Wait for it! The New Miata is gonna be something special with it's new lighter weight and improved chassis. Am I the only one here who sees a bright future for Mazda? I'm so glad Ford is out of the way.

 

Here's a pimped out 3 at Mazda's booth at Sema show.

 

I for one think Mazda is bringing some great cars to market. Hopefully with any luck, Mazda will generate a lot of money with the new cars and can once again look at the 16x. The 50th anniversary of the rotary is in 2017 I can't believe Mazda would miss that opportunity. Here's hoping Mazda does something special.

 

I think Mazda is headed in the right direction with SkyActiv.

With a more fuel-efficient, emissions-reduced fleet, the business case for the rotary becomes stronger, at least in the US.

For example, Porsche + Volkswagen = increased CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy):
Porsche Seeks Exemption from US Fuel Efficiency, Emissions Standards | Earth & Industry

BMW and Mercedes get low market volume emissions exemptions:
Fuel Rules to Spare BMW, Daimler - WSJ.com

 

i agree! on both counts actually. the neat thing about the FD is that i've met a lot of the people involved with the FD, from dealer mechanics, to Koby himself*. the short part is that when the FD arrived in the US there were maybe 5 people in the world that knew how to work on it. so when the hose blew off the white solenoid*2, and they started catching on fire, it was bad!

*Koby is awesome, he's enthusiastic, quick, sharp, just like the FD actually.

*2; the JC cosmo has clamps on all the boost hoses, just think how many FD's got multiple sets of $2500 turbos because the hose blew off…

 

Mazda underestimates the demand for their rotary sports cars – they ended up doubling the production of the Japan-only 2011 Spirit R RX-8 from 1,000 units to 2,000:
2011 Mazda RX-8 Spirit R - Top Speed

By comparison, they produced 1,500 of the 2002 Spirit R RX-7 and 500 of the 2001 Bathurst R RX-7.

 

The FD stands as an example as to why automakers don't really listen to their customer base like we wish they would.
I can imagine, in circa 1989 or so, Mazda asking current RX7 owners what they wanted in the new RX-7.
"More power, lighter weight, lower, wider, RACECAR! Screw the ride quality and cup holders, we want speed!"
So Mazda made it...and sold about a half dozen a year.

 

Yeah, That's why Chevy, Nissan, and soon Toyota again, are successfully selling cars of that description.

This is a complete misnomer. The car was poorly marketed, and poorly supported, and probably poorly timed to the economic conditions. They sold about 10k the first year, AND THEN it dropped to a trickle. Chevy only sold 11-13k Vettes in the last couple years.

 

Perhaps Mazda should solicit preorders for their next supercar, like the high-end manufacturers.

It would give them a better plan for production numbers – the Nissan GT-R is a perfect example of this (a Nissan rep told me the dealerships were losing money on every GT-R sold at launch due to high training, service, etc. costs).

 

because it nearly doubled in price from the 2nd gen...

 

The Yen was high against the dollar and the world economic recession started at the same time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_1990s_recession

I wonder what Mazda is thinking when they consider target competitor vehicles. My RX-7 book (Jack Yamaguchi, Ron Wakefield) shows pictures of road testing against an Acura NSX, a much more expensive car at the time.

Would comparing the next RX-7 against the Nissan GT-R, Chevrolet Stingray, or Porsche Cayman be setting the bar too high?

 

I was just semi-quoting the Yamaguchi book.
Chevy, Nissan and Toyota all have cars that sell well, so they can spend some money on a low-production flagship sports car. Mazda was selling Proteges and B2000s to fund the RX-7, not Maximas and Tahoes.

 

Lets hope the new miata is really cool or better than the alpha that shares it's chassis.

Here's an idea how about doing something different than the competitor like a small light weight coupe that has a really cool unique smooth linear engine with a 9 or 10k redline and they can give it a new name; something like RX7. I bet that would sell pretty well

 

So I looked up the NSX on Wikipedia – it sold more than 18,000 units in 15 years of production.

How many auto manufacturers are interested in producing back to basics sports cars: lightweight, excellent handling and braking, reasonably fast?

Sports car sales are mostly about marketing, image, and irrelevant specs... I imagine the then-new Ford Mustang and Chevrolet Camaro were decent at launch, while sales of the Genesis Coupe, 370Z and RX-8 have been unspectacular. Models like the Audi R8, Dodge Challenger SRT, and BMW 1 Series M Coupé are oddballs, at best.

 

The NSX is a super car similar to the GTR and the GT3 so of course it's sales #s were extremely low.

The FC sold like hot cakes and a similar RX7 built today would do the same as proven by the BRZ.

The current mustangs and camaros sell like hot cakes and the manufactures are smart enough to build several additions from eco boxes to flat out track cars and mazda could easily do the same and easily sell LOTS OF SPORTS CARS.

 

Simple Formula:

The 2013 Mazda MX-5 is about 1,182 kg / 2,605 lbs with A/C and hardtop.

Make a 2015 MX-5-bodied coupe with a 16X engine and slap some racy bits on it. Style it all sexy-like. Call it an RX-6 or something.

Step 3: Profit

 

 

Fritz, the passionate part of me says "HELL YA," Fritz is right on the money... while the realistic rational inner voice says... people don't trust what they don't know. If Mazda had a rotary competitor on the market RIGHT NOW, it wouldn't come close to the BRZ in sales due to one main reason..."fear of the unknown and previous rotary reliability issues." We all know the steps to take to make our cars "MORE" reliable, yet many of us still have hiccups. Why? 'Cause we're pushing the engines to twice their intended power output. If as many Vette owners as FD owners pushed the power density of their cars to 2x we'd be seeing the results (and complaints) on Corvette forums. Think about this, leading up to 1993, Mazda had close to 12 years of rotary production models (1979 to 1991) with relatively good reliability, yet FD sales were weak. Why? The FD was battling major headwinds. 1. Huge price increase over the FC moved the FD up against a new more entrenched customer base (Porsche, Vette and NSX), 2. U.S. Economy was in recession, and 3. Terrible technical training by Mazda due to product launch. To this DAY, the No. 1 question I get from people about my car is "how's the reliability"? Most of this bad rep was developed early on (1971 to 1977). Initial impressions are terribly difficult to overcome. Mazda really needs to address fuel economy and reliability, but even then, I fear that the die may be cast in peoples minds. RX-8 engine replacements and poor gas mileage did not help the cause. We shall see...

Call it the MRX-5 option :0

 

hah that was mazda's recipe for the next rx7 , elongated version of the new miata chassis with the 16x , 300hp and an RX7 badge

 

IMO, yes. The (majority) of current RX7 owners are ones that generally cannot go out and buy a new GT-R, Stringray or Cayman. The simple truth is most rotary followers want a new rotary powered vehicle which can compete against the current big dawgs, but cost the same price as a 20 year old FD. If Mazda would bring a $60k rotary powered vehicle to the market, probably less than 20% of this forum could or would buy one.

Personally, I would love to see a NA 3-rotor two-seater smallish sports car around 2300-2400 lbs. I know that's light compared to what's offered today, but Lotus has proved that there is a market for a minimalistic sports car as long as it looks and performs well. And to be blunt, they need to stay NA for better reliability and go with lighter weight to gain performance rather than FI. With Alfa Romeo bringing their 4C to the US market, there still is a place for small but quick sports cars.

 

I was going to call it Option R, but it sounded too JDM.

RX-6 is more classic, following in the footsteps of the nearly-forgotten RX-2, RX-3, RX-4, and RX-5 (Cosmo) models.

 

a 91 turbo was $26,500, and the convertible was $27,700, when it came out the FD was ~32k. this is partly why the 91 turbo is rarer than the 95 FD, it was EXPENSIVE.

the recession of 1992 is probably more significant.

 

i agree! obviously Mazda has shown us the 2 rotor 16X, but i think i like a multi rotor engine for a couple of reasons.

1. sound. a three or 4 rotor would sound like nothing else on the road. i feel this would add a lot to the whole experience. it could take a car from ordinary to extra ordinary.

2. displacement, if Mazda wants to go bigger, you have to wonder if a 12A sized 3 rotor isn't a better way to get to 1.6 liters?

3. the rotary is STILL compact in multi rotor form, apparently the new engine would have narrower rotors, which makes it shorter. i have a bad comparison, but even a fully dressed 20B is 22" long and the TR3's engine was 24" long….

 

Again, a rotary powered "hardtop Miata" called an RX5 or RX6 was a no-brainer great idea like 12 years ago. There's your BRZ competitor. Before there was a BRZ. Never happened because Mazda sucks.

 

It's annoying because Billy Bob and his idiot cousin could probably be hired to put one together in the barn for some moonshine and magazines with nekkid lady pitchers.

Seriously: Buy a 2013 MX-5, figure out out how to put a Renesis in. Pay us in whisky for our valuable R&D, Mazda.