Shhh, RG, don't tell that to my dyno.

 

3 injectors! the 09 will certainly live up to the oil burner reputation of the rotaries!
________
Web shows

 

I wouldn't be too sure about this. I mean, having one more injector per rotor means that the lubrication system can place the oil where it's needed, not just throw it in. The dual OMP design also points in this direction.
So it's possible (IMHO) that the total oil injection volume remains more or less constant, while improving general lubrication due to better oil distribution.

 

I suspect that they will be able to reduce the oil consumption through this increase in precision. Now if it were possible to implement ceramic seals into the production car oil metering could be further reduced. Hmmm, one can always dream.

Paul.

 

Oil consumption has steadily decreased since the mid-80's in every new car brought out.

The EPA doesn't like oil burners.

Yet the let industry rain toxic debris over the nation.

 

I think rotaries are the engine of the future... it will continue to improve till 1 day honda and toyota will start to copy it becos its such a great design... they r just waiting for mazda to get it right.. then it will be a world phenomenon

 

I agree with you. With all the stuff on the 16x coming out, and the Hydrogen RE, direct-injection, Ethonol capabilities etc. I think their only starting to scratch the surface of the rotaries capabilities. Of course now it doesn't seem very eco/fuel friendly, but that's because only now is there markets being created for those types of powerplants. Not only that, but isn't the rotary more useful in trying different metals and seals versus piston engines?

 

Instead of injecting more oil to cover up for insufficient oil distribution, they will inject just enough to all the places that need it... I would expect oil usage to be the same.

 

That would be a great deadpan delivery if you were joking. I hope you are.

Inherently poor thermodynamic efficiency due to the large area the charge sweeps through.

Inherent upper limit on compression, due to the charge having to pass through the bowl on the rotor.

You can't change the inlet and exhaust event timing ("cam profiles") without also changing the port shape and size.

You can't change the port size at the chamber without changing the event timing.

Once you've built the engine, all of the above are fixed. No VTEC-like function, no variable cam timing function.

Injecting oil into the chamber, rather than working to keep it out.

Nearly zero tolerance for detonation.

If the rotary was proposed today, nobody would pursue it.

I didn't come here to hate on rotaries, but statements like the one above just leave me shaking my head. The RX-8 is a sweet car, but it would be soooo much better with a 2.3L turbo piston motor. 300 hp at the wheels with basic bolt-ons, tons of torque and 30+ mpg on the highway. I hate that I'll be killing polar bears just to get the chassis I want to drive. When you look at it that way, it's no different than an SUV. Except that what I want to drive is cooler.

 

hell , boys why didnt you just ask you want a 2009 with the cover on?





or with the cover off?












maybe between Paul's diagram and this photo we can figure out what were looking for?

 

You'd need the upper intake off to see what I'm talking about.

I must point out at this time that Zoom was the first person to mention to me changes in oil systems for 09 and that was quite some time ago .

Paul.

 

aren't there rules in autocross that don't allow that kind of front brace? but if it's stock, it'd have to be allowed right?

 

thanks for the credit Paul i figured they must be under the manifold- nothing to see with just the cover off really(as far as oiling is concerned- theres that new Brake distribution block and maybe one or 2 other things)

 

You can't be serious. That's like saying a dog is a great pet, but it would be soooo much better if it was... a cat.

 

yes, if it's stock, it's allowed (it has to be). what you can change depends on the class.

 

Not to mention it would be difficult at best to get the same handling characteristics and center of gravity with a piston motor.

 

Difficult at best? try impossible.

That's almost the entire reason to use a rotary engine. Sure, you have smooth power delivery and other cool things about the rotary, but the rotary is so small and light it makes an unbelievably good handling car. I don't think a lot of you realize how important the CoG is to handling.

 

To each his own but the Rotary speaks to my soul, like good music does .

Paul.

 

actually i agree with that statement

 

Depends on the type of "cat" we are talking about.

 

Try this... I love your dog, but she would be so much cooler if she didn't instantly **** all over the floor when I pet her.

I'll respect the title of this thread now.

 

Obviously you need to learn how to pet a dog properly

 

I think this thread is going to the dogs unless someone can say what type of cat will be used on the 16x engine for emission purposes.

Back to your regularly scheduled program.

Seal.

 

we know what kind of cat will be used on the 16x for emissions purposes. they were telling us that near the end of last year. how quickly everyone forgets

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/9/...467609&ref=rss

 

What are the best guess these days on when the 16x will get to production and how much power will this engine have?