I rode maybe fifty different RE-5s, commuted on them, and was a mechanic on them. In 1976/77 I was a mechanic at a large Suzuki dealership. They had a certified RE-5 specialist who preferred not to work on them and supervised me instead. I wanted to work on them as I was very intrigued by the Wankel, though I thought the RE-5 ugly and guilty of trying too hard. What I remember: It was heavy. Whatever the official weight was, it carried it high. HIGH. Policy was that to move one onto a lift or anything other than basic flat surface rolling required a spotter. While there were two model years, there were a lot of rolling changes. The second year gauge cluster ditched the goofy motorized roll-forward lens cover, and many were supplied to left over 1st year models to help move them. While the core powerplant was simple, there was a whole galaxy of subsystems that were fidgety, needed frequent adjustment, and were difficult to diagnose. The best thing you could do for an RE-5 was to just kill the secondary on the two-stage carb. There were a variety of sensors that worked in concert to manage that, lots of cables and adjustments, and it didn't do a damn thing anyway. On a drag strip or at Bonneville, yes. On the road, you never needed to rev it to where the secondary kicked in (it was way up there) because the torque curve was so flat (plus, at revs it did vibrate. Not a lot, but it was kinda unpleasant). Easily 3/4 of the rideability issues just disappeared if you disconnected the secondary and forgot about all the sensors. At least ten times we just could not get one to behave, we would then tell the customer we wanted to try something and he could judge. He would come back ecstatic & ask what we had done to finally fix it. One guy ever wanted us to restore the secondary and sensors/cables/vacuum lines/whatever. I liked riding them, it was different, and once going was pleasant enough if you didn't try to push it. Ground clearance was not much anyway. I have to say, it got boring pretty quickly. On the point of the Wankel's small size..... not really. Water jackets were AROUND everything (not between cylinders) all the subsystems had to be somewhere, the carb arrangement.... when you had the engine out of the frame, that is the biggest hole I ever saw on a motorcycle. I remember looking at the huge/heavy lump on the bench and the gaping cavern in the bike, and thinking, "what happened to the Wankel thing?"
Love your videos, Bart. Never owned an RE-5, but as someone who entered motorcycling in the early 1970s, I remember it well. Cycle magazine -- arguably THE U.S. journalistic authority of the era -- had an extremely interesting road test to introduce the RE-5 in their January, 1975 issue, which really got into not only its performance and riding qualities, but its design as well. Great reading for anyone who can dig that article up. A couple of thoughts, as your video takes us down memory lane... One of the RE-5's strong points was its handling, at mid-and (fairly) high speeds. Suspension was crude, to be sure, but relative to other big Japanese bikes of the era, it was arguably the best handling non-European bike of its time. The wonky look of the RE-5 engine was largely a result of Suzuki trying their best to make servicing as accessible as possible, with nearly all typical tune-up components adorning the exterior of the engine. It sure made for a busy and non-traditional look, but if nothing else, the engine's appearance wasn't random. And maybe the one thing not mentioned in the video that helped seal the RE-5's fate was its sound. From Harleys to mopeds, historically bikers have had a visceral appeal to different engine sounds, and the RE-5 was truly out in left field when it came to that. People have described the sound in different ways over the years, but I don't think I've ever heard anyone praise it as pleasant or involving. Along with its somewhat alien design, cost, relatively unexceptional performance, mileage/range, and fears about reliability, I really think its sound was the final nail in its coffin. Again, Bart, thanks for this ride down memory lane!
As an ex Re5 owner, best I ever saw was 36 mpg on hwy going under 60. Other than that the standard was 24-26mpg not counting oil consumption. I do miss it, it was quirky in a good way.
For the 1976 model year, Suzuki toned down the styling of the RE5 with more conventional looking gauges and bodywork. Unfortunately, it didn't help sales at all. Surprised this wasn't mentioned in the video.
Nice to see the digitalized version of a 16 mm movie which I rescued from the Belgian Suzuki importers scrapeyard in 1992 again appears on a youtube movie. I still have the original 16mm film which I believe is the only left in the world I still have my RE5 after 45 years ownership. The engine still lasts but my back is unfortunately not as everlasting as the bike....
First engine I ever built was a 12A rotary from a Mazda RX2 when I was 13 year's old 😂. Bart you seem to forget about the Norton Rotary which dominated racing in it's day.
Local MC repair shop here had one in a couple of years ago. Had one mile on it. Apparently it sat on dealership floor for so long they started cannibalizing parts of it to repair customer bikes
My parents owned two Arctic Cat Snowmobiles with Wankel 303 cc engines. They were good engines. I wanted a Suzuki RE5 when they came out, but went the conservative route with a Suzuki GS750.
I owned a rotary bike and a rotary car. I was disappointed with both. I bought a Hercules German made rotary that sat on dealers show room floor for 3 years before I bought it. I drove a Chevy Nova with a 305ci engine at the time. It got close to twice the fuel mileage my rotary bike got. The old sales pamphlet the dealer gave me said it was 500cc that preforms like a 1000cc bike. It did not, my Yamaha RD 350 was faster. The rotor seals failed at 4000 miles. I had worse luck with a Mazda rotary powered truck. Their sales slogan was, cars that make you go hmmm. They were correct! Hmmm, why did I buy this. I swapped the rotary engine with a Mazda piston engine in my truck and drove the wheels off that little truck. The Hercules bike is still sitting in my shed out back. Right next to the 1997 Ural bike that I wore out with only 9600 kilometers on the odometer which works out to be 6000 miles. The engine, transmission, and rear drive is shot. It would be cheaper to replace than fix. Want to know the most fun bikes to own? Ask me. Want to know the worst bike for reliability? Ask me. I owned them all and the answer to both questions is the same. The trick is buy them when brand new and get rid of them before they need repair. Which means having a disposable income much greater than mine. I really enjoyed the Hercules and Ural before they stopped being fun.
I was riding when the RE5 came out and in all these years I never noticed the round-sided tail light. I guess I was always focused on that weird instrument cluster and odd-looking engine.
I enjoy Bart's videos, but am sometimes dismayed at how significant factors can be overlooked in a single generation when reviewing history. My '76 RE5 was my first 'I should have never sold it' bike in my 55 years of riding. Suzuki was a daring innovator in the '70s. As such, it created some of worst- and best-looking bikes. My RE5 replaced another equally ugly Suzuki that I dearly loved: the first-year model GT750 'Water Buffalo'. Mine was purple. So yes, the first year RE5 was shockingly ugly to American tastes, with its cylindrical tail light and matching instrument cluster with its goofy pop-up cover. But that factor is left half-told by lack of even a photo of the '76 RE5 which was one of most beautiful bikes of the times. Gone were the goofy shapes. Glossy black with tasteful gold pinstripes and (first ever?) matching full fiberglass fairing and luggage-direct from the factory! RE5 rotor cases had a wire 'lock'. Suzuki sold the RE5 with a customer policy to replace the whole rotor case for a modest (as I recall $150) exchange fee if it ever failed. Mine had rotor seal failure at 32,000 miles. I took it apart myself, carried the still-sealed rotor case to the Dealer, who submitted the claim and received the replacement. I put it back together myself and put another 32,000 miles on the bike before selling it and replacing it with a first-year Honda CX500. There's another unmentioned RE5 popularity factor: In the early and mid '70s, conventional wisdom among much of the motorcycling community was still that two strokes were 'good and proper' for dirt and dual-purpose bikes; not so much for road bikes. No doubt many potential buyers initially interested in the RE5 were turn-off as soon as they found out that, like a 2-stroke, it also 'burned oil' and required watching and keeping its separate injection oil tank full. That was another element tilting borderline sales toward the 'like a car' security of 4-stroke buying decisions for large road bikes. JET
As a Mazda Rx-7 owner and someone who loves motorcycles and has been looking for either a Re5 or Hercules for a long time, the rotary only has 1 way to come back imo. As you mentioned emissions would probably stop them from being production bikes, there was recently a rotary race bike build, and Norton also made a few rotary engines. The only way for a road going bike to have it is most likely as a generator for a hybrid system like the new Mazda suv that is out.
Suzuki's gem was the water Buffalo, said to use the same chassis, suspension, and brakes as the RE5 and a very roadable bike for its time. Missed buying one from a coworker (and a CBX from another, same near miss/reason) because he (they) passed before we cut a deal. btw, Selling a few H-Ds now, hope to ride my 650 Yam more, miss my Suzi Titans.
I owned 76 RE5, bought it new in 77 . At around 25k miles it locked up, at 90mph. The Suzuki dealer wouldn't work on. But can't complain, I it ran very hard. I paid $1500. Out the door ..
My first motorcycle was a Suzuki GS750. My last motorcycle was a Suzuki RG500 (square 4 two stroke). Between 1977 and 1988 I had seen a total of one Suzuki RE5.
A Rotary revival? Honestly, it's unlikely. When Mazda stopped using the Wankel design, that was pretty much the death knell. Too difficult to meet emissions, too prone to maintenance issues, and too expensive to make reliable in a production setting... As for a rotary being used as a range extender in a Hybrid setup, it would probably be easier to use a pure gas turbine (Jet) as a generator. Cheaper to build, only 1 moving part, will run on anything (including E95), and there's been a whole lot more research done on making gas turbines reliable than there has ever been done on the Wankel...
I had a Suzuki first model RE5 .. it was a wonderful & excellent motorcycle , never had any problems , still dont under stand why it had a rev counter , off the dial every time , thank you for the Video
BART your videos are getting better and better! Great point about cars getting ugly and slow in the 70’s, and bikes getting faster and beautiful in the same era. Wankles make very little torque, and that is the bottom line. And they don’t last long, use lots of fuel, but the cool factor is there no doubt. Look forward to your next video.
Another great video, thank you! I’d love to see a big manufacturer give another full effort towards a rotary bike like they did in the beginning with a ton of money, but with all the knowledge and advancements we have now. There’s that bike Guy Martin has a video of him riding, but I’m not too sure what is going on with that, it’s a boutique manufacturer I believe.
To me the most interesting part of the RE5 was the fact that Suzuki tried something different. Many times those oddball inventions become the norm. In those days Suzuki wasn’t afraid to try new ideas. Like the water buffalo Gt750. I can’t remember other manufacturers making liquid cooled motorcycles at the time. Now liquid cooled motorcycle engines are very common.
As a new motorcyclist when this bike came out, I remember wondering what the point was it didn’t make any special horsepower number. It didn’t have any 0 to 60 or quarter mile performance value it was ugly as sin and it cost more. The landscape at that time was full of lower cost better looking lightercheaper Motorcycles this bike looked like a science project on wheels scared everybody with its complexities that’s why no one bought it. It was a science project built to showcase a motor that no one wanted.
The biggest problem with rotaries is lubrication. They typically use a port to bring lubrication to the combustion chamber resulting in burnt sludge buildup. Using two stoke oil in the fuel and blocking off the engine oil injection port cures it.
As much as i like the idea of the rotary engine it will never be a winning concept. The reason is that in relation to the volume of the combustion chamber it has too much combustion chamber wall surface area. This wall surface area is where heat escapes into the cooling system instead of being used to drive the engine. The consequence is that in terms of thermodynamic efficiency it can never win from a conventional ICE engine. And there is also the oil consumption that prevents it (like 2stroke engines) from getting good exhaust emissions like a 4stroke ICE.
Suzuki was a real mess in the 70's. Early in the decade, they fielded a series of two stroke triples (their GT series) capped by the GT750, aka the 'Water Buffalo' as it was the only two stroke with liquid cooling at the time. Unfortunately, two strokes were on the way out due to emission concerns and of all the Japanese 'Big 4', Suzuki was the last to finally work on a true 4-stroke multi cylinder replacement for its line-up. In hindsight, the foray into the Wankel really put Suzuki at a disadvantage with regard to finally adopting a class-leading, performance focused, 4-stroke engine. Suzuki's GT series (multiple displacements) ran from 1972 to 1976, overlapping the RE5 model. This fact probably didn't help the RE5 gain much market share, which had become very crowded by the mid-70's. As you noted, the Wankel was very complicated, but also made for a relatively heavy bike for its displacement (563 lbs. vs 482 lbs. for the GT750 and the all-new Gold Wing tipping the scales at a competitive 584 lbs.) For all the Japanese makes and models on offer at the time, even the slightest negative reports would probably have been enough to sink any new technology equipped motorcycle. As to your musings on any potential Wankel rebirth, I seriously doubt there has really been technological advancements to warrant an effort by the motorcycle industry to dive into this form of motive power again. Look how long Mazda has been toiling on this type of engine. The RX5 has had a few rebirths using a Wankel, but they've yet to realize a vehicle that outperforms any other engine technology. I do like the notion of looking at specific motorcycle models that didn't quite make the cut. Perhaps you could do another video on something like Yamaha's XS750 (aka, the Foam Boat).
Yes, I do think rotary engines could make a comeback for motorcycles. Despite being a fan of electric cars, I don't see how electric bikes make sense - too much battery, too heavy, to short a range - if the range could be solved then maybe but I don't see that happening any time soon. Basically - the gold standard of motorcycling will be some kind of light weight nuclear isotope that delivers unlimited power to a perfectly proportioned chasis and associated systems - when that will happen I don't know, in the meantime - ride a Hayabusa - it's the best.
Suzuki thinking: If it is difficult, don't do it. It has to be almost impossible to achieve. So we just make it close to impossible, even if we don't have to!
at this point - like it or not - electric (or some development of usable hydrogen technology in the distant future) seems like the way all transportation is going. Retooling from one form of internal combustion to another seems counter to the thinking of corporate planners. And I don't think some independent start up could have the capital to develop a revolutionary form of motivation - unless a Musk or Beezos suddenly got the two-wheel bug.
I feel like today more than ever people want to have a reliable n low maintenance motorcycle not the exotic one ... probably has to do with biker getting older on average.
The oil crisis didn't really affect Australia l can remember petrol been 50c a gallon in the 1970s and l ride and owned Suzuki motorcycles and l had a GT750 but my brother owned a RE 5 he owned the second generation which dropped the termous flask tail light and instrument cluster also the tennis ball indicators and l rode the RE 5 and for performance it would blow my GT750 into the weeds l rode it to work one day and hit 140kph on the Sydney Harbour Bridge my dream was to do 160kph on the Sydney Harbour Bridge l nearly did that l wasn't watching the speedometer that day fortunately no Police around but the RE 5 nearly sent Suzuki broke
Also rotary engines and emission control just doesnt work look at the mazda rx8 it was a flop because of them under powered and very poor reliability due to emissions control
sure, this is a non-AI intelligent commenter. the advantage of the current engines is the SOUND . machos want a good " beast " sound. look at Harley correctly patenting - or trying to patent their sound.
That wanker who pitched his butt in the advert is one of the _real_ reasons people are out against smokers. You get really sick and tired of going somewhere, anywhere, everywhere and there are old cigarette butts lying on the ground wherever you look. I was a smoker for half my life and it pisses _me_ off.
The rotary engine will never make a comeback. It has too many problems that cannot be corrected. Fuel and oil consumption are the two main factors. In order to ensure the longevity of the Apex seals it must burn some oil. This is counterproductive considering today's smog control measures.
Not just the many problems, imo the concept is fundamentally flawed. The combustion pushes into a wedge like corner, so you never get to nearly use the same power from any single explosion a piston engine does. Don't tell the Wankelbros I said this please, they can be quite vindicative.
I don't know but the Rotary engine in motorcycles have been cursed to flop. Either the bike turned out to be flop or it took down the whole company 😅. No1 wants a rotary engine in bikes atleast even today because today bikes are getting expensive with advanced electronics,safety package, complying with emissions norms etc so no1 in their right minds would put a rotary engine in a bike in 2024-25 because it will just just cause the bike to cost a bomb to manufacture and sell later on. It would be a disaster.
Is it me or was it pretty much american cars that sucked during the 70s? Like i know even before and after they were not the greatest but during the 70s at least here in Australia we had decent cars also japan and Europe had great cars.
I guess the argument can be made that motorcycles have become too high tech and too smooth and that all the raw excitement has been lost chasing the next big thing. Since for most of us in North America, a motorcycle is a hobby and play thing, I don't want my motorcycle to ride like my boring but very reliable Toyota. My next bike maybe a Royal Enfield.
Never accept an idea from someone whose parents named him Felix, it can only go wrong. I rode an RE 5 and it was, to put it mildly, an underwhelming experience. Heavy, complex, and no improvement on conventional engines.
![Digital Circus Episode 4 [TRAILER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/abZtsmMUbJo/mqdefault.jpg)
How does this channel not have a million subscribers? There's a lack of high-quality mini documentaries on motorcycles - this is the stuff we need!
Maybe it’s his algorithm (he doesn’t produce consistent content) and/or he doesn’t “buy” subscribers.
FortNine is holding the bar high. But Bart is really good. 👍🏻
@@vincedibona4687 FortNine and - The illestrator - (although, he's been AWOL for over a year)
Right?
He totally deserves a million subs….. these videos are always so awesomely done!
I rode maybe fifty different RE-5s, commuted on them, and was a mechanic on them. In 1976/77 I was a mechanic at a large Suzuki dealership. They had a certified RE-5 specialist who preferred not to work on them and supervised me instead. I wanted to work on them as I was very intrigued by the Wankel, though I thought the RE-5 ugly and guilty of trying too hard. What I remember: It was heavy. Whatever the official weight was, it carried it high. HIGH. Policy was that to move one onto a lift or anything other than basic flat surface rolling required a spotter. While there were two model years, there were a lot of rolling changes. The second year gauge cluster ditched the goofy motorized roll-forward lens cover, and many were supplied to left over 1st year models to help move them. While the core powerplant was simple, there was a whole galaxy of subsystems that were fidgety, needed frequent adjustment, and were difficult to diagnose.
The best thing you could do for an RE-5 was to just kill the secondary on the two-stage carb. There were a variety of sensors that worked in concert to manage that, lots of cables and adjustments, and it didn't do a damn thing anyway. On a drag strip or at Bonneville, yes. On the road, you never needed to rev it to where the secondary kicked in (it was way up there) because the torque curve was so flat (plus, at revs it did vibrate. Not a lot, but it was kinda unpleasant). Easily 3/4 of the rideability issues just disappeared if you disconnected the secondary and forgot about all the sensors. At least ten times we just could not get one to behave, we would then tell the customer we wanted to try something and he could judge. He would come back ecstatic & ask what we had done to finally fix it. One guy ever wanted us to restore the secondary and sensors/cables/vacuum lines/whatever.
I liked riding them, it was different, and once going was pleasant enough if you didn't try to push it. Ground clearance was not much anyway. I have to say, it got boring pretty quickly.
On the point of the Wankel's small size..... not really. Water jackets were AROUND everything (not between cylinders) all the subsystems had to be somewhere, the carb arrangement.... when you had the engine out of the frame, that is the biggest hole I ever saw on a motorcycle. I remember looking at the huge/heavy lump on the bench and the gaping cavern in the bike, and thinking, "what happened to the Wankel thing?"
Awesome comment...
I thought myself where tf is the space gain???
There's nothing quite as satisfying as stopping for a smoke break while out for a ride on your RE-5 in your all white riding suit.
After retro bikes, I see a retro clothing trend lurking around the corner😅
Everyone who has chased the Wankel has lost their shirt.
Love your videos, Bart. Never owned an RE-5, but as someone who entered motorcycling in the early 1970s, I remember it well. Cycle magazine -- arguably THE U.S. journalistic authority of the era -- had an extremely interesting road test to introduce the RE-5 in their January, 1975 issue, which really got into not only its performance and riding qualities, but its design as well. Great reading for anyone who can dig that article up.
A couple of thoughts, as your video takes us down memory lane...
One of the RE-5's strong points was its handling, at mid-and (fairly) high speeds. Suspension was crude, to be sure, but relative to other big Japanese bikes of the era, it was arguably the best handling non-European bike of its time.
The wonky look of the RE-5 engine was largely a result of Suzuki trying their best to make servicing as accessible as possible, with nearly all typical tune-up components adorning the exterior of the engine. It sure made for a busy and non-traditional look, but if nothing else, the engine's appearance wasn't random.
And maybe the one thing not mentioned in the video that helped seal the RE-5's fate was its sound. From Harleys to mopeds, historically bikers have had a visceral appeal to different engine sounds, and the RE-5 was truly out in left field when it came to that. People have described the sound in different ways over the years, but I don't think I've ever heard anyone praise it as pleasant or involving. Along with its somewhat alien design, cost, relatively unexceptional performance, mileage/range, and fears about reliability, I really think its sound was the final nail in its coffin.
Again, Bart, thanks for this ride down memory lane!
The Wankel rotary engine: Smaller than a standard 4-cylinder, the power of a good 6-cylinder, and the fuel economy of a poorly-maintained 8-cylinder!
Oh, and the maintenance schedule to make Lucas electronics look reliable.
As an ex Re5 owner, best I ever saw was 36 mpg on hwy going under 60. Other than that the standard was 24-26mpg not counting oil consumption. I do miss it, it was quirky in a good way.
With smoothness of a v12
As a ex rx8 owner I concer. I loved that car though. 😊
For the 1976 model year, Suzuki toned down the styling of the RE5 with more conventional looking gauges and bodywork. Unfortunately, it didn't help sales at all. Surprised this wasn't mentioned in the video.
Nice to see the digitalized version of a 16 mm movie which I rescued from the Belgian Suzuki importers scrapeyard in 1992 again appears on a youtube movie. I still have the original 16mm film which I believe is the only left in the world
I still have my RE5 after 45 years ownership. The engine still lasts but my back is unfortunately not as everlasting as the bike....
Gee, I think I recognize the motorcycle in your profile picture!
As a re5 owner I will not give up on her.
First engine I ever built was a 12A rotary from a Mazda RX2 when I was 13 year's old 😂.
Bart you seem to forget about the Norton Rotary which dominated racing in it's day.
Local MC repair shop here had one in a couple of years ago. Had one mile on it. Apparently it sat on dealership floor for so long they started cannibalizing parts of it to repair customer bikes
My parents owned two Arctic Cat Snowmobiles with Wankel 303 cc engines. They were good engines. I wanted a Suzuki RE5 when they came out, but went the conservative route with a Suzuki GS750.
I had an RE-5 Rotary. Bought it new in 75. It was a cool looking bike, but it was not practical. Had lots of problems.
I owned a rotary bike and a rotary car. I was disappointed with both. I bought a Hercules German made rotary that sat on dealers show room floor for 3 years before I bought it. I drove a Chevy Nova with a 305ci engine at the time. It got close to twice the fuel mileage my rotary bike got. The old sales pamphlet the dealer gave me said it was 500cc that preforms like a 1000cc bike. It did not, my Yamaha RD 350 was faster. The rotor seals failed at 4000 miles. I had worse luck with a Mazda rotary powered truck. Their sales slogan was, cars that make you go hmmm. They were correct! Hmmm, why did I buy this.
I swapped the rotary engine with a Mazda piston engine in my truck and drove the wheels off that little truck. The Hercules bike is still sitting in my shed out back. Right next to the 1997 Ural bike that I wore out with only 9600 kilometers on the odometer which works out to be 6000 miles. The engine, transmission, and rear drive is shot. It would be cheaper to replace than fix.
Want to know the most fun bikes to own? Ask me. Want to know the worst bike for reliability? Ask me. I owned them all and the answer to both questions is the same. The trick is buy them when brand new and get rid of them before they need repair. Which means having a disposable income much greater than mine. I really enjoyed the Hercules and Ural before they stopped being fun.
Why no mention of the Norton Commanders? That's what I think about when I hear rotary. Suzuki only comes 3rd after Van Veen.😊
I rode a Norton Wankel once. Smooth, powerful, good handling.
Yup, Norton eventually got it right. About a week before they went bust again.
you need to add some sound bites of the motor in action
I was riding when the RE5 came out and in all these years I never noticed the round-sided tail light. I guess I was always focused on that weird instrument cluster and odd-looking engine.
I enjoy Bart's videos, but am sometimes dismayed at how significant factors can be overlooked in a single generation when reviewing history. My '76 RE5 was my first 'I should have never sold it' bike in my 55 years of riding.
Suzuki was a daring innovator in the '70s. As such, it created some of worst- and best-looking bikes. My RE5 replaced another equally ugly Suzuki that I dearly loved: the first-year model GT750 'Water Buffalo'. Mine was purple.
So yes, the first year RE5 was shockingly ugly to American tastes, with its cylindrical tail light and matching instrument cluster with its goofy pop-up cover. But that factor is left half-told by lack of even a photo of the '76 RE5 which was one of most beautiful bikes of the times. Gone were the goofy shapes. Glossy black with tasteful gold pinstripes and (first ever?) matching full fiberglass fairing and luggage-direct from the factory!
RE5 rotor cases had a wire 'lock'. Suzuki sold the RE5 with a customer policy to replace the whole rotor case for a modest (as I recall $150) exchange fee if it ever failed. Mine had rotor seal failure at 32,000 miles. I took it apart myself, carried the still-sealed rotor case to the Dealer, who submitted the claim and received the replacement. I put it back together myself and put another 32,000 miles on the bike before selling it and replacing it with a first-year Honda CX500.
There's another unmentioned RE5 popularity factor: In the early and mid '70s, conventional wisdom among much of the motorcycling community was still that two strokes were 'good and proper' for dirt and dual-purpose bikes; not so much for road bikes. No doubt many potential buyers initially interested in the RE5 were turn-off as soon as they found out that, like a 2-stroke, it also 'burned oil' and required watching and keeping its separate injection oil tank full. That was another element tilting borderline sales toward the 'like a car' security of 4-stroke buying decisions for large road bikes.
JET
As a Mazda Rx-7 owner and someone who loves motorcycles and has been looking for either a Re5 or Hercules for a long time, the rotary only has 1 way to come back imo.
As you mentioned emissions would probably stop them from being production bikes, there was recently a rotary race bike build, and Norton also made a few rotary engines.
The only way for a road going bike to have it is most likely as a generator for a hybrid system like the new Mazda suv that is out.
Good video! Have you heard that it was rumored that Suzuki had so many unsold RE5's that many of them were dumped in the ocean off of Japan!
Suzuki's gem was the water Buffalo, said to use the same chassis, suspension, and brakes as the RE5 and a very roadable bike for its time. Missed buying one from a coworker (and a CBX from another, same near miss/reason) because he (they) passed before we cut a deal. btw, Selling a few H-Ds now, hope to ride my 650 Yam more, miss my Suzi Titans.
I owned 76 RE5, bought it new in 77 . At around 25k miles it locked up, at 90mph. The Suzuki dealer wouldn't work on. But can't complain, I it ran very hard. I paid $1500. Out the door ..
I purchased new in 1972 a Mazda RX2. Terrible mpg, stupid high oil consumption and went through 2 engines in 30,000 miles. Enough said.
My first motorcycle was a Suzuki GS750. My last motorcycle was a Suzuki RG500 (square 4 two stroke). Between 1977 and 1988 I had seen a total of one Suzuki RE5.
I have only ever seen two of them on the road here in England in my life.
Rotary engines; for when 2-strokes are just too long-lived and fuel efficient...🤔
Well said! They basically are low torque versions of the two stroke that don’t sound cool, weigh lots more, and last half as long.
A Rotary revival? Honestly, it's unlikely. When Mazda stopped using the Wankel design, that was pretty much the death knell. Too difficult to meet emissions, too prone to maintenance issues, and too expensive to make reliable in a production setting...
As for a rotary being used as a range extender in a Hybrid setup, it would probably be easier to use a pure gas turbine (Jet) as a generator. Cheaper to build, only 1 moving part, will run on anything (including E95), and there's been a whole lot more research done on making gas turbines reliable than there has ever been done on the Wankel...
Suzuki were leaders in two strokes, but only because they stole the tech from MZ!
I had a Suzuki first model RE5 .. it was a wonderful & excellent motorcycle , never had any problems , still dont under stand why it had a rev counter , off the dial every time , thank you for the Video
BART your videos are getting better and better! Great point about cars getting ugly and slow in the 70’s, and bikes getting faster and beautiful in the same era. Wankles make very little torque, and that is the bottom line. And they don’t last long, use lots of fuel, but the cool factor is there no doubt. Look forward to your next video.
Another great video, thank you! I’d love to see a big manufacturer give another full effort towards a rotary bike like they did in the beginning with a ton of money, but with all the knowledge and advancements we have now. There’s that bike Guy Martin has a video of him riding, but I’m not too sure what is going on with that, it’s a boutique manufacturer I believe.
Had the privilege of seeing a couple of these at motorcycle shows over the years. What a weird bike! Thanks for another great video 😁
To me the most interesting part of the RE5 was the fact that Suzuki tried something different. Many times those oddball inventions become the norm. In those days Suzuki wasn’t afraid to try new ideas. Like the water buffalo Gt750. I can’t remember other manufacturers making liquid cooled motorcycles at the time. Now liquid cooled motorcycle engines are very common.
As a new motorcyclist when this bike came out, I remember wondering what the point was it didn’t make any special horsepower number. It didn’t have any 0 to 60 or quarter mile performance value it was ugly as sin and it cost more. The landscape at that time was full of lower cost better looking lightercheaper Motorcycles this bike looked like a science project on wheels scared everybody with its complexities that’s why no one bought it. It was a science project built to showcase a motor that no one wanted.
The biggest problem with rotaries is lubrication. They typically use a port to bring lubrication to the combustion chamber resulting in burnt sludge buildup. Using two stoke oil in the fuel and blocking off the engine oil injection port cures it.
Each of your videos is a story that touches the deepest feelings and emotions. Thank you for your sincerity and talent!🌹🛻💰
Thotbot.
As much as i like the idea of the rotary engine it will never be a winning concept.
The reason is that in relation to the volume of the combustion chamber it has too much combustion chamber wall surface area. This wall surface area is where heat escapes into the cooling system instead of being used to drive the engine. The consequence is that in terms of thermodynamic efficiency it can never win from a conventional ICE engine.
And there is also the oil consumption that prevents it (like 2stroke engines) from getting good exhaust emissions like a 4stroke ICE.
Suzuki was a real mess in the 70's. Early in the decade, they fielded a series of two stroke triples (their GT series) capped by the GT750, aka the 'Water Buffalo' as it was the only two stroke with liquid cooling at the time. Unfortunately, two strokes were on the way out due to emission concerns and of all the Japanese 'Big 4', Suzuki was the last to finally work on a true 4-stroke multi cylinder replacement for its line-up. In hindsight, the foray into the Wankel really put Suzuki at a disadvantage with regard to finally adopting a class-leading, performance focused, 4-stroke engine. Suzuki's GT series (multiple displacements) ran from 1972 to 1976, overlapping the RE5 model. This fact probably didn't help the RE5 gain much market share, which had become very crowded by the mid-70's. As you noted, the Wankel was very complicated, but also made for a relatively heavy bike for its displacement (563 lbs. vs 482 lbs. for the GT750 and the all-new Gold Wing tipping the scales at a competitive 584 lbs.) For all the Japanese makes and models on offer at the time, even the slightest negative reports would probably have been enough to sink any new technology equipped motorcycle.
As to your musings on any potential Wankel rebirth, I seriously doubt there has really been technological advancements to warrant an effort by the motorcycle industry to dive into this form of motive power again. Look how long Mazda has been toiling on this type of engine. The RX5 has had a few rebirths using a Wankel, but they've yet to realize a vehicle that outperforms any other engine technology. I do like the notion of looking at specific motorcycle models that didn't quite make the cut. Perhaps you could do another video on something like Yamaha's XS750 (aka, the Foam Boat).
Nice video
I want a water buffalo wicked bad.
Yes, I do think rotary engines could make a comeback for motorcycles. Despite being a fan of electric cars, I don't see how electric bikes make sense - too much battery, too heavy, to short a range - if the range could be solved then maybe but I don't see that happening any time soon. Basically - the gold standard of motorcycling will be some kind of light weight nuclear isotope that delivers unlimited power to a perfectly proportioned chasis and associated systems - when that will happen I don't know, in the meantime - ride a Hayabusa - it's the best.
Rotary engines today have come a long way, I think we definitely need a revival.
Suzuki thinking: If it is difficult, don't do it. It has to be almost impossible to achieve. So we just make it close to impossible, even if we don't have to!
Bart posts. I watch. Simple as that
surface finish is a big deal. Im working on finish to help a human powered sled go slightly faster on ice.
at this point - like it or not - electric (or some development of usable hydrogen technology in the distant future) seems like the way all transportation is going. Retooling from one form of internal combustion to another seems counter to the thinking of corporate planners. And I don't think some independent start up could have the capital to develop a revolutionary form of motivation - unless a Musk or Beezos suddenly got the two-wheel bug.
I feel like today more than ever people want to have a reliable n low maintenance motorcycle not the exotic one ... probably has to do with biker getting older on average.
And that fantastic technology, is why we are all riding and driving Rotary Engines to this day... except...we're not
The oil crisis didn't really affect Australia l can remember petrol been 50c a gallon in the 1970s and l ride and owned Suzuki motorcycles and l had a GT750 but my brother owned a RE 5 he owned the second generation which dropped the termous flask tail light and instrument cluster also the tennis ball indicators and l rode the RE 5 and for performance it would blow my GT750 into the weeds l rode it to work one day and hit 140kph on the Sydney Harbour Bridge my dream was to do 160kph on the Sydney Harbour Bridge l nearly did that l wasn't watching the speedometer that day fortunately no Police around but the RE 5 nearly sent Suzuki broke
Also rotary engines and emission control just doesnt work look at the mazda rx8 it was a flop because of them under powered and very poor reliability due to emissions control
Howdy Bart
sure, this is a non-AI intelligent commenter. the advantage of the current engines is the SOUND . machos want a good " beast " sound. look at Harley correctly patenting - or trying to patent their sound.
Dude having a cigarette after getting off his wenkel😀
The rotary was dead on arrival.
That wanker who pitched his butt in the advert is one of the _real_ reasons people are out against smokers. You get really sick and tired of going somewhere, anywhere, everywhere and there are old cigarette butts lying on the ground wherever you look. I was a smoker for half my life and it pisses _me_ off.
Oh hey I have one of those
The rotary engine will never make a comeback. It has too many problems that cannot be corrected. Fuel and oil consumption are the two main factors. In order to ensure the longevity of the Apex seals it must burn some oil. This is counterproductive considering today's smog control measures.
Smaller than a 4-cylinder, the power of a good 6-cylinder, and the fuel economy of a poorly-maintained 8-cylinder!
Not just the many problems, imo the concept is fundamentally flawed. The combustion pushes into a wedge like corner, so you never get to nearly use the same power from any single explosion a piston engine does. Don't tell the Wankelbros I said this please, they can be quite vindicative.
Well they live on in military drones
forget rotary. bring back an air cooled inline six or at least the suzuki stratosphere
They Had problems with the Sea
L
guess what? Its still just the internal combustion engine 😂
Wnakel didn't see massive production success because it's not better than either 2 or 4 stroke there I said it eat ship
I don't know but the Rotary engine in motorcycles have been cursed to flop. Either the bike turned out to be flop or it took down the whole company 😅. No1 wants a rotary engine in bikes atleast even today because today bikes are getting expensive with advanced electronics,safety package, complying with emissions norms etc so no1 in their right minds would put a rotary engine in a bike in 2024-25 because it will just just cause the bike to cost a bomb to manufacture and sell later on. It would be a disaster.
Megloa video soon?
no
When I think of Wankel, I think of hmmmmmmmmmm………..Mazda.
did you just say the future of vehicle powertrains is still ICE? I'm a fan - but how deluded could you be?!
Is it me or was it pretty much american cars that sucked during the 70s? Like i know even before and after they were not the greatest but during the 70s at least here in Australia we had decent cars also japan and Europe had great cars.
Can u make another update vid on royal Enfield?
Why make a short story so long? You are repeating yourself man!
Doritos suffer one insurmountable problem, they subjectively cool, and objectively $hit.
I guess the argument can be made that motorcycles have become too high tech and too smooth and that all the raw excitement has been lost chasing the next big thing. Since for most of us in North America, a motorcycle is a hobby and play thing, I don't want my motorcycle to ride like my boring but very reliable Toyota. My next bike maybe a Royal Enfield.
First
Second
Nerds
@@pappydaddy7447 🤣
Nope, you missed being first by a few minutes. Too bad cor your fragile little ego 🤣
@@vincedibona4687 for not cor, oops.
Never accept an idea from someone whose parents named him Felix, it can only go wrong. I rode an RE 5 and it was, to put it mildly, an underwhelming experience. Heavy, complex, and no improvement on conventional engines.