rx8 test drive
10-19-03, 10:54 AM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Easton, PA
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 85rotarypower
I think you all miss the point. By reading this thread, you guys think that the RX-8 is the replacement for the 7
I think you all miss the point. By reading this thread, you guys think that the RX-8 is the replacement for the 7
not at all, we were debating the fall of the fd, not the rise of the 8, I think the 8 is an honest attempt to try and resurrect the rotary engine, nothing more.
10-19-03, 12:31 PM
#28
add to cart
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Saskatoon, SK & Montreal, PQ
Posts: 4,180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"It's Ford's Fault"
"It's Mazda's Fault"
It's both, and it's none.
Back in the 1st gen days Mazda exported the GSL-SE with an N/A 13B to give it more power while the JDM got a turbo'ed 12A. Why? Because in Japan there were repair shops on every corner who knew how to repair the engines, whereas North America needed something more bulletproof.
By the time the FD came around Japanese manufacturers were involved in a twin-turbo arms race. Had Mazda offered the FD with just, say, 180hp and no turbos, they'd have lost sales. So they stuffed a hot twin turbo system with spiderwebs of vacuum hoses, and paid the long-term-reliability price.
What killed the RX7 in North America was a huge sticker price and huge chances of blown engines by the average driver. Had Ford offered their engineering resources to Mazda (by which I mean their computers, etc. not that kid that designed the door handles on the new Mustang) the problem might have been avoided. Had Mazda not cobbled together the twin turbo system (designed by a contractor, not in-house) they might not have shot themselves in the foot. And had the public at the time been less ignorant of rotary engines and proper maintainance...
there's a lot of coulda-woulda-shoulda, but in the end the proof of the pudding is in the eating - the RX-7 stayed on successfully in Japan, design flaws were being overcome, and a small but dedicated group of engineers put in their own time to develop the Renisis.
"It's Mazda's Fault"
It's both, and it's none.
Back in the 1st gen days Mazda exported the GSL-SE with an N/A 13B to give it more power while the JDM got a turbo'ed 12A. Why? Because in Japan there were repair shops on every corner who knew how to repair the engines, whereas North America needed something more bulletproof.
By the time the FD came around Japanese manufacturers were involved in a twin-turbo arms race. Had Mazda offered the FD with just, say, 180hp and no turbos, they'd have lost sales. So they stuffed a hot twin turbo system with spiderwebs of vacuum hoses, and paid the long-term-reliability price.
What killed the RX7 in North America was a huge sticker price and huge chances of blown engines by the average driver. Had Ford offered their engineering resources to Mazda (by which I mean their computers, etc. not that kid that designed the door handles on the new Mustang) the problem might have been avoided. Had Mazda not cobbled together the twin turbo system (designed by a contractor, not in-house) they might not have shot themselves in the foot. And had the public at the time been less ignorant of rotary engines and proper maintainance...
there's a lot of coulda-woulda-shoulda, but in the end the proof of the pudding is in the eating - the RX-7 stayed on successfully in Japan, design flaws were being overcome, and a small but dedicated group of engineers put in their own time to develop the Renisis.
10-19-03, 04:15 PM
#30
brilliantly stupid
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockford, IL
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Manntis
"It's Ford's Fault"
"It's Mazda's Fault"
It's both, and it's none.
Back in the 1st gen days Mazda exported the GSL-SE with an N/A 13B to give it more power while the JDM got a turbo'ed 12A. Why? Because in Japan there were repair shops on every corner who knew how to repair the engines, whereas North America needed something more bulletproof.
By the time the FD came around Japanese manufacturers were involved in a twin-turbo arms race. Had Mazda offered the FD with just, say, 180hp and no turbos, they'd have lost sales. So they stuffed a hot twin turbo system with spiderwebs of vacuum hoses, and paid the long-term-reliability price.
What killed the RX7 in North America was a huge sticker price and huge chances of blown engines by the average driver. Had Ford offered their engineering resources to Mazda (by which I mean their computers, etc. not that kid that designed the door handles on the new Mustang) the problem might have been avoided. Had Mazda not cobbled together the twin turbo system (designed by a contractor, not in-house) they might not have shot themselves in the foot. And had the public at the time been less ignorant of rotary engines and proper maintainance...
there's a lot of coulda-woulda-shoulda, but in the end the proof of the pudding is in the eating - the RX-7 stayed on successfully in Japan, design flaws were being overcome, and a small but dedicated group of engineers put in their own time to develop the Renisis.
"It's Ford's Fault"
"It's Mazda's Fault"
It's both, and it's none.
Back in the 1st gen days Mazda exported the GSL-SE with an N/A 13B to give it more power while the JDM got a turbo'ed 12A. Why? Because in Japan there were repair shops on every corner who knew how to repair the engines, whereas North America needed something more bulletproof.
By the time the FD came around Japanese manufacturers were involved in a twin-turbo arms race. Had Mazda offered the FD with just, say, 180hp and no turbos, they'd have lost sales. So they stuffed a hot twin turbo system with spiderwebs of vacuum hoses, and paid the long-term-reliability price.
What killed the RX7 in North America was a huge sticker price and huge chances of blown engines by the average driver. Had Ford offered their engineering resources to Mazda (by which I mean their computers, etc. not that kid that designed the door handles on the new Mustang) the problem might have been avoided. Had Mazda not cobbled together the twin turbo system (designed by a contractor, not in-house) they might not have shot themselves in the foot. And had the public at the time been less ignorant of rotary engines and proper maintainance...
there's a lot of coulda-woulda-shoulda, but in the end the proof of the pudding is in the eating - the RX-7 stayed on successfully in Japan, design flaws were being overcome, and a small but dedicated group of engineers put in their own time to develop the Renisis.
10-20-03, 03:11 AM
#32
Originally posted by Manntis
repeat after me: THE RX-8 IS NOT A SPORTS CAR.
What 'less' is it accomplishing? Carrying capacity? nope. Reliability? definately not. Straight line acceleration? Maybe, but a used sportbike, by that logic, accomplishes the same, if not more than, an FD for 2-3 times less.
Comparing the RX-8 to an RX-7, irrespective of generation, is silly. It's a 4 door sports sedan. The only thing it has in common with the RX-7 is a rotary engine. Period. If it had a V-6 no one would talk about 'compared to an FD...'
In addition, any new car is going to cost more than a used car. An FD in North America is at least a few years old, and the FD has a reputation (partly deserved) for being unreliable, so of course it's going to sell for far below a brand new, warrantied vehicle.
The FD new cost more than the RX-8, so if comparing sticker prices be fair. The FD, FC, FB, and SA are all small sports cars that aren't even in the same market segment as the RX-8.
Compare the RX-8 against, say, the new BMW 3 series (a more direct comparison) and bang-for-the-buck becomes apparent.
repeat after me: THE RX-8 IS NOT A SPORTS CAR.
What 'less' is it accomplishing? Carrying capacity? nope. Reliability? definately not. Straight line acceleration? Maybe, but a used sportbike, by that logic, accomplishes the same, if not more than, an FD for 2-3 times less.
Comparing the RX-8 to an RX-7, irrespective of generation, is silly. It's a 4 door sports sedan. The only thing it has in common with the RX-7 is a rotary engine. Period. If it had a V-6 no one would talk about 'compared to an FD...'
In addition, any new car is going to cost more than a used car. An FD in North America is at least a few years old, and the FD has a reputation (partly deserved) for being unreliable, so of course it's going to sell for far below a brand new, warrantied vehicle.
The FD new cost more than the RX-8, so if comparing sticker prices be fair. The FD, FC, FB, and SA are all small sports cars that aren't even in the same market segment as the RX-8.
Compare the RX-8 against, say, the new BMW 3 series (a more direct comparison) and bang-for-the-buck becomes apparent.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
fastrx7man
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
33
09-02-15 09:42 PM