Return of the ROTARY
10-09-2011, 05:44 PM
#26
3-wheeler
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 2,734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They truly messed it up on the omp injection in s1, s2 fixed everything but if they use the system in fc in the s1 that would probably be better. for those who dunno, they use 1 center injector plus another one at the intake manifold to mix it with gasoline. So yes that means the gas has some oil with it already and most na fc can go over 200k while the turbo fc have no problem reaching 150k mikes. Mazda just underestimate things badly and it totally messed the rotary reputation up.
Reduction in oil injection for the S1 was no doubt influenced by this. Otherwise Mazda would have opted for more oil injection in a CYA fashion for warranty considerations.
It's not that they "messed it up" but that the injection amounts for the driving style of the vehicle didn't pan out. Any kind of reliability tests like the 24 hour endurance test wouldn't have yielded these problems since MOP output would have been 100% in most of the operational ranges.
The other side of this was the automatic engines that were babied. We've seen example of carbon caked engines that were never ran hard because of a combo of lower operational RPM's with the automatic transmission and owners refusing to beat on their cars.
So let's give the Mazda engineers some credit. The problem was more on the human side of things than the engineering. That said, it wasn't until Mazda started cranking up the MOP injection in the 2006+ PCM revisions did the engine failure amounts plummet.
The S2 center MOP injector seems to have done the trick but the overall S2 mileage is still rather low. I don't know how many S2 owners have 40,000+ miles on their RX8's but I would gather that the number is too low to make any calls.
All of this is why I've given some credit to rumors of Mazda experimenting with surfaces that would require zero lubrication of the combustion chamber to operate. This combined with the higher compression technology that SKYACTIV provides and the I-stop technology might provide some promise.
Although it's pure speculation, I imagine Mazda will take its time with further rotary engine development instead of shoving something out the door. While the MSP was a good amount of new technology, it was still largely based off of an existing blueprint. Mazda learned that it's more expensive to go back and fix a production problem than it is to invest the R&D money up front to weed out issues.
10-09-2011, 06:26 PM
#27
I know 5 people off the top of my head that would put a deposit down tonight on a rotary powered mx5 chassis car
With a power to weight ratio the car would have--instant hit in America.
Gas mileage would be better--probably in the neighborhood of 27-28 mpg on the road and a 0-60 time right at 5secs? Remember too the mx5 chassis etc has lower drivetrain lost also
The s2 engine looks like it has been doing ok? Mazda changed a LOT of stuff on it--not just the omp/system. They were also starting to get the cooling system right for instance.
The renasis engine is tougher than some people may think. I know a lot of those engine replacements where done and they really didnt need to be done. The car was running ok--just down on power a little. If the truth be known.
In the Ga club--these cars have been beat the **** out of--and they keep coming back for more. We have over 100K accumulative TRACK miles on the members cars and not a single one has ever blown a seal. NOT A SINGLE ONE. Mine doesnt count because i threw a supercharger on it. A couple have had coolant seals go but that was from running it too hot and the owners keep going.
The Miata with an S2 engine would be a GREAT package. It would become a legend and the Zoom-Zoom would be back. Right now Mazda is pretty lame.
OD
With a power to weight ratio the car would have--instant hit in America.
Gas mileage would be better--probably in the neighborhood of 27-28 mpg on the road and a 0-60 time right at 5secs? Remember too the mx5 chassis etc has lower drivetrain lost also
The s2 engine looks like it has been doing ok? Mazda changed a LOT of stuff on it--not just the omp/system. They were also starting to get the cooling system right for instance.
The renasis engine is tougher than some people may think. I know a lot of those engine replacements where done and they really didnt need to be done. The car was running ok--just down on power a little. If the truth be known.
In the Ga club--these cars have been beat the **** out of--and they keep coming back for more. We have over 100K accumulative TRACK miles on the members cars and not a single one has ever blown a seal. NOT A SINGLE ONE. Mine doesnt count because i threw a supercharger on it. A couple have had coolant seals go but that was from running it too hot and the owners keep going.
The Miata with an S2 engine would be a GREAT package. It would become a legend and the Zoom-Zoom would be back. Right now Mazda is pretty lame.
OD
10-09-2011, 06:38 PM
#28
10-09-2011, 08:16 PM
#30
Registered
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you missed the part that with a different skin, "permanent hardtop" (rotary version not a convertible), and different badging, there is no dilution of the "Miata" brand or name. It would make it a different car.
Basically it sounds like you're talking about the next rx car.
Basically it sounds like you're talking about the next rx car.
Disagree?
Then do you call the Mazda3, Mazda5, and CX-7 the same car? They share the same chassis and engine, just have different skins and body types.
How about the Mazda6 and the Ford Fusion? Same chassis, different engines, different skins, different badges. Same car? Hardly.
We would know it's the NC chassis, but that doesn't make it a Miata.
This part makes no sense to me. I can't follow what you are saying
ND weight reduction would improve lbs/hp, not hurt it. And at no point and I suggesting a drop in power?
Then do you call the Mazda3, Mazda5, and CX-7 the same car? They share the same chassis and engine, just have different skins and body types.
How about the Mazda6 and the Ford Fusion? Same chassis, different engines, different skins, different badges. Same car? Hardly.
We would know it's the NC chassis, but that doesn't make it a Miata.
This part makes no sense to me. I can't follow what you are saying
ND weight reduction would improve lbs/hp, not hurt it. And at no point and I suggesting a drop in power?
It would be an awesome combination, I just don't see how it works out for mazda, other than being able to say they're keeping the rotary alive. A car can't survive on just a hand full of sales.
EDIT: Actually I lied, I can think of a way it would work out for mazda. If they cam out with a new rx car, used a coupe version of the miata, put the renesis in it now. Then in 4-5 years when they do a refresh, come out with a kodo look and the 16x engine. That would be awesome.
Last edited by serothis; 10-09-2011 at 08:40 PM. Reason: pancakes
10-09-2011, 08:46 PM
#31
Registered
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 16,684
Likes: 0
Received 240 Likes
on
110 Posts
EDIT: Actually I lied, I can think of a way it would work out for mazda. If they cam out with a new rx car, used a coupe version of the miata, put the renesis in it now. Then in 4-5 years when they do a refresh, come out with a kodo look and the 16x engine. That would be awesome.
The 16X was "running" but the last official word of it was that it didn't meet their standards yet, so I'd say that they are still working on the performance aspect (if they are even working on the "16X" at all, I think they shelved it and have moved on to an even better rotary than the 16X, developed from SkyActive tech), and thus don't really have any of the long term testing and reliability studies done. The 16X isn't anywhere close to being put into a production car, if that is still the iteration they are working on.
10-09-2011, 08:57 PM
#32
Registered
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's basically what I'm advocating
The 16X was "running" but the last official word of it was that it didn't meet their standards yet, so I'd say that they are still working on the performance aspect (if they are even working on the "16X" at all, I think they shelved it and have moved on to an even better rotary than the 16X, developed from SkyActive tech), and thus don't really have any of the long term testing and reliability studies done. The 16X isn't anywhere close to being put into a production car, if that is still the iteration they are working on.
The 16X was "running" but the last official word of it was that it didn't meet their standards yet, so I'd say that they are still working on the performance aspect (if they are even working on the "16X" at all, I think they shelved it and have moved on to an even better rotary than the 16X, developed from SkyActive tech), and thus don't really have any of the long term testing and reliability studies done. The 16X isn't anywhere close to being put into a production car, if that is still the iteration they are working on.
yeah I know, stupid me.Still won't happen though. mazda doesn't love us THAT much.
10-09-2011, 11:37 PM
#33
The problem with using the FC metered oil technology is there were totally different emissions standards during that time period. While the overall mileage of the motor might have been better, the environmental regulations on newer cars are very strict.
Reduction in oil injection for the S1 was no doubt influenced by this. Otherwise Mazda would have opted for more oil injection in a CYA fashion for warranty considerations.
It's not that they "messed it up" but that the injection amounts for the driving style of the vehicle didn't pan out. Any kind of reliability tests like the 24 hour endurance test wouldn't have yielded these problems since MOP output would have been 100% in most of the operational ranges.
Reduction in oil injection for the S1 was no doubt influenced by this. Otherwise Mazda would have opted for more oil injection in a CYA fashion for warranty considerations.
It's not that they "messed it up" but that the injection amounts for the driving style of the vehicle didn't pan out. Any kind of reliability tests like the 24 hour endurance test wouldn't have yielded these problems since MOP output would have been 100% in most of the operational ranges.
The other side of this was the automatic engines that were babied. We've seen example of carbon caked engines that were never ran hard because of a combo of lower operational RPM's with the automatic transmission and owners refusing to beat on their cars.
(they actually did side exhaust port test in 1980s, but technology back then did not allow them to run such config)
So let's give the Mazda engineers some credit. The problem was more on the human side of things than the engineering. That said, it wasn't until Mazda started cranking up the MOP injection in the 2006+ PCM revisions did the engine failure amounts plummet.
and they just crank it up from something like 1 to 3 at idle ? (again, correct me if wrong)
yea better than nothing, but it's just stupid that they point those 2 nozzle at the corner.
The S2 center MOP injector seems to have done the trick but the overall S2 mileage is still rather low. I don't know how many S2 owners have 40,000+ miles on their RX8's but I would gather that the number is too low to make any calls.
All of this is why I've given some credit to rumors of Mazda experimenting with surfaces that would require zero lubrication of the combustion chamber to operate. This combined with the higher compression technology that SKYACTIV provides and the I-stop technology might provide some promise.
hope the 0 lubrication part would work, cuz it will get rid of OMP, car will be less complicated and probably cheaper to make.
Although it's pure speculation, I imagine Mazda will take its time with further rotary engine development instead of shoving something out the door. While the MSP was a good amount of new technology, it was still largely based off of an existing blueprint. Mazda learned that it's more expensive to go back and fix a production problem than it is to invest the R&D money up front to weed out issues.
As soon as Ford is gone (lower their shares in the company) they start their SkyActiv development, so Ford is not getting any of that AND Mazda can pretty much do whatever they want now.
ahh, speaking of the OMP nozzle, I was rebuilding/cleaning my engine and I found out that all 4 nozzles on my FC are actually clogged. I had to spray brake cleaner thru it for a good few seconds to "unclog" it, now it's clean and flows/drips. so now I'm thinking this might have something to do with engine failures. clogged up = no/reduced oil dripping = no good in the long run.
Last edited by nycgps; 10-09-2011 at 11:41 PM.
10-09-2011, 11:44 PM
#34
say that if Mazda Japan can make one, write the amount down and deposit it.
I'm sure you will get a reply, pretty fast
(notice : make sure you have enough dough in ur checking account b4 trying something like that, or you gonna get a check-return-fee/check bounced
)
10-09-2011, 11:47 PM
#35
That's basically what I'm advocating
The 16X was "running" but the last official word of it was that it didn't meet their standards yet, so I'd say that they are still working on the performance aspect (if they are even working on the "16X" at all, I think they shelved it and have moved on to an even better rotary than the 16X, developed from SkyActive tech), and thus don't really have any of the long term testing and reliability studies done. The 16X isn't anywhere close to being put into a production car, if that is still the iteration they are working on.
The 16X was "running" but the last official word of it was that it didn't meet their standards yet, so I'd say that they are still working on the performance aspect (if they are even working on the "16X" at all, I think they shelved it and have moved on to an even better rotary than the 16X, developed from SkyActive tech), and thus don't really have any of the long term testing and reliability studies done. The 16X isn't anywhere close to being put into a production car, if that is still the iteration they are working on.
plus the specially designed 4-2-1 header and other stuff.
not sure if those would work in Rotary Engine. DI and Laser Spark plugs ?
10-10-2011, 08:21 AM
#37
3-wheeler
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 2,734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I-stop isn't coming to the US it certainly isn't because the public is too "dumb" to understand the technology or use it correctly. Last I saw, the issue was a failure in the process of determining fuel mileage. The process yields much lower fuel mileage gains than what they see in Japan. Why up-charge people for a feature they won't see any value in?
10-10-2011, 08:29 AM
#38
If I-stop isn't coming to the US it certainly isn't because the public is too "dumb" to understand the technology or use it correctly. Last I saw, the issue was a failure in the process of determining fuel mileage. The process yields much lower fuel mileage gains than what they see in Japan. Why up-charge people for a feature they won't see any value in?
there is value in this tech, just that people will wonder "is this thing really worth 800 bux?", when you try to explain how does it work they will have even more question and "afraid" of trying new things, just like how they treat rotary engine.
maybe they can Add this into the GT package and just explain this feature briefly? *sigh*, hope MNAO will import this "feature" with SkyActiv ASAP.
Last edited by nycgps; 10-10-2011 at 08:31 AM.
10-10-2011, 09:00 AM
#39
3-wheeler
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 2,734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
current EPA testing does not count any of these "stop @ red light" feature.
there is value in this tech, just that people will wonder "is this thing really worth 800 bux?", when you try to explain how does it work they will have even more question and "afraid" of trying new things, just like how they treat rotary engine.
maybe they can Add this into the GT package and just explain this feature briefly? *sigh*, hope MNAO will import this "feature" with SkyActiv ASAP.
there is value in this tech, just that people will wonder "is this thing really worth 800 bux?", when you try to explain how does it work they will have even more question and "afraid" of trying new things, just like how they treat rotary engine.
maybe they can Add this into the GT package and just explain this feature briefly? *sigh*, hope MNAO will import this "feature" with SkyActiv ASAP.
Adoption of the rotary engine is a similar situation but also very different. The rotary engine offers a particular driving experience but comes at the cost of reduced fuel mileage, increased maintenance and the need for owners to be much more aware of their vehicle. Selling people on an experience is pretty tough when it comes to buying a car. The only vehicles you can get away with that kind of sales pitch are supercars and hypercars.
Everyone else purchases cars based on fact sheets. Horsepower, fuel mileage, leg room, technical gadgets etc.
Mazda has their work cut out for them. They are going to have to produce a rotary car that will attract a whole new generation of owners. Most people on this forum are not in positions to jump ship with their RX8 and buy a brand new vehicle so banking on previous rotary owners won't work. With the range of available vehicles Mazda will have to produce something truly original that will capture the attention of everyone.
10-10-2011, 09:03 AM
#40
Not imposable, but potentially expensive.
10-10-2011, 10:32 AM
#41
Registered
Not for me. I don't fit in them. The RX-8 size is perfect for me, and the versatility is great for all the stuff I tote around on weekend trips. I hope whatever they eventually replace it with has at least as much imagination and versatility. After the RX-8, a simple roadster just doesn't do it for me...
10-10-2011, 10:41 AM
#43
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not for me. I don't fit in them. The RX-8 size is perfect for me, and the versatility is great for all the stuff I tote around on weekend trips. I hope whatever they eventually replace it with has at least as much imagination and versatility. After the RX-8, a simple roadster just doesn't do it for me...
10-10-2011, 01:08 PM
#44
reskinned coupe MX-5 chassis setup with upgraded suspension and brakes, S2 Renesis could be called... drumrolllll... RX-5! I'd buy it!
You know what I'd like too? A 12A sized, 180-200hp or so all aluminum direct injected (16X tech) version of the Renesis for the Next Gen lighter weight Miata chassis, 30+ mpg possibility!
You know what I'd like too? A 12A sized, 180-200hp or so all aluminum direct injected (16X tech) version of the Renesis for the Next Gen lighter weight Miata chassis, 30+ mpg possibility!
10-10-2011, 04:40 PM
#46
SARX Legend
iTrader: (46)
I will just be glad when Mazda shuts up all the "expert" nay sayers with another rotary sports car. A Miata with a Turbocharged Series II Renny sounds like a great performance buy but I would still never drive a Miata on a regular basis.
10-10-2011, 05:41 PM
#47
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Massapequa, NY
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure that would be a good idea actually.
Yes, a NC rotary would be pretty epic but think of it this way. I'm not sure the reputation of the miata, being a fun tossable roadster, would work. That much power would change into a serious sports car.
Then there's this problem. Let's assume that for the last years of it's life the NC came with a renesis engine option. Then in 2013/14 the ND goes on sale with it's SA tech.
Assuming the ND reaches it's target weight of 2200lbs with comparable power to the current ND (167hp US spec) then you'd go from a 10.34 lb/hp to 13.17 lb/hp. I imagine it would get the same harsh criticism as the 8 (specifically that it's "not as good as the FD") Especially if the NC-rx is popular I think a lot of people would become greatly disappointed by the drop in power, even with the great leap in fuel economy.
It might be great for the short term but not for the long term.
Edit:
Yes, a NC rotary would be pretty epic but think of it this way. I'm not sure the reputation of the miata, being a fun tossable roadster, would work. That much power would change into a serious sports car.
Then there's this problem. Let's assume that for the last years of it's life the NC came with a renesis engine option. Then in 2013/14 the ND goes on sale with it's SA tech.
Assuming the ND reaches it's target weight of 2200lbs with comparable power to the current ND (167hp US spec) then you'd go from a 10.34 lb/hp to 13.17 lb/hp. I imagine it would get the same harsh criticism as the 8 (specifically that it's "not as good as the FD") Especially if the NC-rx is popular I think a lot of people would become greatly disappointed by the drop in power, even with the great leap in fuel economy.
It might be great for the short term but not for the long term.
Edit:
10-10-2011, 06:10 PM
#48
SARX Legend
iTrader: (46)
It's too bad it took Mazda until the 2009 model year to get the engine right. A lot of rotary reliability bad press could have been avoided. The rotary already had a reputation to most as being quirky and unreliable from the RX-7's, having it be somewhat unreliable in the 2003-2008 models really was a killer reputation wise.
