New-gen Mazda rotary nears
04-19-2010, 06:07 PM
#51
Because it is rich-burning by design, has a high BSFC, burns oil by design and has what can be called "relaxed" sealing tolerances, which produce a ton of effective EGR.
You can continue to evolve the fuel delivery strategies (stratified charge, lean-burn, etc.) and choke it with catalyst upon catalyst, but you will be doing nothing to increase its fuel efficiency and power as you do it.
There is a reason that the gasoline-powered piston motor has been the paradigm for the entire road-going market since its inception and it is not just because of the oil monopolies or laziness on the part of the engineers.
You can continue to evolve the fuel delivery strategies (stratified charge, lean-burn, etc.) and choke it with catalyst upon catalyst, but you will be doing nothing to increase its fuel efficiency and power as you do it.
There is a reason that the gasoline-powered piston motor has been the paradigm for the entire road-going market since its inception and it is not just because of the oil monopolies or laziness on the part of the engineers.
04-19-2010, 07:17 PM
#54
Registered
Mazda has always had a "back room" where stuff brewed. But the samurai are almost all gone and the current corporate philosophy at Mazda - the very thing that made them profitable for the first time in a long time and ultimately independent from Ford - is gonna keep them on the straight and narrow.
04-19-2010, 07:49 PM
#55
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's always been behind in those respects. This has been repetitive for the past 50 years.
04-19-2010, 08:10 PM
#56
What other motors are assembled by hand? Nissan's "halo" motors? Dodge Viper ACR-X V-10s?
Sentra motors are made on a robotic line. So are the G35 VQ motors.
Rotaries are built by hand because it isn't worth the ROI to automate the assembly and there is so much "fudge factor" in the build that hand-assembly helps assure a greater number of non-return motors.
Apex seal manufacturing has a 15% yield on materials. The Stealth Bomber does better than this!
04-19-2010, 08:52 PM
#58
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Massapequa, NY
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How disingenuous. Considering the piston engine had a century of R&D from hundreds of different companies, the fact that Mazda's engineers almost single handedly developed the engine to the point it is today over a span of 40 years is quite impressive. In proportion to the amount of time that's gone into the piston, who knows where the rotary would be with an equal amount of development. I know you think the Rotary is dead, but I applaud Mazda for not giving up on the development. As long as they continue to sell 2s, 3s, 6s, CX-7s, and CX-9s, they have a set percentage of profits that will continue in improving it. The fact is the entire road going community doesn't have the ***** to do what Mazda has been doing for 40 years. That's to openly offer a unique Rotary engine as the heart of open Experiment, and share it with motor enthusiasts. While the rotary is far from perfect, each iteration improve leaps and bounds over the previous model. That deserves some recognition.
04-19-2010, 09:10 PM
#59
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, by manufacturing standards it is behind as well.
What other motors are assembled by hand? Nissan's "halo" motors? Dodge Viper ACR-X V-10s?
Sentra motors are made on a robotic line. So are the G35 VQ motors.
Rotaries are built by hand because it isn't worth the ROI to automate the assembly and there is so much "fudge factor" in the build that hand-assembly helps assure a greater number of non-return motors.
Apex seal manufacturing has a 15% yield on materials. The Stealth Bomber does better than this!
What other motors are assembled by hand? Nissan's "halo" motors? Dodge Viper ACR-X V-10s?
Sentra motors are made on a robotic line. So are the G35 VQ motors.
Rotaries are built by hand because it isn't worth the ROI to automate the assembly and there is so much "fudge factor" in the build that hand-assembly helps assure a greater number of non-return motors.
Apex seal manufacturing has a 15% yield on materials. The Stealth Bomber does better than this!
Tier 1 suppliers scatter at the very notion of consistently replicating Mazda's tolerances and standards on the hard engine internals.
The technologies and resources between aerospace and automotive as well as standards are so divergent it's not even worth mentioning.
04-19-2010, 09:38 PM
#60
I think you guys are missing the point.
I'm not saying that the rotary isn't a significant achievement or that it didn't have its place in automotive history from both the perspective of engineering brilliance and sheer motoring satisfaction.
What you need to accept is that Mazda is an OEM and beholden to the same realities that the other OEMs are saddled with and the days of a large OEM building purely an enthusiasts car without regard to the shareholders is over.
If you want an enthusiasts car, buy a Zonda or a CCGT.
The RX-8 was spectacular not because of its engineering. It was spectacular because of the fast-one that the RX team pulled over on Ford and Mazda corporate. It is spectacular because of the limbo-stick move that they pulled with CAFE and EPA with regards to the emissions changes that were mandated for 2003. It is spectacular because of how deftly Mazda leveraged parts of the chassis and drivetrain on more profitable models.
I love my RX-8. It is a wonderful little misfit hunk of tin. It defied the establishment in many ways while conforming to it in others.
But the world mass-produced automotive market is defined by the taste of American car-buyers and the RX-8 never fit that model and it fits it even less today with the strict demands of emissions requirements, mileage requirements and luxury requirements.
We enthusiasts can rage against the tide and complain about how stupid the market is and how dumb American car buyers are and how a car should be built.
But OEMs are making a product with no more soul than a toaster. That is their mandate and it is profitable.
In the words of Inigo Montoya: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Of course the piston motor has benefited from vastly more R&D than the rotary.
But the laws of physics are what they are.
The planetary rotary motor is what it is and there is only so much lipstick you can put on a pig.
I'm not saying that the rotary isn't a significant achievement or that it didn't have its place in automotive history from both the perspective of engineering brilliance and sheer motoring satisfaction.
What you need to accept is that Mazda is an OEM and beholden to the same realities that the other OEMs are saddled with and the days of a large OEM building purely an enthusiasts car without regard to the shareholders is over.
If you want an enthusiasts car, buy a Zonda or a CCGT.
The RX-8 was spectacular not because of its engineering. It was spectacular because of the fast-one that the RX team pulled over on Ford and Mazda corporate. It is spectacular because of the limbo-stick move that they pulled with CAFE and EPA with regards to the emissions changes that were mandated for 2003. It is spectacular because of how deftly Mazda leveraged parts of the chassis and drivetrain on more profitable models.
I love my RX-8. It is a wonderful little misfit hunk of tin. It defied the establishment in many ways while conforming to it in others.
But the world mass-produced automotive market is defined by the taste of American car-buyers and the RX-8 never fit that model and it fits it even less today with the strict demands of emissions requirements, mileage requirements and luxury requirements.
We enthusiasts can rage against the tide and complain about how stupid the market is and how dumb American car buyers are and how a car should be built.
But OEMs are making a product with no more soul than a toaster. That is their mandate and it is profitable.
In the words of Inigo Montoya: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Of course the piston motor has benefited from vastly more R&D than the rotary.
But the laws of physics are what they are.
The planetary rotary motor is what it is and there is only so much lipstick you can put on a pig.
04-19-2010, 10:48 PM
#63
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
This is all a little bit Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious really...
The RX-8 IS spectacular...even today.
Mazda knew 30 years ago that the Rotary will only be limited to a "Sports" applications.
While I applaud them for trying Hydrogen, I am not so sure this is the correct path ATM.
It is also amazing that a once #3 Japanese Car Maker and today a #2 Japan nett exporter has
continued to make cars with more soul than a toaster or kettle.
Depending on your Local, you can spend 2, 3 and even 4 times the price of an RX-8- MX-5-MPS on a brand that gives you IT in all the right places, year after year.
In some ways I think Mazda's commitment to the Wankel has cost them dramatically in sales and stature, imagine if they had V8's, V10's, larger "Family" cars, where would Mazda be today?
Sadly I think Mazda and "other" Japanese marques are letting the Koreans WALK ALL OVER THEM.
The Japs are taking way too long to respond in the market and when they do it is almost too old.
Mazda needs to pull their finger out and GO FOR IT!
The RX-8 IS spectacular...even today.
Mazda knew 30 years ago that the Rotary will only be limited to a "Sports" applications.
While I applaud them for trying Hydrogen, I am not so sure this is the correct path ATM.
It is also amazing that a once #3 Japanese Car Maker and today a #2 Japan nett exporter has
continued to make cars with more soul than a toaster or kettle.
Depending on your Local, you can spend 2, 3 and even 4 times the price of an RX-8- MX-5-MPS on a brand that gives you IT in all the right places, year after year.
In some ways I think Mazda's commitment to the Wankel has cost them dramatically in sales and stature, imagine if they had V8's, V10's, larger "Family" cars, where would Mazda be today?
Sadly I think Mazda and "other" Japanese marques are letting the Koreans WALK ALL OVER THEM.
The Japs are taking way too long to respond in the market and when they do it is almost too old.
Mazda needs to pull their finger out and GO FOR IT!
How could you not love her 
04-19-2010, 11:12 PM
#67
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Massapequa, NY
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04-19-2010, 11:41 PM
#68
If when he used the word disengenuous, he meant inaccurate, then he doesn't know what it means. But if he meant coming back with more convenient adjustments no matter what others say, then I think he knows what it means!
04-20-2010, 08:43 AM
#69
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Massapequa, NY
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I mean that for someone so knowledgeable about rotaries, their abilities and weaknesses, he couldn't have meant what he said sincerely. At least not 100%, taking into consideration how far the engine came in a relatively short period of time. I'd like to this I'm smarter than a 5th grader...ain't I
04-20-2010, 08:45 AM
#70
The rotary engine sports car when done properly has tremendous sales potential; Mazda has proven it on more than one occasion. It is imperative that it be able to meet the ever changing world regulations as does any other car type. There were a few things that are inexcusable (To my thinking) that were not addressed with Renesis back in 03 of which fuel flooding is one of the worst. Catalyst life and it's relation to fuel milage and carbon buildup is another. In the year 2010 and beyond there is no room for an engine that struggles to get 20 mpg hwy and no room for engines that can't average 150k miles in lifespan.
It is my opinion that Mazda intends to provide a reasonably priced rotary sportscar meeting the necessary standards of today. It is also my opinion that they are attempting to do it 'right'.
I remain highly optomistic and until someone like Robert Davis states otherwise publicly I shall so remain.
Paul.
It is my opinion that Mazda intends to provide a reasonably priced rotary sportscar meeting the necessary standards of today. It is also my opinion that they are attempting to do it 'right'.
I remain highly optomistic and until someone like Robert Davis states otherwise publicly I shall so remain.
Paul.
04-20-2010, 09:23 AM
#71
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There were a few things that are inexcusable (To my thinking) that were not addressed with Renesis back in 03 of which fuel flooding is one of the worst. Catalyst life and it's relation to fuel milage and carbon buildup is another. In the year 2010 and beyond there is no room for an engine that struggles to get 20 mpg hwy and no room for engines that can't average 150k miles in lifespan.
Cat life is simply a matter of purchasing from the correct manufacturer, but accepting the higher cost.
Highway mpg can be addressed by a legitimate 6th gear and dropping a few hundred pounds as they hinted at their 10% weight reduction strategy a while back. City mileage...not so sure about resolving that issue...maybe a stop/start engine strategy?
Carbon...you and I have spoke at length from time to time on that issue in regards to manufacturing (this is Nicoletti from Chicago) and I'm not really sure how they go about it...going to have to be collaborative effort between perhaps the reshaping of the housing (our current "X" designation), more precise fuel injection through DI, improved spark conditions, *maybe* less oil injected but injected more precisely where it's needed...and a partridge in a pear tree...
My old TII original engine didn't kick the bucket until 150 K...hopefully they've learned from their mistakes on the Renesis and are moving foward.
But I agree 100%, Mazda's engineers have managed to keep it going for decades in the face of those constant obstacles, and low funding, no reason to believe they can't do it again, just more a matter of when...
Last edited by Red Devil; 04-20-2010 at 11:14 AM.
04-20-2010, 11:12 AM
#73
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An all aluminum engine would be very costly. Now couple that with the degree of difficulty of manufacturing these parts and low volumes...not saying Mazda won't make this move, for all I know they will, but there are real prohibitive costs.
04-20-2010, 11:22 AM
#74
50lbs total?
IMHO there are things that could be done but i am sure there are other reasons unk to me as to why they couldnt be.
1- lower the rpm limit to 8K--period
2- better coolant/oil temp stability and faster oil warm up
3- sohn adaptor and no premixing---just market it as a dry sump plus crankcase oil system!
4- better ignition coils
5- 3 sparkplugs per rotor
6- no DI--enough holes in the housing as it is
7- change rotor material --make them much lighter --somehow.
8- electric water pump for cooling when the engine really needs it. and gradual cooling on shut down
9- ceramic seals with double springs for all motors after modification of the leading spark plug area and exhaust port for addition cooling.
10- ceramic corner seals and side seals --since they now are passing over a port.
enough for now.
if a company is serious they could do all these things.
but what do i know?
IMHO there are things that could be done but i am sure there are other reasons unk to me as to why they couldnt be.
1- lower the rpm limit to 8K--period
2- better coolant/oil temp stability and faster oil warm up
3- sohn adaptor and no premixing---just market it as a dry sump plus crankcase oil system!
4- better ignition coils
5- 3 sparkplugs per rotor
6- no DI--enough holes in the housing as it is
7- change rotor material --make them much lighter --somehow.
8- electric water pump for cooling when the engine really needs it. and gradual cooling on shut down
9- ceramic seals with double springs for all motors after modification of the leading spark plug area and exhaust port for addition cooling.
10- ceramic corner seals and side seals --since they now are passing over a port.
enough for now.
if a company is serious they could do all these things.
but what do i know?
04-20-2010, 11:31 AM
#75
That could be very cost prohibitive. As example, right now in Chicago 1 gross ton of "heavy melting" that is basically iron mix goes for $360. One gross ton of ingot aluminum off the top of my head in Chicago sells for $2,370. Last year as part of my job I sold more than $1 million in ferrous scrap - most of which went straight from Chicago to Asia. So Chicago prices are fairly reflective of the US and global market.
An all aluminum engine would be very costly. Now couple that with the degree of difficulty of manufacturing these parts and low volumes...not saying Mazda won't make this move, for all I know they will, but there are real prohibitive costs.
An all aluminum engine would be very costly. Now couple that with the degree of difficulty of manufacturing these parts and low volumes...not saying Mazda won't make this move, for all I know they will, but there are real prohibitive costs.