Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Why Does the RX-8's Fuel Economy Suck So Bad?
Why Does the RX-8's Fuel Economy Suck So Bad?
Don't get me wrong, I have always loved the looks of the RX-8. The
main reason I never got one is because it's so under-powered and
lacking in torque. However, in these days of skyrocketing gas prices I
*might* be able to get past that problem if only there were an upside
such as excellent fuel economy. However, the RX-8 doesn't have that,
either! 16 city/22 highway? WTF?? A Corvette with a 6.2L engine gets
better fuel economy than that (16/26) and has twice the horsepower and
3 times the torque!!!
What is it about the Wanker engine that makes it so inefficient? And
why does Mazda still sell it?
--
"Dave's not here, man!"
- Tommy Chong
Don't get me wrong, I have always loved the looks of the RX-8. The
main reason I never got one is because it's so under-powered and
lacking in torque. However, in these days of skyrocketing gas prices I
*might* be able to get past that problem if only there were an upside
such as excellent fuel economy. However, the RX-8 doesn't have that,
either! 16 city/22 highway? WTF?? A Corvette with a 6.2L engine gets
better fuel economy than that (16/26) and has twice the horsepower and
3 times the torque!!!
What is it about the Wanker engine that makes it so inefficient? And
why does Mazda still sell it?
--
"Dave's not here, man!"
- Tommy Chong
Re: Why Does the RX-8's Fuel Economy Suck So Bad?
On 2008-05-10, Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan@yahoo . com > wrote:
> What is it about the Wanker engine that makes it so inefficient? And
> why does Mazda still sell it?
Wankels always sucked gas. The advantage of a wankel is light weight and
fewer moving parts.
On 2008-05-10, Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan@yahoo . com > wrote:
> What is it about the Wanker engine that makes it so inefficient? And
> why does Mazda still sell it?
Wankels always sucked gas. The advantage of a wankel is light weight and
fewer moving parts.
Re: Why Does the RX-8's Fuel Economy Suck So Bad?
Scott in SoCal wrote:
> Don't get me wrong, I have always loved the looks of the RX-8. The
> main reason I never got one is because it's so under-powered and
> lacking in torque. However, in these days of skyrocketing gas prices I
> *might* be able to get past that problem if only there were an upside
> such as excellent fuel economy. However, the RX-8 doesn't have that,
> either! 16 city/22 highway? WTF?? A Corvette with a 6.2L engine gets
> better fuel economy than that (16/26) and has twice the horsepower and
> 3 times the torque!!!
>
> What is it about the Wanker engine that makes it so inefficient? And
> why does Mazda still sell it?
light weight and small size.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
* members.cox . net /njnagel
Scott in SoCal wrote:
> Don't get me wrong, I have always loved the looks of the RX-8. The
> main reason I never got one is because it's so under-powered and
> lacking in torque. However, in these days of skyrocketing gas prices I
> *might* be able to get past that problem if only there were an upside
> such as excellent fuel economy. However, the RX-8 doesn't have that,
> either! 16 city/22 highway? WTF?? A Corvette with a 6.2L engine gets
> better fuel economy than that (16/26) and has twice the horsepower and
> 3 times the torque!!!
>
> What is it about the Wanker engine that makes it so inefficient? And
> why does Mazda still sell it?
light weight and small size.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
* members.cox . net /njnagel
Re: Why Does the RX-8's Fuel Economy Suck So Bad?
In article <nheb245hturct5m904eq57vgca4apve73l@4ax . com >,
Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan@yahoo . com > wrote:
>Don't get me wrong, I have always loved the looks of the RX-8. The
>main reason I never got one is because it's so under-powered and
>lacking in torque.
[...]
>What is it about the Wanker engine that makes it so inefficient? And
>why does Mazda still sell it?
Buying an Wankel for fuel efficiency is like buying a Corvette for the
ground clearance; you're missing the point entirely. They're small
and light for the amount of power they produce.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
In article <nheb245hturct5m904eq57vgca4apve73l@4ax . com >,
Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan@yahoo . com > wrote:
>Don't get me wrong, I have always loved the looks of the RX-8. The
>main reason I never got one is because it's so under-powered and
>lacking in torque.
[...]
>What is it about the Wanker engine that makes it so inefficient? And
>why does Mazda still sell it?
Buying an Wankel for fuel efficiency is like buying a Corvette for the
ground clearance; you're missing the point entirely. They're small
and light for the amount of power they produce.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
Re: Why Does the RX-8's Fuel Economy Suck So Bad?
"Scott in SoCal" <scottenaztlan@yahoo . com > wrote in message
news:nheb245hturct5m904eq57vgca4apve73l@4ax . com ...
> Don't get me wrong, I have always loved the looks of the RX-8. The
> main reason I never got one is because it's so under-powered and
> lacking in torque. However, in these days of skyrocketing gas prices
> I
> *might* be able to get past that problem if only there were an
> upside
> such as excellent fuel economy. However, the RX-8 doesn't have that,
> either! 16 city/22 highway? WTF?? A Corvette with a 6.2L engine gets
> better fuel economy than that (16/26) and has twice the horsepower
> and
> 3 times the torque!!!
>
> What is it about the Wanker engine that makes it so inefficient?
The way the Wankel creates the combustion chamber and changes the
shape of the combustion chamber to compress the charge results in a
moving combustion chamber (the whole chamber moves, not just the
bottom) with an odd shape. The charge is forced into a relatively odd
shape with lots of thin areas next to realtively cool metal. This
results is a relatively slow, somewhat inefficient burn rate. This is
not ideal for fuel efficiency. A lot of still expanding gas escapes
out the exhaust port instead of moving the rotors along.
> And
> why does Mazda still sell it?
Becasue people buy it.
Ed
"Scott in SoCal" <scottenaztlan@yahoo . com > wrote in message
news:nheb245hturct5m904eq57vgca4apve73l@4ax . com ...
> Don't get me wrong, I have always loved the looks of the RX-8. The
> main reason I never got one is because it's so under-powered and
> lacking in torque. However, in these days of skyrocketing gas prices
> I
> *might* be able to get past that problem if only there were an
> upside
> such as excellent fuel economy. However, the RX-8 doesn't have that,
> either! 16 city/22 highway? WTF?? A Corvette with a 6.2L engine gets
> better fuel economy than that (16/26) and has twice the horsepower
> and
> 3 times the torque!!!
>
> What is it about the Wanker engine that makes it so inefficient?
The way the Wankel creates the combustion chamber and changes the
shape of the combustion chamber to compress the charge results in a
moving combustion chamber (the whole chamber moves, not just the
bottom) with an odd shape. The charge is forced into a relatively odd
shape with lots of thin areas next to realtively cool metal. This
results is a relatively slow, somewhat inefficient burn rate. This is
not ideal for fuel efficiency. A lot of still expanding gas escapes
out the exhaust port instead of moving the rotors along.
> And
> why does Mazda still sell it?
Becasue people buy it.
Ed
