The RX-7 confirmed to be in the pipeline for 2017---RX-Vision Unveil!!
12-19-13, 04:18 PM
#726
Yup. The RX8 and the MX-5 were based on the same platform. How can you take a great platform like that, and build a chick car with no power, AND then a goofy looking four-door with suicide doors and rotary power, and then NOT BUILD the obvious winning combo in between?
12-19-13, 06:37 PM
#727
Rotary Enthusiast
I get the feeling that if some of the engineers staged a management coup at Mazda, they would become brilliant.
This is the same company that built the Furai, the 2004-2005 Mazdaspeed MX-5, and the Mazdaspeed6. Why is this so hard?
This is the same company that built the Furai, the 2004-2005 Mazdaspeed MX-5, and the Mazdaspeed6. Why is this so hard?
12-19-13, 09:19 PM
#730
i wanted to add my input
Mazda is not a very profitable car company not so that it can afford to roll out a sports car that will hopefully move in the USA at least 30k units/year. Mazda recently mentioned it would have to sell in units of 100k/year. Well what sports car sells at those figures? The beetle?
Sales of Mazda cars in the US arent a lot. We're talking 260k units/year. When you compare that to the other big boys. Its peanuts
Top three automakers in Japan are as you know Toyota, Honda, Nissan. Then you have a steep drop that represents Mazda, Subaru, and Mitsubushi. Somehwere in between those sales figures you have the koreans who have left Mazda far behind. Also competing for marketshare is Volkswagen and now the Ford Fusion.
Mazda is poorly received by the US for many reasons including poor dealer network, many dealers are shared with others, little incentives, and their failure to get the word out. The successful automakers are the ones who sell every day.
Point being there is nothing to gain by reviving the RX template. Its not going to boost sales, its not going to make the company money. Mazda needs to focus on its assembly plant in Mexico to bring costs down and redirect cash where it needs it most. If youre going to sell a trendy stylish car, do it in markets like NYC and LA. Concentrate there. In most urban areas, buyers will overlook incentives for a market niche car. Very difficult to do in suburban or rural areas where people will buy Camrys blindfolded.
Eventually the rotary will return when the market can bear it. Mazda makes great cars. I tend to think of them as the Alfa Romeos of Japan, Not that they are unreliable so to speak but they have a lot of personality.
Mazda is not a very profitable car company not so that it can afford to roll out a sports car that will hopefully move in the USA at least 30k units/year. Mazda recently mentioned it would have to sell in units of 100k/year. Well what sports car sells at those figures? The beetle?
Sales of Mazda cars in the US arent a lot. We're talking 260k units/year. When you compare that to the other big boys. Its peanuts
Top three automakers in Japan are as you know Toyota, Honda, Nissan. Then you have a steep drop that represents Mazda, Subaru, and Mitsubushi. Somehwere in between those sales figures you have the koreans who have left Mazda far behind. Also competing for marketshare is Volkswagen and now the Ford Fusion.
Mazda is poorly received by the US for many reasons including poor dealer network, many dealers are shared with others, little incentives, and their failure to get the word out. The successful automakers are the ones who sell every day.
Point being there is nothing to gain by reviving the RX template. Its not going to boost sales, its not going to make the company money. Mazda needs to focus on its assembly plant in Mexico to bring costs down and redirect cash where it needs it most. If youre going to sell a trendy stylish car, do it in markets like NYC and LA. Concentrate there. In most urban areas, buyers will overlook incentives for a market niche car. Very difficult to do in suburban or rural areas where people will buy Camrys blindfolded.
Eventually the rotary will return when the market can bear it. Mazda makes great cars. I tend to think of them as the Alfa Romeos of Japan, Not that they are unreliable so to speak but they have a lot of personality.
12-19-13, 09:19 PM
#731
The simple truth is that most people don't want to buy a high maintenance sports car that gets bad gas mileage. Today, they'd rather purchase a low maintenance sporty car that gets decent gas mileage. Mazda isn't really in a position to create a line of cars they know just aren't going to sell well. The fact that they've basically left the Mazda 3/6 line virtually the same for 10 years (well, they finally did something for the 6) doesn't help. They should take a look at what companies like BMW do in which they reinvent their lines about every 5-6 years which helps keep interest up for their brands.
12-19-13, 09:25 PM
#732
Rotary Enthusiast
It's Thursday night. Have a Cosmo:
1993 Eunos/Mazda Cosmo Classic Drive - Motor Trend Classic
Yet another missed opportunity. I'd love to drive one, preferably the 20B Type E. Don't really see the point in setting one up to compete with an FD for hardcoreness.
1993 Eunos/Mazda Cosmo Classic Drive - Motor Trend Classic
Yet another missed opportunity. I'd love to drive one, preferably the 20B Type E. Don't really see the point in setting one up to compete with an FD for hardcoreness.
Last edited by HiWire; 12-19-13 at 09:27 PM.
12-19-13, 09:56 PM
#733
Again with all these supposed business reasons and sales expectations as excuses for why Mazda can't do what they ought to do. I say bullshit. They're looking at it backwards.
You don't just "get" to build cool cars because you're successful, you're successful BECAUSE you build cool cars. And they don't need to sell 100k units a year to be worthwhile. They need to sell enough to make your BRAND RELEVANT to consumers—not all of whom may even be able to afford it, but might start with a lesser model with some of the same DNA because it's compelling to them. What good was it to invest in and be successful at winning Le Mans if you don't sell anything that has any connection to the winning car?
That's why, again, you'll note that successful companies are building those cars, and head-up-their-asses Mazda can't figure out how to slap a Renesis in a Miata for God's sake. And who was the complete idiot—recognizing that the rotary's strength isn't practicality or reliability—decided that the car that should come with it is a compromise car aimed at greater practicality?! He's probably the new CEO.
I only keep harping on it because supposedly they read these forums—though I've got to believe they aren't actually smart enough for that.
You don't just "get" to build cool cars because you're successful, you're successful BECAUSE you build cool cars. And they don't need to sell 100k units a year to be worthwhile. They need to sell enough to make your BRAND RELEVANT to consumers—not all of whom may even be able to afford it, but might start with a lesser model with some of the same DNA because it's compelling to them. What good was it to invest in and be successful at winning Le Mans if you don't sell anything that has any connection to the winning car?
That's why, again, you'll note that successful companies are building those cars, and head-up-their-asses Mazda can't figure out how to slap a Renesis in a Miata for God's sake. And who was the complete idiot—recognizing that the rotary's strength isn't practicality or reliability—decided that the car that should come with it is a compromise car aimed at greater practicality?! He's probably the new CEO.
I only keep harping on it because supposedly they read these forums—though I've got to believe they aren't actually smart enough for that.
12-19-13, 10:08 PM
#734
I couldn't agree more.
What happened to win on Sunday sell on Monday? Mazda has always marketed itself as a driver's car, so where's our flagship?
Some kinda toned-down road going Furai with a less thirsty, more reliable, forced induction Wankel in it, screaming at 9k+ RPMs...
GTR who? LFA what?
What happened to win on Sunday sell on Monday? Mazda has always marketed itself as a driver's car, so where's our flagship?
Some kinda toned-down road going Furai with a less thirsty, more reliable, forced induction Wankel in it, screaming at 9k+ RPMs...
GTR who? LFA what?
12-19-13, 10:20 PM
#735
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Another state obliterated by leftists
Posts: 208
Received 538 Likes
on
270 Posts
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.
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.
12-19-13, 10:30 PM
#736
I disagree there.. Sure, the Vette's sell a lot, but so do Boxsters, S2000s, Elises, BRZ/FRSs, and many other "torqueless" wonders that fill the streets and the tracks. I would wager there are a lot more small block sporty cars running around out there than the big blocks. Vette and Viper owners do expect lots of torque, however those really aren't the target buyers for another rotary vehicle.
12-19-13, 10:48 PM
#737
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Another state obliterated by leftists
Posts: 208
Received 538 Likes
on
270 Posts
Above $50K, as I said in the last post, there's only one successful manufacturer sales-wise whose cars are lacking in torque. S2K's production ended 5 years(!) ago (and those were way less than $40K), BRZs are shitboxes where their only advantage over the RX-8 is 200 lbs lighter weight. Elise is very limited production, nevermind that they're SC'd and make a good bit more torque than a N/A 2.0 or 2.2L S2K.
My whole point being that if there were to be another 7, it must be turbo'd, because without torque there will be no mass sales (i.e. beyond a a couple thousand sold/yr in U.S. market, if they're lucky, and certainly if it plays in the $40K or $50K price point and beyond).
My whole point being that if there were to be another 7, it must be turbo'd, because without torque there will be no mass sales (i.e. beyond a a couple thousand sold/yr in U.S. market, if they're lucky, and certainly if it plays in the $40K or $50K price point and beyond).
12-19-13, 11:02 PM
#738
My whole point being that if there were to be another 7, it must be turbo'd, because without torque there will be no mass sales (i.e. beyond a a couple thousand sold/yr in U.S. market, if they're lucky, and certainly if it plays in the $40K or $50K price point and beyond).
Mazda really didn't have much competition back when the FD was released. The introduction of performance coupes makes it's much harder today.
As for the other vehicles mentioned, that was more of a comparison to talk about people buying lower torque vehicles over higher torque ones during the time they were new/sold. i.e. when the Elise came out (which was not SC'd) and when the S2000 was being made, so were Vette's and Vipers. However, original Elises and S2000's both sold very well and the Boxster continues to do so (mainly by name but also by performance). You can call the BRZ/FRS crapboxes if you like, but they are selling and that's the name of the game.
12-20-13, 03:35 AM
#739
Rotary Enthusiast
The Nismo 370Z makes 350 hp / 276 lb-ft for about $43,000. The base model starts at under $30,000 in the US... while the Z may not be our kind of car, I think the value is there.
Likewise for the $30,000 Mustang V8 (base V6 starts at $22,000), with 420 hp / 390 lb-ft and even more so when the independent suspension update arrives next year.
The $47,000 BMW 1 Series M Coupé had 335 hp / 370 lb-ft and sold 6,309 cars in its limited run.
Mazda obviously can't compete on torque, but an FI design would be attractive to more sports car buyers. The RX-8 already proved you can't sell a car without more torque. The Chevrolet Cobalt SS had better straight-line performance.
Likewise for the $30,000 Mustang V8 (base V6 starts at $22,000), with 420 hp / 390 lb-ft and even more so when the independent suspension update arrives next year.
The $47,000 BMW 1 Series M Coupé had 335 hp / 370 lb-ft and sold 6,309 cars in its limited run.
Mazda obviously can't compete on torque, but an FI design would be attractive to more sports car buyers. The RX-8 already proved you can't sell a car without more torque. The Chevrolet Cobalt SS had better straight-line performance.
Last edited by HiWire; 12-20-13 at 03:46 AM.
12-20-13, 08:32 AM
#740
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
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.
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.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
Call it the MRX-5 option :0
Again with all these supposed business reasons and sales expectations as excuses for why Mazda can't do what they ought to do. I say bullshit. They're looking at it backwards.
You don't just "get" to build cool cars because you're successful, you're successful BECAUSE you build cool cars. And they don't need to sell 100k units a year to be worthwhile. They need to sell enough to make your BRAND RELEVANT to consumers—not all of whom may even be able to afford it, but might start with a lesser model with some of the same DNA because it's compelling to them. What good was it to invest in and be successful at winning Le Mans if you don't sell anything that has any connection to the winning car?
That's why, again, you'll note that successful companies are building those cars, and head-up-their-asses Mazda can't figure out how to slap a Renesis in a Miata for God's sake. And who was the complete idiot—recognizing that the rotary's strength isn't practicality or reliability—decided that the car that should come with it is a compromise car aimed at greater practicality?! He's probably the new CEO.
I only keep harping on it because supposedly they read these forums—though I've got to believe they aren't actually smart enough for that.
You don't just "get" to build cool cars because you're successful, you're successful BECAUSE you build cool cars. And they don't need to sell 100k units a year to be worthwhile. They need to sell enough to make your BRAND RELEVANT to consumers—not all of whom may even be able to afford it, but might start with a lesser model with some of the same DNA because it's compelling to them. What good was it to invest in and be successful at winning Le Mans if you don't sell anything that has any connection to the winning car?
That's why, again, you'll note that successful companies are building those cars, and head-up-their-asses Mazda can't figure out how to slap a Renesis in a Miata for God's sake. And who was the complete idiot—recognizing that the rotary's strength isn't practicality or reliability—decided that the car that should come with it is a compromise car aimed at greater practicality?! He's probably the new CEO.
I only keep harping on it because supposedly they read these forums—though I've got to believe they aren't actually smart enough for that.
I disagree there.. Sure, the Vette's sell a lot, but so do Boxsters, S2000s, Elises, BRZ/FRSs, and many other "torqueless" wonders that fill the streets and the tracks. I would wager there are a lot more small block sporty cars running around out there than the big blocks. Vette and Viper owners do expect lots of torque, however those really aren't the target buyers for another rotary vehicle.
Above $50K, as I said in the last post, there's only one successful manufacturer sales-wise whose cars are lacking in torque. S2K's production ended 5 years(!) ago (and those were way less than $40K), BRZs are shitboxes where their only advantage over the RX-8 is 200 lbs lighter weight. Elise is very limited production, nevermind that they're SC'd and make a good bit more torque than a N/A 2.0 or 2.2L S2K.
My whole point being that if there were to be another 7, it must be turbo'd, because without torque there will be no mass sales (i.e. beyond a a couple thousand sold/yr in U.S. market, if they're lucky, and certainly if it plays in the $40K or $50K price point and beyond).
My whole point being that if there were to be another 7, it must be turbo'd, because without torque there will be no mass sales (i.e. beyond a a couple thousand sold/yr in U.S. market, if they're lucky, and certainly if it plays in the $40K or $50K price point and beyond).
If the exige sold for what it was worth we'd all have one LOL
Mazda can build that car and despite all the BS out their about the rotary if they build one that's designed properly it will be VERY RELIABLE and I think they should build a 2 and 3 rotor version (specialty track version) and price the 3 rotor high for us old bastards with a young heart.
All the negativity about the rotary is BS all it takes is a well built good looking car that makes 250 to 300 hp along with a good ad campaign/warranty and you will have people lined up to test drive it and then the drive should sell the car.
With all that said though it must get 20mpg or they should scrap it and maybe that's the problem in a nut shell.
And as mentioned throughout this thread there are lots of other cool cars out there and more and more designs that are catering to the coming market which is great but it's a shame that the one company who has the most potential to build a light weight, fun, economical, sports coupe is sitting on the fence..............IDIOTS!!!!!!!
PS And that car isn't the MX5, the younger/boy racer market doesn't want a lame convertible.
12-20-13, 08:35 AM
#741
The RX8 issues had nothing to do with a lack of torque. It had to do with the unreliability of the engine and the bad gas mileage (I know many ex-RX8 owners who didn't get 60k out of their engines before they were replaced). Unfortunately, things have changed from 20 years ago and Mazda will have to address those two items if they expect to being another rotary vehicle to the market with any success.
12-20-13, 08:51 AM
#742
The 350Z is a pig.
I've always referred to my car as "the Japanese Lotus", which sometimes referres to it's propensity to break down and leak oil, but on the positive side, Mazda had a good thing going with the Miata and FD both being influenced by Lotus designs.
An "affordable mainstream Exige" would've been a perfect target for a new RX7—keep the weight super low, enhance the great handling that Mazda already does well, and mitigate the relatively low torque and poor mileage of a rotary.
And then you market it as a completely impractical, weekend/2nd car, not a "4-door sportscar" for the poor sod with two kids a 6 bags of groceries, and then nobody gives a **** about the fuel mileage. Support that with some track-friendly Mazdaspeed upgrades like roll bars, seats, big(er) brakes, and Mazda sanctioned track events, corrals at pro events, etc. Corvette, Viper, Porsche, BWM, etc., all do this stuff.
I've always referred to my car as "the Japanese Lotus", which sometimes referres to it's propensity to break down and leak oil, but on the positive side, Mazda had a good thing going with the Miata and FD both being influenced by Lotus designs.
An "affordable mainstream Exige" would've been a perfect target for a new RX7—keep the weight super low, enhance the great handling that Mazda already does well, and mitigate the relatively low torque and poor mileage of a rotary.
And then you market it as a completely impractical, weekend/2nd car, not a "4-door sportscar" for the poor sod with two kids a 6 bags of groceries, and then nobody gives a **** about the fuel mileage. Support that with some track-friendly Mazdaspeed upgrades like roll bars, seats, big(er) brakes, and Mazda sanctioned track events, corrals at pro events, etc. Corvette, Viper, Porsche, BWM, etc., all do this stuff.
12-20-13, 08:54 AM
#743
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
The 350Z is a pig.
I've always referred to my car as "the Japanese Lotus", which sometimes referres to it's propensity to break down and leak oil, but on the positive side, Mazda had a good thing going with the Miata and FD both being influenced by Lotus designs.
An "affordable mainstream Exige" would've been a perfect target for a new RX7—keep the weight super low, enhance the great handling that Mazda already does well, and mitigate the relatively low torque and poor mileage of a rotary.
And then you market it as a completely impractical, weekend/2nd car, not a "4-door sportscar" for the poor sod with two kids a 6 bags of groceries, and then nobody gives a **** about the fuel mileage. Support that with some track-friendly Mazdaspeed upgrades like roll bars, seats, big(er) brakes, and Mazda sanctioned track events, corrals at pro events, etc. Corvette, Viper, Porsche, BWM, etc., all do this stuff.
I've always referred to my car as "the Japanese Lotus", which sometimes referres to it's propensity to break down and leak oil, but on the positive side, Mazda had a good thing going with the Miata and FD both being influenced by Lotus designs.
An "affordable mainstream Exige" would've been a perfect target for a new RX7—keep the weight super low, enhance the great handling that Mazda already does well, and mitigate the relatively low torque and poor mileage of a rotary.
And then you market it as a completely impractical, weekend/2nd car, not a "4-door sportscar" for the poor sod with two kids a 6 bags of groceries, and then nobody gives a **** about the fuel mileage. Support that with some track-friendly Mazdaspeed upgrades like roll bars, seats, big(er) brakes, and Mazda sanctioned track events, corrals at pro events, etc. Corvette, Viper, Porsche, BWM, etc., all do this stuff.
12-20-13, 10:27 AM
#745
Originally Posted by Motor Trend
Reviewers lauded its no-expense-spared leather, and wood trim purportedly harvested from elm trees near Lyon, France, and polished by Italian craftsmen in Milan.
12-20-13, 10:37 AM
#746
Rotary Enthusiast
I'd love for them to bring the Cosmo back. Hell, I'd take the exact same car... just make it a stick, if possible. It's just another example of Mazda creating a great product, and completely failing to sell it.
Toyota did a good job of promoting the Scion FR-S last year and this year... there have been all kinds of track events, sponsorships, car show appearances, etc. to support the new car.
I agree that the Z is a pig, but limiting the Mazda rotary market to Lotus-type enthusiasts will guarantee low volumes. There just aren't that many driving purists out there (who are willing to lay down the money on a new sports car), despite what people say. The rich ones can afford Porsche Caymans and Lotus Exiges, the rest of us make do.
There is a rumor that Nissan is also bringing the Silvia/240 back... that is a another example of a frustrating platform in the past:
Good: RWD, low-cost, lots of mods
Bad: Relatively rare, only truck engine available in North America
Anybody excited about the new Lamborghini? Rock you like a Huracán.
Toyota did a good job of promoting the Scion FR-S last year and this year... there have been all kinds of track events, sponsorships, car show appearances, etc. to support the new car.
I agree that the Z is a pig, but limiting the Mazda rotary market to Lotus-type enthusiasts will guarantee low volumes. There just aren't that many driving purists out there (who are willing to lay down the money on a new sports car), despite what people say. The rich ones can afford Porsche Caymans and Lotus Exiges, the rest of us make do.
There is a rumor that Nissan is also bringing the Silvia/240 back... that is a another example of a frustrating platform in the past:
Good: RWD, low-cost, lots of mods
Bad: Relatively rare, only truck engine available in North America
Anybody excited about the new Lamborghini? Rock you like a Huracán.
Last edited by HiWire; 12-20-13 at 10:46 AM.
12-20-13, 11:01 AM
#747
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
I'd love for them to bring the Cosmo back. Hell, I'd take the exact same car... just make it a stick, if possible. It's just another example of Mazda creating a great product, and completely failing to sell it.
Toyota did a good job of promoting the Scion FR-S last year and this year... there have been all kinds of track events, sponsorships, car show appearances, etc. to support the new car.
I agree that the Z is a pig, but limiting the Mazda rotary market to Lotus-type enthusiasts will guarantee low volumes. There just aren't that many driving purists out there (who are willing to lay down the money on a new sports car), despite what people say.
Toyota did a good job of promoting the Scion FR-S last year and this year... there have been all kinds of track events, sponsorships, car show appearances, etc. to support the new car.
I agree that the Z is a pig, but limiting the Mazda rotary market to Lotus-type enthusiasts will guarantee low volumes. There just aren't that many driving purists out there (who are willing to lay down the money on a new sports car), despite what people say.
Then there's the older guy who wants a fun car to drive so he buys a GTR, corvette, GT3 etc.... to only be completely disappointed in the street driving experience because it's a bloated pig that's impossible to enjoy with out going to a race track.
Build a unique (high revving rotary) attractive light weight sports car and it will sell to both the young and the old.
The next Z will be less of the pig as will the next mustang because the smart car manufactures are starting to understand and cater to the market. They also understand that brand loyalty/marketing means something and if I race my mustang I'll tow it with a F350, my wife will drive an escape and my daughter a focus.
As soon as the current CEO at Mazda said he was shelving the rotary, pinching pennies and building eco boxes he lost my business. That's a great strategy for short term profit but an abysmal business plan.
12-20-13, 11:36 AM
#748
If you build a great rotary platform it opens consumers to look at other Mazda possibilities. If you have nothing to offer you'll never get their foot in the door to begin the conversation.
Finally, Mazda REALLY needs to work on their dealer support network. I can't tell you how many people I spoke with who went to buy RX-8s and were greeted by a sales force that had less product knowledge than the person buying the car.
12-20-13, 12:07 PM
#749
You know darn well GTR, Vette and Porsche owners enjoy their cars regardless of where they are... They may not be hitting the highways and stretching the car's legs, but at least the GTR and Vettes are definitely designed around street driving. GT3, maybe not as much depending on what the buyer requested.This is a GREAT point and something I really noticed at Sevenstock. When Mazda exec Jeremy Barnes got up on the stage to pump other Mazda models he asked the rotary community for a show of hands as to how many owned "other" Mazda vehicles, the number of hands in the air was less than impressive, and this was at a grassroots MAZDA ENTHUSIAST event!!!
12-20-13, 12:23 PM
#750
I actually thought the Porsche Boxster S was a really fun car to drive. Since the FD I think its as close as you can get in fun factor and performance as any RX-7 they would likely make today or have made previously.
It has refinement, excellent performance for price. Maybe the best chassis under $100k.
Since curing it of its intermediate shaft issues its probably more reliable then any sports car period.
I know you don't need to take it to the race track to enjoy it.
It has refinement, excellent performance for price. Maybe the best chassis under $100k.
Since curing it of its intermediate shaft issues its probably more reliable then any sports car period.
I know you don't need to take it to the race track to enjoy it.