Um....all RX-8s have the same power (of course varying from car to car). They're not getting 200+ to the wheels in any country.

 

Someone from the old 2007 rx8 thread that used to be bumped all the time talked about having inside sources, claiming that a rotary with more displacement (16B) would eventually come out, but wrongly said for the 2007 model. I can see it happening later, seems like a realistic rumor.

https://www.rx8club.com/showthread.p...ghlight=inside

 

Sorry, but you didn't do 0-62 in 4.8 seconds. At best you are at 205-rwhp (maybe 210-rwhp if you're lucky). That means, according to physics, your car would have to weight about 2620-lbs, with you and some fuel. Assuming you weight arond 165-lbs or so, that means your RX-8 needs to weight just 2455-lbs plus the weight of fuel. I'm sorry, but you're not going to strip over 500-lbs from this car without loosing everything.

 

ya i calling bs 2 1st gear is just 2 slow unless you had some serious work done including turbo, and going downhill

 

WarmFreedom has one.

Hey WarmFreedom, where's the timeslip or video?, we wanna see your 8 in action

 

1.6L is a very feasible production option.

Now only to get the same or better MPG and they will have a winner.

 

4.8 sec. 0-60 in a NA RX-8 = NO WAY!

1.6L in next rotary = Mazda better to something to get HP up and 0-60 times down or they have killed the rotary.

Mazda screwed up the RX-8 too. There should have been an FI version of the RX-8 or they should have made the engine bigger to begin with to get HP numbers up (looks like they miscalculated).

 

^ ^ Except in Hybrd mode or full Propane use.

 

did the article actually say "16c" or did it say "16b" or did it mention a letter at all?

 

In this fantasy land of what will be, I will say that a 1.6 liter direct injection engine would be great, all aluminum would be the icing on the cake, imo.

 

Everone else will be around 400hp by then. Heck some are at the 500+hp now!

 

I'm pretty sure that there are official reference to Mazda's research on a higher displace rotary...but I wouldn't necessarily assume that this means it's going into a new RX7. I'd imagine most of their engineering department (like all 4 of them) are more focused on getting that hydrogen motor perfected.

 

The sad part is Mazda had the 3 rotor engine out years ago. Yet has done nothing with it.

The 3 rotors are the obvious answer to NA power. Now you just clean up emissions and mpg. You don't have to do anything but get mpg into "near" average. If a guy buys a sports car based on fuel economy than I think you have lost your mind. Sports car = performance first in my opinion. Want good gas mileage? Buy an eco-box. Emissions is a bitch, but Mazda has had how many years with a 3 rotor to figure this out?

If they will stick with 2 rotors, you need to have an FI option. The 2 rotor is going to be underpowered in comparison to its 6 cylinder and 8 cylinder cousins, unless you make a technological breakthrough. However, if you have an FI option than you have the best of both worlds.

Mazda lost its mind by coming out with a purposely raped 4 port engine (which were in the Auto and 5 speed manual) and a 6 port engine (2 versions of NA power???). They could have just had one 6 port NA engine and then a FI version of its 6 port engine.

This time around if they go 2 port, I really hope they use logic and somebody important has this is mind. Have a NA 2 rotor and a FI 2 rotor. If you only want a cool looking sports car then option A. Want performance? than FI option B.

 

As an add to sosonic's post about a three rotor..

I'm sure that with today's technology, a 3-rotor could be plausible even with the emissions and obsession with gas mileage. There has to be something that they could think of/do to at least get it to pass. Example being: that article that popped up here a while ago saying they were working on another rotary that they were able to up the power and fuel economy. It didn't seem like much, but they still did it.

But, if this bigger displacement rotary is coming, then I'm going to welcome it with open arms.

 

it is a bummer with the emission laws that this world has, but i have faith in mazda finding a way around it if they really want to. as for all this babble concerning MPG i dont think it should have any inpact on sales if they work it right, there target market should be enthusiasts not middle aged ladies buying the automatic option and looking at the city/hwy numbers. also a bigger displacement usually means more fuel consumtion, give and take.

 

As Mazda can see the rotary engine makes whatever you put it in a niche car. They should acknowledge this and put the Rotary into a lightweight 2 or 2+2 (Kabura) as a focused sports car for the niche market.

That way they can continue the Rotary heritage with more realistic expectations. The RX8 could morph to the MX8 (new body and revised platform) with the 2.3 turbo 4 in it.

 

so many rumors, so little facts.

Wait and see we shall...

 

It'd be cool if they just scaled down the dimensions of the two chambers and added a third or fourth chamber to get to 1.6L. Wouldn't this allow it to rev faster and thus produce even more horsepower? This probably wouldn't help on the fuel economy side though.

 

I went to Mazda for an oil change and the mecanic was telling me he went to training for Mazda and he was told that the next 8 will have an 1.6L engine but the excentric shaft will be vertically stretch (not sure how to explain it) to give more torque so the engine will be a little bigger. If this is true I think this could be the best for the renesis.

 

That is a cool idea! I could be way off base but a wider diameter E-shaft could work very well. This would let more of the power created by the engine get to the wheels. Kind of like getting a wider grip on a screw driver lets you turn out tight screws easier.

 

Total torque is based on displacement. The greater the offset (stroke in piston terms), the lower the torque peak occurs.

 

I heard a rumor too! Read signature!

 

1.5/2.0 does not mean in liters but rather the version of the renesis.

 

No kidding!!! Every other rx8 owner I see in town is either a woman or old lady! Probably all automatic because every one of them sits on the brake at stop lights too...

 

In an age of emissions and gas mileage concerns, the setup that makes that most sense is to make the engine smaller and then turbo it. Go back down to a 12A size and then turbo it to bring it back up to 250 hp or so. More importantly it would also bring average torque up. At the same time the same total intake and exhaust port area would remain the same and you'd have less heat loss to total internal surface area. You "should" also gain mileage this way but that depends heavily on your right foot. A Renesis based 12A or a 10A based 3 rotor Renesis would be really cool if you absolutely had to go larger. Just don't go with a larger 2 rotor. Bad idea. I'm not a supporter of the larger displacement idea. At the very least, leave the size alone. Remember Pontiac's slogan about the widetrack that said "wider is better"? When it comes to rotor width, this is absolutely not true.