The RX-7 confirmed to be in the pipeline for 2017---RX-Vision Unveil!!
01-24-14, 04:01 PM
#1276
Rotary Freak
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: l.a.
Posts: 1,640
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lol. Spoken like someone who doesn't know all the different ways to mount a 3 rotor. Mine sits even lower in the fd engine bay than the rew and behind the rack. It's also NA so its lighter than the rew cause it doesn't have all the turbo related components. Others have been built 3 rotors in a similar fashion. No one that buys a 3 rotor cares about fuel efficiency. Same goes for those that buy Z06's, ZL1's, GT500's etc. If Mazda happens to give us 2 engine options, go buy the 16x and let the other people who want more and are willing to pay more, pay for the larger engine option.
and if you think people will buy a mazda with the same or worse fuel economy than the fd, you are out of your mind.
01-24-14, 04:57 PM
#1280
and guess what, no matter how far back you position a 3rotor, you can position a 4 cyl or v8 even further back.
and if you think people will buy a mazda with the same or worse fuel economy than the fd, you are out of your mind.
and if you think people will buy a mazda with the same or worse fuel economy than the fd, you are out of your mind.
No your the only person whinning about the fuel economy of a potential engine option. Did you not comprehend my last post to you??? I said let those that want more, pay more. And since I'm willing to pay more, and your obviously not, let me worry about the added total cost. Deal?
Now about that V8 being moved back further. Ok expert! Please explain to the rest of the class how that's possible? If you can't, I'm sure you will find a ton of examples over on our v8/other engine options threads here on this forum. Find me one example that has its engine sitting behind the factory rack placement in a fd while also doesn't have its firewall hacked to ****. Good luck with that.
01-24-14, 05:27 PM
#1281
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep the new 3 and 6 are very good cars 
Also I was wrong about the yen and the dollar has been getting stronger recently so that's likely helped them. I just remember it was pretty bad a while ago, like it only took 70 yen to buy a dollar and now it takes over a 100 which means Mazda's should cost the us/US less dollars.
Mazda has proven over and over that they can build good cars but when you are going up against other manufacturers who can build similar cars for less with stronger reputations you are painting yourself into a corner. Building a badass RX7 would really help their reputation BUT only if they can actually build a good one otherwise as with the RX8 they are treading water and ultimately shooting themselves in the foot. Same goes for the Miata, if it's just another Miata, well it's not going to sell, it must be a big improvement to compete.
Also I was wrong about the yen and the dollar has been getting stronger recently so that's likely helped them. I just remember it was pretty bad a while ago, like it only took 70 yen to buy a dollar and now it takes over a 100 which means Mazda's should cost the us/US less dollars.
Mazda has proven over and over that they can build good cars but when you are going up against other manufacturers who can build similar cars for less with stronger reputations you are painting yourself into a corner. Building a badass RX7 would really help their reputation BUT only if they can actually build a good one otherwise as with the RX8 they are treading water and ultimately shooting themselves in the foot. Same goes for the Miata, if it's just another Miata, well it's not going to sell, it must be a big improvement to compete.
I don't agree with you. Companies look their profits.
FD3S RX-7 Sale numbers
67,859
SE3P/FE RX-8 Sale Numbers
193,094
Now Toyota & Subaru shows us what Mazda did 10 years ago
If you produce a good car with a good price it is priceless but if it is expensive than m3 or near the porsche prices it is not a good marketing strategy. Now why GTR 35 hit the market because its Power = Price ratio
How many of you bought their FD's first owner ?
Mazda managed to sale 193.094 people to show and experienced a Rotary Engine. More people buy it and know it.
01-24-14, 07:55 PM
#1282
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Another state obliterated by leftists
Posts: 208
Received 538 Likes
on
270 Posts
I'm not sure why you're bringing up a pushrod engine into the conversation, as a "simple" powerplant like that has no business in anything other than a muscle car.
So, yes, the simpler choice would be one that would be the clear winner. Unless, the race was measured in fuel economy at 70 mph.
01-24-14, 08:12 PM
#1283
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Another state obliterated by leftists
Posts: 208
Received 538 Likes
on
270 Posts
The Mazda brand is looked down upon, as if they were lucky to have escalated from producing forklift engines and into mundane transportation and "econo" sportscars (Miata).
I think the best they could hope for would be to keep making fine, inexpensive cars to compete (and beat) directly against Honda and Toyota, all the while funding a racing program (e.g. rotary to battle for the overall Lemans win, and NOT the RX-8 tubeframe thing in some lower class), which would then lead to another 7, and not one which would go up against the crapbox BRZs and Nissan Zs, but a semi-exotic that would make companies like Ferrari (gasp) take notice.
01-24-14, 09:27 PM
#1284
Is it even realistic to think that whatever rotary platform Mazda may or may not produce would ever be named the rx7? I can't think of any examples where a company went backwards on a progressively marketed vehicle. That's like Nissan going from the 370z and next year selling the 350z or the ferrari 458 going to the 430, etc. Wouldn't that be admitting to everyone that, "hey, our rx8 tanked and was a mistake so we're going back to the rx7..."? I'd rather they just call it the rx9, keep it a rotary obvious since it's still a Rotary Experiment platform and do their best at being competitive in whatever market they aim at. Mazda, IMO, has turned into this ***** of a company with these econo sports cars they've been producing lately so it would be pretty neat if they produced something like an RX9 with a 3 rotor that could contend with these new corvettes, porsches, etc.
01-24-14, 10:29 PM
#1285
Full Member
Is it even realistic to think that whatever rotary platform Mazda may or may not produce would ever be named the rx7? I can't think of any examples where a company went backwards on a progressively marketed vehicle. That's like Nissan going from the 370z and next year selling the 350z or the ferrari 458 going to the 430, etc. Wouldn't that be admitting to everyone that, "hey, our rx8 tanked and was a mistake so we're going back to the rx7..."? I'd rather they just call it the rx9, keep it a rotary obvious since it's still a Rotary Experiment platform and do their best at being competitive in whatever market they aim at. Mazda, IMO, has turned into this ***** of a company with these econo sports cars they've been producing lately so it would be pretty neat if they produced something like an RX9 with a 3 rotor that could contend with these new corvettes, porsches, etc.
01-24-14, 11:12 PM
#1286
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 416 Likes
on
252 Posts
That strategy would never work. First, because customers of Porsche buy that brand because of prestige, exclusivity (due mostly to the ripoff price), and snob factor. Okay, 95% of them do; the rest are true enthusiasts who know the company's race history, and may actually track the car or at least drive it to 7 or 8/10ths on the street.
The Mazda brand is looked down upon, as if they were lucky to have escalated from producing forklift engines and into mundane transportation and "econo" sportscars (Miata).
I think the best they could hope for would be to keep making fine, inexpensive cars to compete (and beat) directly against Honda and Toyota, all the while funding a racing program (e.g. rotary to battle for the overall Lemans win, and NOT the RX-8 tubeframe thing in some lower class), which would then lead to another 7, and not one which would go up against the crapbox BRZs and Nissan Zs, but a semi-exotic that would make companies like Ferrari (gasp) take notice.
The Mazda brand is looked down upon, as if they were lucky to have escalated from producing forklift engines and into mundane transportation and "econo" sportscars (Miata).
I think the best they could hope for would be to keep making fine, inexpensive cars to compete (and beat) directly against Honda and Toyota, all the while funding a racing program (e.g. rotary to battle for the overall Lemans win, and NOT the RX-8 tubeframe thing in some lower class), which would then lead to another 7, and not one which would go up against the crapbox BRZs and Nissan Zs, but a semi-exotic that would make companies like Ferrari (gasp) take notice.
Ford saved them a few times lets see how they do on their own. So far they are in big trouble but as seen recently they have turned it around and hopefully that will continue and we will one day see another rotary car.
My suggestion is to simply commit to the cars you produce and continually improve them or emulate the way Porsche is constantly improving and marketing their cars.
As Pete mentioned the dude from Mazda comes to the race track surrounded by enthusiast who are enjoying one of the best sports cars ever built and he doesn't even recognize it....... WTF...... FAIL!
PS The miata is probably the biggest selling sports car of all time and they have finally managed to eff that one up as well. Hopefully they really will build a light weight 200 plus HP miata otherwise it's not going to sell.
01-24-14, 11:51 PM
#1287
That strategy would never work. First, because customers of Porsche buy that brand because of prestige, exclusivity (due mostly to the ripoff price), and snob factor. Okay, 95% of them do; the rest are true enthusiasts who know the company's race history, and may actually track the car or at least drive it to 7 or 8/10ths on the street.
The Mazda brand is looked down upon, as if they were lucky to have escalated from producing forklift engines and into mundane transportation and "econo" sportscars (Miata).
I think the best they could hope for would be to keep making fine, inexpensive cars to compete (and beat) directly against Honda and Toyota, all the while funding a racing program (e.g. rotary to battle for the overall Lemans win, and NOT the RX-8 tubeframe thing in some lower class), which would then lead to another 7, and not one which would go up against the crapbox BRZs and Nissan Zs, but a semi-exotic that would make companies like Ferrari (gasp) take notice.
The Mazda brand is looked down upon, as if they were lucky to have escalated from producing forklift engines and into mundane transportation and "econo" sportscars (Miata).
I think the best they could hope for would be to keep making fine, inexpensive cars to compete (and beat) directly against Honda and Toyota, all the while funding a racing program (e.g. rotary to battle for the overall Lemans win, and NOT the RX-8 tubeframe thing in some lower class), which would then lead to another 7, and not one which would go up against the crapbox BRZs and Nissan Zs, but a semi-exotic that would make companies like Ferrari (gasp) take notice.
You do realize that the first Porsches were sold without any brand prestige right? They've earned their sale price by building something special for decades.
01-25-14, 03:31 AM
#1288
Smells like 2 stroke.
It's appalling to me how threads on this forum get so messed up. Were comparing the RX-7 (actually all iterations of the mazda rotary sports car, SA through FE) with the likes of Lotus, the Corvette Z06, Ferrari, the GTR, the BRZ/FRS/86, LFA, etc. And alas even porsche and the miata!
I've driven many diverse cars in a short amount of time; Among them the notable ones were the GSL-SE FB, Shinka RX-8, Jaguar XKR R performance, and the Ferrari 458. My daily is a Z/28 LS1, T56 Camaro, my weekend fun car/project is an N/A FC. To me, from a driver's standpoint horsepower is relative to the amount you are able to realistically use on a day to day basis. (I'm not talking about track days.) Cornering is relative to weather conditions and how 'ballsy' or 'spirited' you are with the car you're in. To me, mazda faught hard with each of their cars to find the perfect balance of power and cornering ability- and in the process, refined the vehicle as a whole. (I.e. Made the vehicle marketable to the average enthusiast.). They've done this with each series of rotary sports car, from 1978 until 2013. Admittedly, when the spirit R RX-8 came out, the Renesis 13B was "stale" because while the RX-8 changed, the Renesis 13B didn't. In every generation of the RX-7 the rotary engine had to become better in every concievable way, except for longevity which seems to be lacking in the FD- in favor of more power. The 16X claims to be "all that" in a compact little package- its supposed to weigh less, make more power, and get better fuel milage.
Remember, 16X only has to knock comparable engines out of the water, not the LS7. I think some people need to look where we've come from. Compare apples to apples. Not sports cars to supercars.
I've driven many diverse cars in a short amount of time; Among them the notable ones were the GSL-SE FB, Shinka RX-8, Jaguar XKR R performance, and the Ferrari 458. My daily is a Z/28 LS1, T56 Camaro, my weekend fun car/project is an N/A FC. To me, from a driver's standpoint horsepower is relative to the amount you are able to realistically use on a day to day basis. (I'm not talking about track days.) Cornering is relative to weather conditions and how 'ballsy' or 'spirited' you are with the car you're in. To me, mazda faught hard with each of their cars to find the perfect balance of power and cornering ability- and in the process, refined the vehicle as a whole. (I.e. Made the vehicle marketable to the average enthusiast.). They've done this with each series of rotary sports car, from 1978 until 2013. Admittedly, when the spirit R RX-8 came out, the Renesis 13B was "stale" because while the RX-8 changed, the Renesis 13B didn't. In every generation of the RX-7 the rotary engine had to become better in every concievable way, except for longevity which seems to be lacking in the FD- in favor of more power. The 16X claims to be "all that" in a compact little package- its supposed to weigh less, make more power, and get better fuel milage.
Remember, 16X only has to knock comparable engines out of the water, not the LS7. I think some people need to look where we've come from. Compare apples to apples. Not sports cars to supercars.
01-25-14, 06:57 AM
#1289
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's appalling to me how threads on this forum get so messed up. Were comparing the RX-7 (actually all iterations of the mazda rotary sports car, SA through FE) with the likes of Lotus, the Corvette Z06, Ferrari, the GTR, the BRZ/FRS/86, LFA, etc. And alas even porsche and the miata!
I've driven many diverse cars in a short amount of time; Among them the notable ones were the GSL-SE FB, Shinka RX-8, Jaguar XKR R performance, and the Ferrari 458. My daily is a Z/28 LS1, T56 Camaro, my weekend fun car/project is an N/A FC. To me, from a driver's standpoint horsepower is relative to the amount you are able to realistically use on a day to day basis. (I'm not talking about track days.) Cornering is relative to weather conditions and how 'ballsy' or 'spirited' you are with the car you're in. To me, mazda faught hard with each of their cars to find the perfect balance of power and cornering ability- and in the process, refined the vehicle as a whole. (I.e. Made the vehicle marketable to the average enthusiast.). They've done this with each series of rotary sports car, from 1978 until 2013. Admittedly, when the spirit R RX-8 came out, the Renesis 13B was "stale" because while the RX-8 changed, the Renesis 13B didn't. In every generation of the RX-7 the rotary engine had to become better in every concievable way, except for longevity which seems to be lacking in the FD- in favor of more power. The 16X claims to be "all that" in a compact little package- its supposed to weigh less, make more power, and get better fuel milage.
Remember, 16X only has to knock comparable engines out of the water, not the LS7. I think some people need to look where we've come from. Compare apples to apples. Not sports cars to supercars.
I've driven many diverse cars in a short amount of time; Among them the notable ones were the GSL-SE FB, Shinka RX-8, Jaguar XKR R performance, and the Ferrari 458. My daily is a Z/28 LS1, T56 Camaro, my weekend fun car/project is an N/A FC. To me, from a driver's standpoint horsepower is relative to the amount you are able to realistically use on a day to day basis. (I'm not talking about track days.) Cornering is relative to weather conditions and how 'ballsy' or 'spirited' you are with the car you're in. To me, mazda faught hard with each of their cars to find the perfect balance of power and cornering ability- and in the process, refined the vehicle as a whole. (I.e. Made the vehicle marketable to the average enthusiast.). They've done this with each series of rotary sports car, from 1978 until 2013. Admittedly, when the spirit R RX-8 came out, the Renesis 13B was "stale" because while the RX-8 changed, the Renesis 13B didn't. In every generation of the RX-7 the rotary engine had to become better in every concievable way, except for longevity which seems to be lacking in the FD- in favor of more power. The 16X claims to be "all that" in a compact little package- its supposed to weigh less, make more power, and get better fuel milage.
Remember, 16X only has to knock comparable engines out of the water, not the LS7. I think some people need to look where we've come from. Compare apples to apples. Not sports cars to supercars.
After Series 2 RX-8 Renesis 13bmsp has changed lots of things maybe you didn't heard.
CONFIRMED MECHANICAL CHANGES FOR SERIES II RX-8 2009~2011
All New Powertrain Control Module (PCM) with TEMPERATURE SENSOR newly added and built into the PCM, when ETC (Engine Compartment Temperature) reaches 230F or 100C with Ignition OFF, Medium Cooling Fans Switch ON.
New Larger Genuine Oil Filter and Repositioned On Front Timing Cover Housing To-wards The Sump (Left Hand Side). USE GENUINE 09 SERIES II OIL FILTER ONLY.
Revised Oil Filler and Dip Stick (Longer Type).
New EMOP "Electric Metering Oil Pumps" Two of them... Internal Oil Pressure in EMOP's is between 7.3 and 21.7 PSI (Used for the first time by Mazda)
New Design Oil Injection Nozzles 3 per Rotor Housing..Totalling 6.
New Oil Pump Assembly.
50% Higher Oil Pressure Rate at 100 oC (121oF) @3000 RPM...500 kPa {5.10 kgf/cm2, 72.5 psi} When compared to Series 1 RX-8.
New Oil Pressure sensor (Located on #1 EMOP).
Larger Oil Pan Sump Capacity.
New Hex (8mm) Type Sump Drain Plug.
New Internal Oil/Sump Pan Magnet...(First Time Used In A Rotary Engine Since 1985 FC RX-7)
New External Silver Plate Engine Sump Guard.
New Inlet Manifold with Changed APV Position Sensors.
Revised 4 Fuel Injection Nozzles (2 Primary, 2 Secondary). (Series I six Port Engine had 6 FI Nozzles).
Revised Atmospheric Air Control Solenoid (Near Throttle Body)
New Fuel Pump.
New Radiator Core.
New Radiator Electric Fan Motors.
Revised Radiator Fans Speeds from 2 to 3 Speeds. (Low, Middle, High).
New Alternator.
New Starter Motor.
New Battery 80D26L. (80 AMP Hour) (Was 50D22L (50AH) or 75D26L (75AH) in Series I)
New Exhaust System.
New Yaw Rate Sensor Unit.
New Air Conditioner Temperature Controller (Amplifier).
New Bridgestone RE050A's in 18" and 19" (R3).
New Manual Transmission (6 speed MX-5/Miata) (Reverse is now next to 1st gear not next to 6th gear).
New Differential Ratio (Manual).
New Differential Fixing Plate Washer on PPF (Power Plant Frame).
Changed Throw Out Bearing (Thrust or Fork Bearing).
Revised Oil Coolers, Air Intakes and Oil Cooler Hose Lines.
Extra Rotor Knock Sensor (Now 1 per Rotor, Total Of 2).
New Water Pump/ New Timing Cover to suit.
New Water Pump Pulley.
New Water Pump "O" Ring as Gasket.
New Spark Plug Leads.
New Ignition Coil Backing/Mounting Plate (looks ventilated or holed)
New Alternator/Air Compressor Drive Belts.
Revised Eccentric Shaft (Crankshaft) Pulley.
Revised Oxygen Sensor (CAT).
Revised Air/Fuel Ratio Sensor (Exhaust Manifold).
New Air Pump Control Unit.
New One Piece Trans Tunnel Heat Shield (Previously Two Piece).
New Under Body Covers Reducing C Drag from 0.31 to now 0.30.
Larger Fuel Tank (5 litres extra or around a gallon).
New Dynamic Stability Control (DSC) Hydraulic Unit Control Module.
New Differential Mounting Bracket.
New Rear Suspension Control Links (Rods) Upper/Lower and Trailing have Increased In Diameter.
New Rear Stabilizer Bar.
New Rear Shocks And Springs.
New Rear Parking Brake Cables.
New ABS Wheel Sensors (All 4 Wheels).
Revised TPMS (Tire Pressure Monitoring System) US Only.
New Front Upper And Front Lower Suspension Arms (Wishbone).
New Front Steering Knuckles And Wheel Hubs.
New Front Stabilizer Bar.
New Front Shock and Springs.
Revised Power Steering Control System Unit.
Revised Headlamp Auto Leveling Sensors.
New 3 Piece (Instead of 2) Strut Tower Brace (Manual Only), Auto's Retains Two Piece Tower Brace.
Revised Front and Rear Wheel Arch Splash Guards/Shields.
Thicker (Heavier Guage) Steel On The Two Front Strut Towers.
Additional Spot Weldings Around Both Door Openings For Increased Rigidity.
Stiffened Body Shell = Torsional (twisting) and Flexural (bending) Rigidity have been increased by 5.4 and 8.7 per cent respectively.
Auto's and Manual's both have 6 port engines, Max Power RPM (kw) has been limited to 7500 for Auto compared to 8200 RPM for the manual.
MOP changes - EMOP located on top of centre plate to suit additional (3rd) oil metering injector
Injectors - Pri2=400cc Sec=525cc
Sump - new baffling
Knock sensors - 1-per rotor
Front timing cover - revised design
Water pump - revised design
Oil pump - revised design
Oil filter - relocated to front lower left corner
IGN coils - cant read the Kanji properly
Oil filler - Spout & dipstick revised design
Series-II chassis drivetrain
Front cross member - foam filled as per 07 run out models (40th Ann version)
LSD - Revised design
Gearbox - Revised design (aka NC MX-5)
Gear level - shorter throw
Wheel/tyre combo - 18" = 22.7kg - 19" = 21.4kg
Steering control arm - link assy raised 7.5mm
Underbody - additional paneling - CD reduction to "0.30"
Shocks - Type-RS/GT Bilsteins, revised mounting points
01-25-14, 07:02 AM
#1290
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All Series 2 Engines made from November 10, 2008 (from my EPC calculations) has this coating applied to Rotors.....see factory pic.
Not yet confirmed why, but, Tech believes the coating is there to defend engine from Excessive Carbon Attachment or ECA (his words).
It is considered a Teflon non stick type of coating.
01-25-14, 08:12 AM
#1292
Full Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No your the only person whinning about the fuel economy of a potential engine option. Did you not comprehend my last post to you??? I said let those that want more, pay more. And since I'm willing to pay more, and your obviously not, let me worry about the added total cost. Deal?
01-25-14, 08:53 AM
#1293
^^^^
I don't think that's true at all. There are plenty of trucks and SUV's on the market that sell VERY well that don't get that kind of mileage. My 4Runner does about 17/22 city/highway. They sell for about $35k new.
People accept it, because they appreciate it's utility for other things. You just need to build something that makes people forget about gas mileage.
I don't think that's true at all. There are plenty of trucks and SUV's on the market that sell VERY well that don't get that kind of mileage. My 4Runner does about 17/22 city/highway. They sell for about $35k new.
People accept it, because they appreciate it's utility for other things. You just need to build something that makes people forget about gas mileage.
01-25-14, 09:49 AM
#1294
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 416 Likes
on
252 Posts
It's appalling to me how threads on this forum get so messed up. Were comparing the RX-7 (actually all iterations of the mazda rotary sports car, SA through FE) with the likes of Lotus, the Corvette Z06, Ferrari, the GTR, the BRZ/FRS/86, LFA, etc. And alas even porsche and the miata!
I've driven many diverse cars in a short amount of time; Among them the notable ones were the GSL-SE FB, Shinka RX-8, Jaguar XKR R performance, and the Ferrari 458. My daily is a Z/28 LS1, T56 Camaro, my weekend fun car/project is an N/A FC. To me, from a driver's standpoint horsepower is relative to the amount you are able to realistically use on a day to day basis. (I'm not talking about track days.) Cornering is relative to weather conditions and how 'ballsy' or 'spirited' you are with the car you're in. To me, mazda faught hard with each of their cars to find the perfect balance of power and cornering ability- and in the process, refined the vehicle as a whole. (I.e. Made the vehicle marketable to the average enthusiast.). They've done this with each series of rotary sports car, from 1978 until 2013. Admittedly, when the spirit R RX-8 came out, the Renesis 13B was "stale" because while the RX-8 changed, the Renesis 13B didn't. In every generation of the RX-7 the rotary engine had to become better in every concievable way, except for longevity which seems to be lacking in the FD- in favor of more power. The 16X claims to be "all that" in a compact little package- its supposed to weigh less, make more power, and get better fuel milage.
Remember, 16X only has to knock comparable engines out of the water, not the LS7. I think some people need to look where we've come from. Compare apples to apples. Not sports cars to supercars.
I've driven many diverse cars in a short amount of time; Among them the notable ones were the GSL-SE FB, Shinka RX-8, Jaguar XKR R performance, and the Ferrari 458. My daily is a Z/28 LS1, T56 Camaro, my weekend fun car/project is an N/A FC. To me, from a driver's standpoint horsepower is relative to the amount you are able to realistically use on a day to day basis. (I'm not talking about track days.) Cornering is relative to weather conditions and how 'ballsy' or 'spirited' you are with the car you're in. To me, mazda faught hard with each of their cars to find the perfect balance of power and cornering ability- and in the process, refined the vehicle as a whole. (I.e. Made the vehicle marketable to the average enthusiast.). They've done this with each series of rotary sports car, from 1978 until 2013. Admittedly, when the spirit R RX-8 came out, the Renesis 13B was "stale" because while the RX-8 changed, the Renesis 13B didn't. In every generation of the RX-7 the rotary engine had to become better in every concievable way, except for longevity which seems to be lacking in the FD- in favor of more power. The 16X claims to be "all that" in a compact little package- its supposed to weigh less, make more power, and get better fuel milage.
Remember, 16X only has to knock comparable engines out of the water, not the LS7. I think some people need to look where we've come from. Compare apples to apples. Not sports cars to supercars.
However the FD was and is a supercar so what else should it be compared to. For once mazda built the car they were capable of building and then left it hanging in the wind...............effing idiots.
Yes mazda is known for building budget oriented cars with great handling characteristics and low power that are fun to drive but it would be nice to see them branch out a little as they once did with the FD and play with the big boys again. As it stands when kids look in the sand box they would rather drive the v6 mustang than any of Mazda's cars and hey I don't blame them. Hell, Hyundai is making a better sports car at this time (car company of the decade/take a look at their financials) and will likely have a 70k sports car in the next several years because they understand that making a cool car is the only way to truly gain respect and develop your name/brand.
01-25-14, 09:56 AM
#1295
Rotary Enthusiast
I think they should make an MX-5 coupe (a real one) with a direct-injection turbo 2.0L four if the rotary plan falls through. That's probably what Alfa Romeo plans to do. GM did it with the Saturn Sky Red Line / Pontiac Solstice in 2007. Mazda should do it right.
http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/wha...-sky-455849727
http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/wha...-sky-455849727
Last edited by HiWire; 01-25-14 at 10:17 AM.
01-25-14, 10:07 AM
#1296
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 416 Likes
on
252 Posts
Hyundai Genesis Coupe - Reviews, Specs, Pricing for Hyundai Genesis Coupe - Motor Trend Magazine
Mazda can and should have a wide variety of miata type cars:
Coupe
Convertible
rotary
v4
v6
v4 turbo
etc.....
If they a had a 2400lb coupe that makes 250 HP it would fly out the door and they could easily do it but NOPE they don't want to take a chance LOL
Mazda can and should have a wide variety of miata type cars:
Coupe
Convertible
rotary
v4
v6
v4 turbo
etc.....
If they a had a 2400lb coupe that makes 250 HP it would fly out the door and they could easily do it but NOPE they don't want to take a chance LOL
01-25-14, 10:14 AM
#1297
Rotary Enthusiast
Apparently, GM sold a turbo upgrade kit for $650 (really, Wikipedia?) that brought the Gen II Ecotec up to 290 hp / 340 lb·ft. Their Gen III Ecotecs are probably capable of more power. GM seemed to have no business sense, but you have to admire their engineering.
My friend has a Hyundai Genesis Coupe with the turbo four (sadly, the year before the power jumped but happily, before the front design became ugly). It's a nice car, but you'd have to modify it to really enjoy its potential. Still a bit heavy for a sports car.
Mazda could even do a 4-door, 4-seater like the RX-8 again... as long as they don't make it the only performance car, and with more power, of course.
My friend has a Hyundai Genesis Coupe with the turbo four (sadly, the year before the power jumped but happily, before the front design became ugly). It's a nice car, but you'd have to modify it to really enjoy its potential. Still a bit heavy for a sports car.
Mazda could even do a 4-door, 4-seater like the RX-8 again... as long as they don't make it the only performance car, and with more power, of course.
Last edited by HiWire; 01-25-14 at 10:20 AM.
01-25-14, 10:41 AM
#1298
Senior Member
The mistake (other than bringing a product to market that wasn't fully developed) was not to have a lower-priced NA version.
As it stands when kids look in the sand box they would rather drive the v6 mustang than any of Mazda's cars and hey I don't blame them. Hell, Hyundai is making a better sports car at this time
(car company of the decade/take a look at their financials) and will likely have a 70k sports car in the next several years because they understand that making a cool car is the only way to truly gain respect and develop your name/brand.
The way to gain respect is to build good, reliable, enjoyable cars that people can afford to buy/own/drive.
The numbers of fanbois who'll buy an Altima over a Civic or Mazda3 because Nissan makes the GTR when there is no Honda or Mazda "supercar" are very very few!
I think it would be a very risky and somewhat pointless move on Mazda's part to repeat the FD model of building a somewhat smaller and lighter-weight Corvette at Corvette $$$.
There is a WIDE OPEN niche for a reasonably-priced fixed-roof minimalist performance-oriented sports car (NOT supercar!) in the market. The 370Z is not that car, it is a cynical exercise by Nissan to cash in on the "Z" name by selling an overweight 2-seat version of the G37.
Keep it small, keep it simple, keep it light, give it decent power. ~2600 lb. with 250hp NA 2-rotor, ~2750 lb. with 350hp turbo'd or 3-rotor.
Try to make it a Corvette, and price and weight will escalate RAPIDLY.
WE can make it into a Corvette killer at the track. Just let Mazda get the basic car out there.
01-25-14, 10:44 AM
#1299
Senior Member
Totally agree! Realistically, that 2400 might turn into 2600+, but still, that's exactly what they should do.
LOVE the V4 idea as well (I brought it up earlier in the thread)!
01-25-14, 10:53 AM
#1300
What's clear is, whatever the conditions were in 1993, it's a different market now. MAYBE people weren't willing to pay Corvette money for a Japanese super car then (which I don't buy, nor do I buy that the FD was simply "too expensive"), but the GTR PROVES that they will now. It has been 20 years, and a generation of people raised on Japanese cars are now adults.
Secondly, again, "keep it simple, keep it light, give it decent power" at the parameters you prescribe sounds great, but not for a rotary. Why bother? The customer for that car isn't going to mess with it.
When we think "Chase Corvette", or aspire to a higher level, it doesn't mean beat them at their own game. So while price may go up, weight doesn't have to. Maybe that price BUYS lightweight (Exige style), and some more horsepower, so that you end up with something that turns a lap time, but not because it has 600 hp. The continuing assumption that the only option you have is to build a Mazda Corvette is just short sighted.
The "giant killer" is a time honored sports car formula. It's actually how Porsche got started, building super nimble little cars that gave big V12 Ferrari's a hard time.
Secondly, again, "keep it simple, keep it light, give it decent power" at the parameters you prescribe sounds great, but not for a rotary. Why bother? The customer for that car isn't going to mess with it.
When we think "Chase Corvette", or aspire to a higher level, it doesn't mean beat them at their own game. So while price may go up, weight doesn't have to. Maybe that price BUYS lightweight (Exige style), and some more horsepower, so that you end up with something that turns a lap time, but not because it has 600 hp. The continuing assumption that the only option you have is to build a Mazda Corvette is just short sighted.
The "giant killer" is a time honored sports car formula. It's actually how Porsche got started, building super nimble little cars that gave big V12 Ferrari's a hard time.
Last edited by ptrhahn; 01-25-14 at 10:56 AM.
