Featured Mazda e-TPV to have Wankel dual fuel range extender

I haven't found any other as well, true.

 

One thing I'd like to point out is that, while our Mazdas were mechanically sound, *all* of them rusted out like I've never seen before..and it actually 100% turned me off on the brand. So much so that I'm not sure I'll ever buy one again..*and* I make sure to tell everyone about my experiences. The point is, I'm not sure if all of these sites even take things like this into account. If they are based on 'repair records'...well...most of us don't repair rust issues like that. Instead, we trade it in and move to another brand ( this is how I ended up with our first Prius...and the rest is history ).

BTW - We had a 2004 Mazda MPV, a Protege 5, and a regular Protege (I forget the model years of the Protege models ).

And I'm sure the TrueDelta data is valuable in some regard. However, I do personally think the data is somewhat suspect.

 

Dashboard Light is looking just at power train issues reported from auction inspections. We don't exactly how bad they were. An issue that develops in an old car could be tolerable to the owner, but would need to be fixed before selling by a dealer.

It appears to be a good site for researching specific used cars, but I wouldn't recommend it as a place to start researching your next car.

 

I owned a 626 from way back in the 80s and liked it, passed it on to my younger son who totally neglected it. Never rusted despite spending time in Indiana and NOVA where they use salt on the road. It expired from neglect. When it died the sun had bleached the paint but the body and frame were still sound.

Bought another from the same era for my older son. Worked fine until he tried driving through an 8" puddle trying to get to an exam that was cancelled. He got at least 100k miles out of it despite that, no rust. Pittsburgh, NOVA, Houston, NC.

Cars that rusted: VW Type 4, Alfa, Porsche 914, Nissan Sentra, Pontiac, Chevy, BMW, Volvo, Ford Falcon. So I know rust when I see it. Not on my Mazdas.

 

Very interesting! Ours were all from the late 1990s and early 2000s. Mazda seems to have changed in that timeframe. Some internets searching seems to bear that out...one example :

Recall Watch: At Mazda, It Seems Rust Never Sleeps

 

1996 was when Ford ownership of Mazda reached its highest at 33.4%.
Mazda - Wikipedia

 

mazda just detailed their cx-60 phev for europe and cx-70 phev for north america, and no surprise it does not have a rotary. The main difference between the crossovers is the cx-70 is wider.

It follows on the rav4 prime with a 300 hp and a 2.5L I4. The cx-50 will be built in the Alabama plant that toyota will build the corrolla cross, and the hybrid model will use the same toyota hybrid engine. So its possible the cx-60 and cx-70 phevs will have toyota engines as well.

It is hard for me to think a rotary could be much cheaper and lighter than than the yaris hybrids 1.5L 3cylinder atkinson engine. I don't think mazda can get close to its 41% efficiency. If they do a big battery phev it is going to be heavy anyway so weight savings is likely less important than highway efficiency.

 

It’s amazing how a concept brought up first 5 years ago got mentioned a few times and fizzled

reminds me of solid state batteries or all the popular science future tech articles

Heck cheapest engine is a regular DI 2 cycle, even has clean emissions

see if anyone uses that system outside a boat

 

I just like rooting for the underdog.

It probably doesn't also have an hydrogen fuel option. I say probably because there is little firm details about this PHEV. One article is claiming it will have an 8-speed transmission. The only thing we can say for sure that isn't possibly info mixed up from the ICE version, are the engine and power values.

Those point to the SUV borrowing parts from the Rav4 Prime, like the Crosstrek PHEV and Prius Prime. Reports are that the platform is RWD, so it may not be a direct transplant from the Toyota, but neither was the Subaru. The most radical possibility is this being a parallel hybrid; perhaps a system designed for the Tacoma and 4runner.

No mention of a BEV model, or even this PHEV's range. I see the Wankel only having a chance as a range extender to a BEV; an Ev with greater than 100 mile range. There its pros(size, NVH, power-to-weight ratio) could be more important than the cons(fuel efficiency and emissions). Piston also has a cost advantage with its much greater manufacturing base, but that hasn't stopped Mazda from continuing with rotary development.

I remember articles about 2 cycles making a comeback in cars years ago. Maybe sometime in the '90s. Now, having clean emissions and meeting regulations are two different things. Motorcycles have clean emissions, but they wouldn't pass regs for vehicles with 4 wheels. Maybe those car 2 cycles weren't clean enough. Maybe consumers would rebel against adding oil and fuel, it happened with DEF, or the manufacturers decided it wasn't worth the head ache from people that didn't add the oil.

As for the OT, I'll repost this:

I think we can all agree the series hybrid there won't happen. Nissan is the only company selling such a hybrid, and while they may have plans to sell them outside of Japan/Asia, it hasn't happened yet. Inefficiency at higher speeds are an issue. Nissan does it because it lets them spread BEV costs out onto ICE models. Giving it a plug and some EV range won't change the math much for Mazda, and they've already gone to Toyota for hybrid systems in the past. As for hydrogen, the Wankel is better, specially if it has less of a NOx problem, but I bet Toyota would give Mazda a deal on fuel cells at this time.

Which leaves the EREV. Aside: I'm viewing EREVs as BEVs given an engine, and PHEVs as ICEs given a big battery. I don't think there is much market for them at this time. BEVs are still pricey, long range ones. Well longer than most daily driving needs, but range is what sells them at this time.

PHEV owners seem to always want more EV range, but that do are able to switch to BEV. Of course, PHEV can get longer EV ranges. The question is when does a BEV with added series hybrid become cheaper to design and make than giving another hybrid type an even bigger battery? Part of that calculus includes what the car companies' manufacturing base can support. Right now they all make more ICE/hybrid platforms than BEV ones.

Another factor is the public charging infrastructure. If there is slow, overnight charging even for apartment dwellers, and plenty of fast charging for trips, an EREV becomes less of a need. It's a more likely need in the US as the country's size means infrastructure will take time to grow. Perhaps battery supplies in the future will make shorter range BEVs and EREVs more attractive.

tl;dr A Wankel EREV is unlikely. Even if it does prove better, piston engines have a massive advantage in production cost. I think chances would be better if Mazda was free of Toyota.

 

The prototype Dodge Neon had a 2 cycle, it required traditional oil changes and did not require oil mixing.

my 1970 Subaru 360 does not require oil mixing, also does not require oil changes and has a bottle for oil that is metered and injected.

As hard as it is to believe people who live in areas that require all vehicles be emissions tested have had their 360 pass emissions.

A few super achievers have added an antique 2 way cat to their 360 to replace a rusted out expansion chamber with good results.

 

I figured any car 2 cycle wouldn't need only mixing, but have separate injection. Many car owners don't check their oil levels now, so having them regularly add oil for injection may not go over well.

My understanding is that emission inspections are against the standards the cars were certified for when new. A 360 is tested against whatever standard that was active at its time. Something considerably lax by today's standards. Any new 2 cycle engine, like that Neon, would have met the EPA Tier II of the time. It seems the EPA was stuck up on some requirements, but the engine for the Neon did have issues with NOx. In the end, its death looks more to corporate issues than technical.
The Chrysler Neon and Two-Stroke Engines | Allpar Forums

 

The Neon 2 cycle like my 360 can easily run lean, I much rather get 66mpg and make a higher percentage of NOX than burn more fuel and lower said percentage

You dump a full gallon jug of 2 cycle oil in the 360, seems to last forever, in my case about 6 months to a year, it has a level switch, if you run out of oil you better have some in the car since it won’t run until you add oil to the tank

no different than def or an old oil burning car

keeping a jug full versus filter and oil change I would take the jug

 

NOx has immediate health and quality of life issues with it. Which is why every lean burner today has a NOx trap and/or SCR. I understand your sentiment, but we have to consider the effects when thousands to millions of cars emit more of it.

I just remember the whining about DEF when it came out, and it would only need as much attention as your oil. When things go from easy to hard, even with the hard being very minor, people complain and even rebel. That's part of the hinderance to EVs.

 

I would be more concerned with grams of NOX per mile not NOX percentages

Trucks still have the solution is dillusion going on
Taken at grams per mile a 50mpg car could spit out twice the percentage as a 25mph vehicle, sadly we do the opposite and all HD Pickups do both make more exhaustive and dirtier exhaust.

Add to this the supply side of crude makes more pollution per gallon than a 50’s era car and saving fuel becomes more critical in 99% of the country than skyrocketing CO2 emissions and fuel use.

VOC emissions alone from the supply side , especially when you consider the sheer size of spills dwarfs pollution made by every vehicle on the planet.

 

Oil refineries and spills tend not to be in population centers. There is merit to moving emissions out of city with BEVs and FCEVs.

 

Mazda has been working on rotaries since the 1960s. They were the only company to sell successful vehicles with the tech, so they keep dangling it, and I am sure some engineers want to keep working on it. They have a newer shiny engine the skyactiv-x and mazda is working on a inline 6, rwd, and 48v mild hybrid system. It is a small company and it makes sense for them to outsource some of the phev bits to toyota. But the concept always seemed like a longshot to me.

It is a slow roll but I expect at least solid state electrolytes in semi solid batteries to start getting market share in the next 5 years. All solid state is going to take much longer with new manufacturing techniques to get a sizeable piece of automotive plug-in batteries.

To get clean emissions and high efficiency you need forced induction, which kills a lot of the cost advantages if not makes them cost more. The most efficient 2 cycles are huge low rpm turbo charged engines on ships where the added weight doesn't matter that much.

What car and driver said is the cx-50 hybrid (which uses a fwd system) would use the engine and other parts from toyota and speculated probably from the rav4 hybrid.

I speculated with the similar power specs at least the engine would probably come from toyota for the cx60 & cx70. We really don't know. No speculation on my part on batteries or other hybrid parts.

If you could get the volume up perhaps the wankel would be cheaper, but now you have to do a lot more work and its likely it would be less efficient than the toyota engines. I think the real engine engineering tallent at mazda will be focusing on skyactiv-x and trying to get the new inline 6 to be on par with bmw and mercedes.

Last summer mazda said they will have a new platform in 2025 with maybe a rotary range extender coming later. My bet is it will be postponed again and not killed.

 

Didn't Mazda already release SkyActiv-X in other markets? Did it live up to the hype?

 

Reminds me of skyactive-D

 

The skyativ-x is available in other markets. They just released an improved version for 2022 models e-skyactiv-x that increases fuel economy and useful torque. This one may make it to the US, the original probably didn't have a very big improvement on the epa test.

If the hype is we got compression ignition working in a production automobile that drives well and sells, then yes they did, science experiment proven.

If the hype was great fuel economy without compromising other engine characteristics, then they still have some more work to do. The first gen had peak efficiency around 42%, I have no idea if this is improved in the current slightly modified model, but it is more efficient in wltp testing and likely driving. They may have done it with the new engine design, but the mild hybrid system and mechanical supercharging definitely needs work. They are working on a 48V mild hybrid system for next year, although I'm not sure if this will be immediately available for skyactiv-x. The engine needs at least a mild hybrid system to stay in its most efficient range and avoid certain power levels that have harsh sounding noise. A 48V system would also allow a switch to an electric supercharger from mechanical which would lead to faster response and perhaps coupled with a small turbo charger could raise efficiency close to 50% peak. Still if you want that efficiency perhaps you want a phev instead ;-) Definitely the technology is worth pursuing but is not there yet. Another benefit is lower emissions before the pollution control. We should see skyactive-x with mazda's mild hybrid system, and toyota's dynamic force hsd in two different models of the cx-50 probably in 2024. Then hopefully a car magazine will do a comparison and we will know how good or lacking the engine is.

Someone mentioned skyactiv-d, mazda did bring this to the US but killed it because of predictably low demand.

 

I was excited for skyactive-d but it’s specs were MEH so it went on ignore

If this new skyactive would be both greatly improved, flex fuel and available with a manual transmission it might go back on my list