3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002) 1993-2002 Discussion including performance modifications and Technical Support Sections.
Sponsored by:

"It's Back" 2016 RX7

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-19-14, 01:01 PM
  #101  
Full Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Evil_Sephiroth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Lavagna (GE) Italy
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Very Little Money compared to FD ...don't know if I am happy or not....
Old 02-19-14, 01:09 PM
  #102  
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary

iTrader: (17)
 
neit_jnf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Around
Posts: 3,895
Received 175 Likes on 129 Posts
The RX-8 as large as it is (compared to the FD) with 2+2 doors and good space for 4 people is pretty light at 2900-3060 lbs depending on model. If Mazda offered a shortened wheelbase 2 door 2 seat coupe RX-8 and made the engine all aluminum it could have reached 26-2700 lbs.

In the new Miata chassis a coupe version RX-X with aluminum rotary could easily be 21-2400 lbs don't you think?
Old 02-19-14, 01:15 PM
  #103  
Lives on the Forum

iTrader: (8)
 
thewird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 6,591
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
No because cars having been getting heavier throughout the years due to safety regulations. So its extremely unlikely you'll see anything under 2,600 lbs. Full race trim NB/NC miata's still weight around 2,300 lbs. Our rotary powered NB miata's weight about 2,300 lbs without driver.

thewird
Old 02-19-14, 01:27 PM
  #104  
Moderator

iTrader: (3)
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,778
Received 2,563 Likes on 1,823 Posts
Originally Posted by HiWire
I actually like the RX-8. But it's a camel car – if they had made it as a 2-door, 2-seater, with the attendant rigidity and weight reduction advantages, it would have made a better sports car with more attractive proportions and better performance..
the Rx8 does look weird, but the rear door/seat is actually hugely practical in the real world. its also way more rigid than the FD, although shortening it would probably make it even more so

Originally Posted by ZDan
I would have bought an RX-8 instead of my S2000 if the fuel mileage weren't so horrendous. I was commuting 70-100 miles/day at the time...
the mileage is the worst thing about the car.
Old 02-19-14, 01:47 PM
  #105  
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary

iTrader: (17)
 
neit_jnf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Around
Posts: 3,895
Received 175 Likes on 129 Posts
well the 2014 Mazda3 is about 2800 lbs, the 6 3200 lbs and the CX-5 32-3500 lbs.

these are large cars compared to the FD, RX-8 and Miata and comply with all safety regulations and got TopSafety+ ratings. Mazda is good at keeping cars light.

Also a coupe body is inherently lighter than the same convertible model so if the new Miata ends up being 2400lbs a coupe version could be the same or lighter.
Old 02-19-14, 04:16 PM
  #106  
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary

iTrader: (17)
 
neit_jnf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Around
Posts: 3,895
Received 175 Likes on 129 Posts
look at this:

Toyota stalling FR-S engine upgrade due to poor sales? | New and Used Car Reviews, Research & Automotive-Industry News & LeftLaneNews

A Toyota executive may have doused cold water on hopes of a turbocharged Scion FR-S/Subaru BRZ, citing poor sales in all markets.

"A faster version of that car would be at the top of most people's wish lists, but like the cabriolet, it is hard to justify a business case to push either model into production based on the current sales," Toyota's VP of European R&D, Gerald Killman, told Auto Express.
Old 02-19-14, 04:44 PM
  #107  
Rotary Enthusiast

iTrader: (9)
 
$lacker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,087
Received 15 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by getgone
I'm not dissing anyone's desires, but you are not going to get 350 hp to the asphalt in a 2700-2800 pound car. And a manufacturer would be insane to put that in the hands of the average motorist. I think 300 hp in a 2700 pound car is the outside with some form of launch control, and Mazda could build that if the economics ever made sense.
In a modern car with ABS, launch control is a no brainier and should cost the manufacturer effectively nothing to implement
Old 02-19-14, 05:21 PM
  #108  
Time or Money, Pick one

iTrader: (36)
 
silverTRD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Torrance, ca.
Posts: 3,346
Received 154 Likes on 125 Posts
I think it will be an interesting next few years to see where the industry is moving too because on the one hand, the safety regulations are getting stricter so cars are getting heavier, but on the other hand the vast majority wants better mileage so weight management plays a huge roll. We'll just have to wait and see. I'm not gonna speculate about what a corporation is planning, it never makes sense to us logical ones anyhow.
Old 02-19-14, 05:33 PM
  #109  
Cheap Bastard

iTrader: (2)
 
adam c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Luis Obispo, Ca
Posts: 8,370
Received 50 Likes on 42 Posts
Originally Posted by neit_jnf
The RX-8 as large as it is (compared to the FD) with 2+2 doors and good space for 4 people ..............

I went to look at an RX8 when they first came out. I was not able to sit in the back seat without my head being up against the roof. I'm just over 5' 10". I dont agree with good space for 4 people.

I'm not really sure why the RX8 is part of this discussion. It isnt anything like an FD, and wont be anything like the next RX7.
Old 02-19-14, 05:50 PM
  #110  
Junior Member
 
T-R-C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ZoomZoom
I think we have seen the Rotary come to the end of its time
It was an interesting alternative engine design that had its place in history.

Possibly the same as the Steam engine but not nearly as popular or proven. Even that engine design gave way to progress.

Even if it can hold on another model or two I think it is destined to decline further into obscurity and surcumb to emissions and political mandates.

Even if you get another motor it looks to be marginalized and weak substitute for what it's enthusiasts really want.
Rinse and repeat. This has been stated for 6 decades.
Old 02-19-14, 06:34 PM
  #111  
Rotary Enthusiast

 
HiWire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,499
Received 211 Likes on 148 Posts
The Porsche Cayman S is a good example of the modern driver's car (2,910 lbs, 325 hp / 273 lb-ft).

The Porsche 911 Turbo S (991) has 560 horsepower and 516 lb-ft of torque and goes 0-60 mph in 2.9 seconds.

Now imagine a Cayman with a turbo engine (yes, I know there are tuning companies that do this).

Why doesn't Porsche make the Cayman Turbo? Money. Notice they don't fret about emissions or their poor fuel economy, either – Porsche cars are efficient in terms of power and displacement, each new engine features lower emissions, and their business model is profitable.

My buddy is looking to replace his Hyundai Genesis Coupe with a BMW 235i. He's an even more hardcore driver than I am – he tried the Scion FR-S and found the engine power deficient. Mazda doesn't make anything he wants.

To me, handling is the #1 criteria in a car. That doesn't just mean slalom speeds, g figures on the skidpad or some other benchmark number – I mean it has to drive the way I like. The FD does that and it goes fast, stops hard, and looks like a million bucks.

In other news: I saw the new Corvette Z06 (with Z07 aero package) at a car show and it left me cold, aesthetically. The SRT Viper is much more exciting to me, even though it has that large lump of an engine under the extra-long hood.
Old 02-19-14, 06:47 PM
  #112  
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary

iTrader: (17)
 
neit_jnf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Around
Posts: 3,895
Received 175 Likes on 129 Posts
Originally Posted by adam c
I went to look at an RX8 when they first came out. I was not able to sit in the back seat without my head being up against the roof. I'm just over 5' 10". I dont agree with good space for 4 people.

I'm not really sure why the RX8 is part of this discussion. It isnt anything like an FD, and wont be anything like the next RX7.
different builds I guess. I'm a little over 5'8" and fit just fine in the back of the drivers seat after adjusting it myself as the driver... so 4 250lbs 5'8" or so people can fit comfortably.

RX-8 discussion came about because there seems to be a lot of hate for it and the rumors indicate a light NA 250ish hp next rotary so it fits the discussion.

it's also light for the size and space so it can be used as a base to imagine a future RX-anything if you make it 2 door 2 seat shorter wheelbase.

same as using an imagined elongated coupe miata to come up with a possible weight size for the next RX.
Old 02-19-14, 08:27 PM
  #113  
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
 
MisterX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Another state obliterated by leftists
Posts: 208
Received 538 Likes on 270 Posts
Originally Posted by neit_jnf
look at this:

Toyota stalling FR-S engine upgrade due to poor sales? | New and Used Car Reviews, Research & Automotive-Industry News & LeftLaneNews

A Toyota executive may have doused cold water on hopes of a turbocharged Scion FR-S/Subaru BRZ, citing poor sales in all markets.

"A faster version of that car would be at the top of most people's wish lists, but like the cabriolet, it is hard to justify a business case to push either model into production based on the current sales," Toyota's VP of European R&D, Gerald Killman, told Auto Express.
That's a surprising statement given that FR-S sold over 11,000 & over 18,000 in calendar year '12 & '13, respectively. The BRZ 's numbers are far less : 4100 and 8600. Total 'em up and in the second year they did about 27,000 cars in the U.S. market. Afterall, they weren't expecting Mustang-like sales were they?
Old 02-19-14, 08:37 PM
  #114  
Rotary Enthusiast

 
HiWire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,499
Received 211 Likes on 148 Posts
For comparison

Ford Mustang:

2005 - 160,975
2006 - 166,530
2007 - 134,626
2008 - 91,251
2009 - 66,623
2010 - 73,716
2011 - 70,438
2012 - 82,995
2013 - 77,186


Nissan 240SX:

1989 - 68118
1990 - 60582
1991 - 34534
1992 - 27033
1993 - 21471
1994 - 1391
1995 - 25114
1996 - 7334
1997 - 3655
1998 - 2178

The market is out there, but you have newer players with wildly different platforms like Subaru, Hyundai, and even Mini getting their share. There is still some crossover with the "sporty coupe" as well. The Acura Integra, Mitsubishi Eclipse, and Toyota Celica may be gone, but people still buy things like the Altima Coupe for some reason.
Old 02-20-14, 09:30 AM
  #115  
Rotor Head Extreme

iTrader: (8)
 
t-von's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Midland Texas
Posts: 6,719
Likes: 0
Received 26 Likes on 17 Posts
Originally Posted by adam c

I went to look at an RX8 when they first came out. I was not able to sit in the back seat without my head being up against the roof. I'm just over 5' 10". I dont agree with good space for 4 people.

I'm not really sure why the RX8 is part of this discussion. It isnt anything like an FD, and wont be anything like the next RX7.

You must have a long torso. I'm 6' and my head didn't hit. I actually found the back seat of the Rx8 more comfortable than my cousins 2012 5.0 Mustang.
Old 02-20-14, 10:32 AM
  #116  
Moderator

iTrader: (3)
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,778
Received 2,563 Likes on 1,823 Posts
Originally Posted by neit_jnf
these are large cars compared to the FD, RX-8 and Miata and comply with all safety regulations and got TopSafety+ ratings. Mazda is good at keeping cars light.
they never have advertised this, but the rotary cars have all had top safety ratings. even the FC is 4 star, like its contemporary Volvo's.

Originally Posted by HiWire
Why doesn't Porsche make the Cayman Turbo? Money. Notice they don't fret about emissions or their poor fuel economy, either – Porsche cars are efficient in terms of power and displacement, each new engine features lower emissions, and their business model is profitable..
my dad has an older Boxster, and they don't advertise this either, but it gets 30mpg on the freeway.

my pro boxster thinking is that, it looks like a Porsche, smells like a Porsche*, sounds like a Porsche, and the top goes down, what more do you want in a car?

my anti boxster thinking is that back to back my FC convertible was better put together, and more reliable, and with the FD we used to seek out Boxsters, because the owners always thought they were fast, but the FD will just decimate a Boxster, or Boxster S.


* the garage smells like leather, its a low mile car, give it another year and it'll be mixing that with burning oil
Old 02-21-14, 04:11 AM
  #117  
Full Member
 
Bwarrrrrp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HiWire
Why doesn't Porsche make the Cayman Turbo?
Because 911.
Old 02-21-14, 03:30 PM
  #118  
Full Member

 
thegemini's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Phoenix AZ
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
I wonder if the styling is going to be based off this " Hazumi " Concept that will be on display
at the Geneva show next month.

Mazda Hazumi previews new supermini - Telegraph
Old 02-21-14, 03:43 PM
  #119  
Rotary Enthusiast

iTrader: (66)
 
Bryan Jacobs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: where the wild things roam
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
When I see it I will believe it. Until then I ain't holdin my breath.
Old 02-23-14, 04:50 PM
  #120  
Rotary Enthusiast

 
HiWire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,499
Received 211 Likes on 148 Posts
Mazda would love to sell with the same numbers they saw in the FB and FC glory years... it's important to remember that the RX has to appeal to rotary lovers and newcomers alike:

From this thread: https://www.rx7club.com/general-rota...uction-162883/

RX-7 production numbers:

1st Generation (FB)
1978 72,683
1979 71,617
1980 56,317
1981 55,321
1982 59,686
1983 57,864
1984 63,959
1985 33,562


2nd Generation (FC)
1985 29,543
1986 72,760
1987 52,204
1988 34,592
1989 37,624
1990 29,411
1991 15,648
1992 245


3rd Generation (FD)
1991 975
1992 26,654
1993 6,801
1994 5,962
1995 5,202
1996 4,762
1997 3,556
1998 1,423
1999 4,151


Total 1st Gen 471,009
Total 2nd Gen 272,027
Total 3rd Gen 59,486 (as of the end of 1999)

Grand Total 802,522


Source: Brian Long, RX-7: Mazda's Rotary Engine Sports Car, 2001
Old 02-23-14, 10:59 PM
  #121  
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary

iTrader: (17)
 
neit_jnf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Around
Posts: 3,895
Received 175 Likes on 129 Posts
RX-8: 191,026 units (As of the end of Nov 2011)
Old 02-24-14, 12:26 PM
  #122  
Rotary Motoring

iTrader: (9)
 
BLUE TII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 8,209
Received 762 Likes on 505 Posts
In a modern car with ABS, launch control is a no brainier and should cost the manufacturer effectively nothing to implement

I love how Mazda implemented the Dynamic Stability Control in the RX-8. That is they made it always on at start up so they could get on with designing a car that didn't understeer like a pig in order to "be consumer safe" and fully defeatable.

My stock RX-8 has less understeer than my stock class FD did (though it had Gab R shocks- maybe stock R1 shocks were better?). I could never solve the stock class FD understeer.

I agree that launch control is the next step.
Old 02-24-14, 12:34 PM
  #123  
All out Track Freak!

iTrader: (263)
 
Fritz Flynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 416 Likes on 252 Posts
Originally Posted by BLUE TII
In a modern car with ABS, launch control is a no brainier and should cost the manufacturer effectively nothing to implement

I love how Mazda implemented the Dynamic Stability Control in the RX-8. That is they made it always on at start up so they could get on with designing a car that didn't understeer like a pig in order to "be consumer safe" and fully defeatable.

My stock RX-8 has less understeer than my stock class FD did (though it had Gab R shocks- maybe stock R1 shocks were better?). I could never solve the stock class FD understeer.

I agree that launch control is the next step.
The understeer is alignment

More camber less caster in the front and boom you have a car that will turn in. However with that said the 8 had a longer wheel base with equal susp setup and the engine was further back from the front axle so it will turn in better overall.
Old 02-24-14, 03:14 PM
  #124  
Rotary Motoring

iTrader: (9)
 
BLUE TII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 8,209
Received 762 Likes on 505 Posts
Well, ofc I had the front camber maxed.

Perhaps the FDs problem was it would get on/close to the bumpstops braking with slicks and then bam on the outside bumpstop on turn in.

The RX-8 might have this problem as well, except I am masking it by being on the gas on turn in lifting the front back up since it doesn't have any torque to upset the handling with early throttle on.

Plus, I am sure the 8s longer wheelbase and superior chassis dynamics help as you say.

I guess I would have to drive an FD R1 on original tires to make the claim it had some understeer designed in for safety.

However the fact it had dynamic toe sliding bushings seems to indicate that Mazda did try to make it a little "easier to drive" and that isn't defeated as easily with a switch.
Old 02-24-14, 04:46 PM
  #125  
All out Track Freak!

iTrader: (263)
 
Fritz Flynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 416 Likes on 252 Posts
I only run about 2.4 front camber on my track car with slicks/275 hoosiers so possibly too much camber

What size and kind of tire did you have to make you decide to go with max front camber?



Originally Posted by BLUE TII
Well, ofc I had the front camber maxed.

Perhaps the FDs problem was it would get on/close to the bumpstops braking with slicks and then bam on the outside bumpstop on turn in.

The RX-8 might have this problem as well, except I am masking it by being on the gas on turn in lifting the front back up since it doesn't have any torque to upset the handling with early throttle on.

Plus, I am sure the 8s longer wheelbase and superior chassis dynamics help as you say.

I guess I would have to drive an FD R1 on original tires to make the claim it had some understeer designed in for safety.

However the fact it had dynamic toe sliding bushings seems to indicate that Mazda did try to make it a little "easier to drive" and that isn't defeated as easily with a switch.


Quick Reply: "It's Back" 2016 RX7



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:27 AM.