so , someone help me out here. Will the Rx-8 have the same issues as the RX-7 did with engine lifespan. I know most RX-7 engines had to be rebuilt or replaced between 30 and 40 K miles and I have heard several times that all rotary engines suffer from the same fate. I guess I dont understand the reason for this and am wondering if the same fate will hit the new RX-8 engine ??

 

i would hope after all these years of technological upgrades that Mazda would've remedied these issues by now, but u never know

 

my rotory went with a 128K on it...

 

I've got an '88 RX-7 convertible (married the hot chick who owned it) with 101K and it's still going strong. I've never heard of any mazda having such a short life span and I've spent lots of time at the dealer having owned 3 Mazdas previous to this Acura. The only chronic Mazda problem is flooding (if you flood an RX-7, it's a BITCH to get running again, can't just hold the pedel down)

 

I've had the pleasure of owning a few Mazda rotaries....the early ones like my 1974 rotary pick up were subject to seal failure around 40k miles. That nearly killed the company. The later models like the series 1 and 2 RX-7's were much better and more durable. Still see a lot of 1981 RX-7's on the road. The only problem with the 3rd generation RX-7's is the twin turbos add a lot of stress.........mechanics told me to hang on to my '91 non turbo instead; much more bulletproof! Turbochargers in general are pretty hard on an engine--a lot of heat generated if you "boost" a lot resulting in cracked exhaust manifolds etc.

 

I owned a 81 Rx-7 12a rotary and I also had a 88 Turbo II 13b.

The early models did have problems with APEX seals on the rotor which failed under heat and stress. These engines were also oil cooled and oil injected which made problems if the system failed or clogged. It was a must to change the oil respectfully at about 2800.

The only problems I ever had with the Turbo II was trying to keep a clutch in it and some exhaust/ gasket leaks due to the heat of these engines. Other than that, they were fun cars to drive and I miss having them both.

 

Yeah, i thought there are a lot less moving parts so the engines are really reliable.

 

With the 1st models mabye... but...

That is a very bad rumor and has more to do with the fact that the rotary (winkel) engine needs more maintenance than a normal engine. So most people didn't keep up with maintenance and the engines failed earlier. I have 2 friends with 150k+ miles on their RX7's And his turbo still keeps up with our CLS's

 

That is a true statement, and makes for nice marketing. But when a seal fails or the oil injection system clogs, none of that matters.

I hope some of these issues are worked out on the Rx-8. I would still buy one becuase i like the unique feel and sound of the rotoary.

 

...........I remember Mazda advertising that rotary engines had one third the moving parts of conventional internal combustion engines back in 1979 with the RX-7. Wonder how many less parts than double overhead cam models?? Rotaries are great--only problem is they tend to be a little "thirsty". My 91 RX-7 was one of those I wish I kept.

 

tubo third gen rx7's and tt 300 zx sufferd from the same problems, small engine bay's with turbos that threw of 2 much heat. which made it harder to cool the engine b/c no air can move around it. all turbo cars biggest enemy is heat. why do you think when some one wants to run higher boost they get a bigger intercooler? it is to keep the tirbo cooler

 

I would be very surprised if any late model RX-7's had major engine problems before 75k. If I am wrong, please let me know, and I will be a very disappointed ex-rotary fan.

I will say that the only time i've driven an RX-7, though, I did blow a seal on the engine. Could have been my (very) hard driving though.