My MIL bought a Mazda with a Wankel as well. The problem was that no one but Mazda dealers knew how to service it, and the same with parts (although this is more common).

The Wankels were actually highly reliable as long as the apex (tip) seals didn't blow, so it's generally worthwhile to change them on a schedule well shorter than their expected life. Wankels are also stunningly tiny--if you've seen under the hood of any of the Wankel-engine cars, there's a lot of space (except in the twin-turbo RX-7s and such, where the hood is filled with nothing but air intakes, turbochargers, intercoolers, and ducts, ducts, ducts.

Mazda is bringing back the Wankel next year as a range extender for a primarily-electric vehicle (apparently on the Mazda 3 "long hatchback"/wagon), where it's located under the rear floor right in front of the bumper. Since it's running generator instead of driving the wheels, it's mounted horizontally for compactness. On a boxer could come close to fitting under the floor in the same way.

On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 3:01 PM Phil Pugliese (via tml list) <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote:
I finally looked at the next page after the 'battleship' article & found mention of the 'new' type of rear-view mirror Chevrolet had invented.

This actually went into production.
My first car, an old '59 Chevy station wagon, had one & I've had them on several others since, even foreign ones.

Of course, I also remember when they were touting the 'Wankel' engine for autos.
I actually knew someone who bought a new car that had one.
She was NOT a happy camper, to say the least!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Monday, June 3, 2019, 11:27:19 AM MST, Bruce Johnson <xxxxxx@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU> wrote:


I ran across this weird little item perusing old issues of Popular Mechanics on Google Books: https://books.google.com/books?id=1tkDAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA44&pg=RA1-PA44#v=onepage&q&f=false

Obviously it didn’t pan out , but I wonder if the basic design is valid? (We’ll ignore the ‘trailing cables to catch bombers', which would make for a briefly interesting Nantucket Sleigh Ride for the unfortunate defenders…)

There are other interesting tidbits scattered through these issues, such as the article describing the “Battleships of the Future” with confidence…about two months after the keel was laid for the last battleship the US ever made.


Not a few of their images of ‘stuff from the Futuuuurrrreee!’ looks exactly like cover illos for Astounding Science Fiction of the same era...

--
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=gi277fSUTkyFeQYIkUkn6zf5f3dXCa4l