I rode maybe fifty different RE-5s, commuted on them, and was a mechanic on them. In 1976/77 I was a mechanic at a large Suzuki dealership. They had a certified RE-5 specialist who preferred not to work on them and supervised me instead. I wanted to work on them as I was very intrigued by the Wankel, though I thought the RE-5 ugly and guilty of trying too hard. What I remember: It was heavy. Whatever the official weight was, it carried it high. HIGH. Policy was that to move one onto a lift or anything other than basic flat surface rolling required a spotter. While there were two model years, there were a lot of rolling changes. The second year gauge cluster ditched the goofy motorized roll-forward lens cover, and many were supplied to left over 1st year models to help move them. While the core powerplant was simple, there was a whole galaxy of subsystems that were fidgety, needed frequent adjustment, and were difficult to diagnose. The best thing you could do for an RE-5 was to just kill the secondary on the two-stage carb. There were a variety of sensors that worked in concert to manage that, lots of cables and adjustments, and it didn't do a damn thing anyway. On a drag strip or at Bonneville, yes. On the road, you never needed to rev it to where the secondary kicked in (it was way up there) because the torque curve was so flat (plus, at revs it did vibrate. Not a lot, but it was kinda unpleasant). Easily 3/4 of the rideability issues just disappeared if you disconnected the secondary and forgot about all the sensors. At least ten times we just could not get one to behave, we would then tell the customer we wanted to try something and he could judge. He would come back ecstatic & ask what we had done to finally fix it. One guy ever wanted us to restore the secondary and sensors/cables/vacuum lines/whatever. I liked riding them, it was different, and once going was pleasant enough if you didn't try to push it. Ground clearance was not much anyway. I have to say, it got boring pretty quickly. On the point of the Wankel's small size..... not really. Water jackets were AROUND everything (not between cylinders) all the subsystems had to be somewhere, the carb arrangement.... when you had the engine out of the frame, that is the biggest hole I ever saw on a motorcycle. I remember looking at the huge/heavy lump on the bench and the gaping cavern in the bike, and thinking, "what happened to the Wankel thing?"
I owned an RE5 briefly in the late Seventies. I ended up selling it to a friend of mine who owned a Suzuki dealership and it sat on his show room floor for decades. Not for sale, just for nostalgia and a conversation piece. Of course it was the first year model with everything round. I have worked for Honda dealers most of my life and bought it only as an oddity to study. I owned a Mazda R100 and an RX2 in the Seventies and loved both of them. 17MPH and 60,000 mile seal life finally moved me to Datsun in 79. I still have a 72 Water Buffalo and love it. 72 is THE year for the Buffalo. Of course now I own a Chevy Bolt and KTM E Freeride. I love both if used for what they are intended. The Bolt is my go to car for everyday use and gets 90% of my car time, and the Freeride is for my 5.5 mile practice trail on my property. I have gasoline motorcycles (Aprilia, Kawasaki, Suzuki etc..) and a Jeep Grand Cherokee for travel. Strangely, the only Honda I own is my beautiful 1975 CB750K. Always interested in innovation. Thanks for the insights and memories.
@@hudsonhollow Actually, I was a closet Water Buffalo fan. It had a dowdy reputation, but I test-rode them after repair and kinda felt differently. So I started taking them home to see in the real world and really fell in love. The power was more 4-stroke in nature, vibration was limited to a couple narrow rpm bands, the tranny was smooth (btw, the RE-5 clunked like a BMW Boxer). It had its limitations, but it was a very honest and predictable bike. With about three moving parts (see RE-5 for contrast). Actually, the two bikes filled the same niche and the Buffalo was easily the better bike, Wankel glamour not withstanding. WB sound at cold idle is joy.
As an ex Re5 owner, best I ever saw was 36 mpg on hwy going under 60. Other than that the standard was 24-26mpg not counting oil consumption. I do miss it, it was quirky in a good way.
Nice to see the digitalized version of a 16 mm movie which I rescued from the Belgian Suzuki importers scrapeyard in 1992 again appears on a youtube movie. I still have the original 16mm film which I believe is the only left in the world I still have my RE5 after 45 years ownership. The engine still lasts but my back is unfortunately not as everlasting as the bike....
Love your videos, Bart. Never owned an RE-5, but as someone who entered motorcycling in the early 1970s, I remember it well. Cycle magazine -- arguably THE U.S. journalistic authority of the era -- had an extremely interesting road test to introduce the RE-5 in their January, 1975 issue, which really got into not only its performance and riding qualities, but its design as well. Great reading for anyone who can dig that article up. A couple of thoughts, as your video takes us down memory lane... One of the RE-5's strong points was its handling, at mid-and (fairly) high speeds. Suspension was crude, to be sure, but relative to other big Japanese bikes of the era, it was arguably the best handling non-European bike of its time. The wonky look of the RE-5 engine was largely a result of Suzuki trying their best to make servicing as accessible as possible, with nearly all typical tune-up components adorning the exterior of the engine. It sure made for a busy and non-traditional look, but if nothing else, the engine's appearance wasn't random. And maybe the one thing not mentioned in the video that helped seal the RE-5's fate was its sound. From Harleys to mopeds, historically bikers have had a visceral appeal to different engine sounds, and the RE-5 was truly out in left field when it came to that. People have described the sound in different ways over the years, but I don't think I've ever heard anyone praise it as pleasant or involving. Along with its somewhat alien design, cost, relatively unexceptional performance, mileage/range, and fears about reliability, I really think its sound was the final nail in its coffin. Again, Bart, thanks for this ride down memory lane!
Local MC repair shop here had one in a couple of years ago. Had one mile on it. Apparently it sat on dealership floor for so long they started cannibalizing parts of it to repair customer bikes
@freeride6073 she's well used has 30k miles on the clock I'm going to be doing some work on mine this winter the engine is still in free spinning but has a leak that needs to be fixed but 50 year old gaskets it's to be expected. But it's a Firemist/Midnight Blue.
@@acuraintegra101 my first RE5 has done 140000 km . Brought me to former Yugoslavia , Greece , Portugal and Sweden . At the end everything but the rotor housing was worn out. ( was replaced at 100000 km) My current is a restauration made by buying another “ customized” re5m and parts of my original one. There was a new unit installed at 35000 km. By previous owner .Now there are 93000 km on the clock.
For the 1976 model year, Suzuki toned down the styling of the RE5 with more conventional looking gauges and bodywork. Unfortunately, it didn't help sales at all. Surprised this wasn't mentioned in the video.
My parents owned two Arctic Cat Snowmobiles with Wankel 303 cc engines. They were good engines. I wanted a Suzuki RE5 when they came out, but went the conservative route with a Suzuki GS750.
Suzuki's gem was the water Buffalo, said to use the same chassis, suspension, and brakes as the RE5 and a very roadable bike for its time. Missed buying one from a coworker (and a CBX from another, same near miss/reason) because he (they) passed before we cut a deal. btw, Selling a few H-Ds now, hope to ride my 650 Yam more, miss my Suzi Titans.
As a Mazda Rx-7 owner and someone who loves motorcycles and has been looking for either a Re5 or Hercules for a long time, the rotary only has 1 way to come back imo. As you mentioned emissions would probably stop them from being production bikes, there was recently a rotary race bike build, and Norton also made a few rotary engines. The only way for a road going bike to have it is most likely as a generator for a hybrid system like the new Mazda suv that is out.
I owned a rotary bike and a rotary car. I was disappointed with both. I bought a Hercules German made rotary that sat on dealers show room floor for 3 years before I bought it. I drove a Chevy Nova with a 305ci engine at the time. It got close to twice the fuel mileage my rotary bike got. The old sales pamphlet the dealer gave me said it was 500cc that preforms like a 1000cc bike. It did not, my Yamaha RD 350 was faster. The rotor seals failed at 4000 miles. I had worse luck with a Mazda rotary powered truck. Their sales slogan was, cars that make you go hmmm. They were correct! Hmmm, why did I buy this. I swapped the rotary engine with a Mazda piston engine in my truck and drove the wheels off that little truck. The Hercules bike is still sitting in my shed out back. Right next to the 1997 Ural bike that I wore out with only 9600 kilometers on the odometer which works out to be 6000 miles. The engine, transmission, and rear drive is shot. It would be cheaper to replace than fix. Want to know the most fun bikes to own? Ask me. Want to know the worst bike for reliability? Ask me. I owned them all and the answer to both questions is the same. The trick is buy them when brand new and get rid of them before they need repair. Which means having a disposable income much greater than mine. I really enjoyed the Hercules and Ural before they stopped being fun.
I took a train to the Canadian Border and a Bus to North Vancouver BC to pick up a restored 1967 Ford Cortina GT I bought. To my surprise there was a Hercules rotary powered motorcycle in the garage. It belonged to the car seller's brother.
I was riding when the RE5 came out and in all these years I never noticed the round-sided tail light. I guess I was always focused on that weird instrument cluster and odd-looking engine.
My first motorcycle was a Suzuki GS750. My last motorcycle was a Suzuki RG500 (square 4 two stroke). Between 1977 and 1988 I had seen a total of one Suzuki RE5.
I think one of the biggest problems in automotive engine design is that the four stroke poppet valve engine is underappreciated genius, and too many people have lost their money trying to better it. The magic of the 4 stroke is that it separates gas flow, cooling and combustion from the mechanicals better than any other design. The only seals are relatively simple cylindrical ones that never have to move over a gap. Every other design is either piston ported meaning seals run over a gap (2 stroke, Wankel), or have complex seal designs with non-ideal operating characteristics (Wankel, Liquid Piston, disc valve, sleeve valve, you name it.) The fact is that by the end of WW2 the only advancement left for the 4 stroke was computer control - supercharging, turbocharging, multivalve heads, DOHC, direct and port injection, every variant of liquid and air cooling, balance shafts, harmonic dampers - had been invented and tested to the limit. It was just a matter of getting the price down to everyday vehicles. The RE5 and the Wankel Norton could never have been successful because the Wankel has so many incurable inherent defects. It's "piston" ported so oil consumption will always be terrible. The combustion chamber cannot be designed for best performance because the rotary piston and seal have to move over it. The port design can't be optimised, same reason. The thermal efficiency will always be poor meaning some of the size gain is then lost in the huge radiator and fuel consumption. The RE5 radiator is bigger than that on many cars and the fuel consumption was around 37mp💂g if you were lucky. Periodically engineers seem to go mad in large numbers and chase the same unicorns along the same rainbow. There are still people trying to solve the Wankel problems. But the laws of physics aren't changing. (The most interesting idea I saw recently, though it never seems to have made production, was a sidevalve engine for trials bikes. These are low power, low revving, fuel consumption isn't important, but a sidevalve can be as small as a two stroke because it doesn't need a big cylinder head, and is extremely easy to work on. I suspect emissions killed the idea, which is a bit silly because the total emissions from all the world's trials bikes would be tiny. But here we are.)
I owned 76 RE5, bought it new in 77 . At around 25k miles it locked up, at 90mph. The Suzuki dealer wouldn't work on. But can't complain, I it ran very hard. I paid $1500. Out the door ..
The dealer in Monroe CT let me ride one and it handled very well ,I seem to remember some one writing that the chassis was similar to the later GS series.
Two stroke engines can be extremely durable providing the designer or owner don’t seek to extract max power. My Suzuki GT bikes never let me down. Not the fastest but on the GT750, almost no single point of failure meant you’d be very unlucky to be stranded.
First engine I ever built was a 12A rotary from a Mazda RX2 when I was 13 year's old 😂. Bart you seem to forget about the Norton Rotary which dominated racing in it's day.
I enjoy Bart's videos, but am sometimes dismayed at how significant factors can be overlooked in a single generation when reviewing history. My '76 RE5 was my first 'I should have never sold it' bike in my 55 years of riding. Suzuki was a daring innovator in the '70s. As such, it created some of worst- and best-looking bikes. My RE5 replaced another equally ugly Suzuki that I dearly loved: the first-year model GT750 'Water Buffalo'. Mine was purple. So yes, the first year RE5 was shockingly ugly to American tastes, with its cylindrical tail light and matching instrument cluster with its goofy pop-up cover. But that factor is left half-told by lack of even a photo of the '76 RE5 which was one of most beautiful bikes of the times. Gone were the goofy shapes. Glossy black with tasteful gold pinstripes and (first ever?) matching full fiberglass fairing and luggage-direct from the factory! RE5 rotor cases had a wire 'lock'. Suzuki sold the RE5 with a customer policy to replace the whole rotor case for a modest (as I recall $150) exchange fee if it ever failed. Mine had rotor seal failure at 32,000 miles. I took it apart myself, carried the still-sealed rotor case to the Dealer, who submitted the claim and received the replacement. I put it back together myself and put another 32,000 miles on the bike before selling it and replacing it with a first-year Honda CX500. There's another unmentioned RE5 popularity factor: In the early and mid '70s, conventional wisdom among much of the motorcycling community was still that two strokes were 'good and proper' for dirt and dual-purpose bikes; not so much for road bikes. No doubt many potential buyers initially interested in the RE5 were turn-off as soon as they found out that, like a 2-stroke, it also 'burned oil' and required watching and keeping its separate injection oil tank full. That was another element tilting borderline sales toward the 'like a car' security of 4-stroke buying decisions for large road bikes. JET
My Dad was an owner of one of the few RE5-A, with the updated dashboard from the GSX 750 in the UK. He absolutely loved it. Says the torque is like nothing else he's ever ridden.
A Rotary revival? Honestly, it's unlikely. When Mazda stopped using the Wankel design, that was pretty much the death knell. Too difficult to meet emissions, too prone to maintenance issues, and too expensive to make reliable in a production setting... As for a rotary being used as a range extender in a Hybrid setup, it would probably be easier to use a pure gas turbine (Jet) as a generator. Cheaper to build, only 1 moving part, will run on anything (including E95), and there's been a whole lot more research done on making gas turbines reliable than there has ever been done on the Wankel...
BART your videos are getting better and better! Great point about cars getting ugly and slow in the 70’s, and bikes getting faster and beautiful in the same era. Wankles make very little torque, and that is the bottom line. And they don’t last long, use lots of fuel, but the cool factor is there no doubt. Look forward to your next video.
I had a Mazda Rx2 as my first car (early 80’s). The seals were already worn down so there was a bit less compression than new. And it leaked, of course. But, man, did it move! Sometimes it just wouldn’t start due to the lack of compression, so we would pour some oil down the carburetor to boost compression. When it finally started, the exhaust would smoke out our high school parking lot. That was fun. Mazda fixed these problems, mostly, with the Rx7 and later models, but the damage was done. Rotary came onto the scene at the exact wrong time, as he said in the video.
Another great video, thank you! I’d love to see a big manufacturer give another full effort towards a rotary bike like they did in the beginning with a ton of money, but with all the knowledge and advancements we have now. There’s that bike Guy Martin has a video of him riding, but I’m not too sure what is going on with that, it’s a boutique manufacturer I believe.
Nice report, Bart, and as a young teen at the time, I recall that motorcycle and the huge ad campaign which tried to popularize the Wankel engine in Mazda automobiles. And I would agree, the Gold Wing was an instant success among touring motorcyclists, with BMW grabbing the alternative-looks spotlight for its faired sport bikes. And my Dad bought a BMW R100RS in West Germany and returned to the States with it and it was my commuter for a year in '79 in the San Francisco Bay Area. It was a smooth spaceship and it looked like one, too. I even had two nice encounters with the California Highway Patrol. Maybe they just wanted to see it up close. 😀
The Suzuki GT 750 Buffalo (or Kettle as we called them in the UK) was my first Japper after years of everything British. I loved it to bits, the acceleration thrill even made me overlook the less than perfect handling! Thanks for the video, but pictures of the gorgeous Norton Wankel or the DKW too would have showed what an opportunity Suzuki missed.
As a new motorcyclist when this bike came out, I remember wondering what the point was it didn’t make any special horsepower number. It didn’t have any 0 to 60 or quarter mile performance value it was ugly as sin and it cost more. The landscape at that time was full of lower cost better looking lightercheaper Motorcycles this bike looked like a science project on wheels scared everybody with its complexities that’s why no one bought it. It was a science project built to showcase a motor that no one wanted.
I had a Suzuki first model RE5 .. it was a wonderful & excellent motorcycle , never had any problems , still dont under stand why it had a rev counter , off the dial every time , thank you for the Video
I remember those! I put one together out of the crate when I worked at a dealership. We only had the one, and some rich dude bought it. I did an oil change on it later as well, never saw it again. I asked our lead wrench what we would do if it had a serious issue. He told me the instructions from Suzuki was to remove the engine and ship it back to Japan. (not sure if that was totally true)
You know that in the early 70s the first two 16 valve fours were introduced. One of them remained in production for close to 30 years. 1972 to close to 2000. To be fair, the one of those engines I owned was reliable and powerful. Close to 13 flat quarter mile and top speed over 160. Good for a 2.2 liter. The early ones had oil leaks. I thought you might consider looking into the biggest lemon motorcycle I can think of. Dual overhead cam 750 twin with a counterbalancer, the Yamaha TX750 was designed in house. Off the market in 2 years with serious issues. According to Cycle Guide it was a lot slower than a Commando, but weighed close to 100 lb more. I collect the old road tests. The supper successful Yamaha 650 twin was designed by a german company that was purchased by Showa, then Yamaha bought Showa, as I remember it.The GS750 transformed the 750 class roadracing. The GS1000 was considered the first good handling Superbike by the motoring press. Both pretty bulletproof as well. Suzuki was on the line after the RE5, and The GS750/GS1000 family allowed them to survive.
Engineer here - the Wankel’s inherent fuel consumption and high exhaust emissions plus the durability issues (always a problem for Mazda) and high manufacturing costs killed it and so sorry, but a comeback is simply not feasible.
Some rotary engined bikes are very good looking, the Norton Classic rotary, the Commander Rotary, and the Norton F1. The Hercules was a nice lookiing machine also.
Bonjour Ian. Hope to hear good news from you soon. Here I can cross the country using B roads and the french police keep an eye on road behaviour. I understand the problem in Bulgaria as I sometimes ride in Poland where a cousin lends an old but great 1993 BMW R 80 GS (which doesn't feel much heavier than my Himy). Concerning your Himalayan in two words: KEEP IT. Regards to both of you. Tony from France.
I owned a mazda rx3 for many years and loved it. The wankel.was smooth and sounded like a small turbine engine. Very high revving, good acceleration, and the car would fly if you wanted to push it. In a motorcycle it would be great, but the re5 had too much against it, as you point out.
To me the most interesting part of the RE5 was the fact that Suzuki tried something different. Many times those oddball inventions become the norm. In those days Suzuki wasn’t afraid to try new ideas. Like the water buffalo Gt750. I can’t remember other manufacturers making liquid cooled motorcycles at the time. Now liquid cooled motorcycle engines are very common.
When ya goona get an RD400, or FZ6 or a Kwacker triple? Come come. Drop the "E" and just get on an R5. Mine's been running plated since 1977 and before that, '71. Takin' the 6 today, 22 degrees.
And here I am having to get my old ASW-15 into the air with 200 feet of rope and an L19 like a schmuck! Just a little jealous! First time I saw one of the Wankel powered self launcher it was a new ASH-26E. The contrast between that ship and the other self launcher at the airport - a PIK20E was amazing. The relative quiet and the much greater climb performance made me decide that if I could ever afford a self launcher it would be one of the Schleichers.
The biggest problem with rotaries is lubrication. They typically use a port to bring lubrication to the combustion chamber resulting in burnt sludge buildup. Using two stoke oil in the fuel and blocking off the engine oil injection port cures it.
You missed a very important part of why they didn't sell. They were more expensive than any other 500cc motorcycle on the market. I remember the Suzuki dealer telling me that the factory was losing $30,000 per motorcycle.
The electric craze is already going down, and with the still ongoing prices in batteries and supply chain issues in microchips, I'm fairly positive, it will never go away as manufacturers keep on installing more chip computers into fridges, microwave ovens, clocks, bicycles, buttplugs, who knows. The demand in microchips will keep on going up as the regulators push for more safety semsors and tech with diminishing returns. While the idea of a safer and smarter future does seem appealing, good old fashioned simplicity and reliability will keep on gaining value. Anyone remember John Deere and the right to repair? So back to the original question about whether or not rotarys will make a comeback? Somehow mazda has made them clean enough for car use, I believe they can be made to work in motorcycles too.
As much as i like the idea of the rotary engine it will never be a winning concept. The reason is that in relation to the volume of the combustion chamber it has too much combustion chamber wall surface area. This wall surface area is where heat escapes into the cooling system instead of being used to drive the engine. The consequence is that in terms of thermodynamic efficiency it can never win from a conventional ICE engine. And there is also the oil consumption that prevents it (like 2stroke engines) from getting good exhaust emissions like a 4stroke ICE.
Suzuki was a real mess in the 70's. Early in the decade, they fielded a series of two stroke triples (their GT series) capped by the GT750, aka the 'Water Buffalo' as it was the only two stroke with liquid cooling at the time. Unfortunately, two strokes were on the way out due to emission concerns and of all the Japanese 'Big 4', Suzuki was the last to finally work on a true 4-stroke multi cylinder replacement for its line-up. In hindsight, the foray into the Wankel really put Suzuki at a disadvantage with regard to finally adopting a class-leading, performance focused, 4-stroke engine. Suzuki's GT series (multiple displacements) ran from 1972 to 1976, overlapping the RE5 model. This fact probably didn't help the RE5 gain much market share, which had become very crowded by the mid-70's. As you noted, the Wankel was very complicated, but also made for a relatively heavy bike for its displacement (563 lbs. vs 482 lbs. for the GT750 and the all-new Gold Wing tipping the scales at a competitive 584 lbs.) For all the Japanese makes and models on offer at the time, even the slightest negative reports would probably have been enough to sink any new technology equipped motorcycle. As to your musings on any potential Wankel rebirth, I seriously doubt there has really been technological advancements to warrant an effort by the motorcycle industry to dive into this form of motive power again. Look how long Mazda has been toiling on this type of engine. The RX5 has had a few rebirths using a Wankel, but they've yet to realize a vehicle that outperforms any other engine technology. I do like the notion of looking at specific motorcycle models that didn't quite make the cut. Perhaps you could do another video on something like Yamaha's XS750 (aka, the Foam Boat).
I think you're way off base with the public perception of rotary engines. Not because they have a positive perception, but because I think the only perception they will have *at all* will be from Mazda's RX cars. Their commubities have a running gag of requiring rebuilding constantly so it's not exactly a glowing endorsement of rotary technology. I've always thought the rotary engines specific desire to run at high RPM with little variation would make them great generator motors, so I could easily imagine them in a hybrid, but I don't know how much engineering and development that would require.
Suzuki thinking: If it is difficult, don't do it. It has to be almost impossible to achieve. So we just make it close to impossible, even if we don't have to!
servicing nightmare, changing the vanes is a weekend job and has to be done every 5000 miles, you cant make the engine higher CC as there is nowhere for the carbs, filters, etc
The rotary engine will never make a comeback. It has too many problems that cannot be corrected. Fuel and oil consumption are the two main factors. In order to ensure the longevity of the Apex seals it must burn some oil. This is counterproductive considering today's smog control measures.
Not just the many problems, imo the concept is fundamentally flawed. The combustion pushes into a wedge like corner, so you never get to nearly use the same power from any single explosion a piston engine does. Don't tell the Wankelbros I said this please, they can be quite vindicative.
oil consumption is already mostly solved(you can't use oil in hydrogen burning engines because hydrogen would attack the oil film so mazda needed a different solution in the form of ceramic apex seals), what remains now is fuel consumption, the remaining emissions issues and the problems introduced by ceramic apex seals
in the 1970's Suzuki held back and let Honda and Kawasaki spend money on R&D, then Suzuki improved on their successes. Innovation (like the rotary) was not their strong suit.
The RE was pushed out too early. It wasn't ready and it made a bad impression. None the less, a motorcycle is the LAST thing that needs to be electrified. There are so few of them in relation to cars and they are inherently far more fuel efficient. I had an RX8 and I liked it and also I hated it. It was cool and flakey. Just not enough of anything good to overcome the excessive service and maintenance requirements. The Wankel design has a lot of potential as do a lot of the newer rotary designs. I think in time we may see a fully refined rotary powered motorcycle, maybe a hybrid se up that can leverage the size of a rotary combustion engine with the power distribution of a battery electric system. But it needs a clutch. If you can't shift, it isn't worth riding 🙂.
at this point - like it or not - electric (or some development of usable hydrogen technology in the distant future) seems like the way all transportation is going. Retooling from one form of internal combustion to another seems counter to the thinking of corporate planners. And I don't think some independent start up could have the capital to develop a revolutionary form of motivation - unless a Musk or Beezos suddenly got the two-wheel bug.
Nope, not a chance they will come back. Those RE5's often used more than 30 miles per gallon. Most family cars can better than today. Also rotaries burn a small amount of oil for the same reason two strokes do, this creates emission problems. Despite working on the seals problem for over a decade, Mazda's MX30 is the first rotary in over 11years, keep an eye on that one...
Yes, I do think rotary engines could make a comeback for motorcycles. Despite being a fan of electric cars, I don't see how electric bikes make sense - too much battery, too heavy, to short a range - if the range could be solved then maybe but I don't see that happening any time soon. Basically - the gold standard of motorcycling will be some kind of light weight nuclear isotope that delivers unlimited power to a perfectly proportioned chasis and associated systems - when that will happen I don't know, in the meantime - ride a Hayabusa - it's the best.
That wanker who pitched his butt in the advert is one of the _real_ reasons people are out against smokers. You get really sick and tired of going somewhere, anywhere, everywhere and there are old cigarette butts lying on the ground wherever you look. I was a smoker for half my life and it pisses _me_ off.
I feel like today more than ever people want to have a reliable n low maintenance motorcycle not the exotic one ... probably has to do with biker getting older on average.
The oil crisis didn't really affect Australia l can remember petrol been 50c a gallon in the 1970s and l ride and owned Suzuki motorcycles and l had a GT750 but my brother owned a RE 5 he owned the second generation which dropped the termous flask tail light and instrument cluster also the tennis ball indicators and l rode the RE 5 and for performance it would blow my GT750 into the weeds l rode it to work one day and hit 140kph on the Sydney Harbour Bridge my dream was to do 160kph on the Sydney Harbour Bridge l nearly did that l wasn't watching the speedometer that day fortunately no Police around but the RE 5 nearly sent Suzuki broke
Also rotary engines and emission control just doesnt work look at the mazda rx8 it was a flop because of them under powered and very poor reliability due to emissions control
The GS engines with 2 valves per cylinder were so over engineered and the GS850g is a great bike that could do 100000 miles abused to hell and had shaft drive. Whether its the GS twins of up to 500cc or GS550 to GS1000 inline fours those engines were so strong and some 1000s of suzuki were made into drag bikes on NO2 and ethanol to race at Santa Pod and got well over 200bhp with 8 ish second standing 1/4 miles.
sure, this is a non-AI intelligent commenter. the advantage of the current engines is the SOUND . machos want a good " beast " sound. look at Harley correctly patenting - or trying to patent their sound.
I don't know but the Rotary engine in motorcycles have been cursed to flop. Either the bike turned out to be flop or it took down the whole company 😅. No1 wants a rotary engine in bikes atleast even today because today bikes are getting expensive with advanced electronics,safety package, complying with emissions norms etc so no1 in their right minds would put a rotary engine in a bike in 2024-25 because it will just just cause the bike to cost a bomb to manufacture and sell later on. It would be a disaster.
Rotor engines are stupid great idea from a German engineer that was set out to prove a point but in practice non-practical not as efficient and still not as reliable yeah it’s smooth, but it’s not smoother than the car nowadays with the regular engine because RD has not stopped in thosetype of engines so I don’t believe we’ll see anything and I don’t think anybody cares about him
The early RE5 was so ugly. The cylindrical gauge pod looked like Rhoda's head, the maid on "The Jetson's" cartoon. That said, I have read that the chassis design on the RE5 was the basis for the GS750 and GS1000 chassis. Those 4 cylinder bikes were generally known as the first Japanese "Superbike" with superior handling. That is at least a legacy of the RE5. The Wankel bankrupted Arctic Cat. Suzuki stepped in and made two strokes for Arctic Cat. I understand that Suzuki became a partner of Arctic Cat.
How does this channel not have a million subscribers? There's a lack of high-quality mini documentaries on motorcycles - this is the stuff we need!
Maybe it’s his algorithm (he doesn’t produce consistent content) and/or he doesn’t “buy” subscribers.
FortNine is holding the bar high. But Bart is really good. 👍🏻
@@vincedibona4687 FortNine and - The illestrator - (although, he's been AWOL for over a year)
Right?
He totally deserves a million subs….. these videos are always so awesomely done!
I rode maybe fifty different RE-5s, commuted on them, and was a mechanic on them. In 1976/77 I was a mechanic at a large Suzuki dealership. They had a certified RE-5 specialist who preferred not to work on them and supervised me instead. I wanted to work on them as I was very intrigued by the Wankel, though I thought the RE-5 ugly and guilty of trying too hard. What I remember: It was heavy. Whatever the official weight was, it carried it high. HIGH. Policy was that to move one onto a lift or anything other than basic flat surface rolling required a spotter. While there were two model years, there were a lot of rolling changes. The second year gauge cluster ditched the goofy motorized roll-forward lens cover, and many were supplied to left over 1st year models to help move them. While the core powerplant was simple, there was a whole galaxy of subsystems that were fidgety, needed frequent adjustment, and were difficult to diagnose.
The best thing you could do for an RE-5 was to just kill the secondary on the two-stage carb. There were a variety of sensors that worked in concert to manage that, lots of cables and adjustments, and it didn't do a damn thing anyway. On a drag strip or at Bonneville, yes. On the road, you never needed to rev it to where the secondary kicked in (it was way up there) because the torque curve was so flat (plus, at revs it did vibrate. Not a lot, but it was kinda unpleasant). Easily 3/4 of the rideability issues just disappeared if you disconnected the secondary and forgot about all the sensors. At least ten times we just could not get one to behave, we would then tell the customer we wanted to try something and he could judge. He would come back ecstatic & ask what we had done to finally fix it. One guy ever wanted us to restore the secondary and sensors/cables/vacuum lines/whatever.
I liked riding them, it was different, and once going was pleasant enough if you didn't try to push it. Ground clearance was not much anyway. I have to say, it got boring pretty quickly.
On the point of the Wankel's small size..... not really. Water jackets were AROUND everything (not between cylinders) all the subsystems had to be somewhere, the carb arrangement.... when you had the engine out of the frame, that is the biggest hole I ever saw on a motorcycle. I remember looking at the huge/heavy lump on the bench and the gaping cavern in the bike, and thinking, "what happened to the Wankel thing?"
Awesome comment...
I thought myself where tf is the space gain???
Very interesting, thanks.
Thanks that was interesting to read!
I owned an RE5 briefly in the late Seventies. I ended up selling it to a friend of mine who owned a Suzuki dealership and it sat on his show room floor for decades. Not for sale, just for nostalgia and a conversation piece. Of course it was the first year model with everything round. I have worked for Honda dealers most of my life and bought it only as an oddity to study. I owned a Mazda R100 and an RX2 in the Seventies and loved both of them. 17MPH and 60,000 mile seal life finally moved me to Datsun in 79. I still have a 72 Water Buffalo and love it. 72 is THE year for the Buffalo. Of course now I own a Chevy Bolt and KTM E Freeride. I love both if used for what they are intended. The Bolt is my go to car for everyday use and gets 90% of my car time, and the Freeride is for my 5.5 mile practice trail on my property. I have gasoline motorcycles (Aprilia, Kawasaki, Suzuki etc..) and a Jeep Grand Cherokee for travel. Strangely, the only Honda I own is my beautiful 1975 CB750K. Always interested in innovation. Thanks for the insights and memories.
@@hudsonhollow Actually, I was a closet Water Buffalo fan. It had a dowdy reputation, but I test-rode them after repair and kinda felt differently. So I started taking them home to see in the real world and really fell in love. The power was more 4-stroke in nature, vibration was limited to a couple narrow rpm bands, the tranny was smooth (btw, the RE-5 clunked like a BMW Boxer). It had its limitations, but it was a very honest and predictable bike. With about three moving parts (see RE-5 for contrast). Actually, the two bikes filled the same niche and the Buffalo was easily the better bike, Wankel glamour not withstanding. WB sound at cold idle is joy.
The Wankel rotary engine: Smaller than a standard 4-cylinder, the power of a good 6-cylinder, and the fuel economy of a poorly-maintained 8-cylinder!
Oh, and the maintenance schedule to make Lucas electronics look reliable.
As an ex Re5 owner, best I ever saw was 36 mpg on hwy going under 60. Other than that the standard was 24-26mpg not counting oil consumption. I do miss it, it was quirky in a good way.
With smoothness of a v12
As a ex rx8 owner I concer. I loved that car though. 😊
@@vaibhavdabwalv1 Actually no. You really could balance a coin on a running Jaguar V12 engine. You cannot beat firing every 60 degrees.
There's nothing quite as satisfying as stopping for a smoke break while out for a ride on your RE-5 in your all white riding suit.
After retro bikes, I see a retro clothing trend lurking around the corner😅
I have seen Japanese riders from the 70s dressed like this (all white w/stripes. I bet they flew a blonde boy and suited him up for this ad.
@@rleerm NNNooooooooooo.......no 70s fashion
Nice to see the digitalized version of a 16 mm movie which I rescued from the Belgian Suzuki importers scrapeyard in 1992 again appears on a youtube movie. I still have the original 16mm film which I believe is the only left in the world
I still have my RE5 after 45 years ownership. The engine still lasts but my back is unfortunately not as everlasting as the bike....
Gee, I think I recognize the motorcycle in your profile picture!
Love your videos, Bart. Never owned an RE-5, but as someone who entered motorcycling in the early 1970s, I remember it well. Cycle magazine -- arguably THE U.S. journalistic authority of the era -- had an extremely interesting road test to introduce the RE-5 in their January, 1975 issue, which really got into not only its performance and riding qualities, but its design as well. Great reading for anyone who can dig that article up.
A couple of thoughts, as your video takes us down memory lane...
One of the RE-5's strong points was its handling, at mid-and (fairly) high speeds. Suspension was crude, to be sure, but relative to other big Japanese bikes of the era, it was arguably the best handling non-European bike of its time.
The wonky look of the RE-5 engine was largely a result of Suzuki trying their best to make servicing as accessible as possible, with nearly all typical tune-up components adorning the exterior of the engine. It sure made for a busy and non-traditional look, but if nothing else, the engine's appearance wasn't random.
And maybe the one thing not mentioned in the video that helped seal the RE-5's fate was its sound. From Harleys to mopeds, historically bikers have had a visceral appeal to different engine sounds, and the RE-5 was truly out in left field when it came to that. People have described the sound in different ways over the years, but I don't think I've ever heard anyone praise it as pleasant or involving. Along with its somewhat alien design, cost, relatively unexceptional performance, mileage/range, and fears about reliability, I really think its sound was the final nail in its coffin.
Again, Bart, thanks for this ride down memory lane!
Everyone who has chased the Wankel has lost their shirt.
Local MC repair shop here had one in a couple of years ago. Had one mile on it. Apparently it sat on dealership floor for so long they started cannibalizing parts of it to repair customer bikes
As a re5 owner I will not give up on her.
You own part of motorcycle history and that's worth something. I have no ideas as to how much it's worth but still history 😊
@freeride6073 she's well used has 30k miles on the clock I'm going to be doing some work on mine this winter the engine is still in free spinning but has a leak that needs to be fixed but 50 year old gaskets it's to be expected. But it's a Firemist/Midnight Blue.
@@acuraintegra101 my first RE5 has done 140000 km . Brought me to former Yugoslavia , Greece , Portugal and Sweden .
At the end everything but the rotor housing was worn out. ( was replaced at 100000 km)
My current is a restauration made by buying another “ customized” re5m and parts of my original one.
There was a new unit installed at 35000 km. By previous owner .Now there are 93000 km on the clock.
@@tripleien1 hello to you my re5 brother thank you for sharing about your re5 what color do you have?
@@acuraintegra101
Original flake midnight blue. Has been repainted 30 years ago in high quality deep flake midnight Blue.
For the 1976 model year, Suzuki toned down the styling of the RE5 with more conventional looking gauges and bodywork. Unfortunately, it didn't help sales at all. Surprised this wasn't mentioned in the video.
I had an RE-5 Rotary. Bought it new in 75. It was a cool looking bike, but it was not practical. Had lots of problems.
you need to add some sound bites of the motor in action
My parents owned two Arctic Cat Snowmobiles with Wankel 303 cc engines. They were good engines. I wanted a Suzuki RE5 when they came out, but went the conservative route with a Suzuki GS750.
I purchased new in 1972 a Mazda RX2. Terrible mpg, stupid high oil consumption and went through 2 engines in 30,000 miles. Enough said.
Suzuki's gem was the water Buffalo, said to use the same chassis, suspension, and brakes as the RE5 and a very roadable bike for its time. Missed buying one from a coworker (and a CBX from another, same near miss/reason) because he (they) passed before we cut a deal. btw, Selling a few H-Ds now, hope to ride my 650 Yam more, miss my Suzi Titans.
I own a 1977 Suzuki GT750A. It’s so much prettier than the RE5.
As a Mazda Rx-7 owner and someone who loves motorcycles and has been looking for either a Re5 or Hercules for a long time, the rotary only has 1 way to come back imo.
As you mentioned emissions would probably stop them from being production bikes, there was recently a rotary race bike build, and Norton also made a few rotary engines.
The only way for a road going bike to have it is most likely as a generator for a hybrid system like the new Mazda suv that is out.
I owned a rotary bike and a rotary car. I was disappointed with both. I bought a Hercules German made rotary that sat on dealers show room floor for 3 years before I bought it. I drove a Chevy Nova with a 305ci engine at the time. It got close to twice the fuel mileage my rotary bike got. The old sales pamphlet the dealer gave me said it was 500cc that preforms like a 1000cc bike. It did not, my Yamaha RD 350 was faster. The rotor seals failed at 4000 miles. I had worse luck with a Mazda rotary powered truck. Their sales slogan was, cars that make you go hmmm. They were correct! Hmmm, why did I buy this.
I swapped the rotary engine with a Mazda piston engine in my truck and drove the wheels off that little truck. The Hercules bike is still sitting in my shed out back. Right next to the 1997 Ural bike that I wore out with only 9600 kilometers on the odometer which works out to be 6000 miles. The engine, transmission, and rear drive is shot. It would be cheaper to replace than fix.
Want to know the most fun bikes to own? Ask me. Want to know the worst bike for reliability? Ask me. I owned them all and the answer to both questions is the same. The trick is buy them when brand new and get rid of them before they need repair. Which means having a disposable income much greater than mine. I really enjoyed the Hercules and Ural before they stopped being fun.
I took a train to the Canadian Border and a Bus to North Vancouver BC to pick up a restored 1967 Ford Cortina GT I bought. To my surprise there was a Hercules rotary powered motorcycle in the garage. It belonged to the car seller's brother.
I was riding when the RE5 came out and in all these years I never noticed the round-sided tail light. I guess I was always focused on that weird instrument cluster and odd-looking engine.
Why no mention of the Norton Commanders? That's what I think about when I hear rotary. Suzuki only comes 3rd after Van Veen.😊
I rode a Norton Wankel once. Smooth, powerful, good handling.
Yup, Norton eventually got it right. About a week before they went bust again.
On a ride back from Europe, I once met three guys on a ferry (or chunnel), all riding rotaries. Two Nortons and one RE5.
My first motorcycle was a Suzuki GS750. My last motorcycle was a Suzuki RG500 (square 4 two stroke). Between 1977 and 1988 I had seen a total of one Suzuki RE5.
I have only ever seen two of them on the road here in England in my life.
I think one of the biggest problems in automotive engine design is that the four stroke poppet valve engine is underappreciated genius, and too many people have lost their money trying to better it.
The magic of the 4 stroke is that it separates gas flow, cooling and combustion from the mechanicals better than any other design. The only seals are relatively simple cylindrical ones that never have to move over a gap. Every other design is either piston ported meaning seals run over a gap (2 stroke, Wankel), or have complex seal designs with non-ideal operating characteristics (Wankel, Liquid Piston, disc valve, sleeve valve, you name it.) The fact is that by the end of WW2 the only advancement left for the 4 stroke was computer control - supercharging, turbocharging, multivalve heads, DOHC, direct and port injection, every variant of liquid and air cooling, balance shafts, harmonic dampers - had been invented and tested to the limit. It was just a matter of getting the price down to everyday vehicles.
The RE5 and the Wankel Norton could never have been successful because the Wankel has so many incurable inherent defects. It's "piston" ported so oil consumption will always be terrible. The combustion chamber cannot be designed for best performance because the rotary piston and seal have to move over it. The port design can't be optimised, same reason. The thermal efficiency will always be poor meaning some of the size gain is then lost in the huge radiator and fuel consumption. The RE5 radiator is bigger than that on many cars and the fuel consumption was around 37mp💂g if you were lucky.
Periodically engineers seem to go mad in large numbers and chase the same unicorns along the same rainbow. There are still people trying to solve the Wankel problems. But the laws of physics aren't changing.
(The most interesting idea I saw recently, though it never seems to have made production, was a sidevalve engine for trials bikes. These are low power, low revving, fuel consumption isn't important, but a sidevalve can be as small as a two stroke because it doesn't need a big cylinder head, and is extremely easy to work on. I suspect emissions killed the idea, which is a bit silly because the total emissions from all the world's trials bikes would be tiny. But here we are.)
I owned 76 RE5, bought it new in 77 . At around 25k miles it locked up, at 90mph. The Suzuki dealer wouldn't work on. But can't complain, I it ran very hard. I paid $1500. Out the door ..
The dealer in Monroe CT let me ride one and it handled very well ,I seem to remember some one writing that the chassis was similar to the later GS series.
Rotary engines; for when 2-strokes are just too long-lived and fuel efficient...🤔
Well said! They basically are low torque versions of the two stroke that don’t sound cool, weigh lots more, and last half as long.
Two stroke engines can be extremely durable providing the designer or owner don’t seek to extract max power.
My Suzuki GT bikes never let me down. Not the fastest but on the GT750, almost no single point of failure meant you’d be very unlucky to be stranded.
First engine I ever built was a 12A rotary from a Mazda RX2 when I was 13 year's old 😂.
Bart you seem to forget about the Norton Rotary which dominated racing in it's day.
I enjoy Bart's videos, but am sometimes dismayed at how significant factors can be overlooked in a single generation when reviewing history. My '76 RE5 was my first 'I should have never sold it' bike in my 55 years of riding.
Suzuki was a daring innovator in the '70s. As such, it created some of worst- and best-looking bikes. My RE5 replaced another equally ugly Suzuki that I dearly loved: the first-year model GT750 'Water Buffalo'. Mine was purple.
So yes, the first year RE5 was shockingly ugly to American tastes, with its cylindrical tail light and matching instrument cluster with its goofy pop-up cover. But that factor is left half-told by lack of even a photo of the '76 RE5 which was one of most beautiful bikes of the times. Gone were the goofy shapes. Glossy black with tasteful gold pinstripes and (first ever?) matching full fiberglass fairing and luggage-direct from the factory!
RE5 rotor cases had a wire 'lock'. Suzuki sold the RE5 with a customer policy to replace the whole rotor case for a modest (as I recall $150) exchange fee if it ever failed. Mine had rotor seal failure at 32,000 miles. I took it apart myself, carried the still-sealed rotor case to the Dealer, who submitted the claim and received the replacement. I put it back together myself and put another 32,000 miles on the bike before selling it and replacing it with a first-year Honda CX500.
There's another unmentioned RE5 popularity factor: In the early and mid '70s, conventional wisdom among much of the motorcycling community was still that two strokes were 'good and proper' for dirt and dual-purpose bikes; not so much for road bikes. No doubt many potential buyers initially interested in the RE5 were turn-off as soon as they found out that, like a 2-stroke, it also 'burned oil' and required watching and keeping its separate injection oil tank full. That was another element tilting borderline sales toward the 'like a car' security of 4-stroke buying decisions for large road bikes.
JET
My Dad was an owner of one of the few RE5-A, with the updated dashboard from the GSX 750 in the UK. He absolutely loved it. Says the torque is like nothing else he's ever ridden.
Good video! Have you heard that it was rumored that Suzuki had so many unsold RE5's that many of them were dumped in the ocean off of Japan!
A Rotary revival? Honestly, it's unlikely. When Mazda stopped using the Wankel design, that was pretty much the death knell. Too difficult to meet emissions, too prone to maintenance issues, and too expensive to make reliable in a production setting...
As for a rotary being used as a range extender in a Hybrid setup, it would probably be easier to use a pure gas turbine (Jet) as a generator. Cheaper to build, only 1 moving part, will run on anything (including E95), and there's been a whole lot more research done on making gas turbines reliable than there has ever been done on the Wankel...
BART your videos are getting better and better! Great point about cars getting ugly and slow in the 70’s, and bikes getting faster and beautiful in the same era. Wankles make very little torque, and that is the bottom line. And they don’t last long, use lots of fuel, but the cool factor is there no doubt. Look forward to your next video.
I had a Mazda Rx2 as my first car (early 80’s). The seals were already worn down so there was a bit less compression than new. And it leaked, of course. But, man, did it move! Sometimes it just wouldn’t start due to the lack of compression, so we would pour some oil down the carburetor to boost compression. When it finally started, the exhaust would smoke out our high school parking lot. That was fun. Mazda fixed these problems, mostly, with the Rx7 and later models, but the damage was done. Rotary came onto the scene at the exact wrong time, as he said in the video.
Really excellent history lesson. Well written.
Another great video, thank you! I’d love to see a big manufacturer give another full effort towards a rotary bike like they did in the beginning with a ton of money, but with all the knowledge and advancements we have now. There’s that bike Guy Martin has a video of him riding, but I’m not too sure what is going on with that, it’s a boutique manufacturer I believe.
Nice report, Bart, and as a young teen at the time, I recall that motorcycle and the huge ad campaign which tried to popularize the Wankel engine in Mazda automobiles. And I would agree, the Gold Wing was an instant success among touring motorcyclists, with BMW grabbing the alternative-looks spotlight for its faired sport bikes. And my Dad bought a BMW R100RS in West Germany and returned to the States with it and it was my commuter for a year in '79 in the San Francisco Bay Area. It was a smooth spaceship and it looked like one, too. I even had two nice encounters with the California Highway Patrol. Maybe they just wanted to see it up close. 😀
The Suzuki GT 750 Buffalo (or Kettle as we called them in the UK) was my first Japper after years of everything British. I loved it to bits, the acceleration thrill even made me overlook the less than perfect handling! Thanks for the video, but pictures of the gorgeous Norton Wankel or the DKW too would have showed what an opportunity Suzuki missed.
As a new motorcyclist when this bike came out, I remember wondering what the point was it didn’t make any special horsepower number. It didn’t have any 0 to 60 or quarter mile performance value it was ugly as sin and it cost more. The landscape at that time was full of lower cost better looking lightercheaper Motorcycles this bike looked like a science project on wheels scared everybody with its complexities that’s why no one bought it. It was a science project built to showcase a motor that no one wanted.
Had the privilege of seeing a couple of these at motorcycle shows over the years. What a weird bike! Thanks for another great video 😁
I had a Suzuki first model RE5 .. it was a wonderful & excellent motorcycle , never had any problems , still dont under stand why it had a rev counter , off the dial every time , thank you for the Video
Rotary engines today have come a long way, I think we definitely need a revival.
I remember those! I put one together out of the crate when I worked at a dealership. We only had the one, and some rich dude bought it. I did an oil change on it later as well, never saw it again. I asked our lead wrench what we would do if it had a serious issue. He told me the instructions from Suzuki was to remove the engine and ship it back to Japan. (not sure if that was totally true)
You know that in the early 70s the first two 16 valve fours were introduced. One of them remained in production for close to 30 years. 1972 to close to 2000. To be fair, the one of those engines I owned was reliable and powerful. Close to 13 flat quarter mile and top speed over 160. Good for a 2.2 liter. The early ones had oil leaks.
I thought you might consider looking into the biggest lemon motorcycle I can think of. Dual overhead cam 750 twin with a counterbalancer, the Yamaha TX750 was designed in house. Off the market in 2 years with serious issues. According to Cycle Guide it was a lot slower than a Commando, but weighed close to 100 lb more. I collect the old road tests. The supper successful Yamaha 650 twin was designed by a german company that was purchased by Showa, then Yamaha bought Showa, as I remember it.The GS750 transformed the 750 class roadracing. The GS1000 was considered the first good handling Superbike by the motoring press. Both pretty bulletproof as well. Suzuki was on the line after the RE5, and The GS750/GS1000 family allowed them to survive.
Engineer here - the Wankel’s inherent fuel consumption and high exhaust emissions plus the durability issues (always a problem for Mazda) and high manufacturing costs killed it and so sorry, but a comeback is simply not feasible.
Some rotary engined bikes are very good looking, the Norton Classic rotary, the Commander Rotary, and the Norton F1. The Hercules was a nice lookiing machine also.
Bonjour Ian.
Hope to hear good news from you soon.
Here I can cross the country using B roads and the french police keep an eye on road behaviour.
I understand the problem in Bulgaria as I sometimes ride in Poland where a cousin lends an old but great 1993 BMW R 80 GS (which doesn't feel much heavier than my Himy).
Concerning your Himalayan in two words: KEEP IT.
Regards to both of you.
Tony from France.
I owned a mazda rx3 for many years and loved it. The wankel.was smooth and sounded like a small turbine engine. Very high revving, good acceleration, and the car would fly if you wanted to push it. In a motorcycle it would be great, but the re5 had too much against it, as you point out.
To me the most interesting part of the RE5 was the fact that Suzuki tried something different. Many times those oddball inventions become the norm. In those days Suzuki wasn’t afraid to try new ideas. Like the water buffalo Gt750. I can’t remember other manufacturers making liquid cooled motorcycles at the time. Now liquid cooled motorcycle engines are very common.
When ya goona get an RD400, or FZ6 or a Kwacker triple? Come come. Drop the "E" and just get on an R5. Mine's been running plated since 1977 and before that, '71. Takin' the 6 today, 22 degrees.
Sevral years ago I rode a long distance race on a rotary motorcycle, it was not the Re-5 but the Hercules W2000.
Missing your uploads Bart from the shire of Oxford - UK…x
I'm flying a rotary Wankel powered motorglider with 55 HP. Look up the Schleicher ASW 31Mi. Self-launches without problems. But I paid $200k for it.
And here I am having to get my old ASW-15 into the air with 200 feet of rope and an L19 like a schmuck! Just a little jealous! First time I saw one of the Wankel powered self launcher it was a new ASH-26E. The contrast between that ship and the other self launcher at the airport - a PIK20E was amazing. The relative quiet and the much greater climb performance made me decide that if I could ever afford a self launcher it would be one of the Schleichers.
The biggest problem with rotaries is lubrication. They typically use a port to bring lubrication to the combustion chamber resulting in burnt sludge buildup. Using two stoke oil in the fuel and blocking off the engine oil injection port cures it.
Do you ever plan on covering the Suzuki GS 1000?
You missed a very important part of why they didn't sell. They were more expensive than any other 500cc motorcycle on the market. I remember the Suzuki dealer telling me that the factory was losing $30,000 per motorcycle.
Piston engine tuning mafia killed the RE5,same thing 25 years later,suspension specialists mafia killed the TL's unique rear suspension..
The electric craze is already going down, and with the still ongoing prices in batteries and supply chain issues in microchips, I'm fairly positive, it will never go away as manufacturers keep on installing more chip computers into fridges, microwave ovens, clocks, bicycles, buttplugs, who knows. The demand in microchips will keep on going up as the regulators push for more safety semsors and tech with diminishing returns. While the idea of a safer and smarter future does seem appealing, good old fashioned simplicity and reliability will keep on gaining value. Anyone remember John Deere and the right to repair?
So back to the original question about whether or not rotarys will make a comeback? Somehow mazda has made them clean enough for car use, I believe they can be made to work in motorcycles too.
Jesus Christ TH-cam. Six fucking ad breaks.
Liquid piston rotary design shows real promise.
Bart posts. I watch. Simple as that
Nice video
As much as i like the idea of the rotary engine it will never be a winning concept.
The reason is that in relation to the volume of the combustion chamber it has too much combustion chamber wall surface area. This wall surface area is where heat escapes into the cooling system instead of being used to drive the engine. The consequence is that in terms of thermodynamic efficiency it can never win from a conventional ICE engine.
And there is also the oil consumption that prevents it (like 2stroke engines) from getting good exhaust emissions like a 4stroke ICE.
Suzuki was a real mess in the 70's. Early in the decade, they fielded a series of two stroke triples (their GT series) capped by the GT750, aka the 'Water Buffalo' as it was the only two stroke with liquid cooling at the time. Unfortunately, two strokes were on the way out due to emission concerns and of all the Japanese 'Big 4', Suzuki was the last to finally work on a true 4-stroke multi cylinder replacement for its line-up. In hindsight, the foray into the Wankel really put Suzuki at a disadvantage with regard to finally adopting a class-leading, performance focused, 4-stroke engine. Suzuki's GT series (multiple displacements) ran from 1972 to 1976, overlapping the RE5 model. This fact probably didn't help the RE5 gain much market share, which had become very crowded by the mid-70's. As you noted, the Wankel was very complicated, but also made for a relatively heavy bike for its displacement (563 lbs. vs 482 lbs. for the GT750 and the all-new Gold Wing tipping the scales at a competitive 584 lbs.) For all the Japanese makes and models on offer at the time, even the slightest negative reports would probably have been enough to sink any new technology equipped motorcycle.
As to your musings on any potential Wankel rebirth, I seriously doubt there has really been technological advancements to warrant an effort by the motorcycle industry to dive into this form of motive power again. Look how long Mazda has been toiling on this type of engine. The RX5 has had a few rebirths using a Wankel, but they've yet to realize a vehicle that outperforms any other engine technology. I do like the notion of looking at specific motorcycle models that didn't quite make the cut. Perhaps you could do another video on something like Yamaha's XS750 (aka, the Foam Boat).
I think you're way off base with the public perception of rotary engines. Not because they have a positive perception, but because I think the only perception they will have *at all* will be from Mazda's RX cars. Their commubities have a running gag of requiring rebuilding constantly so it's not exactly a glowing endorsement of rotary technology.
I've always thought the rotary engines specific desire to run at high RPM with little variation would make them great generator motors, so I could easily imagine them in a hybrid, but I don't know how much engineering and development that would require.
Suzuki thinking: If it is difficult, don't do it. It has to be almost impossible to achieve. So we just make it close to impossible, even if we don't have to!
servicing nightmare, changing the vanes is a weekend job and has to be done every 5000 miles, you cant make the engine higher CC as there is nowhere for the carbs, filters, etc
The rotary engine will never make a comeback. It has too many problems that cannot be corrected. Fuel and oil consumption are the two main factors. In order to ensure the longevity of the Apex seals it must burn some oil. This is counterproductive considering today's smog control measures.
Smaller than a 4-cylinder, the power of a good 6-cylinder, and the fuel economy of a poorly-maintained 8-cylinder!
Not just the many problems, imo the concept is fundamentally flawed. The combustion pushes into a wedge like corner, so you never get to nearly use the same power from any single explosion a piston engine does. Don't tell the Wankelbros I said this please, they can be quite vindicative.
Well they live on in military drones
oil consumption is already mostly solved(you can't use oil in hydrogen burning engines because hydrogen would attack the oil film so mazda needed a different solution in the form of ceramic apex seals), what remains now is fuel consumption, the remaining emissions issues and the problems introduced by ceramic apex seals
in the 1970's Suzuki held back and let Honda and Kawasaki spend money on R&D, then Suzuki improved on their successes. Innovation (like the rotary) was not their strong suit.
I remember this bike. Almost bought almost bought it
And that fantastic technology, is why we are all riding and driving Rotary Engines to this day... except...we're not
The rotary was dead on arrival.
The RE was pushed out too early. It wasn't ready and it made a bad impression. None the less, a motorcycle is the LAST thing that needs to be electrified. There are so few of them in relation to cars and they are inherently far more fuel efficient. I had an RX8 and I liked it and also I hated it. It was cool and flakey. Just not enough of anything good to overcome the excessive service and maintenance requirements. The Wankel design has a lot of potential as do a lot of the newer rotary designs. I think in time we may see a fully refined rotary powered motorcycle, maybe a hybrid se up that can leverage the size of a rotary combustion engine with the power distribution of a battery electric system. But it needs a clutch. If you can't shift, it isn't worth riding 🙂.
surface finish is a big deal. Im working on finish to help a human powered sled go slightly faster on ice.
at this point - like it or not - electric (or some development of usable hydrogen technology in the distant future) seems like the way all transportation is going. Retooling from one form of internal combustion to another seems counter to the thinking of corporate planners. And I don't think some independent start up could have the capital to develop a revolutionary form of motivation - unless a Musk or Beezos suddenly got the two-wheel bug.
Dude having a cigarette after getting off his wenkel😀
Nope, not a chance they will come back. Those RE5's often used more than 30 miles per gallon. Most family cars can better than today.
Also rotaries burn a small amount of oil for the same reason two strokes do, this creates emission problems. Despite working on the seals problem for over a decade, Mazda's MX30 is the first rotary in over 11years, keep an eye on that one...
Yes, I do think rotary engines could make a comeback for motorcycles. Despite being a fan of electric cars, I don't see how electric bikes make sense - too much battery, too heavy, to short a range - if the range could be solved then maybe but I don't see that happening any time soon. Basically - the gold standard of motorcycling will be some kind of light weight nuclear isotope that delivers unlimited power to a perfectly proportioned chasis and associated systems - when that will happen I don't know, in the meantime - ride a Hayabusa - it's the best.
I want a water buffalo wicked bad.
That wanker who pitched his butt in the advert is one of the _real_ reasons people are out against smokers. You get really sick and tired of going somewhere, anywhere, everywhere and there are old cigarette butts lying on the ground wherever you look. I was a smoker for half my life and it pisses _me_ off.
I feel like today more than ever people want to have a reliable n low maintenance motorcycle not the exotic one ... probably has to do with biker getting older on average.
Howdy Bart
I would guess that ugly weird dash binnacle was 90% of the reason it was a sales flop 😂
The oil crisis didn't really affect Australia l can remember petrol been 50c a gallon in the 1970s and l ride and owned Suzuki motorcycles and l had a GT750 but my brother owned a RE 5 he owned the second generation which dropped the termous flask tail light and instrument cluster also the tennis ball indicators and l rode the RE 5 and for performance it would blow my GT750 into the weeds l rode it to work one day and hit 140kph on the Sydney Harbour Bridge my dream was to do 160kph on the Sydney Harbour Bridge l nearly did that l wasn't watching the speedometer that day fortunately no Police around but the RE 5 nearly sent Suzuki broke
Also rotary engines and emission control just doesnt work look at the mazda rx8 it was a flop because of them under powered and very poor reliability due to emissions control
The GS engines with 2 valves per cylinder were so over engineered and the GS850g is a great bike that could do 100000 miles abused to hell and had shaft drive. Whether its the GS twins of up to 500cc or GS550 to GS1000 inline fours those engines were so strong and some 1000s of suzuki were made into drag bikes on NO2 and ethanol to race at Santa Pod and got well over 200bhp with 8 ish second standing 1/4 miles.
Suzuki were leaders in two strokes, but only because they stole the tech from MZ!
Megloa video soon?
I be leave the Rotary can be re-engineered with modern seals and full injection.
wait a second.. Fluump?
Oh hey I have one of those
forget rotary. bring back an air cooled inline six or at least the suzuki stratosphere
guess what? Its still just the internal combustion engine 😂
sure, this is a non-AI intelligent commenter. the advantage of the current engines is the SOUND . machos want a good " beast " sound. look at Harley correctly patenting - or trying to patent their sound.
Wnakel didn't see massive production success because it's not better than either 2 or 4 stroke there I said it eat ship
I don't know but the Rotary engine in motorcycles have been cursed to flop. Either the bike turned out to be flop or it took down the whole company 😅. No1 wants a rotary engine in bikes atleast even today because today bikes are getting expensive with advanced electronics,safety package, complying with emissions norms etc so no1 in their right minds would put a rotary engine in a bike in 2024-25 because it will just just cause the bike to cost a bomb to manufacture and sell later on. It would be a disaster.
Rotor engines are stupid great idea from a German engineer that was set out to prove a point but in practice non-practical not as efficient and still not as reliable yeah it’s smooth, but it’s not smoother than the car nowadays with the regular engine because RD has not stopped in thosetype of engines so I don’t believe we’ll see anything and I don’t think anybody cares about him
The Honda 750 came out in 69
Jet engine fuel mileage, 125cc 4stroke torque and Volkswagen oil consumption
An RX7 with no engine has more value than a new one
The early RE5 was so ugly. The cylindrical gauge pod looked like Rhoda's head, the maid on "The Jetson's" cartoon. That said, I have read that the chassis design on the RE5 was the basis for the GS750 and GS1000 chassis. Those 4 cylinder bikes were generally known as the first Japanese "Superbike" with superior handling. That is at least a legacy of the RE5.
The Wankel bankrupted Arctic Cat. Suzuki stepped in and made two strokes for Arctic Cat. I understand that Suzuki became a partner of Arctic Cat.
They Had problems with the Sea
L
WANKEL is pronounced vuncle..
The Wankel isn't a rotary engine.