RX-8

Status
Not open for further replies.
quote:

Originally posted by unDummy:

Fords influence on Mazda is noted. 5w20 is now used. Ford Motorcraft is labelled--synthetic blend. How can Mazda say that synth is bad when, I'm assuming that, they are using a blended synth 5w20?


The rotary engine needs a small amount of oil injected into the combustion chamber to keep the apex seals lubricated. Apparently, synthetic oil does not work well in this application.

One thing I have heard of people having success with when using Mazda rotaries in aviation applications, is to use synthetic in the crankcase and use a oil tank with 2 stroke oil in it to inject into the combustion chamber for purposes of lubricating the apex seals. It's a simple matter of routing some hoses to an external tank.
 
quote:

do a search, beat to death in the past

-Starbreaker666

Actually I'm not sure the rotary ever left production or at least not for very long - they were still building Rx7s and rotary engines well after they stopped importing them.

quote:

The RX-8 is NOT a replacement for the RX-7...

- Chris A

Ding! EXCELLENT post Chris. I never understand why folks insist upon immediately comparing it to an Rx7. Makes about as much sense as comparing an Rx7 to an Rx4. Or comparing a Corvette to a Pickup or an impala back in the 70s.

quote:

One thing I have heard of people having success with when using Mazda rotaries in aviation applications, is to use synthetic in the crankcase and use a oil tank with 2 stroke oil in it to inject into the combustion chamber for purposes of lubricating the apex seals. It's a simple matter of routing some hoses to an external tank.

- Brons2

Actually it is common enough in roadgoing rotaries. You simply disconnect the oil injection tubes and block them. Then you add 2 cycle to the gas tank in an appropriate ratio. Then you can use synthetic whatever wherever. Personally I think it's a PITA to deal w/ at every fillup.

As I always understood it, the issue with synthetic is the very nature of it's resistance to burning off completely and fully in the intake mixture. With respect to rotaries, it's a little difficult for a synthetic to have it's cake and eat it too. But I do know folks that have run synthetics in rotaries so go figure...? Still, Mazdas concern over synthetics is a compelling one.

quote:

Fords influence on Mazda is noted. 5w20 is now used. Ford Motorcraft is labelled--synthetic blend. How can Mazda say that synth is bad when, I'm assuming that, they are using a blended synth 5w20

- unDUMMY

On what do you base these assumptions that (a) Ford influenced Mazda engineers to recommend 5W20 and they didn't come to it on their own and (b) the factory fill is Motorcraft semi-synthetic.

===

In reading thru this thread, I'm reminded of two things.

I have specifically read in several publications that the automatic engine is rev limited due to "RPM" limitations of the automatic. Not power limitations. What more can be said.

Ford itself is one notable company that got caught w/ inflated HP figures in a HiPo version of the Mustang a few years back. You'd think the Mustang experiment would have taught prudence on the part of HP claims.

[ September 18, 2003, 01:32 PM: Message edited by: pgtr ]
 
I got curious and checked. It seems an early batch of 3500 Rx8s fell short by up to 9 hp. Apparently Rx8s produced after a certain date do not have this. Rather than getting into legal hot water - I'm impressed that Mazda is doing what it is doing (or maybe it's fear of lemon laws?). Interestingly enough there is already some interest by folks wanting to find a 'good deal' on a buy-back Rx8. For the right discount, I'd consider one too.
smile.gif


quote:

Mazda offers to buy back power-short RX8

NEW YORK, Sept. 4 (UPI) -- Mazda says it will buy back most of the 3,551 RX-8 rotary-engine sports cars sold since July because engine power falls short of claims.

The car company says power is as much as 5 percent less than advertised.

USA Today reported Thursday the miscue interrupts an important rollout of image-restoring sporty models but the company's quick action likely will head off any damage to the Mazda reputation.

Mazda sent letters Aug. 22 to RX-8 purchasers saying it would pay full sticker price plus taxes and other fees -- even if owners have run up thousands of miles on their cars. Those who tell Mazda they will keep their cars get free scheduled maintenance for the four-year, 50,000-mile warranty period, plus $500.

Mazda made the same buyback offer to purchasers of 2001 Miata two-seaters because those produced 142 hp instead of the advertised 155 hp.

Washington Times
 
The wackey thing is they under estimated the hp twice, they didnt learn thier lesson ! LOL
That RX 8 isnt a bad looking ride, more for the family but the Rx7 before that early 90's schweeet & quick
smile.gif
.
 
Ford has a stake in Mazda? I'll take it back, they don't influence them at all. No merger.acquistion/no supply chain sharing/no platform sharing/ no influence whatsoever
rolleyes.gif


Phillips66/Conoco listed identical MSDS's for the motor oils. Mazda/Ford 5w20 was, I believe, identical to the Syncon/Hydroclear.....oils.

There is also no proof that synthetic oil doesn't work too well in rotaries. My 7 has 100k with synth oil. My friends 7 has 200k miles with synth oil. No problems/no carbon buildup/ no BS or hearsay!

Mazda doesn't have any official documentation. It aint in any owners manuals. I can't find any TSBs or anything concerning synth. As far as I can tell, the crackhead greasemonkeys and sales gorillas at the dealership are adding to this BS.
Visits to the dealer have come up with nothing from anyone technical at Mazda.
 
quote:

Originally posted by unDummy:
Ford has a stake in Mazda? I'll take it back, they don't influence them at all. No merger.acquistion/no supply chain sharing/no platform sharing/ no influence whatsoever

No need to be sarcastic. If you have any real information that substantiates your claim that Mazda merely recommends an oil weight based simply on Ford's mantra rather than doing due-dilligence and recommending an oil appropriate for a fairly expensive hand built engine - I'd like to hear it. Perhaps we should also take into account that many engine makers are increasingly going towards lighter weight recommendations across the board compared to years ago?

quote:


Phillips66/Conoco listed identical MSDS's for the motor oils. Mazda/Ford 5w20 was, I believe, identical to the Syncon/Hydroclear.....oils.


That's interesting but not really interested in what Mazda retails at their dealerships or who makes what for who... what do they put in the engines when they are assembled over in Japan?

quote:


There is also no proof that synthetic oil doesn't work too well in rotaries. My 7 has 100k with synth oil. My friends 7 has 200k miles with synth oil. No problems/no carbon buildup/ no BS or hearsay!


I agree w/ that. 100s of 1000s of miles have been accumulated on rotaries w/ synthetic oil in them.

quote:


Mazda doesn't have any official documentation. It aint in any owners manuals. I can't find any TSBs or anything concerning synth. As far as I can tell, the crackhead greasemonkeys and sales gorillas at the dealership are adding to this BS.
Visits to the dealer have come up with nothing from anyone technical at Mazda.


Can't speak for the modern Renesis era but in the day Mazda certainly did recommend against synths. I want to say back in the 80s. In the day this was propogated by folks like Mazdatrix et al and present day Rotary FAQs found online. I'm NOT saying it's presently Mazda policy or ever was valid and I have no idea what the current position is on the modern Renesis. There was a certain logic to their reasoning and it was specific to rotaries and not their piston engines. But there are certainly now many rotary engines w/ plenty of miles accumulated while running the 'non' recommended synthetics. Mazda doesn't care about those old 12As and 13Bs (certainly none are in warranty - they don't support them much w/ parts) but I would be curious to know if Mazda makes any statement at all about synthetics in the modern Renesis... now that they are back? But the absence of it would certainly leave folks of new Renesis engines open to using synthetics and be within compliance of their warranty requirements.

BTW I tend to agree w/ your assessment of Mazda dealership technical support - I wouldn't hold my breath for any decent technical support on rotaries at the dealership level right off the bat. Much of the talent that existed there has generally moved on since the late 80s or so. They'll have to rebuild their rotary knowledge & talent from the ground up. I even heard somewhere they even hired some of the old rotary gurus to help w/ training...?

[ September 19, 2003, 02:38 AM: Message edited by: pgtr ]
 
quote:

Originally posted by Last_Z:
So, Mazda "over-estimates" horsepower huh?
thumbsdown.gif

SUCKERS!!!
That's what you get for buying imports! Then again...Steeda and Saleen Mustangs were grossly over-rated back in the mid-late 90's....they said something about the headers being too restrictive
rolleyes.gif

Should have bought a Z28 or T/A....these babies are grossly "under-rated"
patriot.gif

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Too bad they don't make them anymore.....but you can always get an under-rated vette Z06.
Anyway, went to check out the new RX8s.....and I didn't like it very much....it looks very much out of proportions....especially the length....you can tell it's a stretched out body.
I'm with Patman on this one.....bring the RX7 back and make improvements on it and be done with it.......bring the Supras back and the 300ZXs....the new Z sucks...butt ugly in my opinion....the Infiniti counterpart is much better looking.....the current Eclipse is a disaster....bring the I4 Turbo back and the old MR2 Turbo....the 3000 GT VR4 and Stealth.....Hmmmm...who knows, maybe we are going back in time......"unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix says....you have to see it for yourself"

Rick


I gotta put in my 2 cents worth. The old rx-7 looks much much better than the rx-8. I liked the looks of the old supra, 300zx, mr-2, and stealth/3000gt. But I think the new eclipse, is a work of art, compared to the old ones. The old ones looked like turds.
tongue.gif
Too bad it doesn't have the power to match its looks.
 
quote:

Originally posted by pgtr:
Ford itself is one notable company that got caught w/ inflated HP figures in a HiPo version of the Mustang a few years back. You'd think the Mustang experiment would have taught prudence on the part of HP claims.

Interesting you would bring that up.

In Ford's case, the problem affected some of the '99 Cobra engines with the new tumble port heads. When word got out, Ford issued a TSB and replaced or remachined the heads for free, so they would produce the stated power.

In Mazda's case with the Miata, they never even tried to make the car produce the stated power. They simply offered a rebate or refund to customers.

High performance V-8 engines from Ford, Chevy and Dodge all tend to be underrated. When you put 'em up on the dyno you get higher numbers than you would expect.

BTW, I'm not slamming Mazda at all. Some of their cars, most notably the '93 to '95 RX-7, were underrated. All companies have made cars both underrated and overrated for engine output. Never take conspiracy for what can be explained by mere stupidity or incompetence.
dunno.gif
 
So, Mazda "over-estimates" horsepower huh?
thumbsdown.gif

SUCKERS!!!
That's what you get for buying imports! Then again...Steeda and Saleen Mustangs were grossly over-rated back in the mid-late 90's....they said something about the headers being too restrictive
rolleyes.gif

Should have bought a Z28 or T/A....these babies are grossly "under-rated"
patriot.gif

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Too bad they don't make them anymore.....but you can always get an under-rated vette Z06.
Anyway, went to check out the new RX8s.....and I didn't like it very much....it looks very much out of proportions....especially the length....you can tell it's a stretched out body.
I'm with Patman on this one.....bring the RX7 back and make improvements on it and be done with it.......bring the Supras back and the 300ZXs....the new Z sucks...butt ugly in my opinion....the Infiniti counterpart is much better looking.....the current Eclipse is a disaster....bring the I4 Turbo back and the old MR2 Turbo....the 3000 GT VR4 and Stealth.....Hmmmm...who knows, maybe we are going back in time......"unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix says....you have to see it for yourself"

Rick
 
SBC;
I agree with you on the looks of the Eclipse GT V6 only....It looks good, but it's heavier and has a lower HP/Weight ratio. I guess it's a car for hot chicks to drive to school and so on....but not for us power hungry SOBs!
Now, you make that car a RWD with an in-line 6 and a turbo.......and watch out mustangs and even vettes.
Rick
 
There was a similar issue with my '94 Mustang GT, only Ford announced before the car's release that they "re-rated" the engine's horsepower. Basically the motor was identical since the late 1980's and always rated at 225 HP, 300 TQ. In '94, the changed it to 215/285, due to different way of calculating. I never got anything out of it from Ford.
wink.gif
 
quote:

Originally posted by Last_Z:
So, Mazda "over-estimates" horsepower huh?
thumbsdown.gif

SUCKERS!!!


Yup they did with at least one car. The '93-'95 RX-7 was rated at 255 BHP. One would expect 215-220 at the rear wheels SAE corrected. I dynoed mine and it put down 240. That's more like 280-285 BHP. That car was seriously underrated by Mazda.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top