| Author | Message | ||
     Blake |
Bruce, Please, no more plagiarizing. At least post an attributing link. It appears as though you are attempting to take credit for someone else's words. http://www.dieselnet.com/ http://www.dieselforum.org/background/miningapplications.html | ||
| 984_cc |
And besides, driving a rotary is an entirely different experience that has to be tried. You drive them differently because they are different. They are fun. They like to rev. You can't just look at the torque figure and say it's crappy. | ||
| Brucelee |
"Rotary engines: great hp/wt ratio, crappy torque. You'll never see one in a vehicle larger than a compact car." Terrible gas mileage and emissions. Always been an issue for Mazda. | ||
| M1combat |
Anyone ever heard of the 787-B? Rotary engines are capable. Very. | ||
| Brucelee |
"Bruce, Please, no more plagiarizing. At least post an attributing link. It appears as though you are attempting to take credit for someone else's words" C'mon Blake, you know me better than that. That text is clearly cut from the site you mentioned, to save the reader time. I profess no great knowledge of diesel technology but thought I could add to the discussion. I will try to remember to cut and paste site references but frankly, the info is not all the critical to our lives, no? | ||
| 984_cc |
Right on M1! Brucelee- the current Renesis is very clean. It made European engine of the year last year in many categories. It is also pretty efficient on gas considering the power it makes and it's sporting intentions. | ||
| Brucelee |
All I know is that the number 1 complaint about the RX8 is awful fuel mileage. This month's Automobile has a reference to it in their long term test car. Also, I still think they need three cats to make it "clean." | ||
| 984_cc |
Well, when a car is so great, they have to find something to gripe about. A lot of cars have multiple catalytic converters. | ||
| 984_cc |
One thing to consider about rotary engines- the more RPM, the more efficient they become. If you could just keep it howling along at 9000 RPM and couple it to a continuously variable transmission, it would be more fuel efficient. Or how about using it as a generator (Hydrogen powered) to power an electric motor? They are so simple, that reliability wouldn't be an issue. | ||
| 984_cc |
A single-rotor Renesis would make an excellent snowmobile engine. Or even a motorcycle engine. Let's see...around 125 HP and maybe around 90 lb. ft. of torque. I think the only real reason Suzuki's RE5 went away was because people were scared of the new technology. I've heard of people having 500,000+ miles on their original engine. | ||
| 984_cc |
If rotary engine's burned Hydrogen, the emissions wouldn't even be an issue anyways...I think I've had too much sugar today.  | ||
| Buellkowski |
The Mazda USA website lists the RX-8 with 6-speed at 238 hp @ 8500 rpm & 159 lb ft @ 5500 rpm. Fuel economy 18 city/ 24 hwy. Curb weight is just a shade over 3,000 lb. I'll admit the 787-B is impressive, but that's $$$ of race technology. I'll also admit that 159 lb ft of torque is great for driving a 3,000 lb car, but that's all the design is good for, IMHO. | ||
| Phillyblast |
looks like there's at least one more diesel entry for '05. | ||
| Brucelee |
Reality check time. 2005 C6 Corvette 400 HP, weighs more than an RX8 by say 500 lbs. Has superior fuel mileage by nearly 8 MPG. How efficient can the motor be?? | ||
| 984_cc |
C'mon, there are plenty of applications for it- Generators, flying cars, regular cars, sports cars (a Renesis in a Miata would be great), snowmobiles, motorcycles (Norton made some really nice race bikes with rotaries), micro power cells (they burn Methonal and are so, so tiny, they turn a little generator to make power for portable electronics. Now think, what if they decided to turbocharge the Renesis? Think of the possibilites. Or even a 3 rotor version? (Message edited by 984 cc on August 13, 2004) | ||
| 984_cc |
Brucelee- the Corvette engine is a great engine. But you are comparing apples to oranges when it comes to driving the beasts. Never said it was the most efficient engine in the world as far as fuel consumption. Just said it's not that bad. | ||
| 984_cc |
Brucelee- I just checked the Chev site- 18/25 auto, and 19/28 manual. Where do you get the nearly 8 MPG? | ||
| Brucelee |
May have overstated, but-- Many owners of C5 corvettes report consistent 30+ MPG on highway. I have done that many times. Current rx8 owners are complaining about 22 MPG on highway, not the number in the EPA manual (this is not uncommon with EPA numbers), Moreover, the C5 is much heavier than the RX8 ERGO, my point was not to hammer the rotary engine but to point out that it is a bit of a gas pig and we were talking about the gas marvels of diesels. Put another way, I would much rather have one of those Europeon 200+ HP diesel engines that VW is using in performance Golfs, complete with 45 plus MPG than I would a rotary engine at 22 MPG. Just a thought! And BTW, I had and RX7 and really liked it. And it was a gas pig in the extreme! | ||
| 984_cc |
Yeah but, consider this- the RX-8 is making 183 HP/liter compared to the Corvette's 61 HP/liter. It's a lean machine doing a lot of work, so you would think it would get a little bit thirsty.  | ||
| 984_cc |
I, personally, wouldn't like the characteristics of a diesel engine in my performance car. | ||
| Roc |
Biodiesel- http://www.journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html How about alcohol for bikes? | ||
| Brucelee |
"Yeah but, consider this- the RX-8 is making 183 HP/liter compared to the Corvette's 61 HP/liter. It's a lean machine doing a lot" I guess my point was that, yes it is physically small but consumes gas like a pig and is not as powerful as the engine in the C5 PER Gallon of gas! Therefore, why would I care if it were small when I was paying at the pump? | ||
| Spike |
I agree with 984 on the diesel vs rotary- no way would I have a diesel in anything for sporting use. The power delivery just isn't the same. Also, my '86 RX-7 would get as much as 27mpg on the highway and averaged about 19mpg around town. Not bad for a car that would eat stock 5.0 mustangs.  In case anyone is interested, I've got video of a 10 year old RX-7 running down a Lamborghini on track . . . twice! | ||
| 984_cc |
Bruce-  . . . I think you're being a little bit harsh saying it consumes like a pig. Look at the Honda S2000 figures- 20/25. It's just that the Corvette is so great in that respect. BTW- Thanks for backing me Spike. | ||
| 984_cc |
Okay...what I thought about a long time ago, which I just remembered, is why not make the trucks diesel/electric? This would make a lot of sense to do. This way it is just acting as a generator and doing what it is really good at. It would be better for the engine and make it more efficient and less polluting. The big ships are diesel/electric, the locomotives are diesel/electric and the giant earth movers are diesel/electric. Then one day I saw on TV that Dodge has made a prototype diesel/electric truck called the Contractor Special. That's the way to go if you like diesels and would want to own one. http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/news/ram_contractor.html | ||
| Blake |
I guess you diesel naysayers are not familiar with offshore racing boats. They run supercharged diesel engines. Big ones. | ||
| 984_cc |
Are they diesel/electric? | ||
| Buellkowski |
Diesel generation/electric traction is good for the heavy applications because electric motors provide instant torque at all rpms, zero to whatever. Otherwise you'd need a massive clutch/torque converter using a diesel engine alone. Pickup trucks & racing boats are light enough and don't need electric motors for torque, unless you're building a contemporary hybrid vehicle and want to use a tiny diesel engine for generation. | ||
| Brucelee |
"They run supercharged diesel engines. Big ones." Blake, anymore info on this? Why diesel vs. gas? Is it a mileage thing or what? | ||
| Brucelee |
http://www.detnews.com/2003/autoshow/0301/29/b01-55782.htm This article cites a diesal hybrid being developed with 25-40% fuel savings. |
