3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002) 1993-2002 Discussion including performance modifications and Technical Support Sections.
Sponsored by:

New Rotary Engine Technology

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 14, 2001 | 09:51 PM
  #1  
93 RX-7's Avatar
Thread Starter
Full Member
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
From: Shawnee, KS, USA
New Rotary Engine Technology

Hey guys, ran across a great article on an 85 year old man who's working on a revolutionary new rotary design. While the article does briefly mention our beloved car, its focuses mainly on one man's dream to make the ultimate engine. Take a look:


Rotary Development
Reply
Old Nov 15, 2001 | 01:33 AM
  #2  
wReX's Avatar
Does not drive a WRX!!!
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,253
Likes: 1
From: San Antonio
Very cool article.

"...the engine in the McMaster prototype, they won't find it under the hood or in the trunk. It will be tucked into the rear axle, where the differential typically sits. So placed, the MRE would eliminate the transmission and the drivetrain and reduce the car's weight by a third...
...McMaster claims that it could theoretically generate more than 1,000 horsepower."


Better have lots of new tires sitting around
Reply
Old Nov 15, 2001 | 05:25 AM
  #3  
Jsquared's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
From: Raleigh, NC (NC State)/Charlotte, NC
that sounds incredible if he can get it to work
Reply
Old Nov 15, 2001 | 06:05 AM
  #4  
Node's Avatar
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,383
Likes: 3
From: Stinson Beach, Ca
I want a engine for each wheel, **** differentials.
All Wheel Steering
All Wheel Drive
All Wheel Independent Suspension
All Wheel Independent Engines ;-)
Reply
Old Nov 15, 2001 | 06:09 AM
  #5  
Node's Avatar
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,383
Likes: 3
From: Stinson Beach, Ca
"Called the McMaster Rotary Engine (MRE), it has no oil, no seals, no rings, and no coolant; it is designed to run completely dry. The burnished-steel apparatus weighs just 220 pounds -- about a third lighter than a typical six-cylinder car engine -- yet McMaster claims that it could theoretically generate more than 1,000 horsepower, enough to drive an M-1 tank. In a car it would eliminate the need for the transmission, the drivetrain, and the exhaust system. "
Uhm, itd have about 1000hp and about 100lbs/torque
Sorry but tanks are staying diesel ;-)

"As radical as the engine's design may be, even more so is the fuel with which McMaster intends to run it. "We begin with sunshine and water," he says"
Sunshine, lollipops and raiiiiiiiiiiiinbows :-D
Reply
Old Nov 15, 2001 | 06:22 AM
  #6  
Node's Avatar
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,383
Likes: 3
From: Stinson Beach, Ca
this guy sounds pretty amazing
but no transmission? They expect to run that ****** at 1:1???
They definately need a transmission.
I mean, there idea of none makes for a smooth ride and constant acceleration through the powerband.
But still, with a tranny they would stress the engine less, and have more power in some areas, and less RPMs would mean less vibration (little but there will be some), and less noise.
I say go for a 3 speed or so centrifugal tranny.
But that wouldnt fit in the axle. Oh well, fault of design ;-)
Reply
Old Nov 15, 2001 | 06:27 AM
  #7  
Node's Avatar
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,383
Likes: 3
From: Stinson Beach, Ca
"As for rotary car engines, only one company has really championed them in a meaningful way. That was Japan's Mazda, which in the late 1960s developed its own rotary engines and in 1978 introduced the RX-7, the sporty coupe that finally validated the design. With Detroit mired in a slump, Mazda sold more than 1 million RX-7s between 1978 and 1985. But as conventional engines caught up in fuel efficiency, Mazda all but gave up on the rotary by the early 1990s. The company last year introduced two new rotary designs -- the new RX-7 and the RX-8 -- but even its chief executive has admitted that Mazda's rotary cars are merely "icon products.""
THOSE BITCH *** MOTHER *******!
Reply
Old Nov 16, 2001 | 02:20 AM
  #8  
Donovan's Avatar
Hi sir
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 443
Likes: 2
From: Modesto/Rancho Cordova CA
why Oh WHY couldn't Mercedes have gotten the Rotary cars they where working on off the ground. Some times I really hate Mazda
Think of where the rotary could be if a GOOD ( Toyota BMW etc.) car company had made them.
Reply
Old Nov 16, 2001 | 08:55 AM
  #9  
Junior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
From: A Place Where KIWI Birds Build Their Nest
OMG......He'll be punished by GOD by making a car such that fast. :p :p :p

OMG....1000hp, man!!!
Reply
Old Nov 16, 2001 | 01:20 PM
  #10  
93 RX-7's Avatar
Thread Starter
Full Member
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
From: Shawnee, KS, USA
Am I off on this? I think Ford, who owns Mazda, won't let them import the RX-7 because of the competition it would give to their Rustang.
Reply
Old Nov 16, 2001 | 05:55 PM
  #11  
Mykl's Avatar
Senior Member
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 724
Likes: 0
From: Montgomery, Al.
Originally posted by Node

Uhm, itd have about 1000hp and about 100lbs/torque
Sorry but tanks are staying diesel ;-)


Sunshine, lollipops and raiiiiiiiiiiiinbows :-D
Modern tanks are not diesel powered.

M1 tanks run on a gas turbine engine that makes 1500 horsepower, they don't run on an ICE. I'm not sure how much torque it makes at low revolution, but since it's a turbine probably not very much. Turbines are actually most efficient when running at peak power.

So, if that rotary concept could produce and sustain 1500 horsepower then it could very easily move a tank.

Remember, that horsepower is merely a multiplication of torque at a certain RPM.

torque X RPM / 5252 = horsepower

So, theoretcially, if you can spin a Honda engine to 100000 RPM's, and it made ~100 lbft of torque there, it could easily move a 63 ton tank. Fuel efficiency would suck though, and you'd be better off with a turbine in the end.
Reply
Old Nov 16, 2001 | 05:56 PM
  #12  
Mykl's Avatar
Senior Member
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 724
Likes: 0
From: Montgomery, Al.
Originally posted by 93 RX-7
Am I off on this? I think Ford, who owns Mazda, won't let them import the RX-7 because of the competition it would give to their Rustang.
I think you're a bit off there.

I think it has more to do with that the car just isn't profitable over here. Not enough of a demand for it.
Reply
Old Nov 16, 2001 | 06:15 PM
  #13  
Swamp RX-7's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
From: Washington D.C.
I have a hard time thinking of my RX-7 as an "icon product". WTF is that all about? If Honda or maybe mercedes had gotten hold of the rotary first, the RX-7 and other rotary powered cars would be the norm. Also, a company like honda or toyota would have made the car almost bullet-proof, by using state-of-the-art parts under the hood and around the car. They wouldn't cheap out like Mazda and use cheap plastic. Cheap plastic on a $33000 car!!!I doubt the S2K(although slow) has cheap shitty parts on it. It is the #2 sport car behind the NSX. Oh well, I bought my RX-7 for it's innovative looks, beautiful lines, wonderful handling, and telling people that they just got beat by a 1.3L engine. I didn't buy it cuz it's a Mazda.
Reply
Old Nov 24, 2001 | 12:13 PM
  #14  
93 RX-7's Avatar
Thread Starter
Full Member
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
From: Shawnee, KS, USA
I have to agree that it wasn't profitable for them. Especially with so many car companies going after the limited high dollar market (Nissan, Toyota, not to mention Chevy with King Vette).

Having owned an 85 GS new from the showroom, I'd like to see Mazda drop back on the RX- 7. Make it a little smaller again, keep the handling but less muscle. We'd have a quick agile car again at more of a $25K price tag. And all you guys that are into opening up the engines could still have a blast adding all the horsepower you want.

And I can't agree more. Spend a couple bucks more on the interior and get rid of some plastic.
Reply
Old Nov 24, 2001 | 01:00 PM
  #15  
Flobb's Avatar
Rattle can retard
Tenured Member: 20 Years
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
From: St. Peters, MO
old news, and I already argued this thing being crap in the old thread so I won't bother doing it again.
Reply
Old Nov 24, 2001 | 10:28 PM
  #16  
poony's Avatar
Junior Member
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
From: Canada
The following link is their McMaster Motor's website. Just went to check that! Very simple, but explain you what the engine looks like.

That's quite a neat idea. I guess I'll want to try a car with this type of rotary engine when the day comes!



http://www.mcmastermotor.com/concept.htm
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
elfking
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
3
Aug 19, 2015 09:48 PM
Seaweed
Introduce yourself
0
Aug 16, 2015 11:46 AM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:00 AM.