• The development of any software program, including, but not limited to, training a machine learning or artificial intelligence (AI) system, is prohibited using the contents and materials on this website.

Mazda is working on a new RX-7 and the RX-8 MPS!

oliB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
1,391
Location
Germany
Hi!

I know that Renesis will be very excited about this... :wink:

RX-7:
http://www.rx7city.com/2006rx7.htm
- lightweight two-seater
- shorter and wider than the RX-8
- amped up version of the RX-8's Renesis engine, about 300hp; probably a turbocharged MPS model later
- coupe (there will probably be a convertible version too though, with a roof like the SLK/SL)

RX-8:
http://www.mazda.com.au/currentnews.asp?articleZoneID=3225
- turbocharged, about 360hp/350Nm of torque
- bigger wheels, tires, brakes and a new bodykit
---> This sounds very interesting!

cya
Oliver

PS: I don't think we had those news yet.
 
Wohoo!
I still didn't drive that car... Actually I really like it... Styling is great.
If the engine would be turbocharged the biggest minus of the car (personal opinion!) only having power on very high revs would be diminished...

Buba
 
Phix said:
That RX-7 is fake, isn't it? I remember seeing that picture a long time ago or so....

Yeah, it most likely is.
The fact that they're building one remains though. :)

Buba said:
Wohoo!
If the engine would be turbocharged the biggest minus of the car (personal opinion!) only having power on very high revs would be diminished...

I've driven the RX-8 two times and that's really the biggest disadvantage of it. Not much low end power...

cya
Oliver
 
I'm not excited because both news are bullshit.

1. That pic of the RX-7 is like 2 years old and it's a poor photoshop, the RX-7 hasn't been confirmed by mazda since 2 years of speculation

2. The Renesis won't be turbocharged by Mazda, word is that a Supercharger is the best option for that engine.
 
Go renesis...knowing his rotary engines bio!

Why a supercharger for rotary?
 
Turbo chargers take time to spool up. The engine has to be under enough load making enough exaust gas to spin the turbine inside the turbo. Once that happens your in business have fun :thumbsup:, but wait, you just spent 1st gear and alittle bit of 2nd gear getting your turbo spinning.:thumbsdown:

superchargers, run off the crank shaft. When you punch the throttle the revs come up and so does the boost :thumbsup:. The more you rev the more boost you make. The problem is that the supercharger creates parasitic drag on the engine. At a certain point it takes more power to turn the supercharger than you get out of it.:thumbsdown:

If you have an engine that has lots of highend power but no lowend power (like say a rotary) you supercharge it and trade off that highend power for some lowend grunt.

hope that helps.
 
The problem with supercharged engines is the weith of it.
I really preffer a turbocharger than a supercharged <- 2 simples reasons:
- Less expensive
- Ligther

The only problem is the Turbo-Lag
 
Depends on what sort of supercharger you use... Screw-type or Centrifugal.

Centrifugal is the type TVR is using in the Typhon, it weithts a lot less than a screw-type superchrager and a turbo. It's like a half turbo, with just the compressor, thats driven by a belt from the cranck and trough gears. It doesent steal too much power either. It spins in about the same speeds as Turbos.

What kind of supercharger were they planning to use...?
 
Gulf said:
The only problem is the Turbo-Lag

and the heat, and the fact you have to do plumbing if your car hasn't got one stock, and the fact that the bearings wear out way faster, and the fact you lose boost each gearchange, and the fact you need your eninge running for a while after u've been giving your turbo a workout, ...
i'd also take a turbocharger, but a supercharger is better if you ask me
 
Buba said:
Wohoo!
I still didn't drive that car... Actually I really like it... Styling is great.
If the engine would be turbocharged the biggest minus of the car (personal opinion!) only having power on very high revs would be diminished...

Buba

How would having a turbo (of all things) help you achieving low-rev power?
 
Cactus said:
Buba said:
Wohoo!
I still didn't drive that car... Actually I really like it... Styling is great.
If the engine would be turbocharged the biggest minus of the car (personal opinion!) only having power on very high revs would be diminished...

Buba

How would having a turbo (of all things) help you achieving low-rev power?

Forced induction for one thing...
 
Gulf said:
The problem with supercharged engines is the weith of it.
I really preffer a turbocharger than a supercharged <- 2 simples reasons:
- Less expensive
- Ligther

The only problem is the Turbo-Lag
Add to that the fact that a supercharger takes engine power to make engine power, whereas a turbo uses engine waste to make engine power.
 
chaos386 said:
Cactus said:
How would having a turbo (of all things) help you achieving low-rev power?

Forced induction for one thing...

Sorry if I wasn't clear. What I meant was, if it's a turbo, it would only decrease performance in low revs, and by the time it'd spin up, you'd already be in a higher rev. I'm not arguing that a turbo wouldn't increase the overall power output of the RX-8 (obviously), but I don't think it'd help with low-rev power.
 
Renesis said:
2. The Renesis won't be turbocharged by Mazda, word is that a Supercharger is the best option for that engine.

I would be happy either way. :)
The RX-8 definitely needs more powerrrr. :D

cya
Oli
 
Cactus said:
chaos386 said:
Cactus said:
How would having a turbo (of all things) help you achieving low-rev power?

Forced induction for one thing...

Sorry if I wasn't clear. What I meant was, if it's a turbo, it would only decrease performance in low revs, and by the time it'd spin up, you'd already be in a higher rev. I'm not arguing that a turbo wouldn't increase the overall power output of the RX-8 (obviously), but I don't think it'd help with low-rev power.

Maybach 5.5L Turbocharged V12:
Max HP: 543 @ 5250rpm
Max TQ: 664 @ 2300rpm

SL600 5.5L Turbocharged V12:
Max HP: 493 @ 5000rpm
Max TQ: 590 @ 1800rpm
(^Less TQ and HP than the Maybach, but it peaks even lower)

SLR 5439cc Supercharged V8
Max HP: 617 @ 6500rpm
Max TQ: 575 @ 3250-5000rpm

As you can see, the turbocharged engines have more torque and get it earlier than the supercharged engine, and all of the engines make more torque per litre than N/A engines. Superchargers are more predictable and responsive though (100% no lag), which is why the sports cars (SLR, RX-8 ) do better with supercharged engines. The big, heavy cars in this case (Maybach, SL-class) use turbocharging because it gives the most torque low down for quieter, more refined motoring. ;)
 
marcos_eirik said:
Depends on what sort of supercharger you use... Screw-type or Centrifugal.

Centrifugal is the type TVR is using in the Typhon, it weithts a lot less than a screw-type superchrager and a turbo. It's like a half turbo, with just the compressor, thats driven by a belt from the cranck and trough gears. It doesent steal too much power either. It spins in about the same speeds as Turbos.

What kind of supercharger were they planning to use...?

centrifugal from what I've heard.
 
Dark_Templer_102 said:
Go renesis...knowing his rotary engines bio!

Why a supercharger for rotary?

Well it's what suits the car best, adding turbo lag woudln't fix the lack of torque, and apparently other than suiting the engine better than a turbo, the supercharger was better to pass the emissions, we know the stock RX-8 had to be detuned already so...
 
Top