neit_jnf

iTrader: (17)

There were rumors that Mazda surpassed 300-330 engine hp already with 30+mpg capability and the issues they're working are mostly emissions.

Current stock port Renesis when tuned leaner, with a stronger ignition system and better flowing intake and exhaust can surpass 250 engine hp as proven by the 260bhp @8600rpm engines in Star Mazda series and also some RX-8 owners getting 210whp.

t-von

iTrader: (8)

Are those the special cats Mazda engineeres have developed? Don't forget this engine will also have a longer stroke to go with that 23% larger displacement. I can't wait to see those torque figures.

t-von

iTrader: (8)

2015 aint happening 2016 possible???? Mazda is a small company. The next Mx5 is scheduled to come out next as a 2015 model. Dont forget that most manufactures release their new models towards the end of summer. 2014 Mazda 6 has been out for several months. 2014 C7 Corvette will be out in September. Hell my 94 fd was built in Sept 1993. It's still 2013 and 2014 model cars and trucks are all over the roads right now. I say early 2016 before a production prototype is running around for the magazines to gawk over. That's only 2 1/2 years away.

arghx

iTrader: (3)

I'm not sure where this "special cat" idea is coming from. Cats can't handle more than 850-900C midbed temperature. That's why most engines are significantly enriched from the factory, in addition to some knock benefit for a richer mixture.

As for NOx-scrubbing, not sure where that came from either. Rotary engines as we know them don't have NOx issues. Diesels do, but not rotaries. The problem with rotaries, is HC due to mixture formation issues inside the engine, and also CO, especially when having to go richer than stoich. Particulates have got to be bad too for a gasoline engine.

The only way they'd have NOx issues is if they really did try to run lean stratified combustion in normal cruising operation. In that case you'd have a NOx trap and all that crap that you see on diesels. NOx traps can't handle high temperatures (requiring rich mixtures under load) and they need to be purged of sulfur (which means going rich and hurting fuel economy). Maybe the benefits would outweigh the costs though.

The Rx-8 was using all the special tricks in the book that you normally fine on superclean "PZEV/SULEV" engines for California standards, except even then it wasn't enough to pass Euro 5. The Renesis had an airpump (only during cat warmup), air assisted port injection, AND an HC trap catalyst. Put all that crap on a 4 cylinder and it basically doesn't pollute. So if that wasn't cutting it, it's no wonder they had to go back to the drawing board and do a major overhaul of the combustion in the engine.

BLUE TII

iTrader: (9)

The new rotary will have to be lean burn to meet the economy targets. We can't live with the rotary "as we know it".

Mazda has developed new nano particle cats that use 70%-90% less precious metals so the won't go broke replacing them under warranty (fed mandated 10yr warranty on emissions equipment). Now they can run them hotter.

Mazda has developed the LNT cat with ceria sphere particles that has good high temp stability.

Lean burn gas engines are dependent on NOx reduction technology. Here is an interesting study.

http://www4.eere.energy.gov/vehicles...rks_2013_o.pdf

Lean burn rotary is my guess and hope for the new rotary.

decline

I have a feeling the new RX will be some kind of hybrid/electric set up. It seems like the best way to make good power with little emissions. Plus everyone else is doing it so by 2017 it will practically be industry standard.
The NSX is electric. The new supra is rumored to use hybridR tech(or whatever they call the sports coupe)
It makes sense

$lacker

iTrader: (9)

Electric provides instant low-end torque (good when combined with a rotary) but the batteries would increase weight significantly (bad)

ZDan

I think that Mazda would disagree! Sales were abysmal compared to any other RX-7. RX-8 was an out-of-the-park home run success story in comparison!

Some might think that the FD "ruined" the SA's "heritage" by becoming so much bigger, more overwrought, expensive.

Not every enthusiast is thrilled with the"Corvettification" of the 911. I think it should still be a ~2400-2800 lb. MAX European sports/GT car rather than being in the Corvette's size/weight class.

As offended as you'd be by a simpler/cheaper-spec RX-7, I'd be more offended by one that tries to be like the 3600+ lb. E92 M3!

By being 2750 lb.! That would put it nearly on power/weight parity with the M3, at least.

I hope they do sacrifice the hell out of "comfort", features, etc. in the name of performance. And of course keeping the weight down. And the price!

The only hope for a legitimately lightweight sports car is to keep the size and the content LIMITED and to not lux it out.

For people who want more features, more content, more power, there are already MANY cars that suit: M3, Corvette, 911, GTR, etc.

I hope they do something very much like the FR-S/BRZ, but a dedicated 2-seater with the engine and driver/passenger moved *way* aft for 50/50 or more-rearward weight distribution, and with double-wishbones all around. 2750 lb., 50/50, 300hp, damn that sounds sweeet to me...

I sincerely hope they don't try to make it MORE than that (the path to increased size/weight/price and reduced fun factor).

adamrs80

iTrader: (7)

It does not make economical sense. Considering Mazda has no current products with hybrid technology and has put so much into their Skyactive line of engines I don't see them testing hybrid tech on the RX-7 without proving it in lesser vehicles that at this point don't exist. They seem to "get it", that hybrid stuff is heavy, expensive and largely unnecessary. Just look at the next Mazda diesel. The NSX will be very expensive and and the Supra is likely to be well above the cost of the next RX-7. Mazda won't be doing another expensive sport car like the FD. They will stick with something similar to the BR-Z, FR-s but nicer, more capable but probably only a bit more than the RX-8. We shall see

ZDan

I wouldn't mind them doing a hybrid model, but it should ONLY be an option. I do believe such a car would appeal to a lot of people who wouldn't be able to stomach the rotary fuel mileage (even if the added cost of the hybrid would never be paid for with fuel savings), and would help CAFE.
Weight from hybrid batteries is going to be reduced with lithium, and costs should also continue to come down. There is no question whatsoever that hybrids are much more efficient than ICE-only overall, even vs. diesels (+25% better overall fuel economy, 30% less CO2 emissions). I wouldn't be surprised if some kind of *mild* hybridization becomes the norm. Like an integrated electric motor/starter/alternator/flywheel and a ~25 lb. ~1.5kW-hr battery. I'd rather see something very MILD like that implemented than some kind of KERS system with bigger and heavier batteries/motor(s)/controller(s) designed for serious power.

BLUE TII

iTrader: (9)

I also think a mild hybrid would compliment the rotary very well without adding a lot of weight.

Just enough battery/motor to be able to stop/start the engine in traffic while rolling the vehicle just long enough for engine to catch.

This could work out to make a dual clutch transmission simpler to implement and easier to live with and could be used for some nice instantaneous roll in throttle torque as well.

Plus, the rotary (especially the renesis) could REALLY use a very high speed/torque starter. If the RX-8 had this 90% of the "flooding", carbon lock, "worn out engine", etc problems would not have existed.

The motor would have started 100% of the time and once the combustion gasses got behind the seals the engine would run fine. The customer never would have been the wiser.

Even in cases where the seals really have considerable wear rotaries make about the same top end power and the electric assist torque would mask the loss of low end power from poor sealing.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

How is the FD big, or overwrought (with possible exception of the TT system)?

It's roughly the same size as the SA. Nearly same wheelbase and overall length, but wider and lower. And, the SA is only a few hundred pounds lighter despite the lack of any modern safety systems, power, or chassis rigidity, a live axle, small brakes/wheels, and simplistic interior. Strip that stuff off the FD, and it would be nearly as light, and handle and brake light years better.

j9fd3s

iTrader: (3)

lol, i saw this too. i've had a 1976 Rx3, 1981 Rx7, 1987 Rx7 and FD in the driveway at the same time, and the FD is actually the shortest, its also the least tall. the 1976 Rx3 has giant bumpers... its easily 6" longer than the FD

with weight, the FD is what 2750lbs? my 1979 Rx7 was 2400lbs, my 1983 Rx7 was 2330lbs*

the FD has a huge amount more equipment, and it more than doubles the power, and its only 350lbs more?


*both 1st gens were 100% stock. the 81+ cars are lighter, as they have aluminum bumpers vs steel, and cats vs the thermal reactor.

ZDan

I might have exaggerated a bit to make a point!
2800 lb. is a 19% weight gain over 2350 lb., that is pretty significant. But yeah, the FD isn't much if any physically "bigger" vs. the SA, but I just walked past an SA last night, and somehow it *seems* like it is quite a bit smaller
FD was definitely a LOT more expensive, relatively.

Anyway, if they can do close 300hp NA and keep weight in the 2750 lb. range, I'm there

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

I was actually shocked that the FD really isn't any bigger than an SA when I looked it up. I expected close, but not that close. But yeah, even a modern Miata isn't 2350 anymore.

Modern safety, chassis rigidity standards, and strength/robustness of components for twice the horsepower account for the vast majority of that increase.

mastawyrm

If they are going to go electric at all I don't think it should be an option so the car can be built ground up with batteries in mind complete with making them a stressed member and really low. The Tesla Model S is nearly 5000lbs but it handles more like a regularly weighted sedan because the weight is so low. Imagine that concept in a 3000lbs car.

fmzambon

Personally, I think that anything electric is not even an option in the new Rx-7. And it's not just an opinion, but what was said in the original interview that started this thread last october: "for a sports car it has to be internal combustion". I don't think this leaves much to imagination...

Probably I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that moving to the side exhaust ports configuration changed the situation a bit, helping reduce HC but increasing NOX.
Also, if NOx becomes a problem, the excessive temperature problem for NOx traps could be circumvented by having a bypass valve in the exhaust that, uh, bypasses the NOx trap at high engine loads (perhaps going to a secondary outlet to improve exhaust sound as well).
I'm really curious to see how much of a difference will come from the "clean sheet design", that is not having to carry over design decisions taken when computers were no more powerful than current wristwatches.

Drifted88

iTrader: (3)

Anyone have any ideas on what the new 7 would look like? Be neet to see some concepts from the community.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

Yeah, I've got a real good idea: Nothing.

Just when I saw a preview of the new Supra that Toyota is coming out with, we heard that Mazda is canning the rotary/RX7 development. Mazda sucks.

I love my car, but I'd never consider buying another Mazda vehicle, after they've just committed to building nothing but sporty **** boxes. Even if I'm in the market for a sporty **** box. There's nothing compelling about the brand that would make me want to keep it in the family. I can just buy a Toyota, and it'll be worth more in a few years.

If you're reading Mazda, bite me.

RCCAZ 1

iTrader: (10)

Wow Peter, that's pretty intense

Hey, we all have a love of Doritos and the FD in particular. In speaking with several Mazda execs "in the know" at Sevenstock, I'm convinced that Mazda is only "shelving" the rotary discussion for now to focus on Skyactiv and making the company more profitable. Is the rotary engine gone forever.... NO, but for now talking about it would only confuse the Automotive press and community at large. They are committed to staying on topic, and the current topic is "Skyactive and Skyactive D." I'm certain that rotary development will continue. We can only hope that the current Mazda president can be persuaded, or that his predecessor will be more open to a next generation rotary sportscar.

MisterX

It may as well be gone forever if its sole purpose will be to run as a series hybrid. Huge thumbs down for the a-holes at the top who shelved the product that has defined them for decades; the engine that made them the first - and, only - Jap manufacturer to win LeMans; the engine carmakers from Europe and America all abandoned long before the first RX-7 debuted. And now, they too join that club.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

Yeah. Skyactive diesel really makes my sphincter tingle. Not really sure how you can't "talk about" rotary a while you talk about sky active diesels. And I do branding and advertising for a living. Bottom line, Mazda are losers. You can tell the execs in the know that I said so.

Mazdaspeed RX8 ver2

iTrader: (7)

The novelty of the rotary engine is awesome, don't get me wrong about that, but I think we are all forgetting the fact that to run a business, you must be profitable. Imagine how much money mazda lost doing all the recalls or having a constantly supply of engines and parts readily available. Mazda is now back to being an independent company and regardless if they want a rotary, times have changed, super cars are now pushing for hybrid powerplants, im sure that most people want the GTR to still be all engine, or the NSX or the upcoming Supra but that wont happen. Sadly to say, we're living in the past if we think that all engine cars are going to survive. With emissions regulations going crazy, what makes everyone think that an all motor sports car will be developed in the future? Regardless of how much i enjoy the rotary power plant, it isn't feasible for Mazda to maintain it at the moment when they need to make a profit, when they need to build a good reputation and sustain all the supply chains, manufacturing demands and everything. We just have to deal with times changing.

Its definitely hard for me to deal with the rotary power plant being lost, but it definitely isn't a surprise with all the issues that the power plant has gone through. Working for Tesla Motors really opened my eyes to the reality of what the auto industry may be going towards. Honestly, i love the smell of gasoline, love the smell of my car with the full exhaust and love the feel and vibration of the engine but we are now becoming as a whole more environmentally conscious and we should be. There is definitely always those what if's, if the SUV's didn't become very popular in the 90's, and oil prices didn't sky rocket, if emissions didn't become as strict, im sure we would still be developing rotaries and high power sports cars. What if more RX8's were sold that shows exec's that there is still a good demand, there is a lot of what if's but we have to just deal with the here and now and we can all hope for a new rotary but lets just enjoy the ones we got now, we will never have any pure sports cars any more that are as raw as the rx7's.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

GEEZ guys give mazda a break they have another 2 years to dwell on it and they can still easily make there 2017 deadline

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

I the last 4-5 years, Nissan sold fewer GTR's, and Chevy sold fewer C6 Corvettes than Mazda sold RX8's in the middle of their production run, and they're not bailing on them. Those cars have over 450 horsepower made from motors twice the size of the rotary and still pass emissions.

Stop blaming sales, or emissions, or economics, or other bullshit. This was completely doable. Mazda just sucks.