Mazda halts rotary engine development

They are working to fix that, that's why is important to support Mazda by buying their regular cars so we can get the best rotary possible in the future, and because regular Mazdas still look great and have a very good handling.

While the inline-6 is naturally balanced, they are becoming harder and harder to package into todays modern crash spaces (longitudinal inline-6s are so long they dont have anywhere to go when the entire front crash-box has crumpled; thats why Mercedes pretty much gave them up over a decade ago). BMW is even having problems packaging them now. Word is, they are considering a V configuration for their next generation of 6 cylinder engines... Rotories will only be back when electric motors (and their required accessories) are small(er) and cheap(er). Cars are pretty heavy now (because of all the safety tech) and tq is a REQUIREMENT; the biggest drawback of the Wankel combustion cycle being the lack there-of. I loathe the day when the silky smooth power delivery of the inline-6 is lost, but I fear its not too far away. At least Porsche will NEVER give up on its flat-6. They're already preparing the next, next generation...

I dont know, there has to be a way they can make it fron mid engined to fit it. The inline is more efficient with gas and hp i feel. Companies have new reduction in the amount of emissions every year.

The only consistent benefit of an I6 over a V6 is the fact its naturally balanced so no balance-shafts are required to calm first and second-order vibrations. True Front-Midship (FM) arrangements dont make much financial sense in the market that a 6 cylinder engine would be heavily distributed. Not to mention, most manufacturers engineer modular engine families that must proliferate through their entire product lineup, not just a specific model. Why make a NA I6 when you can just turbo a 4?

A turbo 4 is most likely to be a front drive car. The rx8 is rear drive. you need the torque of a 6 to balance out the loss of torque for getting the power to the rear wheels. A front mid engine makes sence for a SPORT car configuration which the rx8 is the only car in the lineup to recieve a rotary. It would make sence for a company to make v6 models for their regular, everyday cars. But when it comes to a sports car that defines a line up, FM I6 configuration makes sence for a 30k-50k sports car. I dont think a rotary engine is smart for your regular everyday model, but it makes sence for a sports car that you arent going to sell much of and theres a price premium.

Sounds like a really fun way to lose a bunch of money...

I dont think they would loose money. In this day and age they can make a well balanced sports car and charge ppl 45k for it. Imagine a 350-400hp turbo charged inline 6 with mazdas handeling. mitsubishi did it with a 4cyl turbo with manual windows and no options. I dont think ppl will be bothered with the extra torque and the less maintenance and better gas consumption.

Since Mazda doesnt have an I6 in its coffers, they'd have to engineer one from scratch... With current CAFE and performance needs present, it would cost quite a bit (CFD processing ALONE can run past one million dollars easily...). Then, after they've invested tons into JUST the engine (which can only be used in this ONE model) they must engineer a complete FM platform to hold it. An FM platform would share VERY little (if any) mechanical hardware with their FWD platforms, so no economies of scale here either. After all that, they'd have to sell it for far more than 45K (because of the small sales volume) and no one is going to spend that kind of money on a Mazda... The economies of scale are against any engine that can only be in one model, especially if it must be designed from the ground up. The longitudinal I6 is dead, and any manufacturer investing heavily in one will be dead too... Volvo came up with a trick way to use the transverse I6 block in their FWD cars as PART of the crumple-zone, thats the only future with this engine configuration.

Thats what they said about the GTR. Who is going to buy a 100k nissan? well many ppl have. The initial investment is always great on a motor. Engines and platforms pay off in the future. Nissan used the rear of the gtr suspension set up in my Altima (the old gtr) and they also used it in their van! lol mazda can always shrink this new platform and use it in a furture MX5. Well balanced cars will always be loved. BMW has been sucessful at it, and they have a FR platform their cars. It all comes down to numbers. If you build it and the numbers look good, they will come! lol.

I don?t agree. I have my 2004 RX-8 now for 4 years and 60000 km (it had 19.000 when I bought it) and there was not one single problem with the engine, in fact no problem at all. For use of oil, it is probably 0,5 l in 1000 km, so it is not really important. Lack of torque is a fact, but that can be compensated by a clever driving style and is more than outweighed with the smooth acceleration from 2.000 to 7.500 rpm in each gear! ;-))

SkyG forgoes the turbo in favor of an EXTREMELY high compression ratio and advanced electronic controls. While this technically achieves the same goal, (higher combustion pressures and better thermal efficiency) it stresses the engine in different ways than forced induction and the verdict is still out on how these engines will age. Power, efficiency and longevity are dependent on exact cylinder filling during the intake stroke; more so than any other production engine of our time. Mazda has invested TONS of money into SkyG and SkyD R&D. Hopefully, they've worked out all the longterm issues with running at that high a compression ratio...