Mazdas new homogeneous-charge compression Engine

Very interesting news, so mazdas going to release some HCCI engines for its mazda 3's.

>The differences between gasoline and diesel engines lie not only in their fuels, but in how those fuels are ignited.

Gasoline engines use spark plugs, while diesels simply use compression.

But it is possible to ignite gasoline in an internal-combustion engine with compression, as in a diesel.
The process is known as homogeneous-charge compression ignition (HCCI), and it's a technology multiple automakers have experimented with over the years—but never put into practice in production vehicles.

Mazda is one of two automakers planning to introduce a homogeneous-charge compression engine next year, and expects a 30-percent improvement in fuel economy over a conventional gasoline engine, according to Nikkei Asian Review.

The new engine will debut in the Mazda 3 compact as part of a mid-cycle refresh of that car, although it is unclear whether it will be available in all markets.

It will be considered part of the next-generation Skyactiv family of efficiency-focused engines.

yahoo.com/news/mazda-launch-homogeneous-charge-compression-engine-next-123000282.html

>daily reminder that Mazda is the salvation and no other manufacturer cares as much about our Veeky Forumstism.

Another interesting snippet from the article

"The compression-ignition gasoline engine technology was demonstrated on the Mercedes-Benz F700 concept, which debuted back in 2007 at the Frankfurt Motor Show.

At the time, Mercedes claimed HCCI—along with other efficiency-related technologies—allowed the F700's 1.8-liter twin-turbocharged 4-cylinder engine to offer the performance of a 3.5-liter V-6."

This has some very interesting potential for the future....

>Gasoline engines use spark plugs, while diesels simply use glow plugs.

Fixed that for you.

Not really. Glow plugs are part of a cold start system; when the engine is at operating temperature, they are no longer active, and there's nothing at all helping the fuel combust.

Go back to your frog board faggot this is a mazduratti thread.

Cummins motors in Dodge pickups don't use glow plugs. They have a grid heater which is a warming system in the intake.

This is just going to be a meme, like the wanker rotary. Even with a computer constantly monitoring intake conditions to keep combustion occurring at the right point in the cycle, there's no way this thing is as reliable or as long-lived as a traditional gas or diesel.

Really? Seems like theirs some good potential in this one. The skyactive engines have been pretty good so far, mazda must be very confident if they want to make this their next gen engine

Of course it seems like there's potential. It's no different than Nissan's variable compression engine or that camless engine Koenigsegg has been developing for years. They might attract investors but I sure as hell ain't going to buy one. The closest thing to "next gen" that I'd ever spend money on is a memeboost.

Everything everyone else already said to you, plus new diesels don't even have glow plugs and just use careful timing and direct injection to get the shit to combust

Very interesting. I recently read an article wherein a Mazda executive claimed the next Mazdaspeed would arrive either with or after Skyactiv2, which was what the engineering group was focused on.

I wonder how much performance envelope there will be left to work with if the blocks are already under that much compression as naturally aspirated. I very much doubt they will produce a Mazdaspeed-only block--they seem to have (wisely) abandoned any halo concept that doesn't derive directly from their passenger lineup.

I tell you what you do you just take them dang ol spark plugs out and in that little hole you just put a little oil around there it's like Bobby Unser says like it'd go BOOM just like that man

...

>Mazdas new homo
only mazda would come out with a homo engine

Why isn't there a mazda general?

Anyways, Mazdaspeed6's are uncommon and I'm starting to think of considering just a normal mazda6 or mazda3 now even if the insurance is higher.

Since I'm not limiting myself to the speed6 anymore, I want to ask. Are pre-skyactiv mazdas even a good idea now? A used 2012 mazda is within my budget too, but I've mostly been looking at older mazdas so I can easily get a GT trim for cheaper, and a hatchback mazda6 that looks like a sedan sounds kinda neat.

jeez with that kind of pessimism, you might as well just not buy anything because you know basically any kind of engine will eventually break down

The last gen body of the 3 got the Skyactiv 2.0l a year before the redesign. I considered buying one of those but I liked the Kobo design more than the savings.

I dunno, neither of the other examples have been slated to be put into production. They were big on showing off the mechanisms, but with little real world application.

You're dumb as fuck. I bet you think high compression means low reliability too.

Late next year, no less.

I have many questions. How would mixed octane fuel work? What if I drove from the high plains where they sell 85 to the normie altitudes where they sell 87? What about all those folks who think 91-94 means it's better for the engine? Is the octane being measured in real time? How is the compression altered to account for octane or altitude differences? Is direct injection still used?

>Is the octane being measured in real time?
effectively yes
>How is the compression altered to account for octane or altitude differences?
wiht variable valve timing
>Is direct injection still used?
yes

The 2nd gen 3 with Skyactiv 2.0 doesnt have the huge exhaust header, so max torque is about 800-1000 RPM higher then the 3rd gens with it.
Same transmissions.

People already say the 2.0 is alittle anemic for high 3000lbs though. More then enough for the MX5 though.

Test drove the 2.5 in the newer 3s, pretty good. Id say wait alittle longer for late 2014/2015 3s to drop if you can wait. (If you want a manual 2.5)

Forgot to add.

The older 2.3s are hit or miss, it seems like.
Either eats oil and dies a early death, or quite bulletproof. The Turbos are well known for their quirks.

The 2.5 that replaces it dont seem to have any outstanding issues. The old 2.0 is slow as fuck, but near indestructible.

All 3 get mid 20s MPG, not the best but not great either. But still competitive with other engines of its time.

Mazda thinking about releasing a new engine for their newer year car while nissan hasn't done jack shit. Investing in Mazda seems like the right way to go.

2nded for mazda general

>implying engines matter these days
>implying apple carplay doesn't matter more

The other manufacturers have been better situated in SUVs, which is where consumer sentiment is now. Mazda did a remarkable pivot to change their fortunes when gas prices spiked and the yen's value was trading near 100:$ but now the market has reverted to its previous conditions with the added danger that Trump is going to impose a tax on the shiny new Mexico plant. On the plus side, a booming dollar makes the failure of Abenomics a moot point.

Mazda is definitely not afraid to take risks. It takes balls to roll the dice on HCCI when SUVs again rule the earth. My guess is the strategy is to eat into the RAV and CR-V with MPG numbers that Honda and Toyota can't compete against. Still, I don't see how that helps in the upmarket segments which is where the profit traditionally is; therein I suspect lies the risk.

>effectively yes

I wonder if that means relying on a knock sensor after the fact. If so,

>there's no way this thing is as reliable or as long-lived as a traditional gas or diesel.

would seem to have a point there.

Also, where are you getting your facts? I'd like to read more about it, if you have a source available.

Old diesels are subject to the same "knock" that you are referring to. I'd wager that this hcci will be heavier than a traditional gas engine but have similar mileage to a diesel (similar, not equivalent). Maybe it won't be heavier and will instead rely on more complex control schemes.

Don't underestimate modern engine control technology. We got to the moon with less computational power than a graphing calculator. Compared to ECUs from a decade ago, we can stuff nutty tech into cars these days. See the ARM Cortex-R series microcontrollers and similar platforms. Whereas old engines relied on lookup tables, it would not be infeasible to implement a calculative approach instead.

disclaimer: I don't know the technical details of this engine or their control schemes, just general principles.

>Don't underestimate modern engine control technology.

It's not the computational power that I wonder about, it's the sensing required to provide data for the SoC to work with.

For example, I have a VG33E. It utilizes a knock sensor bolted to the crotch of the block to sense when a detonation has occurred and when enough of these in a given time period have been sensed, the ECU selects a default control profile. This system is hardly ideal but as the VG33E is relatively sturdy, a few unlikely wayward explosions won't affect the durability of the engine to any significant degree.

Now, what if that same sort of after-the-fact system were used to shape a control profile for an engine that were far more likely to experience detonations? Perhaps there is an octane sensing system used in the fueling circuit? If so, I wonder what it could be. As a hypothetical newly added system, it adds complexity in that like knock and O2 sensors, it will tend to fail sheerly due to the rigors of the operating environment.

Glad someone is still betting on NA engines and not falling to the econo-turbo meme.

Mazda do just as good of a job at fuel economy as the little turbo econo engines and produce more power.