Well, this is interesting. I just checked out Mazda's new Web site publicizing the soon to be released RX-8: http://www.mazdausa.com/rx8/performance/re...nesisengine.asp?

Their new-era rotary engine, aka the Renesis engine, has some target performance characteristics which should arouse a sense of deja vu amongst us S2000 fanatics. 250 hp @ 8500 rpm, and 159 lb-ft @ 7500 rpm. That is awfully similar to the 240 hp @ 8300 rpm, and 153 lb-ft @ 7300 rpm which represent our beloved little roadster. I suppose I could observe that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. However, I do regard the S2000 as the current champion of highest rpm capability among production automobiles, and I would feel badly if we were dethroned by the RX-8.
Note that these hp and torque numbers for the RX-8 are stated as
target values, which means that the finally certified numbers for the U.S. market are not yet determined. Shall we all hold our breath and see if Mazda can beat our 9000 rpm (or is it only 8900)??

 

It is possible that their Renesis will out-rev our F20C, but then again, it's a rotary engine, and rotary engines are made to rev. It will actually be quite sad if Ford can't manage to get a higer red-line from this baby.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by jelliotlevy
[B]Well, this is interesting.

 

Comparing rotary engines to non rotary engines is not really a valid comparison. The engines are so totally different that redline, displacement, and output aren't really comparable if you're looking for bragging rights. I wouldn't worry about our engine being dethroned.

 

I remember reading somewhere claming the redline=10K-11K.

 

Remember that for every rotation, our pistons have to accelerate, stop, go the other direction, stop and do it all over again. A rotary just turns. It makes sense that without having to do all of that stopping and starting a rotary should be able to turn faster.

 

Given that it's a rotary, if that engine doesn't rev much higher than 9,000 RPM it will be a huge disappointment and reflect a lack of engineering ambition on Mazda's (read Ford's) part. But given the problems they had with previous rotary engines, I'm sure they're going to play it safe.

 

Hey guys, are we perhaps overstating the inherent high rev capabilities of the rotary? I wish I could give a better technical description, but the rotors do 'wobble' eccentrically about the crankshaft, and that motion does generate stressful forces. My departed 3rd gen RX-7 had a rev limiter which shut off the fuel supply at 7200 rpm. Perhaps the non-turbo RX-7's could run just a bit higher than that. Anyway, I do not want to lose bragging rights to having the highest revving engine in the U S of A [or Canada too, for that matter].

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by jelliotlevy
[B]Hey guys, are we perhaps overstating the inherent high rev capabilities of the rotary?

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rick Hesel
[B]Given that it's a rotary, if that engine doesn't rev much higher than 9,000 RPM it will be a huge disappointment and reflect a lack of engineering ambition on Mazda's (read Ford's) part.