and… what about the NSU Ro80? why doesn’t it count?

“Mazda’s RX series is probably the only original Asian design EVER.”

944 owners might beg to differ on that “original Asian design” on the second generation RX-7.

For Mercury, I’d go with a rotary powered “Messenger”. If anyone remembers than concept it was a basically “Mercury does a Corvette”. It was powered by the 4.6L V8, an engine that weighs more about twice what their 4L V6 does. Stick a lighter, smaller engine in that and FORD could have had a contender.

FORD is pretty well known for “Making it Work” as far as cars go (business… not so much right now). With FORD’s help Mazda could have a Rotary engine that burns nearly zero oil, compared the a Piston Engine, needs no rebuild for 100K+ miles, though still sooner than a well maintained Piston engine, and just a real alternative to the heavy, complex, piston engine in high performance apps.

This may be case much like the Modern jet engine, where the typical materials we associate with engines just aren’t going to cut it. Newer, stronger, more effective materials may very well be needed. to make an engine that will work. Also maybe a totally new approach as well.

That said, I’ll just reiterate: More than MAZDA is needed to make the Rotary work. Anyone have the number to Boeing or Lockheed-Martin?

It stands to reason that it’s a cost-saving measure, but I have no data to back that up.

Folks who love ANY RX-7 and who also restomod old RX-3′s, RX-4′s, etc. are already sold on the rotary in any state of tune.

It’s newer buyers that Mazda needs to think of and that’s why I think the performance edge is the best thing Mazda has going for the rotary engine in the future.

A Turbo 13B with 300 horsepower and 220+ lb/ft torque and all of Mazda’s modern improvements would do wonders for the RX-8.

Anyone can do this, Blakkarr, yes, but consider that some people live in heavily smog controlled states where they are harassed by the police just for having a modified engine. All they wanted was a turbocharged RX-8, right?

Too many states are considering following California’s dumb emissions laws, so Mazda should build a turbo rotary themselves so there is less of a hassle on the part of an enthusiast owner.

I say “dumb” because in California you can still pass the required tailpipe emissions or pass below the requirement for your vehicle (what everyone is after, right? No more smog per vehicle than allowed. Less if possible?) but regardless of how clean the vehicle runs, a modified engine will almost always fail upon visual inspection.

That’s why Mazda should build a turbo RX-8. Sure, lots of people can do it themselves. That isn’t the issue at all. The issue is the government preventing them from doing it in a normal manner without fear of having their car impounded (yes, impounded!).

Now if they’d just build an MR2 that will sell. Just hammer down and build a mean little club racer.

It is a bit strange that Toyota, Nissan and Mazda all had $40K+ sports cars (okay the RX-7 came in at about $39k) and dropped them within about two years. This is blamed on poor sales due to high prices. In Japan they still sold well, indeed the RX-7 was still a hot seller in Japan even as the RX-8 was making the rounds in the US and Europe.

While Nissan is slowly but dramatically debuting hot 350Zs, Mazda has been slow to do the same. This may be due to FORD’s influence or a feeling on Mazda’s part that superfied RX-8s are not needed.

But for the foreseeable future, the RX-8 will remain NA and defiantly different. Priced as loaded at about $27K, happily useful (Just remember to pack a couple of extra quarts of oil in the trunk), and just a cool looking car, who needs turbo. If you just gots to have it, then go buy it and strap it on yourself. That seems to be the path the Japanese are following these days.

1) where is the new RX-7?
2) why don’t we have a turbocharged 13B Renesis?
3) performance comparable to a 3.0L V6 engine? What KIND of 3.0L v6? Performance like a Ford Duratec 3.0L V6 or performance more like a Nissan VQ30 engine? More specific information please, Mazda…
4) Is there some reason we are not seeing a new 3-rotor engine, since Mazda is reluctant to add turbochargers on a Renesis?

I’m glad they are working on any way to keep the rotary engine alive, but it does need more power and more torque in the form of turbocharging.

Get back in you cage, monkey! Making more noise than you’re worth. If you actually read a thing before responding you wouldn’t look like such a feckless little shit. Bad monkey! no banana for you!

Truthfully I love all sports cars. But I know who is in whose weight class. The RX-8 is not even close the Corvette’s class. The 350Z, Porsche Cayman (not withstanding price), and a few others are more it’s speed.

But then I am not talking to you anymore. This is for anyone who is reading.

Mazda is so far the only maker of Rotary engines in a production car. If this other makers like GM or FORD, who owns a sizable portion of Mazda, put forth the effort and research that Mazda is and bringing it to the streets, Rotary engines might be much more durable, efficient, burn way less oil (and fuel), and make for some really interesting cars.

A Mustang powered by a rotary engine would weight well less than even a V6 ‘Stang and still make over 400Hp. The C6 Corvette (as a hypothetical) would come in at well under 2700lbs and still make over 500hp.

F/econ and Oil consumption would be an issue but not for long as this tiny but powerful engine became more mainstream and less niche as is the case with the RX-8.

Performance: Rotary engines easily rev very high and fast and long. They are natural racing engines. That are simple and light weight making them easy the fix and maintain. They are easily modular. The RX-8 uses only two rotors. The Corvette prototype in the 1970s used three rotors. Mazda regularly races, at least in Japan, tri and quad rotor engines.

BTW, Mazdas flagship is an SUV, their cars are merely econoboxes and chick sportscars.

If they made MS3 RWD, Mazda would have to accept the embarassment of selling a flagship car alongside a compact 4-banger that smokes it.

I dunno man. “The 2008 Corvette will deliver 430 horsepower and get 30mpg”. That about blows everything else in the price range (and higher) out of the water.

Why make the mazdaspeed 3 FWD? it would be an infinitely superior car to the RX-8

Things like this makes me truly believe that someone or several someones inside Ford are deliberately trying to sink the company, perhaps so they can get a buyout offer and then skip off.

I have an ’04 RX-8 and have loved it since buying it new. Gas mileage has been in the high teens (occasional dips into the low 20′s), has been BULLETPROOF for 50,000 miles, and has only eaten about a quart or so every 3,000 miles. Not deal-breaking stuff by any means, considering how much fun it is to drive and how great it looks compared to almost anything else on the road.

Can’t wait to replace it with an even more powerful vehicle, though I agree…it’s time for 3 or 4 rotor Mazdas!

Now, I LLOOVED the RX-7, still do, but right now I’m in the market for an RX-8.. I mean why not it has a very comfortable interior, has 4 doors, cheap insurance, and 9k rpms to play with. For all you guys saying that Japanese cars are bland and have no soul well i could understand that but this car has soul written all over it.

Now the only thing that pisses me off about Mazda is they wont give us a 2 rotor turbo.. or a 3 rotor. But a turbo could only help the rotaries they give some nice torque down low and save gas so I dont understand why they dont turbo the Renesis.

I dream about 3-4 rotor engines. 3-4 rotors put down some serious, serious power.

MAZDA GIVE US A 3 ROTOR!!!

I’ll buy that.

The RX series is, however, eaceptionally fun to drive.