I drive the hell out of my Rx8 and achieve 16.5 mpg average while v8 chargers, Camaros and mustangs achieve 8-12mpg average. I doubt they drive theirs like I do mine. Friend has a 5.3 truck, we both have tunes he achieves 4mpg average. I have a sohn adapter and my tune increased my injection of two stroke by ten percent. I use roughly half a quart per tank. I premix with 10fl ounces. Some reality beyond the jokes. :)
I think the reliability problems could have been fixed, and where I live, rebuilding a rotary is far cheaper than rebuilding a piston engine, because there are so few parts. Granted, it's more prone to failure due to the issues we all know (sealing failures and such) but I think that overall, that could have been fixed. After all, most dedicated rotary owners have third-party solutions installed to fix those reliability issues. Problem is fuel efficiency & emissions. A RX8 can eat like a supercar going presto even at normal city speeds. Like 15l per 100km. That's a lot in a world in which efficient, full combustion cars can go as low as 5l, and a Porsche 911 can do 7-10. And there's emissions. They burn oil by design. Inherently, they pollute a lot more.
I've heard that running them on LPG will solve the oil burning problem, because LPG doesn't mix with the oil. I wonder if Mazda can make some sort of skyactive tweaks (high compression, leaner air-fuel mixutre) on the engine. Piston engine can have poor fuel economy too, one example Subaru WRX/STI worse fuel economy than BMW inline 6.
Basically a 2.5 stroke? lol just keep them lubed and you won’t burn those apex seals. I’m all about simplicity! So beautiful 🥲 no valves or timing chains or cams… just a weird circle thing and a rotating triangle 😂 I love rotaries!
@@farmerjunge He is referring to the 2010 Audi A1 E-Tron Concept car which had a Wankel range extender. There was considerable speculation that Audi was developing a new advanced Wankel engine design. Unfortunately the concept actually used a 1970s Sachs KM24 engine salvaged from a Hercules W2000 motorcycle. Audi like the rest of the automobile industry lost interest in range extenders after improved batteries became available.
@@mikehunt9894 Curtiss-Wright, General Motors and Mercedes-Benz had the largest Wankel development programs in the world. General Motors at on time was spending as much 10 million dollars per month on Wankel development... Mazda was among the smaller of the 26 Wankel KKM licensee's with a limited budget and zero experience in engine development. Prior to the Wankel Mazda only manufacturered engines from other companies under license.
I absolutely loved my RX-7 convertible. People probably thought I was crazy, because sometimes I just laughed out loud while driving it. It was that much fun.
Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. GOD loves you soo much unconditionally.🤩❤😍🤗😄
I think that no matter how you slice it, Mazda has just always had weirdness going for it. I'll always love that unique style, and I'll always hope to have an SA-22 in the garage. Too cool.
@@willg125 Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. GOD loves you soo much unconditionally.🤩❤😍🤗😄
Mazda has always had the lowest prices going for it... but now with decent quality cars coming from Korea and China, Mazda is really struggling to stay in business...
Interesting video. Thank you. My greatest automotive regret was selling my RX8. Everything you say is true, but you left something out. They are absolutely delightfully fun to drive. The rotary engine finds itself at relatively high RPM. And when I say high I mean HIGH! 😱 For instance, entering a cloverleaf and accelerating through it.. downshift one or two gears to 7000 RPMs and accelerate. You can easily go to 10,000 RPM on an RX8 - something most cars would drop fragments of pistons on the road as the engine blew. So it’s not a muscle car dragster, but it finds itself on curvy highways. I much prefer it to the Porsche I have now. The weight distribution was just perfect. The major reason for it being discontinued, was emission regulations. Rotary engines by definition burn oil.
@Andy Birks There must be an epidemic of gullible fools in your area? if you were smart? You would sell that pile of junk to the first sucker that offers to buy it!
@Andy Birks The RX8 is indeed a car... it also happens to be one of the worst cars ever made... anyone who is knowledgeable regarding cars is aware of this..
You most certainly don't need to be a specialist to rebuild a rotary engine. I built my own 13b monster bridge port in our shed on our farm with the help of just a book. This was mid 1970s, in those days, nothing could touch them bang for buck. My completed built in those days was 2000 folding. That includes lightened, balanced rotors and new housings and new everything else including the clutch. She could drop 225hp at the wheels after a few hours on a dyno. That car had a 4 barrel Holly and inlet manifold with a beautiful air cleaner with the velocity trumpet in it from Rotor motion on it, that was a very cool piece of kit. That may not sound like much of a big deal, but I'm from NZ, so it was at the time. My old rx2, what a fun car that was.
I've had my RX8 for 11 years. It has been a generally good car. Well, until a few weeks back when it blew a seal on a track day, with 76k on it. I would rebuild it but there are so many Friday, afternoon rebuilds. Even if it is rebuilt well, it's 20mpg (10 on track) and £600 UK tax. They are fun cars that, to be honest you are better off avoiding.
I feel like most owners of rx7/8s (who still own them) have all said the same. To be a rotary owner, you have to be a pretty dedicated fan. You can't just expect to treat it like any normal car. Unfortunately, there's a ton of delusional fans in the comments who may have never even owned the car.
You got 11 years of trackdays and thrashing on 1 build of a renesis, don't know how you can be unhappy with that. Any car driven on track is going to have a shorter life. In that same time frame I'm on my 3rd 3SGTE
@@scottd8991 Very true. The car had a pretty good run. I would say that I am happy with my rotary ownership period. Many cars would not have withstood the thrashing it had. I'm missing being able to drive it already.
I've heard that for smaller light-duty engines, there have been some substantial improvements -- but this is in the 1/4 to 4hp range. I love mazdas, and am sticking a toe into the crossover market, so the MX30 is very appealing. When I was a kid, a neighbor had an RX3 that rev'd over 10K and sounded amazing. Of course, it was up on blocks a lot waiting for parts a lot. And I still remember Mazda's jingle from the 70's "Piston engine goes boing boing boing boing boing but a Mazda goes Hhhhmmmmmmmmmm"
Not true, the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that smaller engines are inherently less efficient. Mazda abandoned all development of Wankel engines in May 2009. The MX30 is in full production and is available in selected markets. It will only be available in a 100% plug-in battery electric vehicle or a mild series hybrid powered by a 2.0 liter 4-Cylinder Skyactiv G engine.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. GOD loves you soo much unconditionally.🤩❤😍🤗😄
@@sandervanderkammen9230 agree small engines when driving at low speed is sure efficient but push that small engine a little bit harder your fuel cons gonna be worse than v8s
@@reynaldiwidjaja277 Actually just the opposite. Smaller engines are more efficient when pushed harder. Keeping the engine under high load improves BSFC and thus improves overall fuel efficiency.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 are you telling me pushing an engine is gonna improve efficiency? What do you think is the main cause for inefficient combustion? Engine heat
yes, all RX7´s and RX8´s are considered as mid-engined cars, due to the engine being placed behinde the front and infront of the rear axle. They are called front-mid-engined (like an SLS or a Corvette)
Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. GOD loves you soo much unconditionally.🤩❤😍🤗😄
I remember owning the 2004 RX8 high power, it was lots of fun, the sound was great. My main issue was the rear wheels slipping way too often though, I moved from bridgemoans to conti's and that mostly solved the issue. The oil top ups was annoying but the 18 MPG on average was pretty dire but I bought it for the smiles per gallon anyways :)
I remember the Mazda RX8 being recalled for premature engine failures and Mazda settled a class action lawsuit admitting that it lied about the RX8 horsepower specs. The engine failure recall was largest of its kind with over 60,000 engines replaced in the first year alone Mazda opened a new warranty engine remanufacturing center in Chesterfield Virginia to keep up with the demand for Renesis engines.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Whats kinda sad is that the engine replacements were only in USA and Japan, here in the UK you were stuffed with a useless car :\ Mine was fine luckily but I was part of the members group and saw many horror stories.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 The only recall notices I get when searching are for a fuel pump O-ring, very early production lower control arms and/or ball joint casing and the Takata Air-Bags which effected multiple different car companies and models. I've noticed that you hate the engines but that's no excuse to make shit up, you could just not watch Wankel/Rotary engine videos so you won't waste hours of time posting nasty comments.
@@Cluuey You are clearly not familiar with the Mazda RX8 and its huge premature engine failure fiasco. It's absolutely nothing personal, the facts here are irrefutable, the RX8 was the worst sedan Mazda ever made and without question the worst RX model made by Mazda. Wankel engines are obsolete today because they are inherently inferior to reciprocating engines and cannot compete against them in any type of application.
"That's cheap RX8 isn't looking like a deal anymore" What? For a weekend car it's an absolute bargain. The car I'd compare it to is the S2000 and the RX8 has slightly better handling and is way easier to drift. Even with a very expensive rebuild of 5k$ you can get an RX8, a full rebuild with bridgeport making it go BRAP, 5 years worth of fuel and it will still cost you like 1/4 the price of the S2000.
@@BigMan7o0 bridgeports have worse engine life no matter how good you build them compared to other types of porting like extend porting. when bridgeporting your essentially cutting down the area that the corner seal passes over, cutting down the lifespan of the motor over time. the lifespan of a bridgeported motor has many other factors that decide how long it'll last like the size of the bridge, how hard you will drive it etc. it does however have its benefits like increased power thru mid range and top end drastically, at the cost of low end torque, making them a not really good option for street however this doesn't stop people from doing it. bridgeporting is great for race motors and such, but for daily use and practicality they are not that good. they increase fuel consumption, reduce driveability and smoothness etc. rotarys can be very reliable if you build them right, all depends on what modifications you make to them though.
Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. GOD loves you soo much unconditionally.🤩❤😍🤗😄
My household had 3 first gens and 2 second gens. Rotary cars are very special, but today I drive a 50k mile BRZ/FRS/GT86 as I really don't want to be on automotive forums 24/7 trying to diagnose and fix my sportscar on life support. No regrets, not even the 85 where I changed the gearbox oil and had to do synchros and bearings right after. No regrets, not even lightly drifting at over 100mph on lakeshore in Saskatoon in the 91. No Regrets on the 82 that I bought for $1200 in 95 and wrote off for $3k in 96. No Regrets for the 82 that I power shifted until the clutch disappeared. No regrets drifting the bridge loop at work every day in 100hp car. These cars were simple enough that a kid could learn how cars work and how to diagnose car problems. These cars changed my life... but today I choose an FRS. Its still lightweight, low CG, better suspension, killer in the corners - but its good on gas, doesn't break and will last twice as long... maybe more. Here's to the car and the engine that taught me how cars work and how to drive them. RX7/8.
@@CaramelColored Have you driven them both? Wanna be? What does the 86 want to be? I find it a fun car, like my rx7s. RX8 was a bit a disappointment in the looks dept for me but performed fine. Not quite as drifty as I like TBH but it wasn't my car so I didn't really get into it. I don't really understand people who trash the gt86 as though the original was somehow a better daily. Do you mean the rx8 is objectively better only in the suspension department or that you would rather own an rx8 or that you do own an rx8 and somehow need to defend its honor against the waves of 86 owners who just can't see how good the rx8 is... Let me know. I'm genuinely curious what makes you blurt out insults to a car that I can only assume you have very little seat time with.
@@dachanist Yeah, I have driven the wannabe 86, multiple RX7s, multiple Rx8s including the one I daily, every iteration of supra (except the BMW one), every iteration of Skyline (except the crap V6 one) and every other iconic JDM car at least 3 times. The FRS is not a gt86 so it's a wannabe 86 and the original is 100% a better car all-around. The RX8 has, factually, better suspension, better accel, more torque, FAR better interior, better brakes, drifts better, better and easier to insure, lower road taxes, sounds heavenly in comparison to the bloated walrus grunts the FRS pukes out. No need to defend it against FRS owners because you lot are just like the Tesla idiots with your bloated self worth and skin deep superiority complex, frankly I don't care about your opinion but I have no problem slamming you back down to where you belong.
4:08 The arrow at the lower left points to the primary inherent problem in the Wankel engine: this area of the stator housing (in red) is constantly exposed to the hot combustion gases, consequently lubricating oil that impinges on this surface is quickly burned off. As the apex seals sweep over the hot, dry surface, the steel-on-steel friction wears them down rapidly, this is the main reason the overhaul interval is short in Wankel engines. Also, the long, cornered combustion chamber leads to incomplete flame propagation and poor combustion efficiency. The shape of the combustion chamber gives it a larger surface area than a cylinder, which contributes to poor overall thermal efficiency. On the other hand, compared to the reciprocating engine the Wankel is small, light and cheap to manufacture, which may make them ideal in certain specialized applications.
The primary failure mode of all Wankel engines is compression loss due to apex seal damage. Damage directly linked to high brisance and ablative damage related to poor combustion eg: detonation and pre-ignition. Apex seals are inherently weak, flawed by design and prone to damage, The Wankel engine cannot support the high swirl or Quench type combustion chamber architecture. Wankel engines have zero advantages over reciprocating engines and are obsolete technology because they are inferior to reciprocating engines in every application. Any questions?
@@sandervanderkammen9230 there's always a fix for minor issues like this. It doesn't even sound complicated. There only isn't one because everyone stuck to pistons. Rotaries sound amazing though.
@@davidt8087 Lol! Indeed you are very confused and naive... The flaws in the Wankel engine are inherent in the fundamental design and cannot be fixed, all of the major engine manufacturers have reached the same conclusion. This is why the Wankel is obsolete technology now.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 show me a resource. If wankel was for some reason the only engine design chosen by the world, you really think they wouldn't have fixed the oil issues or miles per gallon issues already? Engineers who are good at their job can overcome such challenges. Reminds me of carburetors vs direct injection. Without technology carburetors would have seemed like the only major affordable choice
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. GOD loves you soo much unconditionally.🤩❤😍🤗😄
@@alunesh12345 Felix Wankel and Hitler were both racist Nazis, evil minons of Satan, Jujiro Matsuda was an atheist and admitted to being a racist and admirer of Felix Wankel. The Good news is Jesus still loves you and God will forgive your ignorance and evil wickedness.
Always thought that the MX-5 (miata) should have had a Mazdaspeed version with a rotary in it from factory, even if it was the NA from the RX-8, in the smaller car it would be magic.
The reason why Mazda MX5 was a huge success is because it didn't have a Wankel engine. The RX8, which shares the same SE platform was a $3 billion dollar failure.
I read about diesel rotary engines years ago. I wonder if diesel would give a bit longer life to the seals as it is a bit more "oily" fuel. The concept of the rotary engine is amazing. The practicality just has never been there. I had mostly forgotten about them but a while ago I saw a few RUclips channels building and doing rebuilds. I am glad that they have a bit of life still.
All of the original Wankel engine licensee's have abandoned development of Diesel Cycle variants including the 'Diesel-Ring' consortium. The Wankel engine cannot support the static compression ratio needed to for reliable compression ignition. Low sulfur Diesel fuel is a very poor lubricant and has a lubricity of only 600mu, about the same as gasoline. The Wankel engine is an obsolete technology today, no longer in development or series production anywhere in the world... it is now the sole domain of crackpots and con men like Ernie Brink and Rob Dahm.
Sure the rotary is obsolete. But why hate people who enjoy obsolete things? We still got typewriter and Walkman and Ancient Latin and martial arts lovers going around. Yet those were superceded by computers and printers, smartphones, modern languages and firearms. Let go of your hate brother. You'll feel better in general. Time spent on hate is wasted time, and time is precious.
@@ujiltromm7358 Why do you feel the need to kill the messenger? What is it that you hope to achieve??? Its not going to bring the Wankel back... just accept the facts and move on with your life.
Back in the late 70s I had two Mazda RX3s, there was little that quick on the streets and I loved them. More recently I've had two Suzuki RE5s, not quick but a joy to ride.
If people want to spend a lot of time rebuilding things then let them buy rotary engines or boxer engines (H engines ie: Subaru). It's up to people what they do with their money. I, however, choose to be smart. I'm not gonna spend a lot of time having my engine rebuilt. If I buy a vehicle, I want to drive it. Not have it in the shop.
1998 to 2002 rx7's would make around 300hp stock with the waste gate limiter removed as all auto manufacturers in japan had a agreement that none of the sports cars would make over 275 Hp
A Wankel engine is just about the worst engine you could use for an electric generator. They call it a 1.3 liter engine but it actually fires each cylinder more times per output shaft rotation than a traditional 4 stroke reciprocating engine. That means it acts more like a 2.6 liter engine. If you compare the fuel economy of a 2.5 liter Nissan Altima 4 cylinder to the RX8 you will see that the Altima has vastly better efficiency. It even produces similar Torque to the RX8 and weighs slightly more. Yes the RX8 has more power. However, if you compare the turbocharged 2.0 liter Altima to the RX8 you will see that the Altima surpasses the Wankel engine in the RX8 for Horsepower and Torque all while having vastly superior fuel economy in a heavier vehicle. The Wankel engine is SPECTACULARLY inefficient no matter what you do to it.
Seeing the rx7 from nfs carbon being referenced even for just a second made me happy asf, that version of it made me fall in love with the car and have been ever since I got that pink slip from the boss as a kid.
So, the 1.3L rating of the 13B was based on the displacement of a single chamber of the rotor... But as far as mass flow over RPM, the 13B is actually comparable to a 2.6L engine. This is a pedantic little detail, but the 1.3L designation was a great boon for advertising, since they could claim 200hp+ from a "1.3L engine," but makes their fuel consumption/displacement sound abysmal. If you think of them in terms of actually being equivalent to a 2.6L 6-cylinder, their power and fuel consumption make a lot more sense. They DO still have the advantage of small size and weight for displacement. That oil consumption, though...
Absolutely, engineers, government agencies and motorsports sanctioning bodies use the 2X formula conversion and rate the 13b as a 2.6 liter. Unfortunately the Wankel engine has not real advantages in power to weight ratio performance or power density which is why they were a failure in motorcycles and aircraft... Of course the horrible reliability and durability problems is the main reason why the Wankel engine is obsolete.
Owned an RX7 and an RX8 never had an issue with oil consumption usually top it up once between oil changes plus mineral oil is cheaper then other engine oils so it’s not expensive, mpg is the main issue
@@sandervanderkammen9230 only major thing I had go wrong in over 8 years was the oil pump going on the RX7, part of the problem is they need more looking after than a piston engine, a lot of owners don’t realise or don’t bother then run into problems. Having said that your not going to get as many miles out of one than a piston engine
The Rx8 might of had a rotary engine. But it was far different compared to the RX7s. The emissions regulations made Mazda redesign the 13b and tried to reduce the oil injection which caused premature failure. My FD never had a "need to top up oil every third fueling"... Drove 2000 km through Germany and the Netherlands. Barely any oil missing.
Mazda never made Rotary type engines, only Wankel engines. Still a 13b series The primary failure mode is not related to lubrication. Apex seals are inherently fragile and unreliable. The 13b suffered from compression loss failures both in the turbocharged engines and the high compression Renesis because apex seals cannot handle high combustion pressures and are quickly destroyed by detonation/pre-ignition
My first car was a 1984 Rx-7 and always wanted the third gen so bad but I was young and poor 🤷🏻♂️. I know it didn't have a rotary but had an S-2000 later which was also unique and fun. I have looked up these cars today and low mileage ones are insanely priced but they are very rare so I get it.
When GM was testing the C4 corvette, they tried out several rotary motors, the "big one" was a twin turbo 4 lobe. turns out that it got so hot, it melted the housing (gm did it again with the ZL motors of today). we never got the "Rotovette" but one can still imagine.
i wouldn't trust a rotary built by GM. they still manage to pump out shit engines and they been making them for awhile, can you imagine a completely new to them engine that is already known for reliability issues? fuck that i'll put in a upgraded mazda version if i wanted that.
@@djjaysky9071 Rotary cars are extinct and RX cars are known for being horribly unreliable. On the other hand, the Corvette is one of the best performing and highest priased cars in the world. Yeah sorry, reality proves you wrong.
Uh.... The comparison of the Bugatti with the Rotary was really bad for HP/L . Buggati intentionally makes their engine huge for reliability. And I don't mean like get some extra years. They've said they want Veyrons to still roam the earth in 50-100 years and that's why the engines are huge. A better example would've been koenigsegg wich cram all the power they can out of engines.
I was always fascinated by these because it's under developed and could still possibly be a game changer someone needs to make a double dorito with combustion happening between both chips \/ to possibly do away with alot of the apex seal issues
That statement reveals a shocking lack of knowledge about the development history of the Wankel engine... The Wankel engine obsolete technology because it is inherently inferior to reciprocating engines and horribly unreliable. There is no cure for the fatal flaws in the Wankel KKM57 design... that is why there are no longer any legitimate engineers or manufacturers working with the Wankel, it is now the sole domain of crackpots and con men.
i think there’s a dude with a channel who talks about upgrading rotarys. bro has some wild claims about upgraded rotary motors, 700+hp, 50 mpg. it sounds fantastical but if you own one why not i guess
@@dereksmith7082 Travis Pastrana has only won Rallye events driving a Subaru. He has also won several other motorsports victories driving a Toyota, Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge and Ferrari. Mazda left racing and no longer has any factory motorsports program.
"Rotaries make awesome hp/L" Only if you count the swept volume of one chamber of each rotor. Essentially, if you ignore 2/3 chambers, they're incredibly small displacement. The only reason why this "Geometric Displacement" started being used was to dodge displacement taxes in Europe and Japan (thanks to Max Bentele suggestion when visiting Germany's NSU, the company that licensed and built the first Wankels). Ironically, people bought into the Geometric Displacement that was sold to lawmakers, so now they think the rotary is some engine that makes god-tier HP/L, when that displacement figure is clearly a ruse at every possible metric. When you look at their "Thermodynamic Displacement" like engineers do (counting all 3 chambers for displacement), it's easy to see why they're so thirsty. A 13b has two 654cc chambers firing every crank rotation. That's akin to a 2.6L four cylinder... Which is why "Equivalent Displacement" ratio is used in competition. Despite spinning at a high RPM, they're actually slow to fire all three chambers on each rotor. If Thermodynamic Displacement were used for rotary displacement in competition, they'd be absolutely trounced. But again, people have been fooled by the Geometric Displacement that tricked lawmakers, so they automatically spout off about how "a bigger engine is needed to compete against a 1.3L rotary". Essentially, that RX8 example of "174 hp/L" only seems good when Geometric Displacement is used (ignoring 2/3 of the chambers. If Equivalent Displacement is used, it's only a paltry 87 hp/L. If the Thermodynamic Displacement is used, it's only 58 hp/L, which is absolutely dismal. And before the comments about "that's not how it's supposed to be measured" rain in, you can talk to the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE, the organization responsible for regulations concerning power claims from car manufacturers) that include all 3 displacement measurements in SAE J1220 (approved June 1978); which included all three to satisfy everyone since a single procedure couldn't be agreed upon (manufacturers didn't want the displacement taxes, and racers didn't want the severe disadvantage) You can continue to pick Geometric Displacement as your preference, but if you want to understand the rotary's pros and cons, the best way to do so is to consider all three chambers of each rotor. Only counting the swept volume of 1 chamber per rotor is like only counting the swept volume of a 4 stroke engine in 1 crank rotation (meaning a 5L V8 would only displace 2.5L)... Which would be completely absurd to virtually everyone. That said, a rotary's biggest benefits is how much displacement it can fit into a tiny, lightweight package and its minimal amount of moving parts for that displacement.
You didn't mention the internal gearing, a rotary takes three revolutions to complete a combustion cycle on all chambers where a conventional engine only takes two revolutions. Once you realise that a 13B is a 3.9l 6 cylinder which revs to 6000 RPM, they make a lot more sense.
you missed a few things. first off the 1.3 liter figure comes from that they only count 1 face of each rotor. and remember its heyday was the early 90s back then you couldn't just ask the internet what the displacement figure actually meant for rotaries and get an answer in 30 seconds. it was extremely arcane information because mazda sure as hell didn't want to admit to the world that they were pulling such shenanigans. It took a full decade to get the answer to that question from the time i first wondered about it. second is the 9000rpm redline. what is it that spins to 9000rpm? well it's not the rotors, it's the output shaft which spins 3 times for every one revolution of the rotors. and because it's the rotors that are the things that are doing the work that 3 times as fast eccentric shaft does so with 1/3 the torque. it's called a rotary engine not an eccentric shaft engine. the truth is that it's a 3.9 liter motor that redlines at 3000rpm. that's why it sucks.
When I was kid my favorite uncle drove a new 1988 Rx7 and took me for a drive when he bought it. Every sportscar we stopped beside wanted to race. This was in Chicago suburbs in 1989. RIP uncle.
I love the sound of rotaries (because it’s mandatory) but I think a v8 or i6 beats it in almost every way. Reliability, price, v8 has better sound, both can be much faster, more hp, etc
If some car manufacturer were to make a lightweight sportscar with a 700hp rotary engine, and good chassis, it would most likely beat every other car on the nurburgring.
i would love a 6 rotor muscle rotor car like a viper lol A 6 rotor would have a ton of torque and then if you turbo charge it, then it would just be a beast
@@mikehunt9894 yeah, but would a 6 rotor fit in a vette? Because a 4 rotor would just not have the oomph that a 6 would and a turbo 4 has already been done a ton. I have yet to really see a 6 rotor let alone a turbo 6 rotor.
@@charliemaybe Corvette's dont weight anything.. infact probably just as light as a 90s rx7.. So a yeah a boosted 4 would power it fine.look on youtube, someone has done it already
@@mikehunt9894 I know a vette can be light especially with a turbo 4 rotor in it, but have you ever seen a serious build of a turbo 6 rotor before? I mean imagine rolling into a meet with a viper acr or something and popping the hood and you just have a long line of rotary and it would look so good and have the power and torque to back up the viper badge
They are not 650cc. It's more like 1300 or 1750cc. Cc is calculated when all cylinders have fired. So 650 being one dorito side the full number should be 1750cc. It's very small for it's size and very light. But this way of calculating it's cc makes sense for alternating piston comparisons and explains why it was so damn thirsty. 2x650 it's like a 6 cylinders 2.6 of the same era.
@@Aditya-sc6wu each rotor has 3 sides that is 654cc each. An engine displacement is calculated when all pistons have fired once. This means that the number should be tripled. But usually 4 stroke engines do that every 2 crankshaft rotations. The Wankel fires one side each crankshaft rotation so the displacement should be at least doubled if we have to compare to alternate piston engines.
@@davidpriestley7585 You need to learn about how swept volume displacement is calculated correctly. "Tax Displacement" is a concocted marketing gimmick.
Rx8, the joke of Mazda, held its value like a child holding a red hot coal. Pick 1 up for a grand and that’s pricey. That’s why a lot ended up with kids modifying them to make them even worse. 🤣
rx8 had better lap times than supras and gtrs while relased. Up to today many rx8 hold the top lap times on race tracks, losing mostly to awd cars. There are mostly rx8 on time attacks in my country. The car is funny cheap and its a great weekend car. Value goes down, but its good for us. And LHD r3 2009+ lift mazdas rx8 are very rare and nowhere to be cheap. Engine problems were caused by people using mazda oil which was designed to fail, now people tune oil injectors better and use good oil. 350z v6 did die all around the world too, because people used cheap oil on them.
@@szaka9395 😂 I accept they have a following within the younger guys but believe me a lot of people lost a lot of money within 2yrs on these heaps of shite. My cousin use to be a Mazda mechanic and even he said it was a waste of time developing this hence why they ditched it but just not quick enough.
Most rotaries die. Due to people beating on them and not keeping up with the maintenance. Unlike a piston motor. A rotaries motors maintenance directly correlates to how it's driven. And most people's maintenance habits can't keep up with their driving habits
@@terrellfair9812 I certainly hear what you are saying here, but tbf rotaries actually enjoy a good beating on occasionally lol. I mean that the Mazda techs I've spoken with tell me to redline my Rx8 at least once a week to help blow out any excess carbon deposits. But I absolutely agree that they require meticulous maintenance. But good God it is by far the most enjoyable car to drive that I have ever owned!
@@ambergraves798 Your engine is already damaged if you are having carbon build-up, carbon deposits are a direct indication of low compression. You must have driven some really garbage cars.
Dude what an original concept for an automotive RUclips video. I literally have not seen this opinion anywhere else. Rotary engine bad? Burns oil? Apex seals breaking? Cooling issues? I had no idea. Man if only every other car channel had made this video I would have known sooner.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 my guy most of the internet shits on rotaries. Like they're in more than just a few Mazdas or something if you don't like the rotary engine don't buy an RX simple as.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 even I am aware of Mazda stopping production of rotary engines but I still like them. Do i think that they should come back into production not necessarily but I do think that they're an interesting engine and the cars that use said engine are fun to drive, yes. You just don't like them because the internet has told you not to like them. If not for the internet telling you they were bad you would probably not care about the rotary engine and focus on whatever car you actually like but because it's profitable to make a RUclips video that says "why X sucks" you gobble it up anyway. I came here to see if he had anything new to bring to the table about rotary engine discussion and was not surprised when it didn't thus i posted my comment.
@@SomberFireBall Wankel engine... _'Mazda Rotary'_ is a defunct brand name now. Everyone knows these horrible, unreliable Wankel engines suck. Even Mazda now admits this, why are you still in denial?
If someone decided to redefine the rotary and make it more reliable but still keep that rotary feel rotary's will make a come back in the car market and racing scene
Growing up, I was in love with the RX-7. My heart literally skipped a beat the first time I saw an FD, and I eventually bought a 91 GXL FC. It was a great car, but yeah the rotary engine (as cool as it is) does actually kinda suck. Wankel's engine concept is unique and MaZDa's execution is also very well thought out. Its just that the rotary engine's pros dont outweigh a traditional piston engine.
I have often wondered what might have happened if the Sarich Orbital Engine had gotten the investment to be put into production cars. Both the rotary and the orbital concepts had many advantages but ultimately bean counters decided to play it safe and put investment money into conventional engines rather than more risky designs.
Babying a rotary is bad for the Apex seals you want to warm them up completely make sure the entire engine is the same Temp and then run it out to Red line a few times
@@djjaysky9071Old wives tales... nothing you can do will ever make a Wankel engine reliable. The "Italian Tune-up" only applies to carburated engines, if your car is fuel injected? Revving it up will not fix your problem, only a new engine will.
The other reason why the Wankel-engine might make a comback as a range extender (besides its small size/weight) is because while it was very inefficient as a main engine with constantly changing rpm and torque demand, it can run much more efficient when designed for and kept at a specific and constant rpm and torque -> which it could as a generator/range extender.
That's completely false. Wankel engines have repeatedly proven to be completely unsuitable for use in generator/APU applications. Wankel engines are extremely noisy, dirty, have horrible fuel efficiency, produce more carbon emissions and are completely incompatible with the entire "Green Energy" concept of EVs. The Concept of Range Extenders was a topic of interest among several automobile manufacturers a decade ago but has been completely abandoned. Not a single manufacturer has ever offered a vehicle with a range extender as standard equipment and only one, (BMW i3) was offered as an option but was discontinued. Mazda completely abandoned development of production Wankel engines in May 2009, no new prototypes have been made since the 16X program in 2007 and was cancelled on May 15th 2009. The Mazda MX30 has been available in selected markets since the 2021 model year and will only be available in a 100% plug-in battery EV or a mild series hybrid powered by 2.0 liter 4-Cylinder Skyactiv G engine. Any questions?
Even though rotaries are connected to Mazda, it's still a german invention... by Felix Heinrich Wankel (which is why it's called the Wankel Motor). Funniest thing about the "Wankel Motor" is I think, that "Wankel" in german means "to tumble" - so the inventor's name was basically perfectly describing the movement of the piston I guess :-) 787B has still the most magnificent sound of any rotary i know though
You have to be monumentally stupid to pour the wrong oil down the wrong filler hole... please stop spreading lies and misinformation about about Wankel engines.
That would mean you get little to No compression. Since the Apex seals are spring loaded to Push against the Rotorhousings to create compression and allow for it to move and Not instantly Ruin the Rotorhousings surface.
If Liquid Piston rotary were implemented to production for next Mazda RX it could theoretically speaking every previous problen commonly found on rotary is gone
That statement reveals a shocking lack of knowledge about the development history of the Wankel engine.. All of the 26 original Wankel KKM licensees have all come to the same conclusion... that the Wankel engine is inherently flawed in its fundamental concept and is inferior to the reciprocating engines it failed to replace.
on top of that, mazda had a hydrogen powered (as in, hydrogen combustion instead of gasoline) RX8 variant (JDM only). it was not as powerful as the gasoline variant, but it only produced NOx emissions, and basically no CO/CO2. I think there might be some ways to tweak the design to burn less oil, and then add a cat that specifically filters NOx, and you'd have a "clean" combustion engine. if it's just meant to power some electric motors and recharge batteries, even better as you don't feel the lack of torque and horsepower, or whatever (and it's not gonna guzzle fuel any more).
@@sandervanderkammen9230 yes, but that was just a 13B running on hydrogen and directly powering the rear wheels (through a gearbox). also hydrogen refill stations were basically non-existent as well. things can/have changed a lot since then. also some of it's shortcomings are less significant when it's just charging a battery.
Mazda's choice to inject engine oil into the combustion chamber is the biggest problem the rotary faces; I have a naturally aspirated 13b in my plane that has run the equivalent of well over 100k miles (600 hours) mostly at full throttle; with no issues. I removed the crankcase oil injection system and mix 2-cycle oil in the fuel at one ounce per gallon. Horror stories come from tweakers trying to boost the engine to 20psi and don't understand the needs for fueling and timing in a rotary.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 WOW! You have to be monumentally stupid to not realize what massive improvement premixing 2 stroke oil in with gas tank makes on the life cycle of a rotary everything they say about rotary haters is true!
@@jaylongee11 *PROVE IT!* You clearly have no formal education or professional experience on this topic and are not qualified to speak inteligently regarding engine lubrication if you can't read the label on a bottle of motor oil.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 You're dense🤣.. You haven't a clue what your talking about, you haters rarely ever do. What the o.p is saying is engine oil in a Mazda rotary is drawn from the oil sump by an oil metering pump and injected into the combustion chambers to lubricate the apex, corner and side seals. This oil has to be mineral oil or specific rated as most Synthetic oils create too much carbon when burnt which makes seals jam and your engine loses compression, but mineral oil doesn't perform aswell in performance applications as compared to synthetic. The oiling system from stock can also suffer failure, it also isn't very good at dispersing lubricant evenly throughout the combustion chamber. Another issue is it draws oil from the sump which gets dirty, can contain contaminants, fuel dillution aswell as needing the engine oil level to be constantly monitored so as to not run out of oil. Now, to easily resolve all of these issues in one foul swoop, you just delete the oil metering pump and blank the oil injectors off on the housings. Obviously you still need to lubricate the combustion chambers so you add two-stroke oil into the fuel tank. This also means you can run any oil as you are no longer burning sump engine oil.
Brian, horror stories are from poor tuning regardless of if they're boosted or not. Especially if they're running brittle apex seals. You can build reliable 13b's to take alot of boost without any issue's, problems occur on poor builds or people who have no idea🤣
If I had the money I'd probably buy an RX8 (I kinda like its design) and replace the rotary with the Mazda 6 MPS' 2.3l i4 engine, which is just as powerful, but a lot more reliable
Most people who own rx7s delete the system that consumes the engines motor oil and move to premixing. Premixing is where you add 2 stroke oil to your gas everytime you fill up. This is done to lubricate the apex seals and depending on what 2 stoke oil you use it can also brake down carbon.
@@Buffalobills-fh2be I just fill it up with 2 stroke oil and let the oil injection do its thing, i incresed the flow rat and just add and go no oil changes required as i make it work more like a 2 stroke.
Can confirm. Had an stock RX8 with 20B Rotary Engine. Very slow, drings too much fuel for to less power, and drinks too much oil as well. Sound is incredible if you change catalysator and exhaust, and intake. The inside is quite nice and timeless. But the engingereally kinda sucks.
What would the benefit be as a range extender? The priority for a range extender would be fuel economy while maintaining the low battery level at a steady/ low RPM. So not really a rotary's thing.
NOTHING, while some manufacturers looked at range extenders as a way to compensate for poor battery performance decades ago the automobile industry has completely abandoned range extenders.
The Wankel engine is the absolute antithesis of the Efficient "Green" Energy concept. The Wankel is noisy, dirty, inefficient and unreliable... the exact opposite of what attracts anyone who is interested in buying electric cars.
I had a 1988 rx7, bought with 90k and it died at 140k. 4 oil changes a year, always early but to go along with heat ranges for the seasons. a new set of sparkplugs every year with new air filter. everything was always kept upto date and done early.... but there's no longevity. definitely a better toy car, not a good reliable daily tho.
Very true, Wankel engines are inherently less reliable and are less durable than reciprocating engines. A perfect example of thos is the gact that Wankel engines cannot be used in passenger aircraft because they are too unreliable to meet aviation safety standards.
Here's the problem with the whole "engine as range extender" concept: it defeats the whole purpose of electric cars. In both Europe and USA, according to current laws, you would be able to sell a car with a thermal engine, regardless of how big it is, after 2035. So investing in technology that will be obsolete in 13 years is beyond idiotic, it makes ZERO sense. Or you have to bet that the current laws will be overridden, which is also stupid but perhaps less (since the law itself is retarded, but that's besides the point).
Excellent comment, very accurate and informative. Range Extenders are a hard sell and make little sense, they are in conflict with the entire concept and sales pitch that sells EVs.
I have a 2006 RX-8 that I purchased as a weekend sports car, and I absolutely love it. It is, and will always remain, a cult classic. It always starts, never floods, will rev to almost 10,000, and looks and sounds amazing the whole time..
@@nerdly44 The RX8 was the worst sedan Mazda ever made... 3 billion dollars failure that bankrupted Mazda and killed off the entire RX brand for good. You don't seem to know anything about cars or the RX8... doubtful that you are even old enough to drive a car kid.
If you can not understand the difference between a ROTARY type engine and a RADIAL type engine you have no business discussing engines are all. Stay in school kid and don't do drugs... someday you might learn something about engineering.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Yeah, but I understand the difference between radials and rotaries, the guy who posted the video doesnt. He showed pictures of radial engines and said that airplanes used to have rotaries. Radial =/= Rotary. In fact, a Rotary engine could be properly described as a tangential engine, because the piston moves in a tangential path instead of a radial or axial vector.
My RX8 is still purring @105k running marine synthetic premix through a Sohn adapter, It’s my daily, but I’m a mechanic by trade. I take the problems with the advantages that come with it, I’ve never had more fun daily driving a car than the RX8, even far more powerful ones.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 the fact that you'd assume that means you likely don't know what a sohn adapter is, have never owned an rx8, and aren't entitled to speak on it.
I’ve had several rx-7’s over the years and I LOVED them! Yep. Keep a few quarts of oil on the trunk all the way in the back to give you better grip😂👍👍👍👍
These engines are just so beautiful and lovely and light. Just that once you get down to the details nearly everything about them sucks compared to a normal piston engine: - by definition, some significant portion of the power from combustion is pushing it in the wrong direction - the flame from ignition has to travel along the direction of rotation from the spark plug and this makes combustion inefficient - the compression ratio is limited by the shape of the Wankel and relatively low compared to a piston engine that is mainly limited by the auto-ignition point of the compressed fuel - the Dorito shaped piston needs sealing gaskets at 4 sides, making leaks more common - the ignition and input stroke are on opposite sides of the engine, so it always heats up a lot more on one side, making proper sealing even harder as it doesn't expand uniformly The vibration thing is a big plus though of this design. Actually I think they mainly make sense for motor cycles, strangely enough they haven't really been used for this.
The Wankel engine was invented by a motorcycle manufacturer... NSU Motorenwerkes GmbH. Honda, Yamaha, Kawasaki, Suzuki, BSA, Norton, MZ, Van Veen all developed or manufactured Wankel engine bikes. The Wankel engine has no actual weight or power advantages in motorcycle applications and is more expensive than reciprocating engines. The Wankel engine's poor torque characteristics and lack of engine braking effect made them very unpopular with motorcycle enthusiasts.
The reason rotary engines never really caught on is because sealing internally is hard to do with a rotary engine because of the cylindrical shape of the motor also rotary engines are not that efficient in terms of combustion alot of the fuel ends up coming out the exhaust similar to a flathead motor
FD RX7 owner here: if your engine burns that much oil, it needs a rebuild. A healthy engine is supposed to burn 1 quart every oil change, which is better than some of the modern engines from Fiat and others that consider it "normal" to burn even more than that on a 40k mile engine. You have to care for these engines in a specific way, like giving the engine time to warm up before driving and time to run before shutting it down to prolong apex seal life. Most people won't do any of this. They also like to be revved, unlike a V8 that makes torque from idle. If you take care of these engines, they can last. They drive like nothing else on the road and they're one of the most responsive and most fun engines you will ever drive. They run just as smooth near redline as they do when cruising at 3k rpm. They make effortless power in a 2500lb vehicle and everything about the way it drives feels perfect. It really is the perfect driver's car. If you're an engineer (guess what, I'm also an engineer) or a bench-racer who only cares about numbers on a spec sheet, they make no sense on paper. People who haven't driven one will never understand just how slept on these cars are.
I believe the advertised capacity is misleading. Mazda calculate the capacity as the displacement of the rotor at a fixed position. The true capacity is closer to double the advertised.
The true, total displacement is 3 times the so called "tax displacement method" Because the Wankel KKM57 engine requires 1080° degrees of crankshaft rotation of crankshaft to complete the 4-stroke operating cycle we use the 2x conversion formula to establish the displacement at 720° degree of the Otto Cycle.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Comparing to a 4 stroke like this is unfair. That’s how they managed to screw 2 stokes in motor cross, by allowing double capacity 4 strokes to compete.
@@benwilkins2998 But the premise and logic is completely sound, a 250cc 2-stroke displaces the same volume of air every 720° degrees as a 500cc 4-stroke. The Mazda 13B displaces the same volume of air as 2.6 liter Otto engine every 720°.
Duh you gotta rev the fk out of it high revs very little torque even then, but you can get crazy power out of them with very little money and they are good a turning.
I have not got a clue as to how the volume of a rotary was decided but to me its wrong to measure the swept volume of one turn of the eccentric shaft or only one chamber is like measuring only one cylinder of a 3 cylinder engine. No concession is made between a 4stroke an a 2stroke so why for the wankle? Yes they are popular, light and sound great but as you have already said heavy on fuel and oil and the hp/ litre would be atrocious if measured properly. So all in all good fun but a poor choice for power unit that needs to make good power good torque and have longevity and fuel economy
Something to be admired from a far for the weak of heart. For those of us willing to put in the time with these engines when they run good its wirth every second you spend on them.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 well im saying so what if it’s unreliable. Doesnt mean they are unreliable that they suck. Talking by knowing abt cars when u j take other people’s opinion and claiming its urs
@@gloriousbagette2053 Wankel engines suck because they are inherently unreliable and less durable than reciprocating engines... this is an irrefutable fact that cannot be disputed and is also the reason why Wankel engines have been obsolete for more than a decade.
![Jack Harlow - Hello Miss Johnson [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Q86_nlRoIGw/mqdefault.jpg)
Rotary engines:
Displacement of a 4 cylinder
Power of a 6 cylinder
And fuel economy of a 8 cylinder
I spat out my drink reading this comment 🤣
And finally - oil economy of 10 piston engines
8 cyl is an unstatement
I drive the hell out of my Rx8 and achieve 16.5 mpg average while v8 chargers, Camaros and mustangs achieve 8-12mpg average. I doubt they drive theirs like I do mine. Friend has a 5.3 truck, we both have tunes he achieves 4mpg average. I have a sohn adapter and my tune increased my injection of two stroke by ten percent. I use roughly half a quart per tank. I premix with 10fl ounces. Some reality beyond the jokes. :)
@@sofakingdom3076 rx8 lolol you compare your RX8 to Camaro etc…..lol if you would have said RX7 maybe…
I think the reliability problems could have been fixed, and where I live, rebuilding a rotary is far cheaper than rebuilding a piston engine, because there are so few parts. Granted, it's more prone to failure due to the issues we all know (sealing failures and such) but I think that overall, that could have been fixed. After all, most dedicated rotary owners have third-party solutions installed to fix those reliability issues.
Problem is fuel efficiency & emissions. A RX8 can eat like a supercar going presto even at normal city speeds. Like 15l per 100km. That's a lot in a world in which efficient, full combustion cars can go as low as 5l, and a Porsche 911 can do 7-10.
And there's emissions. They burn oil by design. Inherently, they pollute a lot more.
I've heard that running them on LPG will solve the oil burning problem, because LPG doesn't mix with the oil. I wonder if Mazda can make some sort of skyactive tweaks (high compression, leaner air-fuel mixutre) on the engine. Piston engine can have poor fuel economy too, one example Subaru WRX/STI worse fuel economy than BMW inline 6.
The engines designed where the apex seals are a piece that intentionally wears.
Where I live, it's cheaper to rebuild a rotary than to change a BMW bumper lol.
@@Rose_Butterfly98 especially if it's an M sport bumper. Like $1200 just for the bumper skin. Not including any of the pdc or lights
Basically a 2.5 stroke? lol just keep them lubed and you won’t burn those apex seals. I’m all about simplicity! So beautiful 🥲 no valves or timing chains or cams… just a weird circle thing and a rotating triangle 😂 I love rotaries!
"10 years ago, Audi tested a Rotary engine"
Huh, I didn't know Audi did that in the early 2000s... Wait, 10 years ago was 2011. Damn.
Audi invented the Wankel engine... when it was called NSU
Alot of companies played around with the Wankel design over the years. Hell, GM almost produced a corvette with a wankel in it!
I thought about the 90s
@@farmerjunge He is referring to the 2010 Audi A1 E-Tron Concept car which had a Wankel range extender. There was considerable speculation that Audi was developing a new advanced Wankel engine design. Unfortunately the concept actually used a 1970s Sachs KM24 engine salvaged from a Hercules W2000 motorcycle.
Audi like the rest of the automobile industry lost interest in range extenders after improved batteries became available.
@@mikehunt9894 Curtiss-Wright, General Motors and Mercedes-Benz had the largest Wankel development programs in the world.
General Motors at on time was spending as much 10 million dollars per month on Wankel development...
Mazda was among the smaller of the 26 Wankel KKM licensee's with a limited budget and zero experience in engine development.
Prior to the Wankel Mazda only manufacturered engines from other companies under license.
I absolutely loved my RX-7 convertible. People probably thought I was crazy, because sometimes I just laughed out loud while driving it. It was that much fun.
Rotaries sound fantastic. 787b all the way.
Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. GOD loves you soo much unconditionally.🤩❤😍🤗😄
@@alunesh12345 amongus sus vent sus god is the imposter sus.
@@TeenWithACarrotIDK As a catholic I find this extremely funny
@@ur_boyfriend8612 same here lmaoo
Also nice pfp lol
@@ur_boyfriend8612 Jesus got ejected, and still lived, he mega sus.
I think that no matter how you slice it, Mazda has just always had weirdness going for it. I'll always love that unique style, and I'll always hope to have an SA-22 in the garage. Too cool.
Right now you're looking at a car that's slowly increasing in value, now is a good time to pick one up!
@@willg125 Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. GOD loves you soo much unconditionally.🤩❤😍🤗😄
Mazda has always had the lowest prices going for it... but now with decent quality cars coming from Korea and China, Mazda is really struggling to stay in business...
@@willg125 Scrap metal prices are slowly increasing... but I don't think buying old Mazdas for scrap metal is going to make you rich...
@@sandervanderkammen9230 someone's a mazda hater. Just tell us which car company you fanboy over and get it over with.
Interesting video. Thank you.
My greatest automotive regret was selling my RX8.
Everything you say is true, but you left something out. They are absolutely delightfully fun to drive. The rotary engine finds itself at relatively high RPM. And when I say high I mean HIGH! 😱
For instance, entering a cloverleaf and accelerating through it.. downshift one or two gears to 7000 RPMs and accelerate. You can easily go to 10,000 RPM on an RX8 - something most cars would drop fragments of pistons on the road as the engine blew.
So it’s not a muscle car dragster, but it finds itself on curvy highways. I much prefer it to the Porsche I have now.
The weight distribution was just perfect. The major reason for it being discontinued, was emission regulations. Rotary engines by definition burn oil.
Your comment sounds completely fake
Rotary engine:
size of R4
torque of wet noodle
fuel economy of V12
oil economy of 10x V12
@Andy Birks You don't really have a choice... you can't even give away junk like that.
@Andy Birks There must be an epidemic of gullible fools in your area? if you were smart? You would sell that pile of junk to the first sucker that offers to buy it!
@Andy Birks The RX8 is indeed a car... it also happens to be one of the worst cars ever made... anyone who is knowledgeable regarding cars is aware of this..
You most certainly don't need to be a specialist to rebuild a rotary engine. I built my own 13b monster bridge port in our shed on our farm with the help of just a book. This was mid 1970s, in those days, nothing could touch them bang for buck. My completed built in those days was 2000 folding. That includes lightened, balanced rotors and new housings and new everything else including the clutch. She could drop 225hp at the wheels after a few hours on a dyno. That car had a 4 barrel Holly and inlet manifold with a beautiful air cleaner with the velocity trumpet in it from Rotor motion on it, that was a very cool piece of kit. That may not sound like much of a big deal, but I'm from NZ, so it was at the time. My old rx2, what a fun car that was.
I've had my RX8 for 11 years. It has been a generally good car. Well, until a few weeks back when it blew a seal on a track day, with 76k on it. I would rebuild it but there are so many Friday, afternoon rebuilds. Even if it is rebuilt well, it's 20mpg (10 on track) and £600 UK tax. They are fun cars that, to be honest you are better off avoiding.
I feel like most owners of rx7/8s (who still own them) have all said the same. To be a rotary owner, you have to be a pretty dedicated fan. You can't just expect to treat it like any normal car. Unfortunately, there's a ton of delusional fans in the comments who may have never even owned the car.
You got 11 years of trackdays and thrashing on 1 build of a renesis, don't know how you can be unhappy with that. Any car driven on track is going to have a shorter life. In that same time frame I'm on my 3rd 3SGTE
@@scottd8991 Very true. The car had a pretty good run. I would say that I am happy with my rotary ownership period. Many cars would not have withstood the thrashing it had. I'm missing being able to drive it already.
It had a good life, when the time comes I'd be considering an engine swap rather than a rebuild .
@@Noojtxeeg Or pretty gullible and naive...
I've heard that for smaller light-duty engines, there have been some substantial improvements -- but this is in the 1/4 to 4hp range. I love mazdas, and am sticking a toe into the crossover market, so the MX30 is very appealing.
When I was a kid, a neighbor had an RX3 that rev'd over 10K and sounded amazing. Of course, it was up on blocks a lot waiting for parts a lot.
And I still remember Mazda's jingle from the 70's "Piston engine goes boing boing boing boing boing but a Mazda goes Hhhhmmmmmmmmmm"
Not true, the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that smaller engines are inherently less efficient.
Mazda abandoned all development of Wankel engines in May 2009.
The MX30 is in full production and is available in selected markets.
It will only be available in a 100% plug-in battery electric vehicle or a mild series hybrid powered by a 2.0 liter 4-Cylinder Skyactiv G engine.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. GOD loves you soo much unconditionally.🤩❤😍🤗😄
@@sandervanderkammen9230 agree small engines when driving at low speed is sure efficient but push that small engine a little bit harder your fuel cons gonna be worse than v8s
@@reynaldiwidjaja277 Actually just the opposite.
Smaller engines are more efficient when pushed harder.
Keeping the engine under high load improves BSFC and thus improves overall fuel efficiency.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 are you telling me pushing an engine is gonna improve efficiency? What do you think is the main cause for inefficient combustion? Engine heat
yes, all RX7´s and RX8´s are considered as mid-engined cars, due to the engine being placed behinde the front and infront of the rear axle. They are called front-mid-engined (like an SLS or a Corvette)
Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. GOD loves you soo much unconditionally.🤩❤😍🤗😄
To make something a plural, put an "s" after it.
NEVER add an apostrophe - they only EVER indicate missing letters, or possession!
@@Chris.Davies Cut him some slack he is not old enough to drive a car yet, does not have a clue what he is talking about.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 neither do you
@@200130769 I know more about Wankel engines than you ever will boy.
I remember owning the 2004 RX8 high power, it was lots of fun, the sound was great. My main issue was the rear wheels slipping way too often though, I moved from bridgemoans to conti's and that mostly solved the issue. The oil top ups was annoying but the 18 MPG on average was pretty dire but I bought it for the smiles per gallon anyways :)
I remember the Mazda RX8 being recalled for premature engine failures and Mazda settled a class action lawsuit admitting that it lied about the RX8 horsepower specs.
The engine failure recall was largest of its kind with over 60,000 engines replaced in the first year alone
Mazda opened a new warranty engine remanufacturing center in Chesterfield Virginia to keep up with the demand for Renesis engines.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Whats kinda sad is that the engine replacements were only in USA and Japan, here in the UK you were stuffed with a useless car :\
Mine was fine luckily but I was part of the members group and saw many horror stories.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 The only recall notices I get when searching are for a fuel pump O-ring, very early production lower control arms and/or ball joint casing and the Takata Air-Bags which effected multiple different car companies and models.
I've noticed that you hate the engines but that's no excuse to make shit up, you could just not watch Wankel/Rotary engine videos so you won't waste hours of time posting nasty comments.
@@bygonebebygones8503 Indeed, RX8 owners in other countries got screwed over by Mazda big time...
@@Cluuey You are clearly not familiar with the Mazda RX8 and its huge premature engine failure fiasco.
It's absolutely nothing personal, the facts here are irrefutable, the RX8 was the worst sedan Mazda ever made and without question the worst RX model made by Mazda.
Wankel engines are obsolete today because they are inherently inferior to reciprocating engines and cannot compete against them in any type of application.
"That's cheap RX8 isn't looking like a deal anymore" What? For a weekend car it's an absolute bargain. The car I'd compare it to is the S2000 and the RX8 has slightly better handling and is way easier to drift. Even with a very expensive rebuild of 5k$ you can get an RX8, a full rebuild with bridgeport making it go BRAP, 5 years worth of fuel and it will still cost you like 1/4 the price of the S2000.
And with that Bridgeport, it’ll last 1/4 as long as a s2000.
@@threadworm437 yup, rotarys are reliable just gotta keep up on maintenance. premixing helps too
@@snowxxxxx if you build it poorly maybe. Rotaries can be quite reliable if you build them right.
@@BigMan7o0 bridgeports have worse engine life no matter how good you build them compared to other types of porting like extend porting. when bridgeporting your essentially cutting down the area that the corner seal passes over, cutting down the lifespan of the motor over time. the lifespan of a bridgeported motor has many other factors that decide how long it'll last like the size of the bridge, how hard you will drive it etc. it does however have its benefits like increased power thru mid range and top end drastically, at the cost of low end torque, making them a not really good option for street however this doesn't stop people from doing it. bridgeporting is great for race motors and such, but for daily use and practicality they are not that good. they increase fuel consumption, reduce driveability and smoothness etc. rotarys can be very reliable if you build them right, all depends on what modifications you make to them though.
pls do not get a bridgeport, semi pp pls
Ha, love the included outtakes Callum! Presenting is WAY harder than people think! 👍👍👍
Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. GOD loves you soo much unconditionally.🤩❤😍🤗😄
My household had 3 first gens and 2 second gens. Rotary cars are very special, but today I drive a 50k mile BRZ/FRS/GT86 as I really don't want to be on automotive forums 24/7 trying to diagnose and fix my sportscar on life support. No regrets, not even the 85 where I changed the gearbox oil and had to do synchros and bearings right after. No regrets, not even lightly drifting at over 100mph on lakeshore in Saskatoon in the 91. No Regrets on the 82 that I bought for $1200 in 95 and wrote off for $3k in 96. No Regrets for the 82 that I power shifted until the clutch disappeared. No regrets drifting the bridge loop at work every day in 100hp car. These cars were simple enough that a kid could learn how cars work and how to diagnose car problems. These cars changed my life... but today I choose an FRS. Its still lightweight, low CG, better suspension, killer in the corners - but its good on gas, doesn't break and will last twice as long... maybe more. Here's to the car and the engine that taught me how cars work and how to drive them. RX7/8.
Yeah but they still suck... what's your point?
The RX8 has WAAAAAY better suspension than the wannabe 86.
@@CaramelColored Have you driven them both? Wanna be? What does the 86 want to be? I find it a fun car, like my rx7s. RX8 was a bit a disappointment in the looks dept for me but performed fine. Not quite as drifty as I like TBH but it wasn't my car so I didn't really get into it. I don't really understand people who trash the gt86 as though the original was somehow a better daily. Do you mean the rx8 is objectively better only in the suspension department or that you would rather own an rx8 or that you do own an rx8 and somehow need to defend its honor against the waves of 86 owners who just can't see how good the rx8 is... Let me know. I'm genuinely curious what makes you blurt out insults to a car that I can only assume you have very little seat time with.
@@dachanist Yeah, I have driven the wannabe 86, multiple RX7s, multiple Rx8s including the one I daily, every iteration of supra (except the BMW one), every iteration of Skyline (except the crap V6 one) and every other iconic JDM car at least 3 times. The FRS is not a gt86 so it's a wannabe 86 and the original is 100% a better car all-around. The RX8 has, factually, better suspension, better accel, more torque, FAR better interior, better brakes, drifts better, better and easier to insure, lower road taxes, sounds heavenly in comparison to the bloated walrus grunts the FRS pukes out. No need to defend it against FRS owners because you lot are just like the Tesla idiots with your bloated self worth and skin deep superiority complex, frankly I don't care about your opinion but I have no problem slamming you back down to where you belong.
4:08 The arrow at the lower left points to the primary inherent problem in the Wankel engine: this area of the stator housing (in red) is constantly exposed to the hot combustion gases, consequently lubricating oil that impinges on this surface is quickly burned off. As the apex seals sweep over the hot, dry surface, the steel-on-steel friction wears them down rapidly, this is the main reason the overhaul interval is short in Wankel engines. Also, the long, cornered combustion chamber leads to incomplete flame propagation and poor combustion efficiency. The shape of the combustion chamber gives it a larger surface area than a cylinder, which contributes to poor overall thermal efficiency. On the other hand, compared to the reciprocating engine the Wankel is small, light and cheap to manufacture, which may make them ideal in certain specialized applications.
The primary failure mode of all Wankel engines is compression loss due to apex seal damage.
Damage directly linked to high brisance and ablative damage related to poor combustion eg: detonation and pre-ignition.
Apex seals are inherently weak, flawed by design and prone to damage, The Wankel engine cannot support the high swirl or Quench type combustion chamber architecture.
Wankel engines have zero advantages over reciprocating engines and are obsolete technology because they are inferior to reciprocating engines in every application.
Any questions?
Dude there's always a solution to these minor problems. There just isn't one because everyone stock to pistons
@@sandervanderkammen9230 there's always a fix for minor issues like this. It doesn't even sound complicated. There only isn't one because everyone stuck to pistons. Rotaries sound amazing though.
@@davidt8087 Lol! Indeed you are very confused and naive...
The flaws in the Wankel engine are inherent in the fundamental design and cannot be fixed, all of the major engine manufacturers have reached the same conclusion.
This is why the Wankel is obsolete technology now.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 show me a resource. If wankel was for some reason the only engine design chosen by the world, you really think they wouldn't have fixed the oil issues or miles per gallon issues already? Engineers who are good at their job can overcome such challenges. Reminds me of carburetors vs direct injection. Without technology carburetors would have seemed like the only major affordable choice
787b and efini rx7 pretty much defined rotary engines. Honorable menations: Mazda Cosmos, RX3 etc :o
Yes, they were both failures.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Believe in JESUS today, confess and repent of your sins. No one goes to heaven for doing good but by believing in JESUS who died for our sins. GOD loves you soo much unconditionally.🤩❤😍🤗😄
@@sandervanderkammen9230 the 787 b one multiple championships the only reason they had to pull it out of racing is because they couldn't make weight
@@sandervanderkammen9230 ah yes, because a car that won very many races and had to be banned as a result is a failure
@@alunesh12345 Felix Wankel and Hitler were both racist Nazis, evil minons of Satan, Jujiro Matsuda was an atheist and admitted to being a racist and admirer of Felix Wankel.
The Good news is Jesus still loves you and God will forgive your ignorance and evil wickedness.
Always thought that the MX-5 (miata) should have had a Mazdaspeed version with a rotary in it from factory, even if it was the NA from the RX-8, in the smaller car it would be magic.
The reason why Mazda MX5 was a huge success is because it didn't have a Wankel engine.
The RX8, which shares the same SE platform was a $3 billion dollar failure.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 It's weird to put both the dollar sign and the word dollars. 3 billion dollars dollars?
@@totalmetaljacket789 Are you an English teacher???
@@sandervanderkammen9230 I'm apparently your tutor.
@@totalmetaljacket789 Not when it comes to Wankel engines son... why don't you go read some poetry or change a diaper.
I read about diesel rotary engines years ago. I wonder if diesel would give a bit longer life to the seals as it is a bit more "oily" fuel. The concept of the rotary engine is amazing. The practicality just has never been there. I had mostly forgotten about them but a while ago I saw a few RUclips channels building and doing rebuilds. I am glad that they have a bit of life still.
All of the original Wankel engine licensee's have abandoned development of Diesel Cycle variants including the 'Diesel-Ring' consortium. The Wankel engine cannot support the static compression ratio needed to for reliable compression ignition.
Low sulfur Diesel fuel is a very poor lubricant and has a lubricity of only 600mu, about the same as gasoline.
The Wankel engine is an obsolete technology today, no longer in development or series production anywhere in the world... it is now the sole domain of crackpots and con men like Ernie Brink and Rob Dahm.
Sure the rotary is obsolete. But why hate people who enjoy obsolete things? We still got typewriter and Walkman and Ancient Latin and martial arts lovers going around. Yet those were superceded by computers and printers, smartphones, modern languages and firearms.
Let go of your hate brother. You'll feel better in general. Time spent on hate is wasted time, and time is precious.
@@ujiltromm7358 Why do you feel the need to kill the messenger?
What is it that you hope to achieve???
Its not going to bring the Wankel back... just accept the facts and move on with your life.
Bro just tune your oil injectors...
Thats why i use nothing but amsoil interceptor 2 stroke oil in my rotary and nothing else.
The Mazda dealer I turned wrenches for had a grip of dead RX7's and 8's sitting abandoned behind the shop. We called it The Field of Broken Dreams.
Location ? 🤔
Nice story, fiction doesen't though. So try again . . .
Psst stop lying 😂
Lol you hurt a couple rotary guys feelings
Back in the late 70s I had two Mazda RX3s, there was little that quick on the streets and I loved them. More recently I've had two Suzuki RE5s, not quick but a joy to ride.
11 seconds 0-60 mph is not quick...
If people want to spend a lot of time rebuilding things then let them buy rotary engines or boxer engines (H engines ie: Subaru). It's up to people what they do with their money. I, however, choose to be smart. I'm not gonna spend a lot of time having my engine rebuilt. If I buy a vehicle, I want to drive it. Not have it in the shop.
1998 to 2002 rx7's would make around 300hp stock with the waste gate limiter removed as all auto manufacturers in japan had a agreement that none of the sports cars would make over 275 Hp
The FD got it’s Series 8 facelift in 1999 the gentleman’s agreement HP figure was 276HP/280PS
@@Aditya-sc6wu And nobody really took the agreement all that seriously, they just said they made 280ps.
@@DjDolHaus86 no one took the FD seriously... it was a major sales flop.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 The FD is highly sought after these days....
@@sandervanderkammen9230 how do u have so much free time? first the dokterbimmer account and now this one.
A Wankel engine is just about the worst engine you could use for an electric generator. They call it a 1.3 liter engine but it actually fires each cylinder more times per output shaft rotation than a traditional 4 stroke reciprocating engine. That means it acts more like a 2.6 liter engine. If you compare the fuel economy of a 2.5 liter Nissan Altima 4 cylinder to the RX8 you will see that the Altima has vastly better efficiency. It even produces similar Torque to the RX8 and weighs slightly more. Yes the RX8 has more power. However, if you compare the turbocharged 2.0 liter Altima to the RX8 you will see that the Altima surpasses the Wankel engine in the RX8 for Horsepower and Torque all while having vastly superior fuel economy in a heavier vehicle. The Wankel engine is SPECTACULARLY inefficient no matter what you do to it.
Better not let Rob Dahm read that title 👀
that and/or the vargas brothers lol
Rad potential
Yeah.. Rob Dahm might learn something and stop wasting his time....
@@jesusgurrola7062 vargas brothers? Are they the drug dealers that supply Rob Dahm with cocaine?
@@sandervanderkammen9230 funny part of your comment is the engines of rob dahms cars are the MOST reliable part of his cars 😂
Seeing the rx7 from nfs carbon being referenced even for just a second made me happy asf, that version of it made me fall in love with the car and have been ever since I got that pink slip from the boss as a kid.
So, the 1.3L rating of the 13B was based on the displacement of a single chamber of the rotor...
But as far as mass flow over RPM, the 13B is actually comparable to a 2.6L engine.
This is a pedantic little detail, but the 1.3L designation was a great boon for advertising, since they could claim 200hp+ from a "1.3L engine," but makes their fuel consumption/displacement sound abysmal. If you think of them in terms of actually being equivalent to a 2.6L 6-cylinder, their power and fuel consumption make a lot more sense.
They DO still have the advantage of small size and weight for displacement. That oil consumption, though...
Absolutely, engineers, government agencies and motorsports sanctioning bodies use the 2X formula conversion and rate the 13b as a 2.6 liter.
Unfortunately the Wankel engine has not real advantages in power to weight ratio performance or power density which is why they were a failure in motorcycles and aircraft...
Of course the horrible reliability and durability problems is the main reason why the Wankel engine is obsolete.
Owned an RX7 and an RX8 never had an issue with oil consumption usually top it up once between oil changes plus mineral oil is cheaper then other engine oils so it’s not expensive, mpg is the main issue
@@alexpurssell1349 Reliably has always been the biggest single problem with the Wankel engine... fuel efficiency is also abysmal.
1.3 13b rx7 spirt R-280bhp/231lbs
1.6 toyota GR corolla-300hp/280lbs
@@sandervanderkammen9230 only major thing I had go wrong in over 8 years was the oil pump going on the RX7, part of the problem is they need more looking after than a piston engine, a lot of owners don’t realise or don’t bother then run into problems. Having said that your not going to get as many miles out of one than a piston engine
The Rx8 might of had a rotary engine. But it was far different compared to the RX7s. The emissions regulations made Mazda redesign the 13b and tried to reduce the oil injection which caused premature failure. My FD never had a "need to top up oil every third fueling"... Drove 2000 km through Germany and the Netherlands. Barely any oil missing.
Mazda never made Rotary type engines, only Wankel engines.
Still a 13b series
The primary failure mode is not related to lubrication.
Apex seals are inherently fragile and unreliable.
The 13b suffered from compression loss failures both in the turbocharged engines and the high compression Renesis because apex seals cannot handle high combustion pressures and are quickly destroyed by detonation/pre-ignition
reads title
you take that back right now
My first car was a 1984 Rx-7 and always wanted the third gen so bad but I was young and poor 🤷🏻♂️. I know it didn't have a rotary but had an S-2000 later which was also unique and fun. I have looked up these cars today and low mileage ones are insanely priced but they are very rare so I get it.
Mine was a 1980 rx7 I wreck it and bought a 1987 rx7 and still have it but that first gen hold a special place
When GM was testing the C4 corvette, they tried out several rotary motors, the "big one" was a twin turbo 4 lobe. turns out that it got so hot, it melted the housing (gm did it again with the ZL motors of today). we never got the "Rotovette" but one can still imagine.
i wouldn't trust a rotary built by GM. they still manage to pump out shit engines and they been making them for awhile, can you imagine a completely new to them engine that is already known for reliability issues? fuck that i'll put in a upgraded mazda version if i wanted that.
GM was smart. The rotary is inherently trash.
@@01Z06guy rotaries are good GM is trash
@@djjaysky9071 Rotary cars are extinct and RX cars are known for being horribly unreliable. On the other hand, the Corvette is one of the best performing and highest priased cars in the world. Yeah sorry, reality proves you wrong.
Uh.... The comparison of the Bugatti with the Rotary was really bad for HP/L . Buggati intentionally makes their engine huge for reliability. And I don't mean like get some extra years. They've said they want Veyrons to still roam the earth in 50-100 years and that's why the engines are huge. A better example would've been koenigsegg wich cram all the power they can out of engines.
I was always fascinated by these because it's under developed and could still possibly be a game changer someone needs to make a double dorito with combustion happening between both chips \/ to possibly do away with alot of the apex seal issues
That statement reveals a shocking lack of knowledge about the development history of the Wankel engine...
The Wankel engine obsolete technology because it is inherently inferior to reciprocating engines and horribly unreliable.
There is no cure for the fatal flaws in the Wankel KKM57 design... that is why there are no longer any legitimate engineers or manufacturers working with the Wankel, it is now the sole domain of crackpots and con men.
@@Stevie-J The more apex seals... the less reliable the engine.
i think there’s a dude with a channel who talks about upgrading rotarys. bro has some wild claims about upgraded rotary motors, 700+hp, 50 mpg. it sounds fantastical but if you own one why not i guess
@@d0rkweb Are you referring to a Florida cocaine dealer named Rob Dahm??? All of his engines blow-up!
@@dereksmith7082 Travis Pastrana has only won Rallye events driving a Subaru.
He has also won several other motorsports victories driving a Toyota, Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge and Ferrari.
Mazda left racing and no longer has any factory motorsports program.
Wew lets go! Long live rotaries
R..I.P. 1964 - 2012
"Rotaries make awesome hp/L"
Only if you count the swept volume of one chamber of each rotor. Essentially, if you ignore 2/3 chambers, they're incredibly small displacement. The only reason why this "Geometric Displacement" started being used was to dodge displacement taxes in Europe and Japan (thanks to Max Bentele suggestion when visiting Germany's NSU, the company that licensed and built the first Wankels). Ironically, people bought into the Geometric Displacement that was sold to lawmakers, so now they think the rotary is some engine that makes god-tier HP/L, when that displacement figure is clearly a ruse at every possible metric. When you look at their "Thermodynamic Displacement" like engineers do (counting all 3 chambers for displacement), it's easy to see why they're so thirsty.
A 13b has two 654cc chambers firing every crank rotation. That's akin to a 2.6L four cylinder... Which is why "Equivalent Displacement" ratio is used in competition. Despite spinning at a high RPM, they're actually slow to fire all three chambers on each rotor. If Thermodynamic Displacement were used for rotary displacement in competition, they'd be absolutely trounced. But again, people have been fooled by the Geometric Displacement that tricked lawmakers, so they automatically spout off about how "a bigger engine is needed to compete against a 1.3L rotary".
Essentially, that RX8 example of "174 hp/L" only seems good when Geometric Displacement is used (ignoring 2/3 of the chambers. If Equivalent Displacement is used, it's only a paltry 87 hp/L. If the Thermodynamic Displacement is used, it's only 58 hp/L, which is absolutely dismal.
And before the comments about "that's not how it's supposed to be measured" rain in, you can talk to the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE, the organization responsible for regulations concerning power claims from car manufacturers) that include all 3 displacement measurements in SAE J1220 (approved June 1978); which included all three to satisfy everyone since a single procedure couldn't be agreed upon (manufacturers didn't want the displacement taxes, and racers didn't want the severe disadvantage)
You can continue to pick Geometric Displacement as your preference, but if you want to understand the rotary's pros and cons, the best way to do so is to consider all three chambers of each rotor. Only counting the swept volume of 1 chamber per rotor is like only counting the swept volume of a 4 stroke engine in 1 crank rotation (meaning a 5L V8 would only displace 2.5L)... Which would be completely absurd to virtually everyone.
That said, a rotary's biggest benefits is how much displacement it can fit into a tiny, lightweight package and its minimal amount of moving parts for that displacement.
My buddies old 88 RX-7 would eat corvettes on NOS. It was almost stock aside from a little turbo pushing 14ibs
hey alright
@@cbassthefirst1343 That's the riciest post I've read in years.
You didn't mention the internal gearing, a rotary takes three revolutions to complete a combustion cycle on all chambers where a conventional engine only takes two revolutions.
Once you realise that a 13B is a 3.9l 6 cylinder which revs to 6000 RPM, they make a lot more sense.
Thankyou , not many people understand this, and some do but are too salty .
And I also love the fact 2 stroke piston engines exist haha.
you missed a few things. first off the 1.3 liter figure comes from that they only count 1 face of each rotor. and remember its heyday was the early 90s back then you couldn't just ask the internet what the displacement figure actually meant for rotaries and get an answer in 30 seconds. it was extremely arcane information because mazda sure as hell didn't want to admit to the world that they were pulling such shenanigans. It took a full decade to get the answer to that question from the time i first wondered about it. second is the 9000rpm redline. what is it that spins to 9000rpm? well it's not the rotors, it's the output shaft which spins 3 times for every one revolution of the rotors. and because it's the rotors that are the things that are doing the work that 3 times as fast eccentric shaft does so with 1/3 the torque. it's called a rotary engine not an eccentric shaft engine. the truth is that it's a 3.9 liter motor that redlines at 3000rpm. that's why it sucks.
Excellent comment.
When I was kid my favorite uncle drove a new 1988 Rx7 and took me for a drive when he bought it. Every sportscar we stopped beside wanted to race. This was in Chicago suburbs in 1989. RIP uncle.
I love the sound of rotaries (because it’s mandatory) but I think a v8 or i6 beats it in almost every way. Reliability, price, v8 has better sound, both can be much faster, more hp, etc
not in intial d tho
If some car manufacturer were to make a lightweight sportscar with a 700hp rotary engine, and good chassis, it would most likely beat every other car on the nurburgring.
i would love a 6 rotor muscle rotor car like a viper lol
A 6 rotor would have a ton of torque and then if you turbo charge it, then it would just be a beast
Rotary corvette.
It makes sense too if ya know your corvette history too. Lol
@@mikehunt9894 yeah, but would a 6 rotor fit in a vette? Because a 4 rotor would just not have the oomph that a 6 would and a turbo 4 has already been done a ton. I have yet to really see a 6 rotor let alone a turbo 6 rotor.
@@charliemaybe Corvette's dont weight anything.. infact probably just as light as a 90s rx7.. So a yeah a boosted 4 would power it fine.look on youtube, someone has done it already
@@mikehunt9894 I know a vette can be light especially with a turbo 4 rotor in it, but have you ever seen a serious build of a turbo 6 rotor before? I mean imagine rolling into a meet with a viper acr or something and popping the hood and you just have a long line of rotary and it would look so good and have the power and torque to back up the viper badge
YOu guys might want to chekc out Rob Dahm's chanel. he has a rotary-vette and so much more
Y'all are just now figuring this out?
GT Sport has a very fun GT3 version of the concept Mazda RX Coupe. It sounds a lot like an older Ferrari V10 F1 engine.
GT7 has a road version too. It's more like a V8. I think it's got the quad rotor engine.
4:17 ok mixture is kinda relative in this example
ALL OF THE FUEL
They are not 650cc. It's more like 1300 or 1750cc. Cc is calculated when all cylinders have fired. So 650 being one dorito side the full number should be 1750cc. It's very small for it's size and very light. But this way of calculating it's cc makes sense for alternating piston comparisons and explains why it was so damn thirsty. 2x650 it's like a 6 cylinders 2.6 of the same era.
He was taking about the displacement for each rotor (1308cc= 654cc x 2 )
@@Aditya-sc6wu each rotor has 3 sides that is 654cc each. An engine displacement is calculated when all pistons have fired once. This means that the number should be tripled. But usually 4 stroke engines do that every 2 crankshaft rotations. The Wankel fires one side each crankshaft rotation so the displacement should be at least doubled if we have to compare to alternate piston engines.
@@Aditya-sc6wu Each rotor has 3 displacement volumes.
It's in the name 13b 1.3, 20b 2.0, 26b 2.6 they could not have made it any easier
@@davidpriestley7585 You need to learn about how swept volume displacement is calculated correctly.
"Tax Displacement" is a concocted marketing gimmick.
My first car was a 1971 Mazda Capella RX2. Loved it!
My condolences...
1:24 It's weird seeing a REPU without a V8 with jet boat exhausts on top of an Oldsmobile Tornado front axle in the bed.
Yes, it's the Mazdarati from Roadkill
Rx8, the joke of Mazda, held its value like a child holding a red hot coal. Pick 1 up for a grand and that’s pricey. That’s why a lot ended up with kids modifying them to make them even worse. 🤣
rx8 had better lap times than supras and gtrs while relased. Up to today many rx8 hold the top lap times on race tracks, losing mostly to awd cars. There are mostly rx8 on time attacks in my country. The car is funny cheap and its a great weekend car. Value goes down, but its good for us. And LHD r3 2009+ lift mazdas rx8 are very rare and nowhere to be cheap. Engine problems were caused by people using mazda oil which was designed to fail, now people tune oil injectors better and use good oil. 350z v6 did die all around the world too, because people used cheap oil on them.
@@szaka9395 😂 I accept they have a following within the younger guys but believe me a lot of people lost a lot of money within 2yrs on these heaps of shite. My cousin use to be a Mazda mechanic and even he said it was a waste of time developing this hence why they ditched it but just not quick enough.
They’re so nice to use when they’re working though. The smoothness is unreal.
Most rotaries die. Due to people beating on them and not keeping up with the maintenance. Unlike a piston motor. A rotaries motors maintenance directly correlates to how it's driven. And most people's maintenance habits can't keep up with their driving habits
@@terrellfair9812 I certainly hear what you are saying here, but tbf rotaries actually enjoy a good beating on occasionally lol. I mean that the Mazda techs I've spoken with tell me to redline my Rx8 at least once a week to help blow out any excess carbon deposits. But I absolutely agree that they require meticulous maintenance. But good God it is by far the most enjoyable car to drive that I have ever owned!
You have never driven a V-12 car.
@@terrellfair9812 Then explain why Wankel engines cannot be used in certified passenger aircraft???
@@ambergraves798 Your engine is already damaged if you are having carbon build-up, carbon deposits are a direct indication of low compression.
You must have driven some really garbage cars.
16mpg and 220hp...not terribly efficient. An 8 liter V10 In a Viper gets 23mpg and 450hp
Dude what an original concept for an automotive RUclips video. I literally have not seen this opinion anywhere else. Rotary engine bad? Burns oil? Apex seals breaking? Cooling issues? I had no idea. Man if only every other car channel had made this video I would have known sooner.
There is not alot of good material on the obsolete Wankel engine on the internet... but this was better than most.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 my guy most of the internet shits on rotaries. Like they're in more than just a few Mazdas or something if you don't like the rotary engine don't buy an RX simple as.
@@SomberFireBall Everyone knows Wankel engines are garbage... even Mazda stopped making them a decade ago.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 even I am aware of Mazda stopping production of rotary engines but I still like them. Do i think that they should come back into production not necessarily but I do think that they're an interesting engine and the cars that use said engine are fun to drive, yes. You just don't like them because the internet has told you not to like them. If not for the internet telling you they were bad you would probably not care about the rotary engine and focus on whatever car you actually like but because it's profitable to make a RUclips video that says "why X sucks" you gobble it up anyway. I came here to see if he had anything new to bring to the table about rotary engine discussion and was not surprised when it didn't thus i posted my comment.
@@SomberFireBall Wankel engine... _'Mazda Rotary'_ is a defunct brand name now.
Everyone knows these horrible, unreliable Wankel engines suck. Even Mazda now admits this, why are you still in denial?
If someone decided to redefine the rotary and make it more reliable but still keep that rotary feel rotary's will make a come back in the car market and racing scene
Wankel engines are inherently unreliable and inferior to reciprocating engines... they will never comeback.
No one is building them because they have inferior emissions, efficiency and durability.
They are reliable
Most apes just dont understand basic matinence
@@anyau exactly
Rotron rotaier and AIE 650 presssure gas cooled rotor SPARCS thingy for cooling, all roller beraing and oil injected like some 2 strokes.
Every engine sucks.... AIR 😉
Growing up, I was in love with the RX-7. My heart literally skipped a beat the first time I saw an FD, and I eventually bought a 91 GXL FC. It was a great car, but yeah the rotary engine (as cool as it is) does actually kinda suck. Wankel's engine concept is unique and MaZDa's execution is also very well thought out. Its just that the rotary engine's pros dont outweigh a traditional piston engine.
Keep on bashing on the rotary! Will make my stuff more worth! Thank you!!!
I still love my RX-8 daily driver. That's all I have to say... ;-)
Me too Bebe!
Worst RX ever made
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Je moeder!
@@BebeMischa So bad, it killed off the entire RX brand...
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Do you own one? I do. It's a fabulous car. It killed nothing. The users, who did not understand the car, killed it.
I have often wondered what might have happened if the Sarich Orbital Engine had gotten the investment to be put into production cars. Both the rotary and the orbital concepts had many advantages but ultimately bean counters decided to play it safe and put investment money into conventional engines rather than more risky designs.
While both engines are fascinating... neither design has any real practical advantages and many serious disadvantages.
I'm surprised nobody ever mentions that the rotor spins at 1/3 of the crankshaft speed three revs of the crankshaft for one of the rotor
I will buy a 13 or 20B in the future, and a Oldsmobile 5.7L IDI Diesel fun cars.
I had an rx8. Babied the hell out of it. Apex seals went out at 70k miles.
Babying a rotary is bad for the Apex seals you want to warm them up completely make sure the entire engine is the same Temp and then run it out to Red line a few times
Just open the engine earlier and repair wont cost much.
@@djjaysky9071Old wives tales... nothing you can do will ever make a Wankel engine reliable.
The "Italian Tune-up" only applies to carburated engines, if your car is fuel injected? Revving it up will not fix your problem, only a new engine will.
@@szaka9395Just buy a better car with a reliable engine
@@sandervanderkammen9230mine had 120k and apex seals were fine. Redlined it regular
The other reason why the Wankel-engine might make a comback as a range extender (besides its small size/weight) is because while it was very inefficient as a main engine with constantly changing rpm and torque demand, it can run much more efficient when designed for and kept at a specific and constant rpm and torque -> which it could as a generator/range extender.
That's completely false.
Wankel engines have repeatedly proven to be completely unsuitable for use in generator/APU applications.
Wankel engines are extremely noisy, dirty, have horrible fuel efficiency, produce more carbon emissions and are completely incompatible with the entire "Green Energy" concept of EVs.
The Concept of Range Extenders was a topic of interest among several automobile manufacturers a decade ago but has been completely abandoned.
Not a single manufacturer has ever offered a vehicle with a range extender as standard equipment and only one, (BMW i3) was offered as an option but was discontinued.
Mazda completely abandoned development of production Wankel engines in May 2009, no new prototypes have been made since the 16X program in 2007 and was cancelled on May 15th 2009.
The Mazda MX30 has been available in selected markets since the 2021 model year and will only be available in a 100% plug-in battery EV or a mild series hybrid powered by 2.0 liter 4-Cylinder Skyactiv G engine.
Any questions?
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Mercedes is releasing the new unimog with a range extender.
@@tun0fun Thats carzy! Who would be stupid enough to buy one?
@@sandervanderkammen9230 It's actually brilliant for the same reason that diesel-electric trains are.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 It's actually brilliant for the same reason that diesel-electric trains are.
Even though rotaries are connected to Mazda, it's still a german invention... by Felix Heinrich Wankel (which is why it's called the Wankel Motor).
Funniest thing about the "Wankel Motor" is I think, that "Wankel" in german means "to tumble" - so the inventor's name was basically perfectly describing the movement of the piston I guess :-)
787B has still the most magnificent sound of any rotary i know though
Felix Wankel hated this horrible engine... the KKM57 was created by Hanns Paschke and Walter Freode, engineers at NSU Motorenwerkes GmbH.
the best thing to do to get around the oil problem. use 2 stroke oil. it's made to burn. not like synthetic. and therefore better for the environment
You have to be monumentally stupid to pour the wrong oil down the wrong filler hole... please stop spreading lies and misinformation about about Wankel engines.
Basically a car engine that sounds like a motorcycle
But what if we made the Dorito and the Apex Seals one piece?
That would mean you get little to No compression. Since the Apex seals are spring loaded to Push against the Rotorhousings to create compression and allow for it to move and Not instantly Ruin the Rotorhousings surface.
Yeeeaaaah... I love the enthusiasm, but that's probably not gonna work out well. 😅
No matter what , I owned rotary before, and I will chose them over any JZ RB piston built anyday
Don't sugar coat it, kinda suck? They blow
If Liquid Piston rotary were implemented to production for next Mazda RX it could theoretically speaking every previous problen commonly found on rotary is gone
clarify liquid piston u mean?
LiquidPiston is a fraudulent vaporware investment scam
Those still have rotor seals so they need oil
@@mflbikes1870
The seals are more on the housing, so it might be able to reduce the amount of oil getting burnt.
@@Appletank8 its still in the combustion chamber and they still move so it requires lubrication
The amount of development that's gone into piston engines is infinitely higher than the rotary. I think the problem isn't so much the concept itself.
That statement reveals a shocking lack of knowledge about the development history of the Wankel engine..
All of the 26 original Wankel KKM licensees have all come to the same conclusion... that the Wankel engine is inherently flawed in its fundamental concept and is inferior to the reciprocating engines it failed to replace.
My favourite type of engine.
They could put it in a sports car as a range extender. Single rotor may save weight over a larger battery.
on top of that, mazda had a hydrogen powered (as in, hydrogen combustion instead of gasoline) RX8 variant (JDM only). it was not as powerful as the gasoline variant, but it only produced NOx emissions, and basically no CO/CO2. I think there might be some ways to tweak the design to burn less oil, and then add a cat that specifically filters NOx, and you'd have a "clean" combustion engine. if it's just meant to power some electric motors and recharge batteries, even better as you don't feel the lack of torque and horsepower, or whatever (and it's not gonna guzzle fuel any more).
Except for the fact that they're even worse for effeciency
@@vukpsodorov5446 The Mazda RX8 Hydrogen RE was a complete failure..
@@sandervanderkammen9230 yes, but that was just a 13B running on hydrogen and directly powering the rear wheels (through a gearbox). also hydrogen refill stations were basically non-existent as well. things can/have changed a lot since then.
also some of it's shortcomings are less significant when it's just charging a battery.
@@vukpsodorov5446 What about the HyNor program?
Call me when your engine gets banned from LeMans.
I’d love a FD RX7. With a LS swap
Mazda's choice to inject engine oil into the combustion chamber is the biggest problem the rotary faces; I have a naturally aspirated 13b in my plane that has run the equivalent of well over 100k miles (600 hours) mostly at full throttle; with no issues. I removed the crankcase oil injection system and mix 2-cycle oil in the fuel at one ounce per gallon.
Horror stories come from tweakers trying to boost the engine to 20psi and don't understand the needs for fueling and timing in a rotary.
WOW! You have to be monumentally stupid to pour the wrong oil down the wrong filler hole... everything they say about rotards seems to be true.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 WOW! You have to be monumentally stupid to not realize what massive improvement premixing 2 stroke oil in with gas tank makes on the life cycle of a rotary everything they say about rotary haters is true!
@@jaylongee11 *PROVE IT!*
You clearly have no formal education or professional experience on this topic and are not qualified to speak inteligently regarding engine lubrication if you can't read the label on a bottle of motor oil.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 You're dense🤣.. You haven't a clue what your talking about, you haters rarely ever do.
What the o.p is saying is engine oil in a Mazda rotary is drawn from the oil sump by an oil metering pump and injected into the combustion chambers to lubricate the apex, corner and side seals. This oil has to be mineral oil or specific rated as most Synthetic oils create too much carbon when burnt which makes seals jam and your engine loses compression, but mineral oil doesn't perform aswell in performance applications as compared to synthetic.
The oiling system from stock can also suffer failure, it also isn't very good at dispersing lubricant evenly throughout the combustion chamber. Another issue is it draws oil from the sump which gets dirty, can contain contaminants, fuel dillution aswell as needing the engine oil level to be constantly monitored so as to not run out of oil.
Now, to easily resolve all of these issues in one foul swoop, you just delete the oil metering pump and blank the oil injectors off on the housings.
Obviously you still need to lubricate the combustion chambers so you add two-stroke oil into the fuel tank. This also means you can run any oil as you are no longer burning sump engine oil.
Brian, horror stories are from poor tuning regardless of if they're boosted or not.
Especially if they're running brittle apex seals.
You can build reliable 13b's to take alot of boost without any issue's, problems occur on poor builds or people who have no idea🤣
If I had the money I'd probably buy an RX8 (I kinda like its design) and replace the rotary with the Mazda 6 MPS' 2.3l i4 engine, which is just as powerful, but a lot more reliable
and a lot heavier
@@Shadow1986 that's a tradeoff I could live with
@@Inferiis you basically killed the handling of the rx8 and made it like any FR car
@@Shadow1986 I never drove an RX8, so idk how fun it is, but I'd rather have a reliable but powerful car than a fun car standing in the garage
@@Inferiis then why buy a rotary mid engine car and turn it into a FR car of anytime.
DOn't waste your time and just buy another car with FR layout.
Most people who own rx7s delete the system that consumes the engines motor oil and move to premixing. Premixing is where you add 2 stroke oil to your gas everytime you fill up. This is done to lubricate the apex seals and depending on what 2 stoke oil you use it can also brake down carbon.
No one does this daily driving
@@Buffalobills-fh2be I just fill it up with 2 stroke oil and let the oil injection do its thing, i incresed the flow rat and just add and go no oil changes required as i make it work more like a 2 stroke.
Can confirm. Had an stock RX8 with 20B Rotary Engine. Very slow, drings too much fuel for to less power, and drinks too much oil as well. Sound is incredible if you change catalysator and exhaust, and intake. The inside is quite nice and timeless. But the engingereally kinda sucks.
No shit, i would buy a rotary for the sounds. If i wanted something reliable id just put a 1j in it
What would the benefit be as a range extender? The priority for a range extender would be fuel economy while maintaining the low battery level at a steady/ low RPM. So not really a rotary's thing.
Lots of power for the space and weight. EV's use all the space and weight allowance for batteries.
NOTHING, while some manufacturers looked at range extenders as a way to compensate for poor battery performance decades ago the automobile industry has completely abandoned range extenders.
The Wankel engine is the absolute antithesis of the Efficient "Green" Energy concept.
The Wankel is noisy, dirty, inefficient and unreliable... the exact opposite of what attracts anyone who is interested in buying electric cars.
Heavily unreliable but sound amazing and perform pretty well
I had a 1988 rx7, bought with 90k and it died at 140k. 4 oil changes a year, always early but to go along with heat ranges for the seasons. a new set of sparkplugs every year with new air filter. everything was always kept upto date and done early.... but there's no longevity. definitely a better toy car, not a good reliable daily tho.
Very true, Wankel engines are inherently less reliable and are less durable than reciprocating engines.
A perfect example of thos is the gact that Wankel engines cannot be used in passenger aircraft because they are too unreliable to meet aviation safety standards.
Should be towed to scrapyard.That's the best move for that stuff
Anyone who tells you rotary engines suck, not reliable or too expesive to fix have never owned one or doesn't know shit about them lol.
Ultimately a piston engine can rev higher than a rotary and make far more power there's to much weight in the rotors
Excellent comment and absolutely true.
Here's the problem with the whole "engine as range extender" concept: it defeats the whole purpose of electric cars. In both Europe and USA, according to current laws, you would be able to sell a car with a thermal engine, regardless of how big it is, after 2035. So investing in technology that will be obsolete in 13 years is beyond idiotic, it makes ZERO sense. Or you have to bet that the current laws will be overridden, which is also stupid but perhaps less (since the law itself is retarded, but that's besides the point).
Excellent comment, very accurate and informative.
Range Extenders are a hard sell and make little sense, they are in conflict with the entire concept and sales pitch that sells EVs.
My 1982 rx7 still going with 180k km. You must take care of the engine and it will work well. This 12a engine gives me lots of fun
I have a 2006 RX-8 that I purchased as a weekend sports car, and I absolutely love it. It is, and will always remain, a cult classic. It always starts, never floods, will rev to almost 10,000, and looks and sounds amazing the whole time..
You're not a very good liar kid.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Alright........
@@nerdly44 The RX8 was the worst sedan Mazda ever made... 3 billion dollars failure that bankrupted Mazda and killed off the entire RX brand for good.
You don't seem to know anything about cars or the RX8... doubtful that you are even old enough to drive a car kid.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Geez dude, I just like my RX-8. You sure are an angry guy. Maybe get off the internet for a little while and read a book.
@@nerdly44 Ignore him, hes baiting under every comment that praises rotaries or cars with rotaries.
The RX8 was a nightmare constantly needed to be babied.
Radial engines. Airplanes had radial piston engines, Mazda's have Rotary engines. Rotaries and Radials have nothing in common.
Wow! You really don't know anything about engines do you???
WW1 airplanes have ROTARY type engines.
Mazda only made WANKEL engines.
If you can not understand the difference between a ROTARY type engine and a RADIAL type engine you have no business discussing engines are all.
Stay in school kid and don't do drugs... someday you might learn something about engineering.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Yeah, but I understand the difference between radials and rotaries, the guy who posted the video doesnt. He showed pictures of radial engines and said that airplanes used to have rotaries. Radial =/= Rotary.
In fact, a Rotary engine could be properly described as a tangential engine, because the piston moves in a tangential path instead of a radial or axial vector.
@@SpecialEDy *The pictures shown in the video were ROTARY aircraft engines!!!! Not Radials!*
My RX8 is still purring @105k running marine synthetic premix through a Sohn adapter, It’s my daily, but I’m a mechanic by trade. I take the problems with the advantages that come with it, I’ve never had more fun daily driving a car than the RX8, even far more powerful ones.
You have to be very gullible to buy an RX8... and monumentally stupid to put the wrong oil in your engine.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 the fact that you'd assume that means you likely don't know what a sohn adapter is, have never owned an rx8, and aren't entitled to speak on it.
There's plenty of production Piston engines making over 190hp/L naturally aspirated and have only 3 moving parts...
I’ve had several rx-7’s over the years and I LOVED them! Yep. Keep a few quarts of oil on the trunk all the way in the back to give you better grip😂👍👍👍👍
if someone decide to put a weekly amount of needed oil into trunk of Rx7 the car would barely move ))
Technically speaking, ALL engines suck
Yes rebuilding a rotary cost alot more because normal mechanics won't do it. They will remove the engine then send it out to rebuild by a specialist.
These engines are just so beautiful and lovely and light. Just that once you get down to the details nearly everything about them sucks compared to a normal piston engine:
- by definition, some significant portion of the power from combustion is pushing it in the wrong direction
- the flame from ignition has to travel along the direction of rotation from the spark plug and this makes combustion inefficient
- the compression ratio is limited by the shape of the Wankel and relatively low compared to a piston engine that is mainly limited by the auto-ignition point of the compressed fuel
- the Dorito shaped piston needs sealing gaskets at 4 sides, making leaks more common
- the ignition and input stroke are on opposite sides of the engine, so it always heats up a lot more on one side, making proper sealing even harder as it doesn't expand uniformly
The vibration thing is a big plus though of this design. Actually I think they mainly make sense for motor cycles, strangely enough they haven't really been used for this.
The Wankel engine was invented by a motorcycle manufacturer... NSU Motorenwerkes GmbH.
Honda, Yamaha, Kawasaki, Suzuki, BSA, Norton, MZ, Van Veen all
developed or manufactured Wankel engine bikes.
The Wankel engine has no actual weight or power advantages in motorcycle applications and is more expensive than reciprocating engines.
The Wankel engine's poor torque characteristics and lack of engine braking effect made them very unpopular with motorcycle enthusiasts.
The reason rotary engines never really caught on is because sealing internally is hard to do with a rotary engine because of the cylindrical shape of the motor also rotary engines are not that efficient in terms of combustion alot of the fuel ends up coming out the exhaust similar to a flathead motor
FD RX7 owner here: if your engine burns that much oil, it needs a rebuild. A healthy engine is supposed to burn 1 quart every oil change, which is better than some of the modern engines from Fiat and others that consider it "normal" to burn even more than that on a 40k mile engine. You have to care for these engines in a specific way, like giving the engine time to warm up before driving and time to run before shutting it down to prolong apex seal life. Most people won't do any of this. They also like to be revved, unlike a V8 that makes torque from idle. If you take care of these engines, they can last.
They drive like nothing else on the road and they're one of the most responsive and most fun engines you will ever drive. They run just as smooth near redline as they do when cruising at 3k rpm. They make effortless power in a 2500lb vehicle and everything about the way it drives feels perfect. It really is the perfect driver's car. If you're an engineer (guess what, I'm also an engineer) or a bench-racer who only cares about numbers on a spec sheet, they make no sense on paper. People who haven't driven one will never understand just how slept on these cars are.
I believe the advertised capacity is misleading. Mazda calculate the capacity as the displacement of the rotor at a fixed position. The true capacity is closer to double the advertised.
The true, total displacement is 3 times the so called "tax displacement method"
Because the Wankel KKM57 engine requires 1080° degrees of crankshaft rotation of crankshaft to complete the 4-stroke operating cycle we use the 2x conversion formula to establish the displacement at 720° degree of the Otto Cycle.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Comparing to a 4 stroke like this is unfair. That’s how they managed to screw 2 stokes in motor cross, by allowing double capacity 4 strokes to compete.
@@benwilkins2998 But the premise and logic is completely sound, a 250cc 2-stroke displaces the same volume of air every 720° degrees as a 500cc 4-stroke.
The Mazda 13B displaces the same volume of air as 2.6 liter Otto engine every 720°.
I had many big block cars. I miss them. I drove a RX-7 they don't have any torque I wasn't impressed at all.
Duh you gotta rev the fk out of it high revs very little torque even then, but you can get crazy power out of them with very little money and they are good a turning.
In German, this kind of engine is (mostly) called "Wankelmotor". It's still shitty, but the name is cool xD
I have not got a clue as to how the volume of a rotary was decided but to me its wrong to measure the swept volume of one turn of the eccentric shaft or only one chamber is like measuring only one cylinder of a 3 cylinder engine. No concession is made between a 4stroke an a 2stroke so why for the wankle?
Yes they are popular, light and sound great but as you have already said heavy on fuel and oil and the hp/ litre would be atrocious if measured properly. So all in all good fun but a poor choice for power unit that needs to make good power good torque and have longevity and fuel economy
Excellent comments
same music in donuts xD great video btw
Something to be admired from a far for the weak of heart. For those of us willing to put in the time with these engines when they run good its wirth every second you spend on them.
The point is they never ran good, these engines suck.
This type of guys to say rotary sucks but says bmw is very solid
Well, it true... you don't know anything about cars do you?
@@sandervanderkammen9230 well im saying so what if it’s unreliable. Doesnt mean they are unreliable that they suck. Talking by knowing abt cars when u j take other people’s opinion and claiming its urs
@@gloriousbagette2053 Wankel engines suck because they are inherently unreliable and less durable than reciprocating engines... this is an irrefutable fact that cannot be disputed and is also the reason why Wankel engines have been obsolete for more than a decade.
It's a fact, compared to reciprocating engines they suck.... they offer no advantages and have many serious flaws and disadvantages.
Doesn’t stop me to still go buy a rx7 and act like I am in initial d
They stopped selling the RX7 decades ago... because of low sales.
@@WilhelmKarsten *second hand market
@@Atonam_real What kind of loser buys a second hand Mazda?