General Rotary Tech Support Use this forum for tech questions not specific to a certain model year
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: CARiD

Renesis Stuff

Old Feb 5, 2002 | 08:55 PM
  #1  
Big_Will's Avatar
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
From: Raleigh, NC
Renesis Stuff

Hey Everybody,

I read on some website (it had a real generic name like rx7.com) about a guy who was waiting to put Renesis rotors into his FD to make more power. Will this actually work? How about renesis rotors into the other generations of motors?

How much of the cool Renesis stuff can be transplanted onto the older rotaries (twin throttle bodies, hardened internal gear for 10,000 rpm redline, etc)?

Will the Renesis make a good engine swap engine? I know electronics control the twin throttle bodies and stuff like that, but assuming you could get all the parts out of an RX-8 (as soon as some idiot crashes his brand new one) or from the Mazda dealership, well most of it just bolt right up?

From what I understand, the block overall should still be the same. The main differences on the new Renesis involve moving the exhaust ports to the side of the rotor housing and the intake ports are now on the other side of the engine. Based on the info from the aforementioned website, it appears that the rotors are redesigned to be a lot lighter though they are the same shape. So will having different manifolds bolting up to the new port locations effect the engine mount locations? I'm just wondering if a Renesis swap is a practical idea or not.

Thanks.

Will
Reply
Old Feb 6, 2002 | 11:28 AM
  #2  
neo_omega's Avatar
***Moderator***
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,413
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
Won't know until someone really do it.
Reply
Old Feb 6, 2002 | 04:59 PM
  #3  
peejay's Avatar
Old [Sch|F]ool
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 12,855
Likes: 567
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
All Renesis thinking right now is conjecture because nobody has any actual specs or engine parts in their hands. Gotta wait like the rest of us...
Reply
Old Feb 8, 2002 | 10:39 AM
  #4  
Jeff20B's Avatar
Lapping = Fapping
Tenured Member 15 Years
iTrader: (13)
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 15,725
Likes: 91
From: Near Seattle
What if Mazda used 13A specs in the Renesis? That would almost gaurantee no interchangeability with the 13B.
Reply
Old Feb 8, 2002 | 10:54 AM
  #5  
lenny's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
From: Orange County, CA
from what i heard, the renesis is smaller than the 13b-rew. im not sure if that is just because of the removed turbos, or if the engine itself is smaller. but I think it would be pretty cool to put one in an FD if it just bolts up.
Reply
Old Feb 8, 2002 | 09:59 PM
  #6  
boostmotorsport's Avatar
Senior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 706
Likes: 0
From: Dover NH
What are the odds of it just bolting up... slim I think
Reply
Old Feb 14, 2002 | 10:08 PM
  #7  
jbontke's Avatar
Damn security clearances
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
From: Fayetteville, NC
I would think that most of the parts would be interchangeable. The redesigened housings and rotors might be different, but the front cover wouldn't change for reasons of saving money by raiding the Mazda parts bin. And the rear plate wouldn't be changed because of redesigining a bell housing and transmission selection. They would have to make transmissions specifically for the RX8. That would be a big waste of money when they could rob the RX7 parts bin for its transmission selections. It would be neat to take the paddle shif from the RX8 and put it in you FD. Kinda have that Modena feel.
Reply
Old Feb 14, 2002 | 10:37 PM
  #8  
peejay's Avatar
Old [Sch|F]ool
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 12,855
Likes: 567
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
They already do have to make transmissions specifically for the RX-8...

If any of the internal dimensions are changed, my thinking is that they'd make the "diameter" smaller and the rotors wider, the engines seem to get more efficient thermally as the rotors get wider, because you get more volume for minimal surface gain. If they made the eccentricity/trochoid dimensions smaller and then widened the rotors to make the same displacement, they would get a better surface/volume ratio, as well as lighter rotors, lower seal sliding speeds, lower internal shaking forces, SO MANY gains.

Even if everything is the same internally as the 13B, I still doubt it would work well because they had to have changed the way the corner seal/side seals fit in. They moved the intake opening point further advanced than what is possible with current rotors. They might still be useable in a side/periph 13B but you most likely wouldn't be able to make a bridge worthwhile because the bridge would have to be so close to the rotor housing that the eyebrow would be quite small, unless you made it big enough to interfere with the water seals.

Again, everything at this point is conjecture, and I'm basing all of these thoughts on what little information we do know, and present them with the full understanding that I might be flat-out wrong.
Reply
Old Feb 19, 2002 | 10:46 PM
  #9  
yayarx7's Avatar
Are you Nucking Futs?
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
From: Abilene, TEXAS
Is the renesis not a dry sump system. I thought I read that somewhere. That would make the front cover have to be different because of the lack of an oil pan. wouldn't it?
Reply
Old May 29, 2002 | 03:24 AM
  #10  
krazyjl's Avatar
Junior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
From: san jo, ca
Originally posted by peejay
They already do have to make transmissions specifically for the RX-8...

If any of the internal dimensions are changed, my thinking is that they'd make the "diameter" smaller and the rotors wider, the engines seem to get more efficient thermally as the rotors get wider, because you get more volume for minimal surface gain. If they made the eccentricity/trochoid dimensions smaller and then widened the rotors to make the same displacement, they would get a better surface/volume ratio, as well as lighter rotors, lower seal sliding speeds, lower internal shaking forces, SO MANY gains.

Even if everything is the same internally as the 13B, I still doubt it would work well because they had to have changed the way the corner seal/side seals fit in. They moved the intake opening point further advanced than what is possible with current rotors. They might still be useable in a side/periph 13B but you most likely wouldn't be able to make a bridge worthwhile because the bridge would have to be so close to the rotor housing that the eyebrow would be quite small, unless you made it big enough to interfere with the water seals.

Again, everything at this point is conjecture, and I'm basing all of these thoughts on what little information we do know, and present them with the full understanding that I might be flat-out wrong.
but your decreasing the "leverarm" of the chamber - so torque will go down, but revs go up. which seems evident in the renesis
Reply
Old May 29, 2002 | 11:29 AM
  #11  
peejay's Avatar
Old [Sch|F]ool
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 12,855
Likes: 567
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Think about it.

Sure you'd be decreasing the leverage however you'd have more width on the rotor pushing on it. It's a zero-sum equation - basically torque is related directly to displacement, regardless of leverage in the engine.
Reply
Old Jun 1, 2002 | 02:43 AM
  #12  
glenn's Avatar
Junior Member
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
From: Ballarat, Victoria, Australia
The internal dimensions are exactly the same. How do I know this? Because I've seen some renesis rotor housings. They look exactly the same as 13b housings but without the exhaust port.

I know of two workshops here in Australia who have had these housings for some time. Unforunatley they dont have any centre or end plates though.

These housings were bought in with some import 13b motors and are apparently mazda test parts.
Reply
Old Jun 1, 2002 | 07:30 PM
  #13  
RETed's Avatar
Lives on the Forum
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 26,664
Likes: 22
From: n
I find it hard to believe Mazda would somehow "missplace" prototype engine parts that really haven't been released for public consumption...



-Ted
Reply
Old Jun 3, 2002 | 04:31 AM
  #14  
glenn's Avatar
Junior Member
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
From: Ballarat, Victoria, Australia
renesis stuff

Why did I know I would get that kind of response?

I can tell you that I have seen these housings with my own eyes. Adelaide Jap Dismantlers aquired them with some import motors and they were later sold to Dalton Automotive. I personally know these two companies very well and I myself was very surprised to see the housings.

Ted , I know it maybe hard to belive but these housings do exist. I am not in the habit of publishing bullshit posts!

Glenn
Reply
Old Jun 3, 2002 | 07:36 PM
  #15  
RETed's Avatar
Lives on the Forum
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 26,664
Likes: 22
From: n
Re: renesis stuff

Originally posted by glenn
Ted , I know it maybe hard to belive but these housings do exist. I am not in the habit of publishing bullshit posts!
You have only 3 posts in here - 2 are in this thread.&nbsp Go figure...


-Ted
Reply
Old Jun 3, 2002 | 08:56 PM
  #16  
glenn's Avatar
Junior Member
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
From: Ballarat, Victoria, Australia
Ted, what difference does it make how many posts I have published? I am simply stating that from what I have seen the internal dimensions of the rotor housings are the same as a normal 13B.

Glenn
Reply
Old Jun 3, 2002 | 09:13 PM
  #17  
13bpower's Avatar
s4 for life
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,516
Likes: 1
From: Oahu
When is the Rx-8 supposed to hit us soil? The first model year will be 2003 if Im not mistaken. Wouldn't that mean about september 2002? Anyone know for sure?
Reply
Old Jun 3, 2002 | 10:26 PM
  #18  
peejay's Avatar
Old [Sch|F]ool
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 12,855
Likes: 567
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
By US law for a car to be sold as a 2003 model, it can be sold no earlier than Jan 1 2002.

Ford did that to us with the '97 F-150, sold starting Jan 1996, and sold alongside the (previous-gen) '96 F-150. Bastards
Reply
Old Jun 8, 2002 | 04:58 PM
  #19  
85RX7GS's Avatar
Rotary Freak
Tenured Member 05 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,693
Likes: 1
From: NJ
Should see it sometime early next year if not later this year...hopefully
Reply
Old Jun 13, 2002 | 04:39 PM
  #20  
im4u's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
From: fayetteville,nc
the rotors would fit.they r 14% lighter so this causes the lower torque plus the higher compression i believe.i was thinkin bout this swap also.plus i believe it is recieving a 6 speed tranny.when i thought about the electronic controlled t. bodies,why not replace them with like 2 ford t.bodies and us two throttle cables,it would just be a great big mess for the person that would do ur ecu wiring
Reply
Old Jun 13, 2002 | 09:20 PM
  #21  
peejay's Avatar
Old [Sch|F]ool
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 12,855
Likes: 567
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Originally posted by im4u
.they r 14% lighter so this causes the lower torque plus the higher compression i believe.
That's ome of the more "interesting" theories that I've ever heard. Hmm, heavier rotors=more torque and lower compression.
Reply
Old Jun 14, 2002 | 09:04 AM
  #22  
RETed's Avatar
Lives on the Forum
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 26,664
Likes: 22
From: n
Gimme some of that crack you're smoking!


-Ted
Reply
Old Jun 14, 2002 | 11:18 AM
  #23  
im4u's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
From: fayetteville,nc
no torque equals twisting force correct?if they are lighter than wouldnt it cause less torque?i wasnt sayin the lighter they are causes high compression i said the high compression of the rotary keeps the torque down but the rpms up
Reply
Old Jun 14, 2002 | 05:11 PM
  #24  
peejay's Avatar
Old [Sch|F]ool
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 12,855
Likes: 567
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
uh.........

I don't even know where to BEGIN...

Torque is no relation to rotating mass. Torque is entirely from the combustion process.

Higher compression ratio increases torque at all RPM.
Reply
Old Jun 14, 2002 | 07:08 PM
  #25  
RETed's Avatar
Lives on the Forum
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 26,664
Likes: 22
From: n
Originally posted by im4u
no torque equals twisting force correct?if they are lighter than wouldnt it cause less torque?i wasnt sayin the lighter they are causes high compression i said the high compression of the rotary keeps the torque down but the rpms up
You're getting all confused, or you just went through a shitload of literature on lighten flywheels...

F=ma, but in this case we can rearrange things around a bit to F/M=a.
Force/Mass = Acceleration
Force is directly related to combustion.
Mass is obviously the mass of the rotor itself.
Acceleration is directly related to torque.
To INCREASE Acceleration, we need to either INCREASE Force (combustion) AND/OR DECREASE Mass.
It's all there in black&white - this is physics.


-Ted
Reply

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:08 AM.