Mazda’s newest hydrogen rotary engine will take to public roads in Japan for testing this year. The company says the vehicle is the world’s first hydrogen hybrid car with a dual-fuel system, enabling the use of either hydrogen or gasoline.
The Japanese government has given Mazda Motor Corporation permission to test the Mazda Premacy Hydrogen RE Hybrid minivan on public roads in that country. The next step will be commercial leasing in Japan during this fiscal year.
The engine’s hybrid system increases power by 40 percent, and is said to increase hydrogen fuel range to 200 kilometers, (135 miles). This is accomplished with the addition of an electric motor to enhance performance.
Mazda plans on debuting the Premacy Hydrogen RE Hybrid alongside the RX-8 Hydrogen RE at the G8 Hoddaido Toyako Summit in July.
Plant-derived materials used for some of the vehicle’s interior plastic parts and seat covers are also featured in the new car, a part of what Mazda calls its Sustainable Zoom-Zoom environmental plan.
Click here for more details on the Mazda Premacy Hydrogen RE Hybrid,
Image: Mazda Corporation
Posts Related to Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Vehicles
- Revolution in Hydrogen Cars – 650 Miles Per Tank
- Honda Begins “Production” of Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle
- VW Debuts Tiguan HyMotion Fuel-Cell Vehicle and 2009 Clean Diesel Jetta
- GM Backs Hydrogen Fueling Station Near LA
- Toyota Announces New 516-Mile Range Fuel-Cell/Electric Hybrid
PDF 
Dude, Mazda has always been a step ahead of the rest with that rotary motor!
http://www.FireMe.to/udi
Dude, Mazda has always been a step ahead of the rest with that rotary motor!
http://www.FireMe.to/udi
Dude, Mazda has always been a step ahead of the rest with that rotary motor!
http://www.FireMe.to/udi
That is because Mazda owns patents for rotary engines. The basically shelfed rotary engines for years and now it is just resurfacing…. suprise…
That is because Mazda owns patents for rotary engines. The basically shelfed rotary engines for years and now it is just resurfacing…. suprise…
one more step in the right direction.
one more step in the right direction.
one more step in the right direction.
I thought the RX series always had rotary engine including the RX8
I thought the RX series always had rotary engine including the RX8
They did not shelve rotary technology but there was a gap between the RX-7 which stopped being sold in 1997 until the RX-8 debuted in 2004. In that time frame Mazda made a lot of general improvements to the rotary engine and the first announcements of the RX-8 as well as the concepts started surfacing around late 1999 or early 2000.
Having owned a fully loaded 2006 model RX-8 I can tell you it is a boss of a machine. The only problem is that that it’s not exactly environmentally friendly and my manual transmission likes to be driven at high RPM and prefers shifting in the 6k to 8k RPM range which cause it gulp rather than sip the recommended premium fuel.
Well maybe it’s just my driving habits in that care makes me like to shift at that high an RPM range.
They did not shelve rotary technology but there was a gap between the RX-7 which stopped being sold in 1997 until the RX-8 debuted in 2004. In that time frame Mazda made a lot of general improvements to the rotary engine and the first announcements of the RX-8 as well as the concepts started surfacing around late 1999 or early 2000.
Having owned a fully loaded 2006 model RX-8 I can tell you it is a boss of a machine. The only problem is that that it’s not exactly environmentally friendly and my manual transmission likes to be driven at high RPM and prefers shifting in the 6k to 8k RPM range which cause it gulp rather than sip the recommended premium fuel.
Well maybe it’s just my driving habits in that care makes me like to shift at that high an RPM range.
They did not shelve rotary technology but there was a gap between the RX-7 which stopped being sold in 1997 until the RX-8 debuted in 2004. In that time frame Mazda made a lot of general improvements to the rotary engine and the first announcements of the RX-8 as well as the concepts started surfacing around late 1999 or early 2000.
Having owned a fully loaded 2006 model RX-8 I can tell you it is a boss of a machine. The only problem is that that it’s not exactly environmentally friendly and my manual transmission likes to be driven at high RPM and prefers shifting in the 6k to 8k RPM range which cause it gulp rather than sip the recommended premium fuel.
Well maybe it’s just my driving habits in that care makes me like to shift at that high an RPM range.
sunder, you obviously missed the sarcasm.
Shame on you.
sunder, you obviously missed the sarcasm.
Shame on you.
sunder, you obviously missed the sarcasm.
Shame on you.
The engine wasn’t shelved….they were still producing them in Japan. The emissions standards is what “shelved” them over in the US.
I blogged about this car, and Mazda’s hyrdogen development back in February of 2007: http://morriesmazda.blogspot.com/2007/02/15-years-of-hydrogen-development.html
I blogged about this car, and Mazda’s hyrdogen development back in February of 2007: http://morriesmazda.blogspot.com/2007/02/15-years-of-hydrogen-development.html
I blogged about this car, and Mazda’s hyrdogen development back in February of 2007: http://morriesmazda.blogspot.com/2007/02/15-years-of-hydrogen-development.html
I think that they are ahead because they do what we USED TO DO. To think outside the box and with inovative ideas.
And they are not only encouraged, but supported by their governments in this pursuit. Look at the difference. We have a government run by oil and for oil. We have a government that is anti-science or discovery of any kind.
We are becoming a second rate country.
I think that they are ahead because they do what we USED TO DO. To think outside the box and with inovative ideas.
And they are not only encouraged, but supported by their governments in this pursuit. Look at the difference. We have a government run by oil and for oil. We have a government that is anti-science or discovery of any kind.
We are becoming a second rate country.
I think that they are ahead because they do what we USED TO DO. To think outside the box and with inovative ideas.
And they are not only encouraged, but supported by their governments in this pursuit. Look at the difference. We have a government run by oil and for oil. We have a government that is anti-science or discovery of any kind.
We are becoming a second rate country.
There has to be some kind of patent reform. It’s necessary to project ideas, but it surely does get abused and damper on innovation.
There has to be some kind of patent reform. It’s necessary to project ideas, but it surely does get abused and damper on innovation.
Just when i was getting worried that the rotary engine would eventually phase out, Mazda steps up again. Money.
Mazda, you still have a lot of fans out there, never fear!
Just when i was getting worried that the rotary engine would eventually phase out, Mazda steps up again. Money.
Mazda, you still have a lot of fans out there, never fear!
Sunder – you’re amazingly uninformed. The patents that cover the basic wankel rotary design all expired years ago, and Mazda has continuously sold cars with rotary engines since the early 1970s. There was a 1-2 year gap between the last RX-7 production run in 2001 and the first of the RX-8 in 2002, but thats it. US availability may be another issue, with the 3rd gen RX-7 becoming unavailable in the US after about 1996 but thats only one market of many in the world.
Practically everybody except Mazda shelved their rotary programmes – including Citroen, Mercedes and General Motors by the 1980s. GM actually planned a Corvette with a 4-rotor engine, and Mercedes broke speed records with their 4-rotor C111 prototypes.
Mazdas current rotary patents apply to some aspects of their refinements to the basic rotary design, notable intake, porting, possibly exhaust emissions reduction and may cover direct hydrogen injection, but I believe most of Mazdas older metallurgical patents – the key to rotary reliability – have expired now, and there is no barrier to entry for anybody wanting to build a rotary engine apart from the technical ones – even if you were pretty much just cloning a 12A or 13B for your engine design it would be quite legal to sell.
There are lots of good reasons why the Wankel rotary is difficult to build reliably, or with good fuel economy – mostly due to combustion chamber shape and sealing issues, thoughthe real issues are complex and this subject is well covered elsewhere.
It is uniquely well suited to hydrogen combustion because the rotor divides the engine into 3 separate spaces, and at no time before combustion does hydrogen/air ever come into contact with hot engine components e.g. exhaust valves which is the biggest reason why piston engines don’t deal well with hydrogen – pre-ignition/backfiring is the major problem.
The last company you should be pointing the finger at for ‘shelving’ rotary development is Mazda, and your ‘owns patents for rotary engines’ assertion is only peripherally (sic) true.
Sunder – you’re amazingly uninformed. The patents that cover the basic wankel rotary design all expired years ago, and Mazda has continuously sold cars with rotary engines since the early 1970s. There was a 1-2 year gap between the last RX-7 production run in 2001 and the first of the RX-8 in 2002, but thats it. US availability may be another issue, with the 3rd gen RX-7 becoming unavailable in the US after about 1996 but thats only one market of many in the world.
Practically everybody except Mazda shelved their rotary programmes – including Citroen, Mercedes and General Motors by the 1980s. GM actually planned a Corvette with a 4-rotor engine, and Mercedes broke speed records with their 4-rotor C111 prototypes.
Mazdas current rotary patents apply to some aspects of their refinements to the basic rotary design, notable intake, porting, possibly exhaust emissions reduction and may cover direct hydrogen injection, but I believe most of Mazdas older metallurgical patents – the key to rotary reliability – have expired now, and there is no barrier to entry for anybody wanting to build a rotary engine apart from the technical ones – even if you were pretty much just cloning a 12A or 13B for your engine design it would be quite legal to sell.
There are lots of good reasons why the Wankel rotary is difficult to build reliably, or with good fuel economy – mostly due to combustion chamber shape and sealing issues, thoughthe real issues are complex and this subject is well covered elsewhere.
It is uniquely well suited to hydrogen combustion because the rotor divides the engine into 3 separate spaces, and at no time before combustion does hydrogen/air ever come into contact with hot engine components e.g. exhaust valves which is the biggest reason why piston engines don’t deal well with hydrogen – pre-ignition/backfiring is the major problem.
The last company you should be pointing the finger at for ‘shelving’ rotary development is Mazda, and your ‘owns patents for rotary engines’ assertion is only peripherally (sic) true.
Sunder – you’re amazingly uninformed. The patents that cover the basic wankel rotary design all expired years ago, and Mazda has continuously sold cars with rotary engines since the early 1970s. There was a 1-2 year gap between the last RX-7 production run in 2001 and the first of the RX-8 in 2002, but thats it. US availability may be another issue, with the 3rd gen RX-7 becoming unavailable in the US after about 1996 but thats only one market of many in the world.
Practically everybody except Mazda shelved their rotary programmes – including Citroen, Mercedes and General Motors by the 1980s. GM actually planned a Corvette with a 4-rotor engine, and Mercedes broke speed records with their 4-rotor C111 prototypes.
Mazdas current rotary patents apply to some aspects of their refinements to the basic rotary design, notable intake, porting, possibly exhaust emissions reduction and may cover direct hydrogen injection, but I believe most of Mazdas older metallurgical patents – the key to rotary reliability – have expired now, and there is no barrier to entry for anybody wanting to build a rotary engine apart from the technical ones – even if you were pretty much just cloning a 12A or 13B for your engine design it would be quite legal to sell.
There are lots of good reasons why the Wankel rotary is difficult to build reliably, or with good fuel economy – mostly due to combustion chamber shape and sealing issues, thoughthe real issues are complex and this subject is well covered elsewhere.
It is uniquely well suited to hydrogen combustion because the rotor divides the engine into 3 separate spaces, and at no time before combustion does hydrogen/air ever come into contact with hot engine components e.g. exhaust valves which is the biggest reason why piston engines don’t deal well with hydrogen – pre-ignition/backfiring is the major problem.
The last company you should be pointing the finger at for ‘shelving’ rotary development is Mazda, and your ‘owns patents for rotary engines’ assertion is only peripherally (sic) true.
The rotary engine has been in producion by Mazda since 1966 and in a Mazda automobile every model year since.
Also was the first Japanese manufacturer to win overall at LeMans!
The rotary engine has been in producion by Mazda since 1966 and in a Mazda automobile every model year since.
Also was the first Japanese manufacturer to win overall at LeMans!
The rotary engine has been in producion by Mazda since 1966 and in a Mazda automobile every model year since.
Also was the first Japanese manufacturer to win overall at LeMans!
Great article Max! Keep up the great work!
Great article Max! Keep up the great work!
I think it should be noted that this hydrogen vehicle appears to be a hydrogen combustion engine as opposed to a hydrogen fuel cell engine. I think there is a lot of confusion about the difference between burning hydrogen which would still result in hydrocarbon emissions and combining hydrogen with oxygen in a fuel cell which would result in water vapor emissions.
I think it should be noted that this hydrogen vehicle appears to be a hydrogen combustion engine as opposed to a hydrogen fuel cell engine. I think there is a lot of confusion about the difference between burning hydrogen which would still result in hydrocarbon emissions and combining hydrogen with oxygen in a fuel cell which would result in water vapor emissions.
I think it should be noted that this hydrogen vehicle appears to be a hydrogen combustion engine as opposed to a hydrogen fuel cell engine. I think there is a lot of confusion about the difference between burning hydrogen which would still result in hydrocarbon emissions and combining hydrogen with oxygen in a fuel cell which would result in water vapor emissions.
Well, Mazda has the RX-8 sportscar out there, which is the successor to the RX-7 of rotary fame. Their renesis engine is supposed to be pretty advanced and of very compact size. But rotary engines, while they offer good power-to-weight ratio and higher rpm, are still poor on fuel consumption. So that means you have to pay more at the pump – or at least pay more often.
Well, Mazda has the RX-8 sportscar out there, which is the successor to the RX-7 of rotary fame. Their renesis engine is supposed to be pretty advanced and of very compact size. But rotary engines, while they offer good power-to-weight ratio and higher rpm, are still poor on fuel consumption. So that means you have to pay more at the pump – or at least pay more often.
Well, Mazda has the RX-8 sportscar out there, which is the successor to the RX-7 of rotary fame. Their renesis engine is supposed to be pretty advanced and of very compact size. But rotary engines, while they offer good power-to-weight ratio and higher rpm, are still poor on fuel consumption. So that means you have to pay more at the pump – or at least pay more often.
too bad they havent found a cheap way to produce hydrogen… short sighted dont you think?
too bad they havent found a cheap way to produce hydrogen… short sighted dont you think?
Watch “Who killed the electric car?” and tell me about what you think of mazda? They developed an electric car years ago with a battery that can surpass any other and what did they do? sold the patent to Opec… and what did Opec do with the patent? Trash it!
Watch “Who killed the electric car?” and tell me about what you think of mazda? They developed an electric car years ago with a battery that can surpass any other and what did they do? sold the patent to Opec… and what did Opec do with the patent? Trash it!
Watch “Who killed the electric car?” and tell me about what you think of mazda? They developed an electric car years ago with a battery that can surpass any other and what did they do? sold the patent to Opec… and what did Opec do with the patent? Trash it!
Typo Alert:
…the G8 Hoddaido Toyako Summit in July.
I believe that that should be:
…the G8 Hokaido Toyako Summit in July.
Typo Alert:
…the G8 Hoddaido Toyako Summit in July.
I believe that that should be:
…the G8 Hokaido Toyako Summit in July.
I read this blog pertaining to a relatively inexpensive way to burn Hydrogen in your car. Its not the home made mayonnaise jar crap, its a professionally manufactured one out of stainless steel. Looks interesting. Just a FYI.
I read this blog pertaining to a relatively inexpensive way to burn Hydrogen in your car. Its not the home made mayonnaise jar crap, its a professionally manufactured one out of stainless steel. Looks interesting. Just a FYI.
I read this blog pertaining to a relatively inexpensive way to burn Hydrogen in your car. Its not the home made mayonnaise jar crap, its a professionally manufactured one out of stainless steel. Looks interesting. Just a FYI.
oops, guess it would help to give you the link to that blog. http://hydrogenfuel4cars.blogspot.com/
oops, guess it would help to give you the link to that blog. http://hydrogenfuel4cars.blogspot.com/
oops, guess it would help to give you the link to that blog. http://hydrogenfuel4cars.blogspot.com/
Almost certain that the patent on the Wankel rothary engine is long expired. Anyone know the history on the rights transfer to Mazda?
Almost certain that the patent on the Wankel rothary engine is long expired. Anyone know the history on the rights transfer to Mazda?
Is anyone looking at conversion kits for existing vehicles? I know it would be costly but I would think it woulk be less than a new car.
Is anyone looking at conversion kits for existing vehicles? I know it would be costly but I would think it woulk be less than a new car.
Is anyone looking at conversion kits for existing vehicles? I know it would be costly but I would think it woulk be less than a new car.
Zero CO2 I think not these engines are notorious consumers of oil, burnt oil = CO2 and worse.
Zero CO2 I think not these engines are notorious consumers of oil, burnt oil = CO2 and worse.
I don’t believe Mazda holds the patent. Wankel is a German name. Other companies have experimented with the “Wankel” engine.
I don’t believe Mazda holds the patent. Wankel is a German name. Other companies have experimented with the “Wankel” engine.
I don’t believe Mazda holds the patent. Wankel is a German name. Other companies have experimented with the “Wankel” engine.
GM had Rotary Engines in early 70s and chose not to market them. Back then GM had the best engineers. Poor mgmt has caused GM to lose half its’ market share.
GM had Rotary Engines in early 70s and chose not to market them. Back then GM had the best engineers. Poor mgmt has caused GM to lose half its’ market share.
The Rotary engine has some drawbacks. For one, the fuel might not burn as clean (but MPG is comparable to standard IC engines). The biggest drawback may be maintenance.
The Rotary engine has some drawbacks. For one, the fuel might not burn as clean (but MPG is comparable to standard IC engines). The biggest drawback may be maintenance.
The Rotary engine has some drawbacks. For one, the fuel might not burn as clean (but MPG is comparable to standard IC engines). The biggest drawback may be maintenance.