why not more uses for the rotary?
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why not more uses for the rotary?
It's just lately that I've researched the rotary and have learned of all it's advantages over a conventional cylinder engine. So why don't we see rotary Miata's, 6's, and Protege's?
It's probably pretty expensive to hand build each rotary for the RX-8. So why not mass manufacture the rotary at different levels for each car, similar to Nissan and their 3.5L V6? I figure that this way Mazda could throw a bit more money into R&D to fix the major flaw with the rotary....torque....just kidding hehe...the fuel consumption.
With the current RENESIS alone you could already cover the whole spectrum of Mazda cars (Mazda 6 excluded because of the higher torque of the V6). Just offer detuned versions for the Miata and Protege.
If only the rotary had near the R&D that conventional cylinder engines have...
It's probably pretty expensive to hand build each rotary for the RX-8. So why not mass manufacture the rotary at different levels for each car, similar to Nissan and their 3.5L V6? I figure that this way Mazda could throw a bit more money into R&D to fix the major flaw with the rotary....torque....just kidding hehe...the fuel consumption.
With the current RENESIS alone you could already cover the whole spectrum of Mazda cars (Mazda 6 excluded because of the higher torque of the V6). Just offer detuned versions for the Miata and Protege.
If only the rotary had near the R&D that conventional cylinder engines have...
#2
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pacifica
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We're at the begining of a revival of sorts, and perhaps if the RX-8 does well, more cars will come with it.
Back in the 70s most of Mazda's cars were rotary, but due to numerous factors (oil crisis/bad reputation) they faded away.
Now that we know for sure the 8 is coming, I can definately say that for as long as I can, I will be rotary powered.
Back in the 70s most of Mazda's cars were rotary, but due to numerous factors (oil crisis/bad reputation) they faded away.
Now that we know for sure the 8 is coming, I can definately say that for as long as I can, I will be rotary powered.
#4
Nomad Mod
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Hilton or Marriott
Posts: 1,520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They are also used in industrial compressor powerplants and fork-lifts, although converted to propane or natural gas. The rotary works well with many fuels, including hydrogen. Kinda' kills the reliability stigma, don't it? :D
#6
Originally posted by ACRX8
I read an artile about a year ago where a boat offered a rotary engine. I think the boat was around 22 feet.:D
I read an artile about a year ago where a boat offered a rotary engine. I think the boat was around 22 feet.:D
http://www.boatingnews.com/rotarymarine.htm
#8
Love it! Keepin' it!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a list of vehicles with rotary engines. Note there is even a lawnmower!
I didn't see it on the list, but isn't there a TANK powered by rotary, too? :D And at one of our East Coast Rotary Expos, a person entered the car show with a wankel powered Lotus!
I didn't see it on the list, but isn't there a TANK powered by rotary, too? :D And at one of our East Coast Rotary Expos, a person entered the car show with a wankel powered Lotus!
#10
Originally posted by ZoomZoomH
is that a supercharger sitting on top of that engine???
is that a supercharger sitting on top of that engine???
#11
mostly harmless
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Greater Vancouver Area, BC
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah, the wankel could have very serious potential in widespread marine use: you get nearly the cleanliness of a 4 stroke piston, with the compactness, simplicity, and power to weight of the 2-stroke (more traditional) piston outboard...
in the industry, lately the 2-stroke guys have been trying to match up with the 4-stroke emissions, where you get neat innovations like the Johnson FICHT technology, but i really think that the wankel could trounce even something like that (seeing as how FICHT engines in their current spec are regarded as crap) without too much trouble.
in the industry, lately the 2-stroke guys have been trying to match up with the 4-stroke emissions, where you get neat innovations like the Johnson FICHT technology, but i really think that the wankel could trounce even something like that (seeing as how FICHT engines in their current spec are regarded as crap) without too much trouble.
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Near Seattle
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That supercharger on the marine engine looks more like an Eaton. Notice the air filter on the end opposite the pulley? Anyway, don't get me started on how many uses there are for the rotary. Especially now with the Renesis. Too many to type
#13
mostly harmless
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Greater Vancouver Area, BC
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Jeff20B
That supercharger on the marine engine looks more like an Eaton. Notice the air filter on the end opposite the pulley? Anyway, don't get me started on how many uses there are for the rotary. Especially now with the Renesis. Too many to type
That supercharger on the marine engine looks more like an Eaton. Notice the air filter on the end opposite the pulley? Anyway, don't get me started on how many uses there are for the rotary. Especially now with the Renesis. Too many to type
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Near Seattle
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right. I steam locomotive uses steam to push on a large piston connected to the wheels. The next logical step was to eliminate the boiler, but they kept the pistons. Anyway, you're right that with some powerplant requirements, a piston engine is best. But then again, some of those requirements have been around longer than the rotary itself. I guess I'm trying to see outside the box (engine bay) here. Remember, most things out there were designed with piston engines in mind. We've got to think of ways to use a rotary instead. If for no other reason than to be different. :D
#15
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: North Kingstown, RI
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by wakeech
yeah, the wankel could have very serious potential in widespread marine use: you get nearly the cleanliness of a 4 stroke piston, with the compactness, simplicity, and power to weight of the 2-stroke (more traditional) piston outboard...
in the industry, lately the 2-stroke guys have been trying to match up with the 4-stroke emissions, where you get neat innovations like the Johnson FICHT technology, but i really think that the wankel could trounce even something like that (seeing as how FICHT engines in their current spec are regarded as crap) without too much trouble.
yeah, the wankel could have very serious potential in widespread marine use: you get nearly the cleanliness of a 4 stroke piston, with the compactness, simplicity, and power to weight of the 2-stroke (more traditional) piston outboard...
in the industry, lately the 2-stroke guys have been trying to match up with the 4-stroke emissions, where you get neat innovations like the Johnson FICHT technology, but i really think that the wankel could trounce even something like that (seeing as how FICHT engines in their current spec are regarded as crap) without too much trouble.
Sorry to get off topic. But like everyone else said, the uses of the rotary are limitless. The only thing the rotary wouldn't excel at would be towing (then again a big *** supercharger could fix that:D).
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Near Seattle
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've heard stories of REPUs towing stuff and doing it really well (embarasing V8 powered trucks). I think Mazda ought to tweak the Renesis' ECU for more torque and throw it in a souped up B series pickup and call it REPU2 or whatever. Or what I'd like even better would be the rumored 10MM wider per rotor 1468-1472CC or 14C or 1.5L or whatever they decide to call it, larger displacement Renesis instead. That's drool-worthy.
#17
mostly harmless
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Greater Vancouver Area, BC
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by cueball1029
I work at a marina and I can tell you everyone I know thinks FICHT and Johnson in general are crap. You want a good engine get a Yamaha.
I work at a marina and I can tell you everyone I know thinks FICHT and Johnson in general are crap. You want a good engine get a Yamaha.
#18
mostly harmless
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Greater Vancouver Area, BC
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Jeff20B
I've heard stories of REPUs towing stuff and doing it really well (embarasing V8 powered trucks). I think Mazda ought to tweak the Renesis' ECU for more torque and throw it in a souped up B series pickup and call it REPU2 or whatever. Or what I'd like even better would be the rumored 10MM wider per rotor 1468-1472CC or 14C or 1.5L or whatever they decide to call it, larger displacement Renesis instead. That's drool-worthy.
I've heard stories of REPUs towing stuff and doing it really well (embarasing V8 powered trucks). I think Mazda ought to tweak the Renesis' ECU for more torque and throw it in a souped up B series pickup and call it REPU2 or whatever. Or what I'd like even better would be the rumored 10MM wider per rotor 1468-1472CC or 14C or 1.5L or whatever they decide to call it, larger displacement Renesis instead. That's drool-worthy.
...but applied in machines built only for speed, well, it's obvious, isn't it??
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Pullman, WA
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know it's been done before, but I'd like to see a motorcycle with a rotary engine. Specifically, I'd like to see a sportbike with a 1000cc version of the Renesis.
Rotaries are smaller, lighter and more powerful than comparable piston engines, and they can achieve higher redlines. That combination makes them PERFECT for motorcycles. Also, the comparable lack of torque would not be an issue because sportbike engines are tuned for greater hp than torque anyway. Stick a rotary in a great sportbike chassis and I think you'd have an instant winner on your hands.
The Norton motorcycle company tried it back in the 80's. Unfortunately, they contributed to the rotay's bad reputation because Norton, like every other British motorcycle manufacturer of the time, didn't know the meaning of the term "quality control".
I wish Mazda would colaborate on such a project with one of the big Japanese bike manufacturers. The ideal would be a Mazda rotary in a Honda chasis. But a more likely combo would be a Mazda rotary in a Yamaha or Kawasaki chasis, since neither Yamaha or Kawasaki build cars, and are therefore not in direct competition with Mazda.
Rotaries are smaller, lighter and more powerful than comparable piston engines, and they can achieve higher redlines. That combination makes them PERFECT for motorcycles. Also, the comparable lack of torque would not be an issue because sportbike engines are tuned for greater hp than torque anyway. Stick a rotary in a great sportbike chassis and I think you'd have an instant winner on your hands.
The Norton motorcycle company tried it back in the 80's. Unfortunately, they contributed to the rotay's bad reputation because Norton, like every other British motorcycle manufacturer of the time, didn't know the meaning of the term "quality control".
I wish Mazda would colaborate on such a project with one of the big Japanese bike manufacturers. The ideal would be a Mazda rotary in a Honda chasis. But a more likely combo would be a Mazda rotary in a Yamaha or Kawasaki chasis, since neither Yamaha or Kawasaki build cars, and are therefore not in direct competition with Mazda.
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa, Ca
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember reading somewhere a number of years ago that the rotors turn at a given rate, but that through gearing the output shaft spins at a double or more the rate of the rotors.
For an aircraft engine you actually need to reduce the speed of the shaft going to the prop otherwise the tips will be constantly braking the sound barrier and the plane will have trouble flying.
The added size and weight of the PSRU reduce the utility of the rotary engine in a plane. I wonder how hard it would be to make the output shaft rotate at the same speed as the rotors, or is that impossible due to the way the engine in built.
For an aircraft engine you actually need to reduce the speed of the shaft going to the prop otherwise the tips will be constantly braking the sound barrier and the plane will have trouble flying.
The added size and weight of the PSRU reduce the utility of the rotary engine in a plane. I wonder how hard it would be to make the output shaft rotate at the same speed as the rotors, or is that impossible due to the way the engine in built.
#24
mostly harmless
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Greater Vancouver Area, BC
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the e-shaft makes one revolution per every 1/3 revolution of the rotor (which is once around for every power stroke)... rpm is a measurement of the output shaft speed, so in reality, the rotors are spinning slower than the e-shaft, and not the e-shaft is going triple the speed of the rotors, if you know what i mean....
in teh RENESIS, at redline, the rotors are only going around at 3k, while the output shaft is doing 9k.
in teh RENESIS, at redline, the rotors are only going around at 3k, while the output shaft is doing 9k.
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cerritos, CA, US
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would think
they dont use it on every model is because that if they make it for every single car that they make then it's not going to be special anymore, ROTARY r suppose to be special!!:D