The RX-7 confirmed to be in the pipeline for 2017---RX-Vision Unveil!!
08-25-16, 03:12 PM
#3176
I'll take the vision over the already fixed up RX7 any day. Love the proportions of the Vision and the subtle but accentuated curves. Super sexy and just plain clean. The other car (i agree it does look nice and awesome) just seems like a very fixed up FD. It's time to let the FD design go and let it become a classic design.
08-25-16, 03:20 PM
#3177
I am only interested in this car if Mazda adheres to the design of the RX-VISION concept. It will be a great misstep if they deviate and end up producing something like that ugly yellow render from the motoring.com.au article, which has all the typical vents and clutter of today's cars.
The cleanliness and proportions of the RX-VISION are refreshing. Those who want a car with a short hood and sharp edges can go buy a FR-S or a plethora of other mundanely designed cars, stop advocating Mazda to change it with wrong inputs
The cleanliness and proportions of the RX-VISION are refreshing. Those who want a car with a short hood and sharp edges can go buy a FR-S or a plethora of other mundanely designed cars, stop advocating Mazda to change it with wrong inputs
08-26-16, 01:46 PM
#3181
No offense to the efforts of the guy revamping the FD, but I'd take the Vision any day of the week. It's been a while since I was excited by a design coming out of Mazda, and it's awesome. There's nothing wrong with the yellow sketch, it looks like a Mazda, but it's pretty pedestrian. Somebody hit it on the head: Z4 with a Mazda bumper.
08-27-16, 08:36 AM
#3183
Granted, GTR's are 100k+ cars now.
08-27-16, 09:53 AM
#3184
Full Member
Originally Posted by argx
you know that nobody buys the GTR right? They sell like a 100 a month in the US. It's been basically 1000-2000 units per year since it came out. The FD sold what like 13k in 3 model years here? Yet Mazda deemed it enough of a money loser that they stopped selling it here when the new emissions regs came in 1996.
Granted, GTR's are 100k+ cars now.
Granted, GTR's are 100k+ cars now.
But if Mazda's plan is to move upmarket, then they may accept the economic loss of the Rx project as a step to build their image. It would be a long term plan: lose some money now in order to (hopefully) gain much more later.
Think about the FD: released 23 years ago and we're still talking about it. Mazda may have lost some money on the FD directly, but it generated a lot of enduring hype.
08-27-16, 10:02 AM
#3185
Full Member
Also, the high price could be even more acceptable if a detuned model was available. The top of the line "GT-R killer" costs 80k and has 400+hp? Make a 300hp base model, perhaps using a smaller turbo or even just software limitations.
That way it would be possible to lower the entry price point, increase the production numbers and spread the R&D costs on a wider basis, making the Whole project more economically sustainable.
The alternative would be a very limited number of cars produced on a special assembly line, similar to the GT-R, NSX and the Alfa Romeo 4C, just to name a few.
By the way, if Alfa Romeo can sell the carbon fiber 4C at 56k, a new Rx at 80k is almost guaranteed to be made of carbon fiber. Especially given Mazda's obsession with weight saving and the recent ties with FCA which may allow Mazda to leverage Alfa Romeo's know-how with this material.
That way it would be possible to lower the entry price point, increase the production numbers and spread the R&D costs on a wider basis, making the Whole project more economically sustainable.
The alternative would be a very limited number of cars produced on a special assembly line, similar to the GT-R, NSX and the Alfa Romeo 4C, just to name a few.
By the way, if Alfa Romeo can sell the carbon fiber 4C at 56k, a new Rx at 80k is almost guaranteed to be made of carbon fiber. Especially given Mazda's obsession with weight saving and the recent ties with FCA which may allow Mazda to leverage Alfa Romeo's know-how with this material.
08-27-16, 03:10 PM
#3187
Where are you getting that from? The Hp to weight isn't hi enough to justify that cost. 2860lbs and 400hp is 7.15 lbs per hp. The base C7 Corvette is $55k and 3298lbs with 455hp. So that's 7.24lbs per hp. Z06 is $79.5k weighs 3524lbs and makes 650hp. That's 5.42lbs per hp. Mazda would be dumb if they think people are gonna spend 80k on a 400hp rotary over any Corvette listed above. Rx9 makes since in the early $50's to undercut the competition. Also I believe Mazda was bench marking the Cayman and these numbers suggest that's where their going. Caymen is $52k 2,888lbs with 385hp. Based on Mazda's reputation with the Rx8, they better start sparing 1st before getting into the ring with the big boys their 1st day back in the ring.
Last edited by t-von; 08-27-16 at 03:14 PM.
08-27-16, 09:21 PM
#3189
Also I believe Mazda was bench marking the Cayman and these numbers suggest that's where their going. Caymen is $52k 2,888lbs with 385hp. Based on Mazda's reputation with the Rx8, they better start sparing 1st before getting into the ring with the big boys their 1st day back in the ring.
08-27-16, 09:30 PM
#3190
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Where are you getting that from? The Hp to weight isn't hi enough to justify that cost. 2860lbs and 400hp is 7.15 lbs per hp. The base C7 Corvette is $55k and 3298lbs with 455hp. So that's 7.24lbs per hp. Z06 is $79.5k weighs 3524lbs and makes 650hp. That's 5.42lbs per hp. Mazda would be dumb if they think people are gonna spend 80k on a 400hp rotary over any Corvette listed above. Rx9 makes since in the early $50's to undercut the competition. Also I believe Mazda was bench marking the Cayman and these numbers suggest that's where their going. Caymen is $52k 2,888lbs with 385hp. Based on Mazda's reputation with the Rx8, they better start sparing 1st before getting into the ring with the big boys their 1st day back in the ring.
08-27-16, 09:49 PM
#3191
you know that nobody buys the GTR right? They sell like a 100 a month in the US. It's been basically 1000-2000 units per year since it came out. The FD sold what like 13k in 3 model years here? Yet Mazda deemed it enough of a money loser that they stopped selling it here when the new emissions regs came in 1996.
Granted, GTR's are 100k+ cars now.
Granted, GTR's are 100k+ cars now.
I think mazda stopped selling the RX7 has more to do with emission reg and reliability than it not selling well.
Last edited by hadokenny; 08-27-16 at 09:51 PM.
08-28-16, 01:19 PM
#3192
My bad I miss read the Google info. Either way, Mazda would be making a HUGE mistake if they think they can price an Rx9 for 80k given the engines recent unstable reliability history. Mazda doesn't have the reputation to command that type money for ANY rotary car out the gate as far too many people still have this notion that rotarys just blow up. 1st gen Rx8 was horrible (and is NA). Now if they put a 3 rotor in there, that's something different because now Americans would be willing to pay for something they never had available to them. Early 50's coming out the gate makes since. Unlikely 3 rotor option starting at 65k and being optioned out towards 80k makes since. 2 rotor 400hp 80k out the gate?????? Hell naw!
Last edited by t-von; 08-28-16 at 01:29 PM.
08-28-16, 01:25 PM
#3194
My bad I miss read the Google info. Either way, Mazda would be making a HUGE mistake if they think they can price an Rx9 for 80k given the engines recent unstable reliability history. Mazda doesn't have the reputation to command that type money for ANY rotary our the gate as far too many people still have this notion that rotarys just blow up. Now if they put a 3 rotor in there, that's something different because now Americans would be willing to pay for something they never had available to them.
08-28-16, 03:06 PM
#3195
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,903
Received 2,644 Likes
on
1,873 Posts
Also, the high price could be even more acceptable if a detuned model was available. The top of the line "GT-R killer" costs 80k and has 400+hp? Make a 300hp base model, perhaps using a smaller turbo or even just software limitations.
That way it would be possible to lower the entry price point, increase the production numbers and spread the R&D costs on a wider basis, making the Whole project more economically sustainable.
The alternative would be a very limited number of cars produced on a special assembly line, similar to the GT-R, NSX and the Alfa Romeo 4C, just to name a few.
By the way, if Alfa Romeo can sell the carbon fiber 4C at 56k, a new Rx at 80k is almost guaranteed to be made of carbon fiber. Especially given Mazda's obsession with weight saving and the recent ties with FCA which may allow Mazda to leverage Alfa Romeo's know-how with this material.
That way it would be possible to lower the entry price point, increase the production numbers and spread the R&D costs on a wider basis, making the Whole project more economically sustainable.
The alternative would be a very limited number of cars produced on a special assembly line, similar to the GT-R, NSX and the Alfa Romeo 4C, just to name a few.
By the way, if Alfa Romeo can sell the carbon fiber 4C at 56k, a new Rx at 80k is almost guaranteed to be made of carbon fiber. Especially given Mazda's obsession with weight saving and the recent ties with FCA which may allow Mazda to leverage Alfa Romeo's know-how with this material.
although really if it was more expensive they probably would have sold the same or more of them.
08-28-16, 05:15 PM
#3196
having a lower spec model actually might be a good idea, the Alfa sales are not encouraging. Alfa Romeo 4C US car sales figures
although really if it was more expensive they probably would have sold the same or more of them.
although really if it was more expensive they probably would have sold the same or more of them.
Porsche, on the other hand, got it right with the cayman GT4. Now if mazda Rx9 can go the direction of porsche with its cayman (manual, lightweight, world class handling, decent power), I think it can be a winner even if the price tag is near 70-80k.
08-28-16, 05:37 PM
#3197
Alfa Romeo 4C is the perfect example of right recipes but poor execution. You have a lightwieght coupe with decent power and good looks. It's target audience should be the miata/lotus crowd. But they decide to **** it up by putting a double clutch tranny when a manual 6 speed is what it needs. They also did not get the handling right with the car. I test drove it and found the car twitchy during spirited driving. Not confidence inspiring at all.
Doesn't it have macphersons in the front?
