Rumored Demise of the RX-8
07-20-2010, 03:57 PM
#101
I think the problem they have run into with the Z is pricing. They are already pushing the limits of an "affordable" sports car for the masses and just about anything else they do will add significantly to the cost. There is talk about going for the smaller/lighter/less power philosophy which I think would be their best bet but that would pretty much require dumping the Z and coming up with a new design.
08-04-2010, 08:01 PM
#102
Just read the new Motortrend magazine and they seem pretty certain that the RX8 will be discontinued next year. Again I think the RX8 has had a great run, going through its life with minimal updates from Mazda and I know for a fact that dealerships have no problem selling them.
As for the 370Z being discontinued, eh. Nissan needs to ditch that platform in the next few years. It really wasn't the huge update that Nissan fans were hoping for. The Z got a little lighter, a little more power, and a little smaller. Nothing major. The interior was the biggest update for the Z but I'd still take a 135i over it any day of the week. And as for the Z being a sports car, it really isn't as fast as people think. The new Camaro SS and Mustang GT (2011) are definitely competitors with the new Z, even on a race track. The Z is slowly approaching Corvette money and is pushing the envelope of what its chassis is capable of. Like the 350Z, bolt ons do very little for the 370Z and are usually pretty expensive. Not the case with the Camaro, Mustang, and don't forget about the Evo or STi.
Mazda and Nissan need to think of something quick to pull themselves back up. A lot of cars have been updated recently and more are right around the corner in the next couple years. The economy is slowly recovering. Now is not the time for Mazda to pull punches on the next rotary car.
As for the 370Z being discontinued, eh. Nissan needs to ditch that platform in the next few years. It really wasn't the huge update that Nissan fans were hoping for. The Z got a little lighter, a little more power, and a little smaller. Nothing major. The interior was the biggest update for the Z but I'd still take a 135i over it any day of the week. And as for the Z being a sports car, it really isn't as fast as people think. The new Camaro SS and Mustang GT (2011) are definitely competitors with the new Z, even on a race track. The Z is slowly approaching Corvette money and is pushing the envelope of what its chassis is capable of. Like the 350Z, bolt ons do very little for the 370Z and are usually pretty expensive. Not the case with the Camaro, Mustang, and don't forget about the Evo or STi.
Mazda and Nissan need to think of something quick to pull themselves back up. A lot of cars have been updated recently and more are right around the corner in the next couple years. The economy is slowly recovering. Now is not the time for Mazda to pull punches on the next rotary car.
08-04-2010, 10:10 PM
#103
2009 RX-8 Touring
I want to know why they don't mitigate the hot-side/cold-side efficiency problem by just rotating one of the rotor housings 180 degrees. Yes, it would make piping and fuel/ignition more complex, but not any moreso than it is on a V# engine.
While they're at it, they could cut some diagonal grooves into the trochoid housing on the cold side to let some of the intake air escape backwards into the next combustion chamber during compression, and convert the engine into an Atkinson-cycle engine. That would probably give them enough extra efficiency to justify adding a third rotor.
Why the hell don't people consult me before they do things??
While they're at it, they could cut some diagonal grooves into the trochoid housing on the cold side to let some of the intake air escape backwards into the next combustion chamber during compression, and convert the engine into an Atkinson-cycle engine. That would probably give them enough extra efficiency to justify adding a third rotor.
Why the hell don't people consult me before they do things??
08-05-2010, 07:24 AM
#105
jersey fresh
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 3,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-05-2010, 07:25 AM
#106
Momentum Keeps Me Going
08-06-2010, 09:43 AM
#110
Zoom Zoom Addict
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Texas Hill County
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3 rotor E85 would eat up a lot of gas and cost a lot to produce. Not done I doubt it could be a profitable vehicle for Mazda.
If they Make another 3 production it needs to be a higher end nich product.
This 1st Generation Rx-8 is done. And in a way it's a good thing cause it starts the long road to Classic that 1st and 2nd Gen Rx7's are now entering.
If it the 2+2 Rx8 comes back for a 2nd generation they will need a body and interior design refresh.
If they Make another 3 production it needs to be a higher end nich product.
This 1st Generation Rx-8 is done. And in a way it's a good thing cause it starts the long road to Classic that 1st and 2nd Gen Rx7's are now entering.
If it the 2+2 Rx8 comes back for a 2nd generation they will need a body and interior design refresh.
08-06-2010, 11:20 AM
#111
The Black Pearl
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just thought you guys would be interested in this. Many of you already know about this, but for those who don't... enjoy.
Mazda Re-Releasing the RX-7 in 2012
Mazda Re-Releasing the RX-7 in 2012
08-06-2010, 11:42 AM
#112
Registered
Just thought you guys would be interested in this. Many of you already know about this, but for those who don't... enjoy.
Mazda Re-Releasing the RX-7 in 2012
Mazda Re-Releasing the RX-7 in 2012
of course it could still be true I guess.
08-06-2010, 12:37 PM
#113
The Black Pearl
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I only heard about the new 7 from the dealership the other day when I took my 8 in for service. I hope its true. I don't think life would be worth living without a rotary... Ok maybe its not that bad, but it would still suck.
08-06-2010, 07:49 PM
#114
Registered
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sheboygan Falls, Wisconsin
Posts: 1,134
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
As for the 370Z being discontinued, eh. Nissan needs to ditch that platform in the next few years. It really wasn't the huge update that Nissan fans were hoping for. The Z got a little lighter, a little more power, and a little smaller. Nothing major. The interior was the biggest update for the Z but I'd still take a 135i over it any day of the week. And as for the Z being a sports car, it really isn't as fast as people think. The new Camaro SS and Mustang GT (2011) are definitely competitors with the new Z, even on a race track. The Z is slowly approaching Corvette money and is pushing the envelope of what its chassis is capable of. Like the 350Z, bolt ons do very little for the 370Z and are usually pretty expensive. Not the case with the Camaro, Mustang, and don't forget about the Evo or STi.
Mazda and Nissan need to think of something quick to pull themselves back up. A lot of cars have been updated recently and more are right around the corner in the next couple years. The economy is slowly recovering. Now is not the time for Mazda to pull punches on the next rotary car.
Mazda and Nissan need to think of something quick to pull themselves back up. A lot of cars have been updated recently and more are right around the corner in the next couple years. The economy is slowly recovering. Now is not the time for Mazda to pull punches on the next rotary car.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/future-c...wered-nissan-z
Last edited by 77mjd; 08-06-2010 at 08:43 PM.
08-07-2010, 09:08 AM
#115
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E85 is a joke.
It take 1.5 gallons of e85 to equal one gallon of gasoline. It is also more ineffecient, meaning the 21MPG the rx8 gets will decrease to 14/15mpg, meaning any amount of money that you save will actually be reversed.
at $3 a gallon, E85 would have to be $2.16 to just break even.
then there's all the water waste used to make it, then there's the gasoline/diesel that's used to harvest, process, and transport it mutliple time.
All-in-all it's using a lot of fuel, and water, to produce something that costs more to run, has less power, and gets worse MPG in your car.
It take 1.5 gallons of e85 to equal one gallon of gasoline. It is also more ineffecient, meaning the 21MPG the rx8 gets will decrease to 14/15mpg, meaning any amount of money that you save will actually be reversed.
at $3 a gallon, E85 would have to be $2.16 to just break even.
then there's all the water waste used to make it, then there's the gasoline/diesel that's used to harvest, process, and transport it mutliple time.
All-in-all it's using a lot of fuel, and water, to produce something that costs more to run, has less power, and gets worse MPG in your car.
08-07-2010, 09:11 AM
#116
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://zfacts.com/p/436.html:
"With only 2/3 the energy of gasoline,
ethanol costs more per mile
*
*
* The energy of ethanol relative to gasoline
*A. *76,000 *= BTU of energy in a gallon of ethanol
*B. *116,090 = BTU of energy in a gallon of gasoline
*C. *.655 = 2/3 = GGE of energy in a gallon of ethanol. *A / B.
*D. *1.53 = Gallons of ethanol with the energy of 1 gallon of gasoline. *D = B / A.
...
23% extra fuel cost of using E85 with 2006 models
The EPA has measured the gas mileage of 2006 flexible fuel models. For the 31 models they tested the average reduction is 26% fewer miles per gallon. For example a car that gets 30 mpg on regular would typically get 22.2 mpg with E85. This is exactly what is predicted from the fact that E85 has less energy per gallon than gasoline.
For these calculations, the EPA assumes that E85 costs $2.00 and regular $2.20/gallon. Obviously they are on the low side, especially for ethanol, but this proportion is similar to what DOE predict for the next few years. The loss in mileage more than makes up for the cost savings, and on average the EPA predicts driving on E85 will cost 23% more than driving on regular."
"With only 2/3 the energy of gasoline,
ethanol costs more per mile
*
*
* The energy of ethanol relative to gasoline
*A. *76,000 *= BTU of energy in a gallon of ethanol
*B. *116,090 = BTU of energy in a gallon of gasoline
*C. *.655 = 2/3 = GGE of energy in a gallon of ethanol. *A / B.
*D. *1.53 = Gallons of ethanol with the energy of 1 gallon of gasoline. *D = B / A.
...
23% extra fuel cost of using E85 with 2006 models
The EPA has measured the gas mileage of 2006 flexible fuel models. For the 31 models they tested the average reduction is 26% fewer miles per gallon. For example a car that gets 30 mpg on regular would typically get 22.2 mpg with E85. This is exactly what is predicted from the fact that E85 has less energy per gallon than gasoline.
For these calculations, the EPA assumes that E85 costs $2.00 and regular $2.20/gallon. Obviously they are on the low side, especially for ethanol, but this proportion is similar to what DOE predict for the next few years. The loss in mileage more than makes up for the cost savings, and on average the EPA predicts driving on E85 will cost 23% more than driving on regular."
08-07-2010, 02:40 PM
#118
Administrator
several studies have been done to evaluate ethanol fuel blend using higher compression engines. compression normally reserved for diesel engines. what has been found is that at these higher pressures you cna not only make MORE power with the ethanol blends but the fuel efficiency actual returns to normal or slightly better than the comparable gasoline engines.
links
http://papers.sae.org/1999-01-3568
this one evaluated blends from e10 to e100 and found the benefits come in as soon as e40 , so "they" could use lower blends to extend the ethanol supply while still providing the benefits of using it in high compression engines designed for its use.
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/presentation...-isaf-no55.pdf
you can use FI to raise the compression. so an FI renesis or 3 rotor running e85 has the potential to get MORE power and Better fuel efficiency than its gasoline only counterpart.
the real problem is the source of the ethanol. as some like to say it you could feed several people for a year on the amount of corn needed to fill one tank for an SUV (no they never say the capacity of the tank). i have read it at 1 acre of corn producing 300 gallons of ethanol.so we cant be using food stock to make our energy.
08-08-2010, 10:44 AM
#119
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
actually that's only true in "flex-fuel" vehicles that are designed as gasoline instead of being designed as e85 engines.
several studies have been done to evaluate ethanol fuel blend using higher compression engines. compression normally reserved for diesel engines. what has been found is that at these higher pressures you cna not only make MORE power with the ethanol blends but the fuel efficiency actual returns to normal or slightly better than the comparable gasoline engines.
links
[url]
this one evaluated blends from e10 to e100 and found the benefits come in as soon as e40 , so "they" could use lower blends to extend the ethanol supply while still providing the benefits of using it in high compression engines designed for its use.
[url]
you can use FI to raise the compression. so an FI renesis or 3 rotor running e85 has the potential to get MORE power and Better fuel efficiency than its gasoline only counterpart.
the real problem is the source of the ethanol. as some like to say it you could feed several people for a year on the amount of corn needed to fill one tank for an SUV (no they never say the capacity of the tank). i have read it at 1 acre of corn producing 300 gallons of ethanol.so we cant be using food stock to make our energy.
several studies have been done to evaluate ethanol fuel blend using higher compression engines. compression normally reserved for diesel engines. what has been found is that at these higher pressures you cna not only make MORE power with the ethanol blends but the fuel efficiency actual returns to normal or slightly better than the comparable gasoline engines.
links
[url]
this one evaluated blends from e10 to e100 and found the benefits come in as soon as e40 , so "they" could use lower blends to extend the ethanol supply while still providing the benefits of using it in high compression engines designed for its use.
[url]
you can use FI to raise the compression. so an FI renesis or 3 rotor running e85 has the potential to get MORE power and Better fuel efficiency than its gasoline only counterpart.
the real problem is the source of the ethanol. as some like to say it you could feed several people for a year on the amount of corn needed to fill one tank for an SUV (no they never say the capacity of the tank). i have read it at 1 acre of corn producing 300 gallons of ethanol.so we cant be using food stock to make our energy.
Yes 1 acre of corn, plus tons of fossil fuels for transport (as there's no pipes for this stuff, it's all on trains/deseil. Then all of the water that's used.
Basically, it's taking a whole bunch of energy to convert something into far less energy.
08-08-2010, 11:46 AM
#120
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been running a mix of E85 (~30%) and regular (~70%) for several years now. Factoring the cost and mileage its less expensive then 93 octane.
Moreover I send a few less dollars to the middle east that ends up in the hands of the folks who are trying to kill our soldiers overseas. If you don't think a dollar or two of middle eastern oil isn't diverted to Al Queda, you don't deserve to vote in an American election.
The car sure seems to run a bit better. Last set of plugs were cleaner at 35,000 miles then the gas only were at 15,000 miles.
I'll keep mixing.
As far as taking from the food stock, yes it does but in a secondary way - Human consumption grade corn isn't used and fetches a much higher price then feed corn does. And with the price of a ribeye about half what it was 6 years ago it doesn't seem to be affecting beef prices that much.
Moreover I send a few less dollars to the middle east that ends up in the hands of the folks who are trying to kill our soldiers overseas. If you don't think a dollar or two of middle eastern oil isn't diverted to Al Queda, you don't deserve to vote in an American election.
The car sure seems to run a bit better. Last set of plugs were cleaner at 35,000 miles then the gas only were at 15,000 miles.
I'll keep mixing.
As far as taking from the food stock, yes it does but in a secondary way - Human consumption grade corn isn't used and fetches a much higher price then feed corn does. And with the price of a ribeye about half what it was 6 years ago it doesn't seem to be affecting beef prices that much.
Last edited by kartweb; 08-08-2010 at 11:49 AM.
08-09-2010, 07:01 AM
#121
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's pretty neat, I guess the ECU automatically adjusts for it? Have you had a chance to dino?
You know, I live in Oklahoma, and we have a lot of oil pumps and at one point we used to have a refinery. It's been shut down, and a lot of the pumps are shut down and turned back on 1 a week, if that. Strange when the flow rates are profitable on them.
You know, I live in Oklahoma, and we have a lot of oil pumps and at one point we used to have a refinery. It's been shut down, and a lot of the pumps are shut down and turned back on 1 a week, if that. Strange when the flow rates are profitable on them.
08-09-2010, 07:03 AM
#122
Registered
I've been running a mix of E85 (~30%) and regular (~70%) for several years now. Factoring the cost and mileage its less expensive then 93 octane.
Moreover I send a few less dollars to the middle east that ends up in the hands of the folks who are trying to kill our soldiers overseas. If you don't think a dollar or two of middle eastern oil isn't diverted to Al Queda, you don't deserve to vote in an American election.
The car sure seems to run a bit better. Last set of plugs were cleaner at 35,000 miles then the gas only were at 15,000 miles.
I'll keep mixing.
As far as taking from the food stock, yes it does but in a secondary way - Human consumption grade corn isn't used and fetches a much higher price then feed corn does. And with the price of a ribeye about half what it was 6 years ago it doesn't seem to be affecting beef prices that much.
Moreover I send a few less dollars to the middle east that ends up in the hands of the folks who are trying to kill our soldiers overseas. If you don't think a dollar or two of middle eastern oil isn't diverted to Al Queda, you don't deserve to vote in an American election.
The car sure seems to run a bit better. Last set of plugs were cleaner at 35,000 miles then the gas only were at 15,000 miles.
I'll keep mixing.
As far as taking from the food stock, yes it does but in a secondary way - Human consumption grade corn isn't used and fetches a much higher price then feed corn does. And with the price of a ribeye about half what it was 6 years ago it doesn't seem to be affecting beef prices that much.
Maybe I should dump methanol in with each fill up?
08-09-2010, 05:10 PM
#123
**** E85. **** Ethanol. **** the ball-less ecobastards who keep pushing it on us, trying to force us all to drive little ***** "Smart Cars" because they want us to.
Long live Internal combustion with real gasoline, which we would have available in plenty except for politics.
(Mad Max rant off)
Long live Internal combustion with real gasoline, which we would have available in plenty except for politics.
(Mad Max rant off)
08-09-2010, 05:17 PM
#124
Registered
**** E85. **** Ethanol. **** the ball-less ecobastards who keep pushing it on us, trying to force us all to drive little ***** "Smart Cars" because they want us to.
Long live Internal combustion with real gasoline, which we would have available in plenty except for politics.
(Mad Max rant off)
Long live Internal combustion with real gasoline, which we would have available in plenty except for politics.
(Mad Max rant off)
08-09-2010, 06:18 PM
#125
The Slow and the Serious
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Communistwealth of Virginia
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
**** E85. **** Ethanol. **** the ball-less ecobastards who keep pushing it on us, trying to force us all to drive little ***** "Smart Cars" because they want us to.
Long live Internal combustion with real gasoline, which we would have available in plenty except for politics.
(Mad Max rant off)
Long live Internal combustion with real gasoline, which we would have available in plenty except for politics.
(Mad Max rant off)