas mileage,oil consumption et.al. would be second nature with the rotary. Rotary Miata, Rx7, Rotary Boats, Rotary Airplanes etc. etc.. the possibilities are endless. It just has to take all the good qualities of a piston and refine those into a Rotary.
10-27-2004, 05:32 PM
#28
Momentum Keeps Me Going
Originally Posted by RotaryGoober
Maybe someday Mazda will get enlightened and add a external oil source so crankcase oil won't be used. .....When the Rotary becomes as maintenence free as a piston engine is when the rotary will become more universally acceptable.
One wonders why they don't do that, but then again, it's an additional cost, not really needed. Convenience wise, it sounds cool, but maybe they need to have hot oil or ???.The 2nd statement is just nonsense. In the 1st place the rotary engine will likely never become 'universally' anything. It is unique and justly so, it possesses unique benefits and responsibilities that go with them. It doesn't have to be 'like' pistons engines, it isn't a piston engine (example: jet engines are not like psiton engines, yet they are 'accepted' on their own merits). So that is an arguement non-starter IMHO.
Last edited by Spin9k; 10-27-2004 at 05:35 PM.
10-27-2004, 06:14 PM
#29
car for 2 and the dog
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: CA
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After reading some of the responses I see you do not get it.
It’s not that the Renesis consumes oil (we all knew that)
not that I did not do my homework (I did and owned a RX-7) ,
it’s the same old same old. YOU ALL BEEN LIED TOO BY
MAZDA, and are too stupid to know it. Mazda says a 50 % improvement
when in reality there is a 30-50% increase in consumption.
Why? You ask!
Most likely because they were trying to COVER THE 250 hp
LIE. You see, Mazda NOW says 10w-30 oil is just fine in and Renesis, the 5w-30 is for performance only!!! 10-30 is probably perfectly good for the rotary!!!!!!
So were they trying to use the lightest oil available UP TO get the 238 HP
So the reduced HP would not look so bad.? Maybe
What would the HP be using 10-30 in Phoenix summer heat (197)
It’s not that the Renesis consumes oil (we all knew that)
not that I did not do my homework (I did and owned a RX-7) ,
it’s the same old same old. YOU ALL BEEN LIED TOO BY
MAZDA, and are too stupid to know it. Mazda says a 50 % improvement
when in reality there is a 30-50% increase in consumption.
Why? You ask!
Most likely because they were trying to COVER THE 250 hp
LIE. You see, Mazda NOW says 10w-30 oil is just fine in and Renesis, the 5w-30 is for performance only!!! 10-30 is probably perfectly good for the rotary!!!!!!
So were they trying to use the lightest oil available UP TO get the 238 HP
So the reduced HP would not look so bad.? Maybe
What would the HP be using 10-30 in Phoenix summer heat (197)
10-27-2004, 06:19 PM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phoenix summer heat (197)
anyway - who cares? you know the facts since you did the research, so why do you care what mazda said or didnt say or misrepresented...
car companies misrepresent the truth all the time
10-27-2004, 06:30 PM
#31
Mmmmm... Rotary Donut
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lake in the Hills, IL (NW Chicago Burbs)
Posts: 2,376
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally Posted by sandia8
After reading some of the responses I see you do not get it.
It’s not that the Renesis consumes oil (we all knew that)
not that I did not do my homework (I did and owned a RX-7) ,
it’s the same old same old. YOU ALL BEEN LIED TOO BY
MAZDA, and are too stupid to know it. Mazda says a 50 % improvement
when in reality there is a 30-50% increase in consumption.
Why? You ask!
Most likely because they were trying to COVER THE 250 hp
LIE. You see, Mazda NOW says 10w-30 oil is just fine in and Renesis, the 5w-30 is for performance only!!! 10-30 is probably perfectly good for the rotary!!!!!!
So were they trying to use the lightest oil available UP TO get the 238 HP
So the reduced HP would not look so bad.? Maybe
What would the HP be using 10-30 in Phoenix summer heat (197)
It’s not that the Renesis consumes oil (we all knew that)
not that I did not do my homework (I did and owned a RX-7) ,
it’s the same old same old. YOU ALL BEEN LIED TOO BY
MAZDA, and are too stupid to know it. Mazda says a 50 % improvement
when in reality there is a 30-50% increase in consumption.
Why? You ask!
Most likely because they were trying to COVER THE 250 hp
LIE. You see, Mazda NOW says 10w-30 oil is just fine in and Renesis, the 5w-30 is for performance only!!! 10-30 is probably perfectly good for the rotary!!!!!!
So were they trying to use the lightest oil available UP TO get the 238 HP
So the reduced HP would not look so bad.? Maybe
What would the HP be using 10-30 in Phoenix summer heat (197)
Dude, if all you have to do is sit around and worry about this, you need to sell your RX8 and get a life. Immediately.
10-27-2004, 06:55 PM
#32
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The 2nd statement is just nonsense. In the 1st place the rotary engine will likely never become 'universally' anything. It is unique and justly so, it possesses unique benefits and responsibilities that go with them. It doesn't have to be 'like' pistons engines, it isn't a piston engine (example: jet engines are not like psiton engines, yet they are 'accepted' on their own merits). So that is an arguement non-starter IMHO." Now, Now.. I'm just saying that if Mazda wasn't the only one carrying the torch we may have seen developments in the rotary that would make it more feasable for use in a wider array of applications. The engine never had the development that pistons engines have had and obviously it's still in its infancy compared to piston motors. With the same development, who knows, it may have become the standard and.. oh well, no need to beat that point to death. Fact is, the little old grandmother may love the looks of the 8 but having to add oil, watch out for flooding and less than attractive gas mileage may prevent her from owning one. Unless you have something against little old granma's. Personally seeing an old granny driving an 8 would be just great by me. Put's it in perspective.
10-27-2004, 07:12 PM
#33
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I vaguely remember that other sports cars like m5 and m3's have relatively high oil consumption... does anyone know how much?
1qt/6000mi doesn't really sound like a rotary. 1qt/3000 would be nice... but why bother with topping off when its about the same interval as an oil change? that rate seems like basically piston consumption.
1qt/6000mi doesn't really sound like a rotary. 1qt/3000 would be nice... but why bother with topping off when its about the same interval as an oil change? that rate seems like basically piston consumption.
10-27-2004, 08:05 PM
#35
Senior Geek
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 1,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sandia8
the point 'folks' is that MAZDA says the consumption is better (1/2) of the old rotary.
well the old rotary got 3000 miles before using 1 quart
so 'someone' is mis-representing BIG TIME the car when they say the consumber is better than the standard rotary.
I had no problem with 1 quart per 3000 miles, but 1 quart per 600 really sucks.
well the old rotary got 3000 miles before using 1 quart
so 'someone' is mis-representing BIG TIME the car when they say the consumber is better than the standard rotary.
I had no problem with 1 quart per 3000 miles, but 1 quart per 600 really sucks.
I've had to add 1 qt in over 3,500 miles of driving. And a statement by a company -MNAO- directed to a consumer is nothing else than the deed of a good ol' lawyer.
10-27-2004, 08:18 PM
#36
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: charleston, s.c.
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
whatever, i just hit 3,000 miles and I've only had to top up with one quart of oil over that period.
Those 3,000 miles included two 900 mi road trips from SC to VA and back and a lot of city driving here in Charleston. HWY mpg on those trips averaged 22-23, and CITY mpg (checked today) was 17.7.
nothing shocking here. i knew when i bought it that it was going to burn a little oil, just the nature of the rotary beast. And my mpg results pretty much mirror what was on the window. I'm more than satisfied.
Those 3,000 miles included two 900 mi road trips from SC to VA and back and a lot of city driving here in Charleston. HWY mpg on those trips averaged 22-23, and CITY mpg (checked today) was 17.7.
nothing shocking here. i knew when i bought it that it was going to burn a little oil, just the nature of the rotary beast. And my mpg results pretty much mirror what was on the window. I'm more than satisfied.
10-27-2004, 10:34 PM
#37
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have owned now 8 rotary cars in 25 years.
The RX-8 by far uses LESS oil than all the others.
In the 8 I may not ever have to add oil before I change it at 3000 miles unless I do a track day or something.
The RX-8 by far uses LESS oil than all the others.
In the 8 I may not ever have to add oil before I change it at 3000 miles unless I do a track day or something.
10-27-2004, 10:44 PM
#38
Registered
Originally Posted by sandia8
YOU ALL BEEN LIED TOO BY
MAZDA, and are too stupid to know it. Mazda says a 50 % improvement
when in reality there is a 30-50% increase in consumption.
Why? You ask!
Most likely because they were trying to COVER THE 250 hp
LIE. You see, Mazda NOW says 10w-30 oil is just fine in and Renesis, the 5w-30 is for performance only!!! 10-30 is probably perfectly good for the rotary!!!!!!
So were they trying to use the lightest oil available UP TO get the 238 HP
So the reduced HP would not look so bad.? Maybe
What would the HP be using 10-30 in Phoenix summer heat (197)
MAZDA, and are too stupid to know it. Mazda says a 50 % improvement
when in reality there is a 30-50% increase in consumption.
Why? You ask!
Most likely because they were trying to COVER THE 250 hp
LIE. You see, Mazda NOW says 10w-30 oil is just fine in and Renesis, the 5w-30 is for performance only!!! 10-30 is probably perfectly good for the rotary!!!!!!
So were they trying to use the lightest oil available UP TO get the 238 HP
So the reduced HP would not look so bad.? Maybe
What would the HP be using 10-30 in Phoenix summer heat (197)
In reality? You're still ignoring all the posts from people who state from experience that the Renesis oil consumption is nowhere as high as 1 qt in 600 miles, more like 1 qt in 2500 - 3000 miles? THAT is reality.
Re oil weight - you really have not got a freaking clue. The real reason, in FACT, why Mazda North America Operations specifies 5W20 while Mazda groups outside North America specify 5W30 is due to Corporate Average Fuel Economy reasons. Absolutely nothing to do with power. The lighter oil makes a miniscule reduction in fuel consumption due to less internal friction. Ford dictates the 5W20 for this reason, and this reason alone.
Now go read the rules, lighten up, lose the stupid conspiracy theories, and behave (or else).
Regards,
Gordon
10-27-2004, 11:21 PM
#39
Mr. Skinny
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Clearwater FL
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are to PICKY!!!! What you need is a good old Honda Civic. One with a big wing and a hood painted black to give it the carbon fiber look. Yeah that sounds like the dream car for you.
10-28-2004, 12:24 AM
#40
ZOOM ZOOM
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wally World
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by abbid
i live in phoenix. in the summer, with hard driving, i had to put half a quart in every 1500 miles. Sometimes, ididnt have to add any even after 2500 miles. Ive used 5w30 and 5w20.
10-28-2004, 10:19 AM
#44
car for 2 and the dog
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: CA
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the 197 refers to HP not tempratures in phoenix.
Think of it this way
you start with 250 hp,
that gets reduced to 238 for some reason
then you use regular 87 octance vs high tech,
the grade of gas mazda quotes 'is only for performance and not necessary'
then you skip the special Japan minerial oil and use what
mazda says is just fine 10w-30 or what the car really requires 10-30
because the engine is set to run so bloody hot it needs oil coolers
(probably to stos the hard starting and flooding issue since the manualchoke
has gone bye bye and noone would buy a car that fails to start as much as the RX-7 did)
and then drive the car at some place above sea level.
What HP do you think you would get? won't be 238.
as members have said, 'hp to the rear axles' would be a tad lower (like maybe 197)
Mazda 'gordon' says 10w-30 is issued by 'most delearships!
Mazda 'gordon' says 10w-30 is fine on the RX8,
5w-30 was only for performance purposes and not required!
and 87 octane is just fine according to mazda.
And Mazda quoted the 600 miles per quart - NOT ME - JUST FORWARDING WHAT
YOU DO NOT WANT TO HEAR IT APPEARS
Perhalps Mazda went to a lot of trouble to use high octane,
low vescousity oil and test the car at sea level so they could even get
close to the 238 hp so those of you who were so into HP would not
get a pair of roller skates
Think of it this way
you start with 250 hp,
that gets reduced to 238 for some reason
then you use regular 87 octance vs high tech,
the grade of gas mazda quotes 'is only for performance and not necessary'
then you skip the special Japan minerial oil and use what
mazda says is just fine 10w-30 or what the car really requires 10-30
because the engine is set to run so bloody hot it needs oil coolers
(probably to stos the hard starting and flooding issue since the manualchoke
has gone bye bye and noone would buy a car that fails to start as much as the RX-7 did)
and then drive the car at some place above sea level.
What HP do you think you would get? won't be 238.
as members have said, 'hp to the rear axles' would be a tad lower (like maybe 197)
Mazda 'gordon' says 10w-30 is issued by 'most delearships!
Mazda 'gordon' says 10w-30 is fine on the RX8,
5w-30 was only for performance purposes and not required!
and 87 octane is just fine according to mazda.
And Mazda quoted the 600 miles per quart - NOT ME - JUST FORWARDING WHAT
YOU DO NOT WANT TO HEAR IT APPEARS
Perhalps Mazda went to a lot of trouble to use high octane,
low vescousity oil and test the car at sea level so they could even get
close to the 238 hp so those of you who were so into HP would not
get a pair of roller skates
10-28-2004, 11:03 AM
#45
Not so Super right now
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Beyond that there swamp.
Posts: 1,493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sandia, your not understanding. Mazda quotes 600 miles to a quart as MAX consumption. There's a lot of epople posting here they dont use that much as it is, yet you need to make up a conspiracy theory to justify it?
10-28-2004, 11:30 AM
#46
Administrator
and as was stated above the 5w-20 oil is recommended because of corporate avg fuel economy rules. using it returns slightly better fuel economy numbers. and what ever oil is used during testing HAS to be recommended to the consumer. that's all that's it get over it.
10-28-2004, 11:59 AM
#48
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My first comment: I like Sandia's little "Z2" thing.
Second: Not all RX-8s and neither were/are RX-7s all the same.
Third: Take any Mazda (or Kia, or Toyota, or Mercedes-Benz, et al) customer service comments that are responses to inquiries with a grain of salt. Same for service advisors and salespeople.
Fourth: First gen RX-7s feasibly used more than 1 qt per 500 miles in some cases. Most of the four that I owned were in the qt / 1000-3000 mile range. Don't even remember what the 90 2nd gen conv. used. But a friend still drives it albeit with a ported engine now so I could find out what is now at well over 200K miles. Was in TX and drove it a few weeks ago -it had 230K or more miles now.
Fifth: The Renesis oil consumption will vary based on how hard you drive it and your particular engine. The same type of driving will return different results in different cars. Get to know yours. What mine does is irrelevant to another owners.
Sixth: The fact that the Renesis r uses x quarts per y miles for owner z when driven in manner m at temperature t in atmospheric conditions a doesn't mean it's a bad engine or engine design. Change r,z,t or a and x and y will likely change.
Seventh: Whether Sandia 8 has owned an RX-7 or not and if in fact did and experienced some version of the above equation with said RX-7 whether it was a 12A bought new, with 250,000 miles or was a 13B bought new or had 250,000 miles does in no way affect said above formula for a Renesis engine.
And finally, if I can gain 30HP or even 3HP by changing to a different weight or brand of oil or oil that is bought on Friday the 13th in a yellow bottle while wearing a clown outfit with size 16 shoes - please inform me of what oil to use to attain this HP gain just by using different oil - I need to be enlightened... just IMHO as always, and YMMV (or, more likely ... Your Mileage WILL Vary)
and.... P.S. When I took mine to the Dragon (both times)I brought along an extra bottle of oil. I think I used the whole quart over the course of the weekend, adding the last bit before departing the area for the trip home. If a RX-8 (or RX-7) owner plans to do a day or two or three of hard driving bringing oil along will be as necessary as refueling. It's a fact, Jack.
Second: Not all RX-8s and neither were/are RX-7s all the same.
Third: Take any Mazda (or Kia, or Toyota, or Mercedes-Benz, et al) customer service comments that are responses to inquiries with a grain of salt. Same for service advisors and salespeople.
Fourth: First gen RX-7s feasibly used more than 1 qt per 500 miles in some cases. Most of the four that I owned were in the qt / 1000-3000 mile range. Don't even remember what the 90 2nd gen conv. used. But a friend still drives it albeit with a ported engine now so I could find out what is now at well over 200K miles. Was in TX and drove it a few weeks ago -it had 230K or more miles now.
Fifth: The Renesis oil consumption will vary based on how hard you drive it and your particular engine. The same type of driving will return different results in different cars. Get to know yours. What mine does is irrelevant to another owners.
Sixth: The fact that the Renesis r uses x quarts per y miles for owner z when driven in manner m at temperature t in atmospheric conditions a doesn't mean it's a bad engine or engine design. Change r,z,t or a and x and y will likely change.
Seventh: Whether Sandia 8 has owned an RX-7 or not and if in fact did and experienced some version of the above equation with said RX-7 whether it was a 12A bought new, with 250,000 miles or was a 13B bought new or had 250,000 miles does in no way affect said above formula for a Renesis engine.
And finally, if I can gain 30HP or even 3HP by changing to a different weight or brand of oil or oil that is bought on Friday the 13th in a yellow bottle while wearing a clown outfit with size 16 shoes - please inform me of what oil to use to attain this HP gain just by using different oil - I need to be enlightened... just IMHO as always, and YMMV (or, more likely ... Your Mileage WILL Vary)
and.... P.S. When I took mine to the Dragon (both times)I brought along an extra bottle of oil. I think I used the whole quart over the course of the weekend, adding the last bit before departing the area for the trip home. If a RX-8 (or RX-7) owner plans to do a day or two or three of hard driving bringing oil along will be as necessary as refueling. It's a fact, Jack.
10-28-2004, 12:38 PM
#49
car for 2 and the dog
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: CA
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can read what Mazda said, and I know that not each owner will get the 600 miles per quart usage. But some probably do, my 8 is damn close to that.
But any current usage under 3000 miles is poorer than the old rotary engine. FACT!
I plan to use 10w-30 or even 10-30 and try to stop this oil consumption problem
FYI
My old vehicle was a NEW 1981 Rx-7 (12a of course)
No bloody oil cooler needed
Drove it (full out) 130,000+ miles over 13 years
Used 1 qt per 3000 miles period!
Changed the oil every 3000 miles (43 times at least)
SOLD THE CAR – IT WAS STILL WORKING JUST FINE
(the car worked just fine as long as you did not let the manual choke
go in , as it wanted to automatically, until the engine warm)
if the choke was allowed to close, the car ‘would not start until the engine was 100% cold) no matter how long that took – seems mazda has never fixed that problem – totally
But any current usage under 3000 miles is poorer than the old rotary engine. FACT!
I plan to use 10w-30 or even 10-30 and try to stop this oil consumption problem
FYI
My old vehicle was a NEW 1981 Rx-7 (12a of course)
No bloody oil cooler needed
Drove it (full out) 130,000+ miles over 13 years
Used 1 qt per 3000 miles period!
Changed the oil every 3000 miles (43 times at least)
SOLD THE CAR – IT WAS STILL WORKING JUST FINE
(the car worked just fine as long as you did not let the manual choke
go in , as it wanted to automatically, until the engine warm)
if the choke was allowed to close, the car ‘would not start until the engine was 100% cold) no matter how long that took – seems mazda has never fixed that problem – totally
10-28-2004, 12:53 PM
#50
Registered
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
another reason of me wanting to change the oil in my car is the preference in the brand of oil i want. i have no idea what the dealer might use and just wouldn't want to take the chance with something i paid good money.
the hp number of 250 is most likely a crank hp number. this number will then trickle down to 238 because of the linkages and shaft parts the power must go thru before actually reaching the rear wheels. they need to stop saying the crank hp anyway. i have an '01 r1 with 150hp and an '02 r1 with 153hp. both of these are crank hp. (both bikes have between 135-140 rear wheel horsepower)
yamajj
the hp number of 250 is most likely a crank hp number. this number will then trickle down to 238 because of the linkages and shaft parts the power must go thru before actually reaching the rear wheels. they need to stop saying the crank hp anyway. i have an '01 r1 with 150hp and an '02 r1 with 153hp. both of these are crank hp. (both bikes have between 135-140 rear wheel horsepower)
yamajj