The RX-7 confirmed to be in the pipeline for 2017---RX-Vision Unveil!!
02-19-13, 08:28 AM
#251
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
I hate the idea of playing in the poor man's (<$30K) segment for a flagship sportscar. Because of cost constraints we'd be looking at an update of the current 1.3L, as there'd be no way Mazda would offer the 16X engine (with 280+ hp) in a car that comes in for less than the extinct RX-8. Nevermind the fact that to be a successor to the 7 performance-wise the car should follow the same path its predecessor did vs the more-powerful-but-also-heavier-competition (Vette, 300ZX, even the NSX).
Next 7: 3 rotor turbo, lightweight chassis utilizing as much carbon fiber and/or aluminum as possible for its $65K price. True, sales in the U.S. would be, at most, 150 units/month in that price range, but by building such a car it would be a great way to showcase the engineering prowess of the small, but very dedicated team from the "little" company from Hiroshima.
By doing so, they'd then be able to dabble back in the <$35K with a RX-3/RX-4 or whatever they wish to call it.
Next 7: 3 rotor turbo, lightweight chassis utilizing as much carbon fiber and/or aluminum as possible for its $65K price. True, sales in the U.S. would be, at most, 150 units/month in that price range, but by building such a car it would be a great way to showcase the engineering prowess of the small, but very dedicated team from the "little" company from Hiroshima.
By doing so, they'd then be able to dabble back in the <$35K with a RX-3/RX-4 or whatever they wish to call it.
In a nut shell they should strive for what Lotus does with a broader base and market but don't build 30k cars and sell them for 60 but build 50k cars and sell them for 60k
02-19-13, 12:59 PM
#252
I hate the idea of playing in the poor man's (<$30K) segment for a flagship sportscar. Because of cost constraints we'd be looking at an update of the current 1.3L, as there'd be no way Mazda would offer the 16X engine (with 280+ hp) in a car that comes in for less than the extinct RX-8. Nevermind the fact that to be a successor to the 7 performance-wise the car should follow the same path its predecessor did vs the more-powerful-but-also-heavier-competition (Vette, 300ZX, even the NSX).
Next 7: 3 rotor turbo, lightweight chassis utilizing as much carbon fiber and/or aluminum as possible for its $65K price. True, sales in the U.S. would be, at most, 150 units/month in that price range, but by building such a car it would be a great way to showcase the engineering prowess of the small, but very dedicated team from the "little" company from Hiroshima.
By doing so, they'd then be able to dabble back in the <$35K with a RX-3/RX-4 or whatever they wish to call it.
Next 7: 3 rotor turbo, lightweight chassis utilizing as much carbon fiber and/or aluminum as possible for its $65K price. True, sales in the U.S. would be, at most, 150 units/month in that price range, but by building such a car it would be a great way to showcase the engineering prowess of the small, but very dedicated team from the "little" company from Hiroshima.
By doing so, they'd then be able to dabble back in the <$35K with a RX-3/RX-4 or whatever they wish to call it.
Why would anybody buy it?
WE WANT A BACK TO BASICS CAR WITH A TUNER PLATFORM. DO YOU THINK ITS SOME MISTAKE THE FRS USED A SUBARU MOTOR WITH SUPER LOW CENTER OF GRAVITY AND A HUGE SURPLUS OF STREET LEGAL TUNING PARTS ALREADY ON THE MARKET. IMAGINE THE SUCCESS THE S2000 WOULD OF HAD IF IT HAD A OLD CIVIC ENGINE IN IT.
IT WOULD OF COST FAR LESS MONEY WHICH MEANS MORE OF THEM ON THE ROAD AND IT WOULD SHARE ALL THE TUNING PARTS AVAILABLE FOR THE CIVIC.
I CAN MAKE ANY CAR FAST ITS ALL ABOUT FUN AND AFFORDABILITY NOT TO MENTION, IS THE CAR EASY TO WORK ON. SPORTS CARS ARE SMALL AND LIGHT WEIGHT. THEY COST NEXT TO NOTHING TO BUILD ITS ALL IN THE ENGINEERING. THINGS LIKE CARBON THIS AND FANCY HI TECH THAT CAN BE UPGRADED LATER.
Last edited by ghost1000; 02-19-13 at 01:03 PM.
02-19-13, 01:04 PM
#253
My thought was less a poor-man's-Porsche than a poor-man's-Lotus. Nobody else is currently playing in the lightweight/minimalist space, and this would go perfectly with Mazda's road racing heritage they've invested in, AND the rotary packaging advantages/torque disadvantages.
But if they think they can just develop a new rotary engine and slap it in some average chassis and call it an RX7 (or RX9), I think they're going to be disappointed. Maybe a few of the real rotary enthusiasts will buy it because it's a rotary, but I think you have to appeal to more than that. You have to build an appealing car that is unique because the rotary characteristics help it be so.
OR, you just need to go simple, and do a hardtop rotary Miata, and call it an RX5. They could have done THAT 5 years ago.
But if they think they can just develop a new rotary engine and slap it in some average chassis and call it an RX7 (or RX9), I think they're going to be disappointed. Maybe a few of the real rotary enthusiasts will buy it because it's a rotary, but I think you have to appeal to more than that. You have to build an appealing car that is unique because the rotary characteristics help it be so.
OR, you just need to go simple, and do a hardtop rotary Miata, and call it an RX5. They could have done THAT 5 years ago.
02-19-13, 01:09 PM
#254
If Mazda made a rx7 that cost $65k those who could afford it would be getting beat by every 20year old kid driving a street legal turbo FRS that cost about $30k
Why would anybody buy it?
WE WANT A BACK TO BASICS CAR WITH A TUNER PLATFORM. DO YOU THINK ITS SOME MISTAKE THE FRS USED A SUBARU MOTOR WITH SUPER LOW CENTER OF GRAVITY AND A HUGE SURPLUS OF STREET LEGAL TUNING PARTS ALREADY ON THE MARKET. IMAGINE THE SUCCESS THE S2000 WOULD OF HAD IF IT HAD A OLD CIVIC ENGINE IN IT.
IT WOULD OF COST FAR LESS MONEY WHICH MEANS MORE OF THEM ON THE ROAD AND IT WOULD SHARE ALL THE TUNING PARTS AVAILABLE FOR THE CIVIC.
I CAN MAKE ANY CAR FAST ITS ALL ABOUT FUN AND AFFORDABILITY NOT TO MENTION, IS THE CAR EASY TO WORK ON. SPORTS CARS ARE SMALL AND LIGHT WEIGHT. THEY COST NEXT TO NOTHING TO BUILD ITS ALL IN THE ENGINEERING. THINGS LIKE CARBON THIS AND FANCY HI TECH THAT CAN BE UPGRADED LATER.
Why would anybody buy it?
WE WANT A BACK TO BASICS CAR WITH A TUNER PLATFORM. DO YOU THINK ITS SOME MISTAKE THE FRS USED A SUBARU MOTOR WITH SUPER LOW CENTER OF GRAVITY AND A HUGE SURPLUS OF STREET LEGAL TUNING PARTS ALREADY ON THE MARKET. IMAGINE THE SUCCESS THE S2000 WOULD OF HAD IF IT HAD A OLD CIVIC ENGINE IN IT.
IT WOULD OF COST FAR LESS MONEY WHICH MEANS MORE OF THEM ON THE ROAD AND IT WOULD SHARE ALL THE TUNING PARTS AVAILABLE FOR THE CIVIC.
I CAN MAKE ANY CAR FAST ITS ALL ABOUT FUN AND AFFORDABILITY NOT TO MENTION, IS THE CAR EASY TO WORK ON. SPORTS CARS ARE SMALL AND LIGHT WEIGHT. THEY COST NEXT TO NOTHING TO BUILD ITS ALL IN THE ENGINEERING. THINGS LIKE CARBON THIS AND FANCY HI TECH THAT CAN BE UPGRADED LATER.
Again, build something for which there is no direct comparison, and something that rotarys are actually GOOD at. a higher end 2500 lb. car would attract sportscar enthusiasts, autocrossers, and track day/road racers who aren't necessarily in it to blow off 25 year olds with turbo BRZs.
02-19-13, 02:49 PM
#255
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
Again, I don't think Mazda is going to WIN this segment. A Subaru-based car is always going to be cheaper/easier to mod than a rotary. For kids looking for cheap modding for a car they are going to use for "road kills", just get the piston car. The Civic/S2000 or BRZ/STi dynamic you're looking for will NEVER be there. Why would anyone buy it even if it's $30k like the BRZ?
Again, build something for which there is no direct comparison, and something that rotarys are actually GOOD at. a higher end 2500 lb. car would attract sportscar enthusiasts, autocrossers, and track day/road racers who aren't necessarily in it to blow off 25 year olds with turbo BRZs.
Again, build something for which there is no direct comparison, and something that rotarys are actually GOOD at. a higher end 2500 lb. car would attract sportscar enthusiasts, autocrossers, and track day/road racers who aren't necessarily in it to blow off 25 year olds with turbo BRZs.
Somehow folks seem to think they can throw a turbo on a BRZ and conker the world. Bring it to the track (road course) it will get KILLED unless you've invested 30k and by then you've already paid for your corvette or porsche etc......
We want a car that's good out of the box and just needs a few safety mods, pads etc.....
PS The best part of the S2K is the engine and there are tons and tons of mods for those cars
People spend big money swapping that engine into all kinds of interesting cars including exiges they aren't swapping in civic motors that is what they started with
02-19-13, 03:58 PM
#256
Senior Member
Because of cost constraints we'd be looking at an update of the current 1.3L, as there'd be no way Mazda would offer the 16X engine (with 280+ hp) in a car that comes in for less than the extinct RX-8.
Next 7: 3 rotor turbo, lightweight chassis utilizing as much carbon fiber and/or aluminum as possible for its $65K price.
As a structural engineer who's been involved with composites structures on aircraft and spacecraft, I am a HUGE fan of them. But carbon fiber is not necessary to keep the weight in the 2500-2800 lb. range.
Being a closed coupe is a big advantage in the weight department. Taking advantage of that and keeping overall size down will make lightweight goal possible with conventional lower-cost materials and construction.
True, sales in the U.S. would be, at most, 150 units/month in that price range, but by building such a car it would be a great way to showcase the engineering prowess of the small, but very dedicated team from the "little" company from Hiroshima.
By doing so, they'd then be able to dabble back in the <$35K with a RX-3/RX-4 or whatever they wish to call it.
The problem with higher-dollar "sports" cars is that they get BLOATED with content. Which is why they're almost always pretty heavy.
By aiming at where IMO the RX-7 *should* be in the market in the first place, down around $30k for an NA 2-rotor, ~$40k for a turbo 2-rotor or NA 3-rotor, it is actually more likely that weight will be kept way down where I think we all want it to be.
Another $65k "sports" car on the market? BFD, could not care less.
02-19-13, 04:42 PM
#257
Senior Member
Because ~10 lb/hp kicks the dog-sh*t out of 14lb/hp, and 50/50 weight distribution outhandles and out"feels" 55/45.
So a 240-250hp 2500 lb. "base" model would not appeal to the above?
Or a 300-360hp ~2600 lb. turbo or 3-rotor version of the same car?
No direct comparison to either on the market today.
The "higher-end" approach is not the way to end up at 2500 lb. If upmarket, expect more weight.
Keep it simple, keep it light. Start upping horsepower and going upmarket with the car and weight goes UP.
Again, build something for which there is no direct comparison, and something that rotarys are actually GOOD at. a higher end 2500 lb. car would attract sportscar enthusiasts, autocrossers, and track day/road racers who aren't necessarily in it to blow off 25 year olds with turbo BRZs.
Or a 300-360hp ~2600 lb. turbo or 3-rotor version of the same car?
No direct comparison to either on the market today.
The "higher-end" approach is not the way to end up at 2500 lb. If upmarket, expect more weight.
Keep it simple, keep it light. Start upping horsepower and going upmarket with the car and weight goes UP.
02-19-13, 05:30 PM
#258
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
Because ~10 lb/hp kicks the dog-sh*t out of 14lb/hp, and 50/50 weight distribution outhandles and out"feels" 55/45.
So a 240-250hp 2500 lb. "base" model would not appeal to the above?
Or a 300-360hp ~2600 lb. turbo or 3-rotor version of the same car?
No direct comparison to either on the market today.
The "higher-end" approach is not the way to end up at 2500 lb. If upmarket, expect more weight.
Keep it simple, keep it light. Start upping horsepower and going upmarket with the car and weight goes UP.
So a 240-250hp 2500 lb. "base" model would not appeal to the above?
Or a 300-360hp ~2600 lb. turbo or 3-rotor version of the same car?
No direct comparison to either on the market today.
The "higher-end" approach is not the way to end up at 2500 lb. If upmarket, expect more weight.
Keep it simple, keep it light. Start upping horsepower and going upmarket with the car and weight goes UP.
We are (including pete) on the same page with one small exception we don't want a 10 10 car (compromised sports car) we want a 10 7 (or the best realistic sports car that mazda can build) a car that's able to compete with the elite mass production cars. AGAIN a light weight bare bones sports car with no BS that's competitive (doesn't have to beat the GT3 or the Z06....cough cough until we mod it) and that car will need 350 plus HP and will of course weigh 2600 plus to support the power.
Let the miata with a 16x be your car and me and pete will pray mazda has the ***** to build and race a competitive sports car.
AGAIN though my bet is you'll get your wish. It'll be a 275 HP car that weighs 2700lbs and cost 40 to 50k and I won't want it and neither will anyone else they will by Mustangs, 270Zs, STI turboed BRZs etc.... I'll stick with my modded FD and whatever else might pique my interest.
02-19-13, 06:38 PM
#259
Rotary Enthusiast
A modded Chevy Cobalt SS will blow the doors off a lot of cars... in a straight line, and also on a course, like John Heinricy showed...
It's not just about big $$$ and technology for technology's sake. We like our FDs for many reasons, not just power-weight or 0-60... the FD3S is sublime and I can only hope that Mazda is still capable of making that kind of magic again.
It's not just about big $$$ and technology for technology's sake. We like our FDs for many reasons, not just power-weight or 0-60... the FD3S is sublime and I can only hope that Mazda is still capable of making that kind of magic again.
02-19-13, 06:52 PM
#260
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
A modded Chevy Cobalt SS will blow the doors off a lot of cars... in a straight line, and also on a course, like John Heinricy showed...
It's not just about big $$$ and technology for technology's sake. We like our FDs for many reasons, not just power-weight or 0-60... the FD3S is sublime and I can only hope that Mazda is still capable of making that kind of magic again.
It's not just about big $$$ and technology for technology's sake. We like our FDs for many reasons, not just power-weight or 0-60... the FD3S is sublime and I can only hope that Mazda is still capable of making that kind of magic again.
02-19-13, 08:34 PM
#261
Senior Member
The WORST compromise most "sports" cars make is to be upmarket luxury cars. The upmarket *compromise* makes them hundreds of pounds heavier than they need to be. *AND* thousands of dollars more expensive.
we want a 10 7 (or the best realistic sports car that mazda can build)
a car that's able to compete with the elite mass production cars.
AGAIN a light weight bare bones sports car with no BS that's competitive (doesn't have to beat the GT3 or the Z06....cough cough until we mod it) and that car will need 350 plus HP and will of course weigh 2600 plus to support the power.
Let the miata with a 16x be your car and me and pete will pray mazda has the ***** to build and race a competitive sports car.
AGAIN though my bet is you'll get your wish.
It'll be a 275 HP car that weighs 2700lbs and cost 40 to 50k
and I won't want it and neither will anyone else they will by Mustangs, 270Zs, STI turboed BRZs etc.... I'll stick with my modded FD and whatever else might pique my interest.
Better, IMO, to just do a new RX-7 and offer it in NA 2-rotor form (still at a respectable 10 lb/hp!) for ~$30k, and build the super-high-perf version on that.
Start with the idea that you're going to have a $65k or more "supercar", and it *will* be bigger/heavier, and a downmarket version of that would still be overweight.
Last edited by ZDan; 02-19-13 at 08:36 PM.
02-19-13, 09:02 PM
#262
Never say never. There's always a possibility as Mazda has done it before with the Cosmo. I think they just need to put a reliable product in the market 1st so they gain the confidence to make a 3 rotor available. Vehicles always have a couple of series. Mazda could easily have a 3 rotor version by series 2 release if things are going great with the 2 rotor. Don't take offense to this but I really do get sick and tired of hearing how unfeasible a 3 rotor is when every other manufacturer has multiple engine options with their vehicles. All we ever get is the freaking 2 rotor.
This is what I see as a possibility based on Mazda's current power estimation.
2,650lb 2 rotor 16x 300 (150hp per rotor) hp starting at 35k and up with options.
2,700lb 3 rotor 24x 450 hp limited run 500-1000 units 45k and up.
Even if it's 10 years from now not one manufacture would have a NA sports car that could compete with that 3 rotor Rx7's power to weight and cost.
In all actuality Mazda could easily build these cheaper but they did admit to wanting to upscale the car a bit. That's fine by me if the quality is truly there.
02-19-13, 09:46 PM
#263
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
10 10 I have no idea what I'm saying either
I meant 10lb to 1 hp
10 7
I meant 7lbs to 1 hp
If Mazda builds it with 300 hp and it weighs 2500lbs for 30k sure I'm interested and so will a lot of other people. Lets all hope that's what they build IF they don't build a real sports car that is umm LESS compromised
I meant 10lb to 1 hp
10 7
I meant 7lbs to 1 hp
If Mazda builds it with 300 hp and it weighs 2500lbs for 30k sure I'm interested and so will a lot of other people. Lets all hope that's what they build IF they don't build a real sports car that is umm LESS compromised
02-19-13, 10:01 PM
#264
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
Think about the potential of these two cars in 4 years. As Pete said if Mazda is serious about this they will need to seriously sharpen their pencils.
2013 Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE vs. 2013 Ford Mustang Boss 302 - Automobile Magazine
I'm also pretty sure the BRZ will get a power boost it's just a damn shame Mazda isn't in the game while it's being played.
2013 Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE vs. 2013 Ford Mustang Boss 302 - Automobile Magazine
I'm also pretty sure the BRZ will get a power boost it's just a damn shame Mazda isn't in the game while it's being played.
02-19-13, 10:40 PM
#265
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Another state obliterated by leftists
Posts: 208
Received 538 Likes
on
270 Posts
And by building a car like that, that can do things a GT-R or a GT3 can't, and by having a better balance than its main competitors that are priced significantly more (a la FD), there'd be a halo product that makes people with half the funds buy the <$30K model . . . . the one with the N/A 16X.
02-19-13, 11:48 PM
#266
Here's the REAL dynamic at work. You just don't like high end cars.
You also keep insisting that "up market" = bloat. Sometimes it does, but that wouldn't account for the 65k, 2000 lb Lotus Exige, or the fact that GT3s and Z06s are more expensive yet lighter more stripped down versions of their base models.
Go to the Subaru BRZ section on their site. You can run a direct comparison with a Miata. The Miata is actually the same price or more expensive already. It's lighter (but already within 50-100 lbs of the target youre talking about) but less powerful. Sorry, I don't see Mazda being able to add a new rotary engine and strengthening to accommodate power at the same price/weight/simplicity. And even if they did, it's still just competitive with a fairly pedestrian car, only with an exotic, less reliable, tougher to mod motor. I love rotaries, and I'd go with the Subaru for which there are lots of great STi based mods. If I'm a Buyer at the lower end, reliability, gas mileage, and value for what is still probably my only car really matters. Rotaries don't do any of those things really well.
I don't really see any skin off Mazdas *** to build what is essentially a rotary Miata hardtop "RX5". Then go upmarket with a forced induction or triple rotor version in a more exotic chassis like we want and spread the dev costs out. But, the former seems SO easy, you have to wonder wonder why they haven't done it yet.
You also keep insisting that "up market" = bloat. Sometimes it does, but that wouldn't account for the 65k, 2000 lb Lotus Exige, or the fact that GT3s and Z06s are more expensive yet lighter more stripped down versions of their base models.
Go to the Subaru BRZ section on their site. You can run a direct comparison with a Miata. The Miata is actually the same price or more expensive already. It's lighter (but already within 50-100 lbs of the target youre talking about) but less powerful. Sorry, I don't see Mazda being able to add a new rotary engine and strengthening to accommodate power at the same price/weight/simplicity. And even if they did, it's still just competitive with a fairly pedestrian car, only with an exotic, less reliable, tougher to mod motor. I love rotaries, and I'd go with the Subaru for which there are lots of great STi based mods. If I'm a Buyer at the lower end, reliability, gas mileage, and value for what is still probably my only car really matters. Rotaries don't do any of those things really well.
I don't really see any skin off Mazdas *** to build what is essentially a rotary Miata hardtop "RX5". Then go upmarket with a forced induction or triple rotor version in a more exotic chassis like we want and spread the dev costs out. But, the former seems SO easy, you have to wonder wonder why they haven't done it yet.
02-20-13, 01:22 AM
#267
Senior Member
I pretty much hate what Porsche has become. Big, expensive, heavy(ish) cars. Nothing like what they *used* to be, which was small, minimalist sports cars that were *giant*-killers by virtue of being lightweight. No longer the case.
Love that approach. I really hope that the new Alfa 4C does well in the market. But I don't think Mazda should go that route with a new RX-7. Plus, imagine the screams of horror from those who want any new RX-7 to be a supercar over an Exige-esque 200-something hp!
But you can't realistically *add* light weight. The last Z06 test I saw had that a curb weight over 3300 lb. GT3? Just under 3300 lb. The "lightweight" 911 is as heavy as a Corvette! Not exactly living up to 550 ideals of fastness through minimalism/light weight. Or even 911 ideals for that matter...
??? Base Miata is just under $24k vs. $25.5 for BRZ base. Grand Touring soft-top is $27,350 vs. $27.5 for BRZ "limited".
Most of a car's strength is required for road loads, not power/torque from the engine. The additional loads from a 360ish hp 3-rotor or turbo aren't going to add a whole lot of weight.
Which STi mods give it 240+hp? And which ones fix its 55/45 weight distribution?
Is this an argument for making the car more expensive? Doesn't work. Same car at lower price = more buyers, always.
That said, I'd be all for an MX-7 similar to what I've been describing, but with a piston engine that would get semi-reasonable mpg...
Me neither. The MX-5 chassis is pretty brilliant already. Make a similar closed-top coupe chassis and you could gain a ton of torsional rigidity with no weight increase or price increase.
As a structural engineer who has done work with compsites, believe me, composite construction appeals to me. But realistically, in a high-end road car, the weight savings would be minimal. You can build a lightweight car without resorting to "exotic" materials. Going upmarket enough to justify composite construction brings bloat and weight, offsetting the gains.
Sorta like the "exotic" aluminum NSX. The FD weighed the same or less with a steel unibody. Save the price/cost and just keep the design small and simple, and light weight will come...
I do kinda wonder... But they did do the RX-8, which weighed 3000 lb despite being a 4-door without B-pillars. Imagine though what the weight of a smaller, shorter-wheelbase 2-seater would have been, without having the giant open sides of the rX-8's structure.
No doubt in my mind, Mazda could easily design/build a closed coupe 2-seater with world-class torsional stiffness/weight, with an NA 2-rotor, at 2500 lb., and sell it at $30k base.
IMO, building on *that* is a more sure-fire way to get to a 360hp 2600 lb. 3-rotor or turbo supercar-fighter, and for *reasonable* bucks instead of $65k plus.
You also keep insisting that "up market" = bloat. Sometimes it does, but that wouldn't account for the 65k, 2000 lb Lotus Exige,
or the fact that GT3s and Z06s are more expensive yet lighter more stripped down versions of their base models.
Go to the Subaru BRZ section on their site. You can run a direct comparison with a Miata. The Miata is actually the same price or more expensive already.
Sorry, I don't see Mazda being able to add a new rotary engine and strengthening to accommodate power at the same price/weight/simplicity.
And even if they did, it's still just competitive with a fairly pedestrian car, only with an exotic, less reliable, tougher to mod motor. I love rotaries, and I'd go with the Subaru for which there are lots of great STi based mods.
If I'm a Buyer at the lower end, reliability, gas mileage, and value for what is still probably my only car really matters. Rotaries don't do any of those things really well.
That said, I'd be all for an MX-7 similar to what I've been describing, but with a piston engine that would get semi-reasonable mpg...
I don't really see any skin off Mazdas *** to build what is essentially a rotary Miata hardtop "RX5".
Then go upmarket with a forced induction or triple rotor version in a more exotic chassis like we want and spread the dev costs out.
Sorta like the "exotic" aluminum NSX. The FD weighed the same or less with a steel unibody. Save the price/cost and just keep the design small and simple, and light weight will come...
But, the former seems SO easy, you have to wonder wonder why they haven't done it yet.
No doubt in my mind, Mazda could easily design/build a closed coupe 2-seater with world-class torsional stiffness/weight, with an NA 2-rotor, at 2500 lb., and sell it at $30k base.
IMO, building on *that* is a more sure-fire way to get to a 360hp 2600 lb. 3-rotor or turbo supercar-fighter, and for *reasonable* bucks instead of $65k plus.
Last edited by ZDan; 02-20-13 at 01:32 AM.
02-20-13, 08:19 AM
#269
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
I pretty much hate what Porsche has become. Big, expensive, heavy(ish) cars. Nothing like what they *used* to be, which was small, minimalist sports cars that were *giant*-killers by virtue of being lightweight. No longer the case.
Love that approach. I really hope that the new Alfa 4C does well in the market. But I don't think Mazda should go that route with a new RX-7. Plus, imagine the screams of horror from those who want any new RX-7 to be a supercar over an Exige-esque 200-something hp!
But you can't realistically *add* light weight. The last Z06 test I saw had that a curb weight over 3300 lb. GT3? Just under 3300 lb. The "lightweight" 911 is as heavy as a Corvette! Not exactly living up to 550 ideals of fastness through minimalism/light weight. Or even 911 ideals for that matter...
??? Base Miata is just under $24k vs. $25.5 for BRZ base. Grand Touring soft-top is $27,350 vs. $27.5 for BRZ "limited".
Most of a car's strength is required for road loads, not power/torque from the engine. The additional loads from a 360ish hp 3-rotor or turbo aren't going to add a whole lot of weight.
Which STi mods give it 240+hp? And which ones fix its 55/45 weight distribution?
Is this an argument for making the car more expensive? Doesn't work. Same car at lower price = more buyers, always.
That said, I'd be all for an MX-7 similar to what I've been describing, but with a piston engine that would get semi-reasonable mpg...
Me neither. The MX-5 chassis is pretty brilliant already. Make a similar closed-top coupe chassis and you could gain a ton of torsional rigidity with no weight increase or price increase.
As a structural engineer who has done work with compsites, believe me, composite construction appeals to me. But realistically, in a high-end road car, the weight savings would be minimal. You can build a lightweight car without resorting to "exotic" materials. Going upmarket enough to justify composite construction brings bloat and weight, offsetting the gains.
Sorta like the "exotic" aluminum NSX. The FD weighed the same or less with a steel unibody. Save the price/cost and just keep the design small and simple, and light weight will come...
I do kinda wonder... But they did do the RX-8, which weighed 3000 lb despite being a 4-door without B-pillars. Imagine though what the weight of a smaller, shorter-wheelbase 2-seater would have been, without having the giant open sides of the rX-8's structure.
No doubt in my mind, Mazda could easily design/build a closed coupe 2-seater with world-class torsional stiffness/weight, with an NA 2-rotor, at 2500 lb., and sell it at $30k base.
IMO, building on *that* is a more sure-fire way to get to a 360hp 2600 lb. 3-rotor or turbo supercar-fighter, and for *reasonable* bucks instead of $65k plus.
Love that approach. I really hope that the new Alfa 4C does well in the market. But I don't think Mazda should go that route with a new RX-7. Plus, imagine the screams of horror from those who want any new RX-7 to be a supercar over an Exige-esque 200-something hp!
But you can't realistically *add* light weight. The last Z06 test I saw had that a curb weight over 3300 lb. GT3? Just under 3300 lb. The "lightweight" 911 is as heavy as a Corvette! Not exactly living up to 550 ideals of fastness through minimalism/light weight. Or even 911 ideals for that matter...
??? Base Miata is just under $24k vs. $25.5 for BRZ base. Grand Touring soft-top is $27,350 vs. $27.5 for BRZ "limited".
Most of a car's strength is required for road loads, not power/torque from the engine. The additional loads from a 360ish hp 3-rotor or turbo aren't going to add a whole lot of weight.
Which STi mods give it 240+hp? And which ones fix its 55/45 weight distribution?
Is this an argument for making the car more expensive? Doesn't work. Same car at lower price = more buyers, always.
That said, I'd be all for an MX-7 similar to what I've been describing, but with a piston engine that would get semi-reasonable mpg...
Me neither. The MX-5 chassis is pretty brilliant already. Make a similar closed-top coupe chassis and you could gain a ton of torsional rigidity with no weight increase or price increase.
As a structural engineer who has done work with compsites, believe me, composite construction appeals to me. But realistically, in a high-end road car, the weight savings would be minimal. You can build a lightweight car without resorting to "exotic" materials. Going upmarket enough to justify composite construction brings bloat and weight, offsetting the gains.
Sorta like the "exotic" aluminum NSX. The FD weighed the same or less with a steel unibody. Save the price/cost and just keep the design small and simple, and light weight will come...
I do kinda wonder... But they did do the RX-8, which weighed 3000 lb despite being a 4-door without B-pillars. Imagine though what the weight of a smaller, shorter-wheelbase 2-seater would have been, without having the giant open sides of the rX-8's structure.
No doubt in my mind, Mazda could easily design/build a closed coupe 2-seater with world-class torsional stiffness/weight, with an NA 2-rotor, at 2500 lb., and sell it at $30k base.
IMO, building on *that* is a more sure-fire way to get to a 360hp 2600 lb. 3-rotor or turbo supercar-fighter, and for *reasonable* bucks instead of $65k plus.
Increased power doesn't add much weight......... WHAT???? Didn't you mention you were a structural engineer or something like that. Lets just begin with the necessities:
Driveline (diff, axles, trans, driveshaft, clutch/fly, motormouts, etc...etc..
Wheels tires and wheel bearings
Brakes rotors and pads
Sways coilovers brackets etc..
Engine exhaust manifold intake etc...
Now start considering the ummm little stuff like cooling, chassis stiffness etc...etc...
So all those goodies to deal with the power will have to be lightweight and they will be EXPENSIVE!!!!! Somehow I think a 350 plus HP 2600 pound car will cost a bit more than 30k.
PS The current vette and GT3 are supercars that make driving an old porsche feel like taking a nap. I'm not knocking your sense of less is more but those cars aren't good examples of bloated whales either. They both weigh about 3200lbs and they both have 400 plus RWHP with brakes, wheels, driveline etc... that easily support the power. The problem I have with those two cars is all the the electronic do dads all over the place otherwise they are really good and the corvette is easily the best bang for the buck going on 10 years now. LIKE YOU would I appreciate a smaller 993ish 911 that weighs 2700lbs and has 400 HP absolutely and that's what I want Mazda to build
02-20-13, 11:48 AM
#270
Well first of all, spend a little more time on the details. The base Miata has no 6-speed, no HIDs (optional not standard only on the Grand Touring), 16" wheels (not 17), so you're looking at at least the Club Model to START be comparable the base BRZ, and it's just under $27k. I'm not trying to slice and dice on the details necessarily, but suffice to say, they are comparable price-wise. It's within $1000 or so.
My point was, (and is), adding rotary power right now, and supporting upgrades would probably mean that the theoretical "RX5" would be at best competitive feature/performance (maybe a littl better) wise but probably a bit more money than a BRZ. With a weird untrustworthy motor, no torque, more cost/risk to mod, and ridiculously shitty gas mileage.
I'm not saying it wouldn't be cool, and wouldn't sell, but it's going to have it's challenges, and I'm not sure the VAST majority of consumers at that level could tell the difference (or care) between 50/50 (assuming it's maintained) vs. 55/45, as compared to the REAL WORLD practicality considerations as discussed above. Never mind that Subaru has a 2.5 liter turbo WRX with 305 hp for $37k, and I'm sure they could up the power in the BRZ easily at relatively low cost. You could probably mod it yourself for less. How you going to do that with a N/A 2-rotor? Forced Induction? Get ready for the sort of "reliability" and reputation issues that killed the FD with lower end buyers.
Now, I'm not sure what the gas mileage is on a GT3, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that most people who buy them don't give a ****. Nor do they give a **** about the associated maintenance costs, or the practicality of driving it to work everyday, or whether there's a back seat for their kids. Why? Because it's a toy, and they wipe their asses with the cost of a whole BRZ.
SO, the point isn't to go upscale for upscale's sake—or to make a 100k rotary supercar, it's to get to a pricepoint where buyers are bit less practical minded, less bound by the economics of it, because the fact is, rotaries aren't practical. DOHC direct-injected piston 4's, with or without turbos are perfectly adequate (maybe better) for the BRZ/Miata market. To the vast majority of the public, they're a liability, not an advantage.
My point was, (and is), adding rotary power right now, and supporting upgrades would probably mean that the theoretical "RX5" would be at best competitive feature/performance (maybe a littl better) wise but probably a bit more money than a BRZ. With a weird untrustworthy motor, no torque, more cost/risk to mod, and ridiculously shitty gas mileage.
I'm not saying it wouldn't be cool, and wouldn't sell, but it's going to have it's challenges, and I'm not sure the VAST majority of consumers at that level could tell the difference (or care) between 50/50 (assuming it's maintained) vs. 55/45, as compared to the REAL WORLD practicality considerations as discussed above. Never mind that Subaru has a 2.5 liter turbo WRX with 305 hp for $37k, and I'm sure they could up the power in the BRZ easily at relatively low cost. You could probably mod it yourself for less. How you going to do that with a N/A 2-rotor? Forced Induction? Get ready for the sort of "reliability" and reputation issues that killed the FD with lower end buyers.
Now, I'm not sure what the gas mileage is on a GT3, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that most people who buy them don't give a ****. Nor do they give a **** about the associated maintenance costs, or the practicality of driving it to work everyday, or whether there's a back seat for their kids. Why? Because it's a toy, and they wipe their asses with the cost of a whole BRZ.
SO, the point isn't to go upscale for upscale's sake—or to make a 100k rotary supercar, it's to get to a pricepoint where buyers are bit less practical minded, less bound by the economics of it, because the fact is, rotaries aren't practical. DOHC direct-injected piston 4's, with or without turbos are perfectly adequate (maybe better) for the BRZ/Miata market. To the vast majority of the public, they're a liability, not an advantage.
Last edited by ptrhahn; 02-20-13 at 12:01 PM.
02-20-13, 07:22 PM
#271
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Another state obliterated by leftists
Posts: 208
Received 538 Likes
on
270 Posts
Love that approach. I really hope that the new Alfa 4C does well in the market. But I don't think Mazda should go that route with a new RX-7. Plus, imagine the screams of horror from those who want any new RX-7 to be a supercar over an Exige-esque 200-something hp!
02-20-13, 10:57 PM
#274
Wasn't the FD msrp very close to the M3's of the same year? I think Mazda could build something really amazing if they went for that same market again(current M3 msrp). I love my FD because its not a corolla, miata, impreza, S chasis or a Scion and I really hope Mazda doesn't change the recipe too much for the next rx-7. Im sure plenty of people would love to own the next M3 for the price of a VW golf but BMW sure as **** has sense enough not to cheapen their flagship sports car (even if it has become overly bloated and over run with tech and options), hopefully Mazda does as well.