Here's why they're not used, they catch fire:
Educate Me - Why have rotary engines never really taken off?
- Thread starter Makhaira
- Start date
But it's still not representative, because the way you measure swept volume means you get two crankshaft rotations in a piston engine, but only 1 output shaft rotation in a rotary.
Permabanned
Bar = Apart from, excluding, not including to 'bar' something
Excluding the RX7 and the early RX8s...
Not including the RX7 and early RX8s...
Apart from the RX7 and early RX8s...
...they aren't really that unreliable - they just require a little more maintenance.
You've clearly typed that the RX7 and early RX8s are unreliable, but other rotary cars are fine - just requiring more maintance.
No I haven't. I said quite clearly that perhaps I didn't word it quite right in the first instance.
So let me clarify for you AGAIN. The term unreliable applied to the RX7 and RX8 is a subjective one [term], because of my aforementioned points.
Neither randomly breaks down on you all the time. The RX7 needs a periodic rebuild, and the RX8 mostly just needs maintaining properly (oil levels and coilpacks).
Simples.
Soldato
It would have been more powerful overall, allowed for more potent performance, better cruising ability, an improved exhaust note, more flexibility across the rev range, infinitely easier tuning options, a much more reliable design and simpler, more cost-effective repairs.
It'd have been cheaper to produce too thus cheaper to buy - and much cleaner, so it'd be cheaper to tax and better for the environment.
A piston engined RX-8 would not suffer the oil, fuelling and rotor issues of a rotary-engined equivalent either.
...... does the 330 drink at 18-20 mpg or a litre of oil a day?
the penny should drop in a minute
Caporegime
Would a regular engine even fit under the low nose, putting a longitudinal 4 banger in would make it nose heavy aswell.
Permabanned
A turbo'd rotary would have allowed for more potent performance, also?
Not sure on cruising ability, I disagree with exhaust note and flexibility across the rev range? Its power delivery is half of its appeal.
Plus a big lumpy piston engine would have ruined half of what makes them so fun to drive.
Sure it would have been cheaper, but I believe Mazda keep the rotary going because there is a market for it.
Not sure on cruising ability, I disagree with exhaust note and flexibility across the rev range? Its power delivery is half of its appeal.
Plus a big lumpy piston engine would have ruined half of what makes them so fun to drive.
Sure it would have been cheaper, but I believe Mazda keep the rotary going because there is a market for it.
Rotary engines do have a unique feel and character, they are butter smooth and rev forever. I actually really like them, and the power output is great considering their weight and size, hence the reason they were used in the RX7 and 8. Small engine footprint and light weight helped Mazda could give those cars near-perfect weight distribution.
I do agree however that for the amount of fuel they guzzle the power output is pretty crap as stock.
I still love 'em though
I do agree however that for the amount of fuel they guzzle the power output is pretty crap as stock.
I still love 'em though
Permabanned
I doubt a 330 at the kind of mileage they are on these days drinks significantly less oil in terms of cost (330 will be fully-synth, won't it?).
And no, it'll probably return 22-25MPG? Hardly ground breaking improvement.
None, what is your point? The appeal of a rotary is completely different.
They manage to fit an LS1/2 in an RX8 in the states, I think its a waste personally.
Soldato
Rotary bike:
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/at-the-garage/motorcycles/1975-suzuki-re5/
Mazda Cosmo (multiple parts to this one):
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/at-the-garage/sports-cars/mazda-cosmo-110s---part-1/
Great site by the way, worth a look
I'm currently on a small debt clearing and mega saving mission and when I have some £££ together I rather fancy an RX7, even if for 12 months just to say I have had one and experienced it. A friend of mine had an FD3S for a while and I loved going for a ride in it. Loved the sounds, power delivery and the car itself is gorgeous IMO, especially with the later bumpers etc.
They drink oil and fuel though, that's all you really need to know. In days gone by checking your oil and general maintenance seemed to be approachable by the owners themselves and it was acceptable. People expect a car that doesn't need this kind of attention and can be taken to a garage every year without them even opening the bonnet. The rotaries available thus far need careful owners who aren't afraid of opening the bonnet or taking it to the dealer maybe more than once a year to do this for them which isn't acceptable for modern car buyers anymore. Rotaries are just out of date.
It would be interesting if they could be developed along the same fewer moving parts concept but introduce better fluid usage (compact hybrid rotary anyone?), but I suspect manufacturers will stick to the "better the devil you know approach" whilst money is still a major industry issue.
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/at-the-garage/motorcycles/1975-suzuki-re5/
Mazda Cosmo (multiple parts to this one):
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/at-the-garage/sports-cars/mazda-cosmo-110s---part-1/
Great site by the way, worth a look
I'm currently on a small debt clearing and mega saving mission and when I have some £££ together I rather fancy an RX7, even if for 12 months just to say I have had one and experienced it. A friend of mine had an FD3S for a while and I loved going for a ride in it. Loved the sounds, power delivery and the car itself is gorgeous IMO, especially with the later bumpers etc.
They drink oil and fuel though, that's all you really need to know. In days gone by checking your oil and general maintenance seemed to be approachable by the owners themselves and it was acceptable. People expect a car that doesn't need this kind of attention and can be taken to a garage every year without them even opening the bonnet. The rotaries available thus far need careful owners who aren't afraid of opening the bonnet or taking it to the dealer maybe more than once a year to do this for them which isn't acceptable for modern car buyers anymore. Rotaries are just out of date.
It would be interesting if they could be developed along the same fewer moving parts concept but introduce better fluid usage (compact hybrid rotary anyone?), but I suspect manufacturers will stick to the "better the devil you know approach" whilst money is still a major industry issue.
I really miss my FD sometimes, it was such an 'event' to drive, just epic. The power delivery was linear but brutal at the same time, when the second turbo came on-song it was just a relentless wall of power all the way to the red-line. It felt like it could rev and rev for all eternity 
Last edited:
Soldato
My 330 drinks VERY little oil (if at all!) between services (now on 92k) and hardly ever sees the wrong side of 30mpg.
Last edited:
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
A Renesis weighs, fully dressed, 122kg, Something like an S2000 engine is 158kg fully dressed (a 'big' engine), so a 36kg difference.
A Toyota 1.9 VVTi engine clocks in at 137kg dressed (15kg more), a high-specification K-series at about 100kg (22 less)!
Easily done without upsetting the handling.
Rotaries can end up being pretty 'big' in terms of bay-filling once they're dressed with ancilleries and in some instances turbochargers. The core engine, however (i.e just block), is more compact than a standard piston engine.
Last edited:
Caporegime
What about something with enough power to make the swap worthwhile? Also this doesn't take into account altering the cars center of gravity.
Permabanned
[TW]Fox;17668198 said:
Oh, so you get more than 25MPG out of your 530 unless on a run, then?
The problem isn't weight, it is location.
So no other engines require these rebuilds every X miles, and other companies have been producing better more effient engines for decades.
My point ofcourse being:
That is why.