3rd Gen General Discussion The place for non-technical discussion about 3rd Gen RX-7s or if there's no better place for your topic

The RX-7 confirmed to be in the pipeline for 2017---RX-Vision Unveil!!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-06-14, 03:03 AM
  #876  
Full Member
 
Bwarrrrrp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HiWire
Re: the piston-engined MX-7 – Mazda doesn't have a V8 engine, so their piston engine would either have to be a brand new design, a V6 NA/FI, or sourced from another manufacturer.
It won't be a v8. V8's are not mazda. I doubt they'd do a six either, but it's more plausible than a v8. My bet is it would be a boosted 4. Maybe 2, 2.5L.
Old 01-06-14, 07:22 AM
  #877  
Full Member

 
fmzambon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Reggio Emilia, Italy
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by ZDan
IMO, new RX-3 wouldn't work. A new small/lightweight rwd car with a piston engine (modern Datsun 510) would be a great idea, though.

To gauge public acceptance of the rotary prior to investing in a new platform, I would make it an option on the MX-5/Miata (already suggested in this thread), call it the RX-5 (obvi).

And/or, develop a new small/lightweight coupe sports car for a rotary *and* a piston powerplant (RX-7 and MX-7) and let the market decide.

I have an LS2 in my FD, but I do love rotaries. But I want Mazda to make a new '7-like sports car either way, with or without the rotary. But preferably with both.

It would be supercool for them to do something novel/interesting like a very short and compact 2.5 V4 that could be shoved way back and down low to allow for a short wheelbase and very low hoodline. Basically something that could be packaged somewhat like a rotary. 250hp na, 400hp turboed, 2800 lb. or less.
Or use the rotary to power the mazdaspeed versions of the 3 and 6. You want all out performance? Here's your rotary. Don't want to mess with rotaries? go with the 2.5 boinger.

Incidentally, if Mazda wanted a V8 engine, they could just pair up a couple of skyactiv engine heads on a custom crankcase. You could reuse all of the combustion chamber and intake/exhaust solutions already developed for the inline 4 engines, and get a 3, 4 or 5 liter V8 (depending on what engine is used as a starting point, the 1.5, the 2 or the 2.5 liter) for very cheap.

Andrea.
Old 01-06-14, 08:40 AM
  #878  
Mr. Links

iTrader: (1)
 
Mahjik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 27,595
Received 41 Likes on 26 Posts
Thumbs down

If Mazda were to offer the same vehicle from the factory with a rotary or non-rotary option, that would be the death sentence to the rotary. That would demonstrate to the public that Mazda doesn't even believe in the platform enough to dedicate a model towards it.
Old 01-06-14, 09:58 AM
  #879  
TaK
iTrader: (1)
 
ghost1000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: delaware
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I have been cridicized fr saying this before but I believe Mazda new about the faults in the rotary. I believe they made it this way on purpous destroying its reputation, in a attempt to make money on maintenance and repairs.

Most sports cars are driven hard and expected to be high maintenance. My argument is the rotary is the opposite of that. Aside from more frequent plug changes it doesn't have timing belts or a valve train that needs 100k mainetnce. If the apex seals and the coils were designed properly the rx8 would of been a very reliable car that needed less maintenance than the average daily driver. . A low mainetnce highly output engine is what Mazda should of been pushing for in the first place. It's lack of moving part means lack of points of failure which should equal unbeatable reliability.

The guy who taught me to tune has an 10sec rx3 a 74 corolla and a 8sec GLC. He's showed me how strong these engines are and what there're capable of if you know what ur doing, yet Mazda engineers struggle with 250hp driven back and forth to work. It doesn't make sense.

The only problem I have seen from my rx8 is the coils failed and if the engine is running rough and building carbon it's probably going to fail too.
Old 01-06-14, 09:59 AM
  #880  
Senior Member

 
ZDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pawtucket, RI
Posts: 682
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Mahjik
If Mazda were to offer the same vehicle from the factory with a rotary or non-rotary option, that would be the death sentence to the rotary. That would demonstrate to the public that Mazda doesn't even believe in the platform enough to dedicate a model towards it.
Maybe you missed the news, but the rotary is ALREADY DEAD, has been for a couple of years.

A new model with both rotary and piston engines would *bring the rotary back to life*. They could let the piston-engine version subsidize the rotary version to some extent. If it can't survive even with that support, too bad, but is it really WORSE for you to have a new rotary car that also has a piston-engine option than NO new rotary whatsoever?
Old 01-06-14, 10:09 AM
  #881  
TaK
iTrader: (1)
 
ghost1000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: delaware
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I also believe the rx8 lacked much needed air cooling. There is plenty of room In the engine bay and Mazda covered it up with plastic and random parts. They should of been more strategic in the placement of the abs a/c and electronics. A bit more planning and the rx8 would be very easy to work on and have excellent air circulation around the engine.

It's a small 1.3l and yet a ls2 v8 fully dressed fits in with a similar amount of space. No wounded people like that swap.
Old 01-06-14, 10:29 AM
  #882  
Mr. Links

iTrader: (1)
 
Mahjik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 27,595
Received 41 Likes on 26 Posts
Originally Posted by ZDan
but is it really WORSE for you to have a new rotary car that also has a piston-engine option than NO new rotary whatsoever?
It defeats the purpose of what the "RX" line stood for, yes... If Mazda put equal amounts of engineering for both (similar to what the German car manufacturers are doing for their diesel/non-diesel cars), then that could be a good thing. However, using it solely to justify "another rotary vehicle" makes it a gimmick no different than selling a rotary powered Mazda.
Old 01-06-14, 11:00 AM
  #883  
Lives on the Forum

iTrader: (9)
 
ptrhahn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 9,033
Received 506 Likes on 279 Posts
Originally Posted by Mahjik
The problem like I said, the price point. Buying a FD today is cheap. The "kids" who are buying them have just enough to afford the car, not enough to afford the maintenance which is where the complaints stem... Those buying Ferrari's or other high end cars do their research and understand it's more than just getting the car home.
I'm not really talking about the used FD market—that's a given. Even when the car was new though, it was a big leap from the 2G, and a lot of people bought it thinking they could treat it like a 2G, or am Eclipse. It wasn't marketed well, and a lot of people didn't know what they were buying—essentially a 1990 IMSA GTU car for the street.


Originally Posted by Mahjik
The other thing is that Mazda cut a lot of corners on the FD. I'm sure they were trying to cut costs to make sure it wasn't going to be priced to high, but that didn't help with the maintenance cries of the car either (speaking mainly about a lot of plastic under the hood and the overly complex turbo control system). Mazda could definitely learn from these issues but the complaints of maintenance around the car are not complete fallacies.
Agreed, a LOT of cut corners—and really, the car should have cost a couple thousand more and come with a real radiator and IC, AST, dual oil coolers on all models, and more fail safes built in to the ECU.


Originally Posted by Mahjik
Any car can/will fail under extreme usage. However, a FI rotary does it more often and has a smaller margin for error. Who goes to the dealership today to buy a new car knowing the engine won't last 100k without a rebuild? No one. We celebrate people on this forum who make it to 60-80k before another rebuild. That's not what normal/sane people want.
I think that's true of a turbo rotary. But there was no excuse for the RX8. However, modern control systems are pretty remarkable. Even my Mom's base Mini monitors driving habits and calculates when all maintenance is needed, and indicates it. There's no reason Mazda can't monitor some of the things like fuel dilution, oil consumption, coil strength, knock, etc. more efficiently.

Originally Posted by Mahjik
If Mazda wants to bring another rotary to the market, and a performance car with a rotary, they are going to have to up their game and put in some engineering to make a sound rotary engine. The reputation of the rotary reliability, right or wrong, is negative with the majority of car buyers. The V8 and 2JZ swaps don't help that perception either.

If you are expecting Mazda to make a new rotary powered Corvette killer, it ain't going to happen. Their best hope is going a similar direction as Lotus and going lighter weight rather than power. But, they need to figure out some better gas mileage or it will be all for naught.
Agreed, and just as above—maybe Mazda needs to build in rotary specific things into the regular maintenance schedule. The 15k service includes a decarboning. And as I alluded to above, maybe the 60k service is a "seal freshening". "Motor rebuild" in a rotary doesn't really mean the same thing both in practical terms or in dollar terms compared to a piston engine. It's really a semantics/perception thing. A @#$%ing valve job on some V12 car might cost as much, and be as much work. It's just different.

AGAIN, I think that all of that sort of thing (and gas mileage) is FAR more tollerable on a higher-end specialty car than something marketed as a "practical" half-breed like the RX8.

Last edited by ptrhahn; 01-06-14 at 11:02 AM.
Old 01-06-14, 11:13 AM
  #884  
Mr. Links

iTrader: (1)
 
Mahjik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 27,595
Received 41 Likes on 26 Posts
Originally Posted by ptrhahn
AGAIN, I think that all of that sort of thing (and gas mileage) is FAR more tollerable on a higher-end specialty car than something marketed as a "practical" half-breed like the RX8.
Agreed. However, I have a hard time egging a car manufacturer to create a car that I won't be able to afford.
Old 01-06-14, 12:53 PM
  #885  
Moderator

iTrader: (3)
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,900
Received 2,643 Likes on 1,872 Posts
Originally Posted by ptrhahn
I think that's true of a turbo rotary. But there was no excuse for the RX8. However, modern control systems are pretty remarkable. Even my Mom's base Mini monitors driving habits and calculates when all maintenance is needed, and indicates it. There's no reason Mazda can't monitor some of the things like fuel dilution, oil consumption, coil strength, knock, etc. more efficiently.
i've been pretty impressed with the Rx8 ecu, it doesn't tell you when to service the car, but half the coils can be dead and it runs fine.

i do think that the new car needs to have some sort of ignition feedback thing, so the ecu KNOWS the coil fired (the Miata, FC and JC cosmo had such things), as the Rx8 will happily run on 2 coils, which ruins the cat, and sometimes the engine….


Agreed, and just as above—maybe Mazda needs to build in rotary specific things into the regular maintenance schedule. The 15k service includes a decarboning. And as I alluded to above, maybe the 60k service is a "seal freshening". "Motor rebuild" in a rotary doesn't really mean the same thing both in practical terms or in dollar terms compared to a piston engine. It's really a semantics/perception thing. A @#$%ing valve job on some V12 car might cost as much, and be as much work. It's just different.

AGAIN, I think that all of that sort of thing (and gas mileage) is FAR more tollerable on a higher-end specialty car than something marketed as a "practical" half-breed like the RX8.
i also think this is a great idea, they should just have a 8/100 maintenance plan, or something. look at BMW the regular warranty covers everything, and it just removes all of the problems.

Mazda warrantied the Rx8 engine for 8 years or 100k miles, and the downside to this is that the Rx8 owners just expect Mazda to pick up the tab for everything, when at some point its THEIR car.

obviously there is a happy medium in there somewhere...
Old 01-07-14, 12:32 PM
  #886  
Moderator

iTrader: (3)
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,900
Received 2,643 Likes on 1,872 Posts
actually to switch gears here is my idea of a "new" car. i'm not quite sure how to pitch it, but you FD guys seem to like long lists

mechanically the new car (we're calling it the P777), goes back to a ~95" wheelbase, like the FD/FC/1st gen/classic Ferrari's/Bugatti type 35. to me this is the classic sports car size.

two seats, although there is an engineering hurdle to overcome. coupe.

for the engine, Mazda has shown us the 16X, which is fine, but. the Ferarri 250 GTO is 280hp, in a 2300lb car, so for a rotary car to even match that, it needs ~360hp (you have to figure its going to be 3000lbs).

i am thinking of a multi rotor engine, but probably with some revised geometry, maybe a 70mm width rotor three rotor, or Mazda just introduced a 330cc rotary in the Mazda 2, in a 4 rotor that would be neat because of course the other issue with the 2 rotor is

SOUND. a stock FD and Rx8 sound like vacuum cleaners, a three or 4 rotor engine would suddenly change the engine from vacuum cleaner humdrum to something that is unique.

couple that to a flat NA torque curve and its a recipe for something that is just pleasurable.

for the suspension/chassis/drive train, i am thinking to revise the Rx8 stuff, as it really is a world class chassis, so i would rather spend the development budget on getting the thing to start, and or stuff you can touch/see.

thoughts?
Attached Thumbnails The RX-7 confirmed to be in the pipeline for 2017---RX-Vision Unveil!!-n410-02-200a-engine.jpg  
Old 01-07-14, 12:38 PM
  #887  
Rotary Enthusiast

 
HiWire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,499
Received 211 Likes on 148 Posts
Good ideas. Maybe Mazda should consider giving customers a base 2-rotor with a 3-rotor upgrade option. I'm not sure if they would go for a 4-rotor in a lightweight, inexpensive sports car.
Old 01-07-14, 02:10 PM
  #888  
Lives on the Forum

iTrader: (9)
 
ptrhahn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 9,033
Received 506 Likes on 279 Posts
Not at 3,000 lbs. 2,600 or forget it.
Old 01-07-14, 02:52 PM
  #889  
Sharp Claws

iTrader: (30)
 
RotaryEvolution's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 5,107
Likes: 0
Received 41 Likes on 40 Posts
3000 sounds about right for a modern car with a 3 rotor engine.

lighter than that and you have to sacrifice those modern comforts and mazda has never been fond of building any sports cars without them.

it's too bad the 3 rotors only ever came in a luxury sedan, i feel more people would have gotten into the cars if they offered them in more variety. i doubt mazda will ever put even a smaller 4 rotor engine into a car. picture the RX8 with a naturally aspirated 3 rotor, it would have been something people wanted and kept instead of what we have now which is them passing hands like candy after the engine warranty expired.

the RX8 we got was basically the nail in the coffin. it had limited power potential where a 3 rotor with a 275-300whp n/a figure to back it would have kept people content longer, stressing the engine less for more reliability. the standard 6 port MSP only really puts out about 185whp in the real world, compared to the turbo II introduced in 1987 which put out roughly 165whp 17 years earlier. the REW put out 220whp just before the renesis, so the power levels took a step down and not up. this of course was limited by european emissions standards but in the US a 3 rotor could have met the standards and still be successful.

Last edited by RotaryEvolution; 01-07-14 at 03:10 PM.
Old 01-07-14, 03:51 PM
  #890  
Lives on the Forum

iTrader: (9)
 
ptrhahn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 9,033
Received 506 Likes on 279 Posts
A lousy 130 lbs less than a Z06 and 100 more than the average 4-door RX8? The Toyota 86 is supposed to be 2,624–2,862.


3,000 is not going to cut it.
Old 01-07-14, 04:19 PM
  #891  
Sharp Claws

iTrader: (30)
 
RotaryEvolution's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 5,107
Likes: 0
Received 41 Likes on 40 Posts
the RX8 is actually a rather light car for what it is, mazda did do a good job with it in that department.

comparing an older car to a new car also isn't going to cut it when you consider most cars have several hundred pounds of electronics that older cars did not and even more for safety concerns like ABS and airbags. these are current standards, unlike 50 years ago when seatbelts were considered optional. these days people would probably moan and complain if there isn't a USB port for their ipod.

if we want to really get into depth why not compare it to a caterham? drop a 500# engine into a go kart frame and make a 300+whp 1400lb road car with 0 luxuries. there are companies that do just that already though. yes they are true driver's cars, but sometimes you might just want a heater when it's sub 0F outside.. a car like that would have a hard time on a dealership showroom floor.

Last edited by RotaryEvolution; 01-07-14 at 04:25 PM.
Old 01-07-14, 04:47 PM
  #892  
Senior Member

 
ZDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pawtucket, RI
Posts: 682
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by RotaryEvolution
comparing an older car to a new car also isn't going to cut it when you consider most cars have several hundred pounds of electronics that older cars did not and even more for safety concerns like ABS and airbags. these are current standards, unlike 50 years ago when seatbelts were considered optional.
Then again, a modern Corvette is pretty much the same weight as it was in 1968, while still being at the same relative price and performance.

Also, the FR-S/BRZ is precisely a modern version of the S13 Nissan 240SX of 25 years ago, weighs barely if any more than that car did.

Modern cars don't *HAVE* to be as big and heavy as most of them are. But more and more people seem to want big/heavy cars, even 5000+ lb. SUVs, and more and more modern "enthusiasts" don't care at all about the actual FEEL of driving a small/lightweight car, but rather only seem to care about performance figures in a magazine.

Anyway, still hold out some tiny amount of hope that Mazda might develop a 2600-2800 lb. fixed-roof sports car in the RX-7 vein. It is totally technically feasible. But I'm not holding my breath...
Old 01-07-14, 04:53 PM
  #893  
Lives on the Forum

iTrader: (9)
 
ptrhahn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 9,033
Received 506 Likes on 279 Posts
LOL, they only stopped making RX8's like two years ago, I'm pretty sure it had seat belts and electronics. And a heater. It was pretty light for what it is—a 4-door, 4-seater. If a two seater RX7 can't UNDER cut it by a couple hundred pounds, then WTF.
Old 01-07-14, 06:02 PM
  #894  
Sharp Claws

iTrader: (30)
 
RotaryEvolution's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 5,107
Likes: 0
Received 41 Likes on 40 Posts
Originally Posted by ZDan
Then again, a modern Corvette is pretty much the same weight as it was in 1968, while still being at the same relative price and performance.

Also, the FR-S/BRZ is precisely a modern version of the S13 Nissan 240SX of 25 years ago, weighs barely if any more than that car did.

Modern cars don't *HAVE* to be as big and heavy as most of them are. But more and more people seem to want big/heavy cars, even 5000+ lb. SUVs, and more and more modern "enthusiasts" don't care at all about the actual FEEL of driving a small/lightweight car, but rather only seem to care about performance figures in a magazine.

Anyway, still hold out some tiny amount of hope that Mazda might develop a 2600-2800 lb. fixed-roof sports car in the RX-7 vein. It is totally technically feasible. But I'm not holding my breath...
replacing metal with plastic is all good and fine for weight savings but more costly when you start poking holes in your interior with your pinky.

a 1968 vette is more likely to last a decade than a new Z06 will. it's all about what sacrifices we make for enjoyment.
Old 01-07-14, 07:49 PM
  #895  
Senior Member

 
ZDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pawtucket, RI
Posts: 682
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by RotaryEvolution
replacing metal with plastic is all good and fine for weight savings but more costly when you start poking holes in your interior with your pinky.
??? I don't think the '68 Corvette had a metal interior! And no Corvette ever had a metal body.

a 1968 vette is more likely to last a decade than a new Z06 will. it's all about what sacrifices we make for enjoyment.
I seriously doubt a '68 Corvette would hold up as well over a decade as a new Z06. It would be good to have a pristine example of each to find out, though
Old 01-08-14, 08:57 AM
  #896  
Lives on the Forum

iTrader: (9)
 
ptrhahn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 9,033
Received 506 Likes on 279 Posts
The new Corvettes are pretty impressive.

I'm not really a Corvette guy, but you've GOT to hand it to Chevy. It makes me proud to be an American, even if I'm unlikely to buy it. They had a body-less chassis at the Baltimore GP last year, it's really amazing. I've heard that the 2015's will have essentially a TrakMate built in, with video and full performance monitoring for the track. Know-your-audience WIN.

The Corvette had really become a shadow of it's former self, and 80's versions were sort of sad, but they've steadily improved them from the C4 through the C7. All this from a company that overall hasn't had the best reputation, and has had financial troubles, and is an "economy" brand, that's now happily selling $100k cars that enjoy a deserved world class reputation.

Mazda could learn a thing or two about having a vision, sticking to your brand, steadily working through challenges rather than fits and starts, not convincing yourself of what you "can't" do, or what will "never" sell, capitalizing on racing investment and success (see: C5 and C6R), etc., etc., etc.
Old 01-08-14, 09:28 AM
  #897  
All out Track Freak!

iTrader: (263)
 
Fritz Flynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes on 250 Posts
Originally Posted by ptrhahn
The new Corvettes are pretty impressive.

I'm not really a Corvette guy, but you've GOT to hand it to Chevy. It makes me proud to be an American, even if I'm unlikely to buy it. They had a body-less chassis at the Baltimore GP last year, it's really amazing. I've heard that the 2015's will have essentially a TrakMate built in, with video and full performance monitoring for the track. Know-your-audience WIN.

The Corvette had really become a shadow of it's former self, and 80's versions were sort of sad, but they've steadily improved them from the C4 through the C7. All this from a company that overall hasn't had the best reputation, and has had financial troubles, and is an "economy" brand, that's now happily selling $100k cars that enjoy a deserved world class reputation.

Mazda could learn a thing or two about having a vision, sticking to your brand, steadily working through challenges rather than fits and starts, not convincing yourself of what you "can't" do, or what will "never" sell, capitalizing on racing investment and success (see: C5 and C6R), etc., etc., etc.
hear hear!
Old 01-08-14, 09:49 AM
  #898  
Moderator

iTrader: (3)
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,900
Received 2,643 Likes on 1,872 Posts
Originally Posted by ptrhahn
LOL, they only stopped making RX8's like two years ago, I'm pretty sure it had seat belts and electronics. And a heater. It was pretty light for what it is—a 4-door, 4-seater. If a two seater RX7 can't UNDER cut it by a couple hundred pounds, then WTF.
my 89 vert was 3000lbs with a full tank of gas, my 2004 Rx8 base was also 3000lbs.

if you think about that, and realize that the 8 is TWENTY FIVE INCHES longer, they saved a lot of weight in the 8, and it still has ac/ps power windows and all that stuff.

if you look at a modern car vs an old car, the place where the new cars have gained weight is the body. due to crash standards the new car is BIG, and the trunk is higher, there is more structure too. basically we're building tanks vs something else.

my favorite is the new challenger, because its so obvious, but there is like a foot more car between the floor and the bottom of the window, and it looks all short and weird.

a well engineered car like a volvo, or a Mazda, can actually pass the crash tests without too much of this, but **** cars like hyundai/toyota are built like tanks...
Attached Thumbnails The RX-7 confirmed to be in the pipeline for 2017---RX-Vision Unveil!!-challengeroldandnew.jpg  
Old 01-08-14, 11:35 AM
  #899  
All out Track Freak!

iTrader: (263)
 
Fritz Flynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes on 250 Posts
As pete keeps repeating mazda sees the rotary glass as half full and I don't think we'll see another rotary so all this conjecture is pointless because until mazda stops talking about the rotary like it's a PIA and actually has some real enthusiasm about building another RX7 it's not going to happen and from what I can tell even if they have one in the pipeline it will likely be a compromise and won't be a car many of us will want.

The competition is committed to building good sports cars because they understand that it's what excites people about there products (absolutely the best form of advertising any car company can do) and from what I can tell Mazda is committed to making short term profits which is never a good business plan.
Old 01-08-14, 12:29 PM
  #900  
Rotary Motoring

iTrader: (9)
 
BLUE TII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 8,226
Received 772 Likes on 511 Posts
You guys need to get more optimistic.

Mazda just released a new rotary engine design for their generator set and Mazda2 EV range extender.

Since its in a car we know it meets current/future emissions standards.

It has side exhaust ports and peripheral intake ports which not only make more power, but will move the sideseals and remedy the reliability problems the RX-8 had with excessive exposure to exhaust gasses.

Here is what happens when you cut a peripheral intake on a 13BMSP with little development. It has the "right" kind of overlap (unlike old p-port exhaust/sideport intake motors) for good power even with emissions equipment.



Now add in direct injection and more torque from a "stroked" 16x with this port layout.

A dual clutch 6 or 7 speed transmission (cheap enough they are in Dodge Dart now) or option of CVT auto (strong enough now they are in heavy Subaru Legacys) will keep the engine in the proper rev range.

What about a chassis? The spy photos of the 2015 Miata show it is a development mule running the current body and they have clearly extended the wheelbase by adding nearly a foot to the hood between the door and the front wheel arch. It looks like a drop top RX-8 the wheelbase is so long.

Awesome, share this new longer lighter Miata chassis (claimed 2,200lb weight) with the RX-7.

With a fixed roof for even lighter weight and the p-port skyactive 16X under the hood for lighter weight/ better chassis dynamics and 300hp and Mazda would have an incredible machine.

300hp and 2,000lbs with the handling of FD, RX-8 or NC Miata would be near supercar territory for a reasonable price.

That is my dream RX-7


Quick Reply: The RX-7 confirmed to be in the pipeline for 2017---RX-Vision Unveil!!



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:07 AM.