The story reads like the attempts to replace silicon CMOS with theoretically superior semiconductor technologies. Fortunes have been lost adventuring into GaAs or ECL (for example).

No surprise there. They still haven't figured out how to keep it from leaking oil.

Mr. Breeze: No surprise there. They still haven't figured out how to keep it from leaking oil.

Or being a total gas-hog. Those engines jut couldn't be tuned enough to make them anything other than wildly inefficient. Let's face it, 22 mpg on the highway just isn't competitive anymore.

Yet another harbinger of the apocalypse.

I'm confused, Subby...Mazda sold millions of them from 1967 through 2012 -- 45 years. Where is the fail?

There's going to be a segment of the "experimental aircraft" crowd who's going to have a real sad over this (let's just say there have been a number of "build your own forked-tail doctor-killer" kits which used old Wankel engines from RX-7s and particularly RX-8s)...

My RX8 just hit 130,000 miles last week. I has a sad after reading this.

ZAZ: The story reads like the attempts to replace silicon CMOS with theoretically superior semiconductor technologies. Fortunes have been lost adventuring into GaAs or ECL (for example).

Sorta. What I read was that the rotary engine is a simpler design, but is not as practical as the reciprocating piston engine, and the pitfalls of the design have never been really overcome. It's a neat little engine, but not simply not ready for the mass market. Make it as reliable as the current mainstream offering, and then see where it goes.

Mr. Breeze: No surprise there. They still haven't figured out how to keep it from leaking oil.

My '82 RX-7 never leaked oil, and still was the most fun car I ever owned.

Loved that car.

StoneColdAtheist: I'm confused, Subby...Mazda sold millions of them from 1967 through 2012 -- 45 years. Where is the fail?

My guess is that Mazda fails for yanking it's own wankel.

StoneColdAtheist: I'm confused, Subby...Mazda sold millions of them from 1967 through 2012 -- 45 years. Where is the fail?

It never really caught on. Most of that time it was only used in sports cars. It is very light for the power it produces.

Pro Zack: StoneColdAtheist: I'm confused, Subby...Mazda sold millions of them from 1967 through 2012 -- 45 years. Where is the fail?

My guess is that Mazda fails for yanking it's own wankel.

^^^THAT^^^ gets you one funny click! :^)

I guess the Donger needed to get some sleep.

StoneColdAtheist: I'm confused, Subby...Mazda sold millions of them from 1967 through 2012 -- 45 years. Where is the fail?

I think the idea is that it was supposed to be the wave of the future, but it never succeeded in replacing the piston engine.

People who think various issues with the rotary engine couldn't be overcome are just showing their ignorance. Don't forget that Mazda won LeMans in 1992 because of the reliability and power:weight they got from a 4-rotor engine.

I love my CYM.

Mr. Breeze: No surprise there. They still haven't figured out how to keep it from leaking oil.

Maybe semantics, but the RX8 doesn't leak oil. It naturally/intentionally uses some motor oil as a lubricant. I probably add less the a quarter between scheduled oil changes in mine (every 5,000 miles).

Reliability (my original engine died out at 123k miles), gas mileage, and difficulty controlling emissions are the big issues.

RoyBatty: Mr. Breeze: No surprise there. They still haven't figured out how to keep it from leaking oil.

My '82 RX-7 never leaked oil, and still was the most fun car I ever owned.

Loved that car.

Those babies seemed like they had a long wind up and a high top end. I remember going with my Supra on a turnpike with a RX7, and short distances I had it, but top speed I think they had me.

Great Porn Dragon: There's going to be a segment of the "experimental aircraft" crowd who's going to have a real sad over this (let's just say there have been a number of "build your own forked-tail doctor-killer" kits which used old Wankel engines from RX-7s and particularly RX-8s)...

Well, they could buy a new Wankel from Freedom Motors. For a while they weren't licensed for use in cars, but maybe now we know why that restriction was removed... I conjecture that Mazda let their automotive engine license lapse.

Now, let's go on to something ruder!

(What? Oh, bugger!)

basemetal: Those babies seemed like they had a long wind up and a high top end. I remember going with my Supra on a turnpike with a RX7, and short distances I had it, but top speed I think they had me.

Yeah, Supra vs. RX-7 was always good for a debate, but I'm a bit surprised that an early RX-7 would beat a Supra.

I never got so much speed out of my car as much as curves and handling and speed. I loved it driving up Highway 1, above Goleta, and all around the hills in LA. Mulholland Highway, Kanan Dume Road, Topanga Canyon, Angeles Crest Highway, Glendora Ridge Road, Big Bear -- it loved curves and mountain roads. It's one reason I dislike where I live now, Southern California has so many wonderful mountain roads that are just 15 minutes away from the heart of any of the cities. I also took mine to a few "Rotary Rocket" Club rallying workshops. Not competitive rallying, but some really fun, very inexpensive rally courses set up on abandoned airports.

And I'm biased, but I think an early RX-7 has styling that would stand up today.

Grunties.

BASTARDS!!!!!

HOW could you kill such a marvelous power plant?!

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Grunties.

LOL, it took me a minute to get that reference.

StoneColdAtheist: I'm confused, Subby...Mazda sold millions of them from 1967 through 2012 -- 45 years. Where is the fail?

The hype was that the wankle was supposed to be the future - now it gone. You can say, "look, it won Le Mans one year", but conventional engines won it every other year, and they'll continue to win it for the foreseeable future.

trippdogg: StoneColdAtheist: I'm confused, Subby...Mazda sold millions of them from 1967 through 2012 -- 45 years. Where is the fail?

The hype was that the wankle was supposed to be the future - now it gone. You can say, "look, it won Le Mans one year", but conventional engines won it every other year, and they'll continue to win it for the foreseeable future.

To be fair, Le Mans changed the rules after Mazda won with the wankle

trippdogg: The hype was that the wankle was supposed to be the future - now it gone. You can say, "look, it won Le Mans one year", but conventional engines won it every other year, and they'll continue to win it for the foreseeable future.

Yep, just because Audi and others can make a racing diesel that winds to the moon NOW doesn't mean it's ready for 10 years in a grocery getter

P.O. left seven RX7's out in my back forty. I looked at them for a year thinking I had a gold mine. Finally had them hauled off for scrap.

d3: People who think various issues with the rotary engine couldn't be overcome are just showing their ignorance. Don't forget that Mazda won LeMans in 1992 because of the reliability and power:weight they got from a 4-rotor engine.

I love my CYM.

I am sure the hundreds of engineers who addressed this issue and failed would love to hear your solution. My own father (ME, Purdue 1962) who designed the seals for the Saturn 5's F1 and J2 engines took one look at a Wankel's sealing issues and pronounced he was glad to have nothing to do with it...

I breifly had a 1981 RX-7...and it was the most fun I've ever had driving... fastest I've ever driven (143mph...in Traffic...I was young and immortal...so its okay)

sadly... my jack ass of a father needed to pickup 2-5 gallon buckets of dove gray house paint...did he use the PLymoth Horizon hatchback? No.

Did he use his 1963 Ford Pickup? No.

Did he use my 1981 RX-7 and drive it like a douche in a sports car, with lids not sealed? why yes...he did... 10 gallons of grey latex paint on an all black interior. total write off.

/my father...is a dick.

trippdogg: StoneColdAtheist: I'm confused, Subby...Mazda sold millions of them from 1967 through 2012 -- 45 years. Where is the fail?

The hype was that the wankle was supposed to be the future - now it gone. You can say, "look, it won Le Mans one year", but conventional engines won it every other year, and they'll continue to win it for the foreseeable future.

Yeah, I understand that, but if "not taking over the world" is the standard for "not failing" then there sure are a lot failures making bank out there.

/not a rotary-head

StoneColdAtheist: trippdogg: StoneColdAtheist: I'm confused, Subby...Mazda sold millions of them from 1967 through 2012 -- 45 years. Where is the fail?

The hype was that the wankle was supposed to be the future - now it gone. You can say, "look, it won Le Mans one year", but conventional engines won it every other year, and they'll continue to win it for the foreseeable future.

Yeah, I understand that, but if "not taking over the world" is the standard for "not failing" then there sure are a lot failures making bank out there.


If that WERE the standard...then suck it anything that isn't the Honda Cub.

Zoroasterians ftw

I had a second gen (the least exciting, I know) red RX7 in college that I loved to pieces. Still wish I had it now. Sold it when I finished college for $1500 (bought it for $4k).

The thing had a 1.3l engine good for 145 hp when you revved it north of 7k, rear wheel drive, 2 seats and a very low cg with a nice suspension setup.

The trunk / area behind the seat under the glass hatch was actually pretty big - I remember I picked up a sweet 27" CRT TV from circuit city and it fit in the back.

Loved that car. I will pour a little beer into my mouth to remember it shortly.

RIP Wanker

I blame the abortion that was the RX8. What a terrible car.

I''m still waiting for the next FD RX7 to come out. One day...

HMS_Blinkin: Mr. Breeze: No surprise there. They still haven't figured out how to keep it from leaking oil.

Or being a total gas-hog. Those engines jut couldn't be tuned enough to make them anything other than wildly inefficient. Let's face it, 22 mpg on the highway just isn't competitive anymore.



As the joke goes, rotaries have the gas mileage of a V8 and the power of an inline 4. And the lolapexseals where you basically have to rebuild the engine every 60k miles.

That being said, there's still nothing that sounds quite like a rotary at 7000-9000 rpm.

It's sad to see the RX series dies, they were always fun little niche cars. The rotary engine was never cutting it as a widespread commercial engine though. By the end only Mazada even knew how to build one.

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Grunties.

Now lesson two: noises. Noises are a major embarrassment source. Even words like "tits", "winkle" and "vibraphone" cannot rival the embarrassment potential of sounds. Listen to this if you can:

My first "race" was in mom's car, with her riding shotgun (and grinning ear to ear).
I felt the front end lighten when I hit 2nd, and 3rd left the Z28 behind us.



We had been on a slight uphill grade, the Z driver probably thought I was egging them on as I worked the throttle and brake to keep from rolling back (first time driving that car).

I have been amazed that they could keep that engine compliant with emissions for as long as they did. The shear surface area/volumn, the large corner area and the seals should have killed the engine in the mid 80's. Neat areas but there are so many engineering negatives.

Here's my 85 RX-7. Love it.

A few months ago there was an article about Mazda mulling the idea of releasing another rotary model. I submitted several headlines about pulling their wankel out, your mom being impressed, etc. All redlit and quickly. I expected something to make the front page about it, but if there was I didn't notice. I figured that was gold, jerry, gold!

Stratohead: If that WERE the standard...then suck it anything that isn't the Honda Cub.

LOL...Razor FTW. ;^)

Coworker bought a brand new RX-8 and it was only getting about 6 mpg. He took it back to the dealership, who told him it would get better after the engine broke in. A couple months later it hadn't. They wouldn't take it back (but would be glad to take it in on a trade!), so he ended up trading it even on a Hyundai Accent. We still laugh at him and his 28 thousand dollar Accent.

HMS_Blinkin: Mr. Breeze: No surprise there. They still haven't figured out how to keep it from leaking oil.

Or being a total gas-hog. Those engines jut couldn't be tuned enough to make them anything other than wildly inefficient. Let's face it, 22 mpg on the highway just isn't competitive anymore.

Oil leaking? Never had a problem with that (family owned three of the beasts over the course of 25 years).

Gas milage, and emissions were the biggies. That and when something did go wrong with the engine it was obscenely expensive to fix (had a total of four of those moments, with three cars and over 1,000,000 miles between them; most expensive repar was $1900 for an issue that would have cost about $600 in any other car on the road at that time... otherwise no maintenance problems that weren't related to normal wear and tear).

RX-8 was fun, but my dad's '85 RX-7 was the best of the lot.

Goodfella: As the joke goes, rotaries have the gas mileage of a V8 and the power of an inline 4.

Someone an idiot? Rotary engines are very powerful for their size. They also result in great handling because you don't have this big-ass hunk of metal throwing off the vehicle's center of gravity, so for its power it's arguably superior to the V8. Rotaries aren't nearly as prone to over/understeer as piston engines.

If you have money to burn they're fun cars to drive, and the noise they make gets heads spinning with curiosity. The reason why they never caught on is, as others mentioned, it's a very impractical engine for just about every use except illegal street racing.

Tourney3p0: Coworker bought a brand new RX-8 and it was only getting about 6 mpg. He took it back to the dealership, who told him it would get better after the engine broke in. A couple months later it hadn't. They wouldn't take it back (but would be glad to take it in on a trade!), so he ended up trading it even on a Hyundai Accent. We still laugh at him and his 28 thousand dollar Accent.

What a moron. That, right there, is why lemon-laws were written. Should've sued 'em.

HMS_Blinkin: Mr. Breeze: No surprise there. They still haven't figured out how to keep it from leaking oil.

Or being a total gas-hog. Those engines jut couldn't be tuned enough to make them anything other than wildly inefficient. Let's face it, 22 mpg on the highway just isn't competitive anymore.

That's the bit I never understood. Theoretically a wankle engine should be about 2x as efficient as a conventional one becuase you don't waste energy on the "pull" part of typical "push-pull" engine cycle

so how could they be LESS efficent instead?

Magorn: Theoretically a wankle engine should be about 2x as efficient as a conventional one becuase you don't waste energy on the "pull" part of typical "push-pull" engine cycle so how could they be LESS efficent instead?

The combustion chamber, and pretty much everything else about the engine, is built around the smooth, cyclical operation. Also, the rotor -- which must be radially symmetrical -- must maintain a tight seal. This puts serious limitations on the shape of the chambers. So the actual combustion process is very inefficient, and the engine farts out a lot of unburned fuel. A primitive piston engine (i.e., with perfectly cylindrical chambers) is also inherently inefficient (which leads to well-known issues like knocking), but over the years a lot of effort put into optimizing the combustion has eliminated most of the issues and drastically increased efficiency. With a Wankel engine, you can't optimize the shape of the engine because the shape is largely fixed.

dragonchild: Magorn: Theoretically a wankle engine should be about 2x as efficient as a conventional one becuase you don't waste energy on the "pull" part of typical "push-pull" engine cycle so how could they be LESS efficent instead?

The combustion chamber, and pretty much everything else about the engine, is built around the smooth, cyclical operation. Also, the rotor -- which must be radially symmetrical -- must maintain a tight seal. This puts serious limitations on the shape of the chambers. So the actual combustion process is very inefficient, and the engine farts out a lot of unburned fuel. A primitive piston engine (i.e., with perfectly cylindrical chambers) is also inherently inefficient (which leads to well-known issues like knocking), but over the years a lot of effort put into optimizing the combustion has eliminated most of the issues and drastically increased efficiency. With a Wankel engine, you can't optimize the shape of the engine because the shape is largely fixed.

ah. excellent explanation. Thanks for that