mwc

+1

I'm too lazy to write more at this time. But, I hope Mazda is listening.

Cheers

Spin9k

Hey Mazda - Now that you are raking in all the gravy from this never ending rollout of big bucks ~30-40K$ SUVs and SUVettes - let the rotary engineers siphon off just enough R&D cash to perfect the the next gen RENESIS.

...I'd say a 1.5L NA would do the trick (15+% displacment increase plus a bit of tuning), and keep costs in line, but what do I know? Nothing...

playdoh43

theres a big difference between motortrend saying something along the lines of "we speculate that mazda going to be doing x, y, z"
vs
them saying "Mazda has told us that we are doing x,y,z"

Ajax

I'm sure most of the people here would like to see a new RX-7 in some form or fashion, or at least another rotary sports coupe with some more power. The problem is that we're seeing piston engines becoming so much more technologically advanced, getting more horsepower per liter, higher red lines, better fuel economy because everyone in the industry uses them.. whereas Mazda is all by themselves these days with the Rotary and you just don't have the financial backing to get that kind of technological advancement and research done.

The technology gap is only getting wider and by 2010/2011, the rotary may just be too far behind. Yes, there are some technologies that are applicable to both, IE direct injection, new forms of ignition, ethanol/methanol injection, however the rotary is still behind by quite a bit. In order for a new RX-7 to come along and be successful in today's piston world, it is my opinion that a technological leap will be required.

mac11

iTrader: (1)

Kind of like the type of leap that takes you from 255 on 10psi to 230 n/a from one series of the motor to the next with NO increase in displacement?

Ajax

And don't forget about the emissions reductions too!

Think about this though, what really changed with the renesis:
1. Side exhaust ports
2. More intake port timing (as in, the intake ports are open longer than previous non-ported engines)
3. Higher compression ratio
4. 0 overlap
5. Lighter rotors
6. Higher red line

With the exception of #1 in that list, these are all things engine builders played with on the previous engines. Mazda played with side exhaust ports in the past as well.

So technologically speaking, none of those things are really revolutionary. They're just refinements of currently existing ideologies for rotary engines (just like piston engines have similar refinements).

I'm not trying to say that there isn't technological evolution behind the renesis, because there is. There's just not a huge leap in evolution. What I'm getting at is, like evolution of our species, evolution of the internal combustion engine has taken a long time to get where it is today.
The piston engine has had more researcher face time and more money invested in it and it most likely will continue to lead in the next 4 years. It is more evolved than the rotary, more refined and it benefits from those things. The question is, will the rotary evolve to a competitive point in those 4 years or will it fall further behind?

cornrowdpantha

Perhaps I'm off base here, and it may be because the 8 is my first rotary car, but I see no reason to bring back the 7. Let it rest in peace. I would think that it would make more since to make the next rotary car that includes all of these improvements / upgrades or whatever it is that they're gonna do (if anything), and make it the next gen rx8...

We now have the FE, so the next one would be...: the FF!!!

SLWASFK

SHOCK! Icemark has been providing rotary related insider knowledge for years. Though I may not agree with him on some topics, he is definately someone who is "in the know" when it comes to this topic.to be fair, the Spirit R had closer to 330hp(though debatable, 280 is what most people say. I don't own one or never dynoed one, so I can't say for myself). Just because we didn't get FDs state side for the last 12 years doesn't mean Mazda stopped producing them. They just took them out of a crappy market. Sports cars simply don't sell as well in America as they do in other markets. That's why Ford has high performance vehicles in other countries, but not here. The Focus is a world class rally car in Europe competing with WRXs and Evos. The Ford Falcon is(and has been since the 60s) Fords version of the GTO(or Holden) in Australia. We just don't get the good cars here, because they don't sell. The majority of Americans would rather drive an SUV or sedan than a sports car. Unless it's a Mustang or Corvette, most Americans want something bigger. It's a shame, it puts a huge burdon on those of us who do like performance cars, but it's a sad fact of life.

Oh ya, but the Reni is worlds apart from the traditional style 13Bs. I'm just saying that the last FD made a lot more than 255hp and then I got off topic ranting about the fact that we don't get the good cars here

Tessai

^+1 to Icemark having good insider info.

brillo

My idea of a cool clean sheet design would be a 1.1 liter 2 rotor DI variable geometry turbo. Smaller displacement fixes some of the thermal issues naturally as the combusion chamber shape is smaller, so you would get greater fuel economy right there. DI + turbo could get you to 300BHP with decent economy in a small (really small) light weight pakage.

Down side would be that you won't have much upward tuning ability, you'd be close to the limit right there as far as safety goes already.

m477

Ah ok, I stand corrected then. 350Z coupe was ~3200lbs when it first came out, I hadn't realized that it had gained that much weight over the years.

mac11

iTrader: (1)

The information I have found on that car says it was 280bhp and the upped the boost to 13psi from the factory 10. Makes sense that you get an extra ~25bhp on an extra 3psi.

so either way you want to say it what it comes down to is you are talking about a base 13b-REW that naturally aspriated was around 160bhp and a base naturally aspirated Renesis that is around 230bhp with the exact same displacement.

You don't think Mazda can coax another 60-70bhp out of the car if they were to add some displacement, make it direct injection and up the compression a bit more? you have got to be kidding me. I'm sure if the Mazda engineers are reading this thread right now they are rolling in their chairs laughing at you all right now. Doesn't speedsource run their Renesis motors around 250-260bhp on aftermarket engine management?

i would have like to have seen what people on this board would have said about the possibilities of what a 13b could do back in the time of the 12a.

m477

See sig

SLWASFK

While the S8 FDs might have had 13PSI from the factory, they also had more efficient turbos. Those turbos provide more power at lower PSI, or something like that. There's a whole big argument that I don't really care about. But I can tell you that 13PSI on stock S6 turbos, with a cat-back and no precat(which JDM FDs had) can produce upwards of 300whp. Of course, you need a different ECM then, but that's another story.
?? I've never seen a non-turbo 13B-REW dynoed, but I won't dispute any motor that is built for a turbo, with the turbos removed will produce less power than an equal displacement motor that is built to be non turbo. That's common knowledge..Or at least I thought it was.
Where When did I say anything about the MSP not being a fully capable motor? In fact, when did I even say anything about Mazda not using the MSP design in the future? All I said was that the REW was in production up until 2 years before the MSP was released to the public and it made more than 255hp. I also said the MSP was worlds apart from past rotaries. What do you want me to do? swap an MSP into my FD? Honestly, what are you getting at here?
??? well considering there was only 2 years difference between the time the 12A entered production and the time the 13B entered production, I'm not sure the 12A had that strong of a following until 1978 when Mazda released the RX-7. Even still, by 84 you could get an RX-7 with a 13B in it, which had an extra 37hp at the time. But I really don't know what you're getting at?

rotary crazy

thats a great idea, the small size of a 1.1l rotary as long as it is out of boost will give better fuel economy, but it may be a dog off the line

Im sure you remember Brillo that the 12a turbo had 145 +/- hp and the 13b NA had 147+/- , and if given a choise I would rather go NA

I would love a 1.5l 3 rotor NA engine, just imagine the sound of it with a free exhaust

rotary crazy

The 1999-2002 FD, in my expirience dyno's at 270+ whp, so it is my belive that the car comes with 300+ hp

SLWASFK

To be fair, the fatory turbo 12A(which all 12As are 1.1L, incase anyone reading doesn't know that already) came in the FB, whereas the 145hp N/A 13B came in the S4 FC. You're talking about a 200-300lb weight difference there. The 13B in the GSL-SE(FB trim level with 13B availible in 84-85 in America) came with something like 138hp IIRC. So in short, the 145hp 13B in its native car would be considerably slower than the 147hp turbo 12A in its native car.
That would just be plain old :mspank: mmmmmmmmmm

edit: What do you mean you guys don't have monkey spanks on the RX8 Club...ahhhh....
good to have clarification from someone who actually has access to the cars thank you.

Red Devil

I think you're getting too caught up in the chassis', when we're discussing the merits of the engines. Not the differences between the 1st and 2nd gen. Or what the FD did or didn't do at different pr levels and in different configurations.

It's all just a matter of opinion as to how we'd like to see Mazda reach this mythical 300bhp mark. I think this was Mac's point with the increased displacement and di argument...those in conjunction could get us pretty close.

Personally, I'd rather see natural aspiration in a base model like the 2nd gen and for more cost a forced induction variant. But if I had to choose one, I'll take NA power.

m477

Yeah, I remember a quote from the RX-7 book from the guy who was in charge of engineering for the '99 updates saying that with the new turbos, plumbing, and ECU it would have been very easy for them to produce much more than the advertised 280hp. In other words, basically confirming this without breaking the rules which prevented him from making that claim outright.

Also, there were a few Japanese mags that ran high 12's with the 99-spec, which also correlates this. It was posted over in rx7 forum a while back.

SLWASFK

sorry to further derail the thread...but I always found it hysterical that the S8 FDs got these great new turbos, upgraded y-pipe, better lubrication for apex seals, better fuel systems, made 320-330bhp, but they kept the same crappy intercooler that was practically inadequate for the S6 RX-7.

mac11

iTrader: (1)

doesn't look like you need 300bhp to run 12's.

ASH8

Actually the Mazda Service Managers meeting is conducted by Mazda Australia who are owned and operated my MMC Japan (unlike MNAO), so I believe they have more cred than any car magazine.

SayNoToPistons

iTrader: (8)

So what if it has two? Doesn't mean it's better than one in every way...


Yeah Mazda listening to their fans. What do "fans" usually want? How many rotary fans are there? How many will actually end up buying a new 30k+ car? Yeah... Doesn't work out very well. Not trying to beat on you or anything, but your posts don't work out too well.

Floyd

Wouldn't a 3 rotor based off of the 12A run ~1.5 to 1.6L? 1.1L / 2 = .55

.55 x 3 = 1.65L

m477

I'm pretty sure that's wheel hp. Otherwise, it would be ridiculously optimistic.