The RX-7 confirmed to be in the pipeline for 2017---RX-Vision Unveil!!
01-23-14, 04:59 PM
#1251
a 3 rotor is the absolute worst engine mazda can put in the new rx7. a 3rotor is longer than an i-4 or v8. mazda's not going to say oh let's just add extra weight over the nose of the car to upset the balance and dynamics that we've spent decades refining over generations of rx7s. fuel efficiency isn't bad enough with the rotary, let's add another rotor to eat 50% more fuel. underhood temps not hot enough, let's add another rotor's worth of exhaust gases to really roast things under here. adding another rotor does not address the inherent deficiencies in the wankel, it's just a band-aid. adding 50% more displacement to get the power we need is the exact antithesis of the rotary's essence..
Lol. Spoken like someone who doesn't know all the different ways to mount a 3 rotor. Mine sits even lower in the fd engine bay than the rew and behind the rack. It's also NA so its lighter than the rew cause it doesn't have all the turbo related components. Others have been built 3 rotors in a similar fashion. No one that buys a 3 rotor cares about fuel efficiency. Same goes for those that buy Z06's, ZL1's, GT500's etc. If Mazda happens to give us 2 engine options, go buy the 16x and let the other people who want more and are willing to pay more, pay for the larger engine option.
Did you get lost on your way to the miata forums or something?
01-23-14, 11:30 PM
#1257
Ive been reading this thread for a while. While I do think the new Rx7 is a pipe dream, it is interesting hearing all of the opinions of what people think it should be. I didnt feel the need to put my (worthless) $.02 in, but wanted to at least respond to this.
Im sure you realize that if a 3 rotor was designated for the car, there is no reason why its placement could not be oriented so that it would still be behind the front axles. As others have said, even in my own FD the 20B has been moved back so the front of the engine is even slightly further back than the original 13B, and I still have an unmodded firewall and shifter is in factory location. And we are talking about designing a car from ground up with this as a concept, not retrofitting it into an older chassis. Running it N/A would take care of most of the other "issues" you had stated as well. The fact is that it is 2014 and for a company's flagship sports car to be taken seriously, it needs to be a serious competitor. Even base v8 mustangs come with 420+HP now. Hell the V6 dime a dozen ones are over 300. Yea, they're heavy and not the true driver's car we all want, but it will still need to at least be in the ballpark in a straight line. So you can add turbochargers which add heat, weight,complexity and potential unreliability.. or add displacement via extra rotor. I vote option 2 by a mile.
A ferrari V8 doesnt have any distinct advantages over a corvette LS7. It makes less torque, has to rev higher, is way more complex and exponentially more expensive. But people still buy them because it has character and it makes you feel like you are driving something special. An rx7 isnt a camry and shouldn't be marketed to soccer moms or as an "everyone's' sports car". I agree, the rotary has alot of things going against it, but the things it has ticks all the right boxes in alot of peoples emotional list and that what makes people lust after a car. I think this is where they went wrong with the RX8. The rotary needs to be a niche enthusiast engine put into a purpose built sports car. Market a BRZ competitor and its going to tank. Price it out at ~45k or so, give it a 375HP N/A 3 or 4 rotor. Target base vette performance but with much better driver engagement and smaller proportions and I think it would be a success. People that buy it will be enthusiasts that not only will maintain the car better but would be more willing to put up with its nuances.
Im sure you realize that if a 3 rotor was designated for the car, there is no reason why its placement could not be oriented so that it would still be behind the front axles. As others have said, even in my own FD the 20B has been moved back so the front of the engine is even slightly further back than the original 13B, and I still have an unmodded firewall and shifter is in factory location. And we are talking about designing a car from ground up with this as a concept, not retrofitting it into an older chassis. Running it N/A would take care of most of the other "issues" you had stated as well. The fact is that it is 2014 and for a company's flagship sports car to be taken seriously, it needs to be a serious competitor. Even base v8 mustangs come with 420+HP now. Hell the V6 dime a dozen ones are over 300. Yea, they're heavy and not the true driver's car we all want, but it will still need to at least be in the ballpark in a straight line. So you can add turbochargers which add heat, weight,complexity and potential unreliability.. or add displacement via extra rotor. I vote option 2 by a mile.
a 3 rotor is the absolute worst engine mazda can put in the new rx7. a 3rotor is longer than an i-4 or v8. mazda's not going to say oh let's just add extra weight over the nose of the car to upset the balance and dynamics that we've spent decades refining over generations of rx7s. fuel efficiency isn't bad enough with the rotary, let's add another rotor to eat 50% more fuel. underhood temps not hot enough, let's add another rotor's worth of exhaust gases to really roast things under here. adding another rotor does not address the inherent deficiencies in the wankel, it's just a band-aid. adding 50% more displacement to get the power we need is the exact antithesis of the rotary's essence.
if the rotary had distinct advantages over piston engines, then i'd be all for it, but in this day and age it doesn't. why introduce all the deficiencies of the rotary just for the sake of having a rotary in the new 7? at the end of the day customers aren't going to care if it's a rotary, piston, or gerbils under the hood. all they care about are that it has decent power, good low/mid range torque, and good fuel economy.
01-24-14, 06:15 AM
#1258
+1^^
Just thinking about Mazda releasing a new rx(X) with a OEM 3 rotor would make me want to sell everything I have to get it regardless of any reliability issues it may or may not have or gas mileage it doesn't get. Hell, it would be under warranty anyways right.
Just thinking about Mazda releasing a new rx(X) with a OEM 3 rotor would make me want to sell everything I have to get it regardless of any reliability issues it may or may not have or gas mileage it doesn't get. Hell, it would be under warranty anyways right.
01-24-14, 06:16 AM
#1259
If it were not for shareholders demanding that company executives make decisions that turn a profit you might all get a rotary powered RX-7 again.
The reality is its going to cost some people their careers and shareholders money if they build another car that sells 500 units in a year.
There were RX-7's on Mazda lots well into late 1996 and maybe a few even later.
It left a crater and it won't likely repeated anytime soon.
Add to the equation that Cafe standards are pushing even the large displacement N/A engines like the V-10 and V-8 BMW's to go to smaller displacement turbo engines you are really living the dream if you think a Rotary can reinvent itself to becoming a low emissions efficient engine.
Even the LS7 makes twice the power and gets nearly twice the MPG as the 13b. And that's 7.0 liters vs 1.3? This trend would require less displacement from the rotary, not more! This now would leave you with an even greater deficiency in power trying to meet current standards.
And they are phasing out the LS7. The new Z06 is going to be a smaller displacement forced Induction motor just like the BMW M cars, Audi S cars etc.
You could argue that they should make it anyway. Even of you used the model like Dodge has for the Viper. The car never intended to make any money. It was meant to improve the image of the brand and bring people into the dealerships which they believed would allow them to sell other models to viper fans.
Even if they could build it.
It is the only possible angle that the car will ever be built. But you can expect it to cost $100k.
So most of you won't have one anyway.
Anyone comparing Mazda to Ferrari needs their head examined lol.
The reality is its going to cost some people their careers and shareholders money if they build another car that sells 500 units in a year.
There were RX-7's on Mazda lots well into late 1996 and maybe a few even later.
It left a crater and it won't likely repeated anytime soon.
Add to the equation that Cafe standards are pushing even the large displacement N/A engines like the V-10 and V-8 BMW's to go to smaller displacement turbo engines you are really living the dream if you think a Rotary can reinvent itself to becoming a low emissions efficient engine.
Even the LS7 makes twice the power and gets nearly twice the MPG as the 13b. And that's 7.0 liters vs 1.3? This trend would require less displacement from the rotary, not more! This now would leave you with an even greater deficiency in power trying to meet current standards.
And they are phasing out the LS7. The new Z06 is going to be a smaller displacement forced Induction motor just like the BMW M cars, Audi S cars etc.
You could argue that they should make it anyway. Even of you used the model like Dodge has for the Viper. The car never intended to make any money. It was meant to improve the image of the brand and bring people into the dealerships which they believed would allow them to sell other models to viper fans.
Even if they could build it.
It is the only possible angle that the car will ever be built. But you can expect it to cost $100k.
So most of you won't have one anyway.
Anyone comparing Mazda to Ferrari needs their head examined lol.
01-24-14, 10:17 AM
#1260
If it were not for shareholders demanding that company executives make decisions that turn a profit you might all get a rotary powered RX-7 again.
The reality is its going to cost some people their careers and shareholders money if they build another car that sells 500 units in a year.
There were RX-7's on Mazda lots well into late 1996 and maybe a few even later.
It left a crater and it won't likely repeated anytime soon.
Add to the equation that Cafe standards are pushing even the large displacement N/A engines like the V-10 and V-8 BMW's to go to smaller displacement turbo engines you are really living the dream if you think a Rotary can reinvent itself to becoming a low emissions efficient engine.
Even the LS7 makes twice the power and gets nearly twice the MPG as the 13b. And that's 7.0 liters vs 1.3? This trend would require less displacement from the rotary, not more! This now would leave you with an even greater deficiency in power trying to meet current standards.
And they are phasing out the LS7. The new Z06 is going to be a smaller displacement forced Induction motor just like the BMW M cars, Audi S cars etc.
You could argue that they should make it anyway. Even of you used the model like Dodge has for the Viper. The car never intended to make any money. It was meant to improve the image of the brand and bring people into the dealerships which they believed would allow them to sell other models to viper fans.
Even if they could build it.
It is the only possible angle that the car will ever be built. But you can expect it to cost $100k.
So most of you won't have one anyway.
Anyone comparing Mazda to Ferrari needs their head examined lol.
The reality is its going to cost some people their careers and shareholders money if they build another car that sells 500 units in a year.
There were RX-7's on Mazda lots well into late 1996 and maybe a few even later.
It left a crater and it won't likely repeated anytime soon.
Add to the equation that Cafe standards are pushing even the large displacement N/A engines like the V-10 and V-8 BMW's to go to smaller displacement turbo engines you are really living the dream if you think a Rotary can reinvent itself to becoming a low emissions efficient engine.
Even the LS7 makes twice the power and gets nearly twice the MPG as the 13b. And that's 7.0 liters vs 1.3? This trend would require less displacement from the rotary, not more! This now would leave you with an even greater deficiency in power trying to meet current standards.
And they are phasing out the LS7. The new Z06 is going to be a smaller displacement forced Induction motor just like the BMW M cars, Audi S cars etc.
You could argue that they should make it anyway. Even of you used the model like Dodge has for the Viper. The car never intended to make any money. It was meant to improve the image of the brand and bring people into the dealerships which they believed would allow them to sell other models to viper fans.
Even if they could build it.
It is the only possible angle that the car will ever be built. But you can expect it to cost $100k.
So most of you won't have one anyway.
Anyone comparing Mazda to Ferrari needs their head examined lol.
100k to build a factory based 3 rotor Rx7??? And your talking about head exams? Lol! Seriously though all they would need to do is break even and make profits elsewhere to justify the project (which they are currently in a position to do). Ask yourself this, did the 20b Cosmo cost 100k when compared to the 13re version? Nope not even close! Also keep in mind it being NA, you wouldn't have all the associated cost of a turbo system. This equals much cheaper to manufacture and produce. Also keep in mind that this Cosmo had its own dedicated chassis and was still much cheaper than its competition.
http://m.motortrend.com/classic/feat...a_cosmo_drive/
01-24-14, 10:41 AM
#1261
Seems like the primary driver for good highway fuel economy in LS-powered cars is a big overdrive and tall final gear. Stock for stock, the C6 Z06 and FD RX-7 have similar city economies. Though the Mazda gives up 250 horsepower to get there. Even using the existing 13B, Mazda could reclaim lost economy with direct injection and laser ignition that would also help with emissions.
01-24-14, 11:27 AM
#1262
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,804
Received 2,577 Likes
on
1,831 Posts
By going back to a 12a displacement employing their long stroke ideas, and refining the center plates and gears (which has been done by aftermarket companies with 12a parts), you end up with a 3-rotor that is i think not even 2" longer than the 13B? But with a better torque curve than any non-turbo 2-rotor.
Plus all aluminum construction and you actually end up lighter than a traditional 13B.
Plus all aluminum construction and you actually end up lighter than a traditional 13B.
so for the new Rx, we're calling it the P777, the chassis is basically an NC miata/Rx8, at a ~95" wheelbase, as its excellent. i would reuse the diff and 6 speed transmission too, as these already are well proven.
i would spend the bulk of the money on the engine, and ecu programming, interior and probably give it an extra 6 months of testing, it needs to work when it shows up at the dealership.
to that end, i have a 12A based 3 rotor drawn up, and a 10A based 4 rotor.
on monday i looked into the "long stroke" thing, i was thinking that the 13B is 15mm crank throw, lets use a 70mm rotor housing and a 20mm crank throw, and life would be wonderful, but its not so.
the 13A, used a 17.5mm crank throw, and 60mm rotor housings for a 655cc chamber
the 16X was 18mm and 70mm rotor housings for ~800cc rotor housings
so my 20mm crank and 70mm rotor housing is like 1000cc per chamber!
i'm not a very good rotary engineer! i think i would spec the HP, give a displacement range, a redline rpm, and durability target, and just let the rotary engineers loose....
i'm way behind, but i have the engine and front suspension mocked up in the computer, clay model of the exterior is probably end of febtober...
i do realize that Mazda would use the new miata chassis as a base, but by using the Rx8/NC we're a cut and paste away from being able to build something like this in reality
01-24-14, 11:33 AM
#1263
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,804
Received 2,577 Likes
on
1,831 Posts
Who said anything about marketing the deficiencies?
You market what it is, and thus indirectly what it isn't. When you buy a nice suit, you're not upset because you read the label and find out you can't throw it in the washer/dryer before you head out to a tailgate party.
People buy high performance, high end, and exotic cars because they do or offer SOMETHING SPECIAL.That's why I doubt anyone on the GTR forum is bitching about the gas mileage or how small the back seat is. That's why Lotus buyers aren't upset that they can't take haul their son's **** back to college for him in it, or the fact that there's probably a half-inch gap between the side window and weather seal. It's actually pretty astounding how **** retentive, pampering, free-spending, and ridiculous owners of those types of cars are. People understand and accept what they are buying.
So if you're going to make a rotary car, make it something special that makes someone want it badly enough to love and put up with it. That doesn't necessarily mean that it needs to be $100k. But it has to be SPECIAL for the money, and expensive enough to weed out the people who value practicality too much.
You market what it is, and thus indirectly what it isn't. When you buy a nice suit, you're not upset because you read the label and find out you can't throw it in the washer/dryer before you head out to a tailgate party.
People buy high performance, high end, and exotic cars because they do or offer SOMETHING SPECIAL.That's why I doubt anyone on the GTR forum is bitching about the gas mileage or how small the back seat is. That's why Lotus buyers aren't upset that they can't take haul their son's **** back to college for him in it, or the fact that there's probably a half-inch gap between the side window and weather seal. It's actually pretty astounding how **** retentive, pampering, free-spending, and ridiculous owners of those types of cars are. People understand and accept what they are buying.
So if you're going to make a rotary car, make it something special that makes someone want it badly enough to love and put up with it. That doesn't necessarily mean that it needs to be $100k. But it has to be SPECIAL for the money, and expensive enough to weed out the people who value practicality too much.
01-24-14, 11:46 AM
#1264
Mazda needs to decide who/what it wants to be. If it has, I can't figure out what it is. Does it want to be another Toyota/Honda/Ford/Chevy/Volkswagen that crank out a full product line of safe and focus-group tested vehicles, or is it more of a specialty builder of cars people LOVE at various levels. Does it want to be the former to do a little of the latter? What's the brand strategy? What does it stand for?
"we need to make a profit" isn't a strategy.
It SEEMS to want to be almost like BMW was, a maker of a line of "drivers" cars... but what''s the ultimate expression of that? I'm sorry, but it's not the Miata, and it's not an 3-rotor ALMS car with a body kit. If the rotary is truly unworkable, then just say so and quit ******* around releasing news about it and then turning around and delaying/killing/confusing.
"we need to make a profit" isn't a strategy.
It SEEMS to want to be almost like BMW was, a maker of a line of "drivers" cars... but what''s the ultimate expression of that? I'm sorry, but it's not the Miata, and it's not an 3-rotor ALMS car with a body kit. If the rotary is truly unworkable, then just say so and quit ******* around releasing news about it and then turning around and delaying/killing/confusing.
Last edited by ptrhahn; 01-24-14 at 11:49 AM.
01-24-14, 12:11 PM
#1265
Seems like the primary driver for good highway fuel economy in LS-powered cars is a big overdrive and tall final gear. Stock for stock, the C6 Z06 and FD RX-7 have similar city economies. Though the Mazda gives up 250 horsepower to get there. Even using the existing 13B, Mazda could reclaim lost economy with direct injection and laser ignition that would also help with emissions.
01-24-14, 12:40 PM
#1266
Full Member
The question is: will they sacrifice some of that profit now in hopes of getting an even larger profit in the following years using the halo effect of the new 7?
The reality is its going to cost some people their careers and shareholders money if they build another car that sells 500 units in a year.
There were RX-7's on Mazda lots well into late 1996 and maybe a few even later.
It left a crater and it won't likely repeated anytime soon.
There were RX-7's on Mazda lots well into late 1996 and maybe a few even later.
It left a crater and it won't likely repeated anytime soon.
Would you buy a 80k Ssangyong (or Great Wall or Tata or whatever other indian or chinese manufacturer) sport car today?
Add to the equation that Cafe standards are pushing even the large displacement N/A engines like the V-10 and V-8 BMW's to go to smaller displacement turbo engines you are really living the dream if you think a Rotary can reinvent itself to becoming a low emissions efficient engine.
Even the LS7 makes twice the power and gets nearly twice the MPG as the 13b. And that's 7.0 liters vs 1.3? This trend would require less displacement from the rotary, not more! This now would leave you with an even greater deficiency in power trying to meet current standards.
And they are phasing out the LS7. The new Z06 is going to be a smaller displacement forced Induction motor just like the BMW M cars, Audi S cars etc.
Even the LS7 makes twice the power and gets nearly twice the MPG as the 13b. And that's 7.0 liters vs 1.3? This trend would require less displacement from the rotary, not more! This now would leave you with an even greater deficiency in power trying to meet current standards.
And they are phasing out the LS7. The new Z06 is going to be a smaller displacement forced Induction motor just like the BMW M cars, Audi S cars etc.
For smaller displacements, I think it's more of a way to cheat in the international testing procedures for both emissions and fuel economy.
Just one example I know about: the FIAT 0.9l TwinAir 2 cylinder turbo engine gets only slightly better mileage in the real world than the much older NA 1.4l MultiAir in the same car.
The improved testing procedures for fuel economy (and thus CO2 emissions) that are under development could stop or at least slow down that trend.
So don't take the shift to FI engines as a given for the upcoming years.
You could argue that they should make it anyway. Even of you used the model like Dodge has for the Viper. The car never intended to make any money. It was meant to improve the image of the brand and bring people into the dealerships which they believed would allow them to sell other models to viper fans.
Even if they could build it.
It is the only possible angle that the car will ever be built. But you can expect it to cost $100k.
So most of you won't have one anyway.
Anyone comparing Mazda to Ferrari needs their head examined lol.
Even if they could build it.
It is the only possible angle that the car will ever be built. But you can expect it to cost $100k.
So most of you won't have one anyway.
Anyone comparing Mazda to Ferrari needs their head examined lol.
The point is that Mazda's sports car program is not meant to make profits directly. It's meant to improve the brand perception, which in turn generates more sales of other Mazda models.
If they made only a 3 rotor available, then yes, they'd have to spread the development costs of the engine on very few cars, and so the price would be very high. If they also made a 2 rotor, however, the number of engines manufactured would be much higher, allowing for a significantly lower final price.
Andrea.
01-24-14, 01:02 PM
#1267
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
It's interesting to see other car companies in recent years (ford and chevy come to mind) emulating what's worked well for Porsche by standing by a good model car and really supporting it in the race world and improving it etc......
BUT that's not how mazda rolls, look at the miata that's been around for 25 years with no real improvement. Each new model gets a heavy face lift with a little more power to carry the weight. Clearly there's a market for it BUT if they build just another miata the sales will continue to plummet and mazda won't be building any sports cars at all.
More than anything the yen killed the FD and it's not looking too good for mazda right now so the days of selling multi cars and scraping by are likely over. I'd suggest emulating Porsche and give up trying to be the next Honda or Toyota while you currently have some money in the bank
01-24-14, 01:32 PM
#1268
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
Well, Mazda IS making a profit right now. And quite a big one according to their latest financial statements.
The question is: will they sacrifice some of that profit now in hopes of getting an even larger profit in the following years using the halo effect of the new 7?
That is related to the pricing and marketing of the product and, in no small part, to the unreliability of the rotary. In the early 90s, japanese manufacturers were still regarded as economy cars manufacturers, so any expensive sport car from one such company could not be expected to sell well.
Would you buy a 80k Ssangyong (or Great Wall or Tata or whatever other indian or chinese manufacturer) sport car today?
When you talk about large displacement engines, then I agree.
For smaller displacements, I think it's more of a way to cheat in the international testing procedures for both emissions and fuel economy.
Just one example I know about: the FIAT 0.9l TwinAir 2 cylinder turbo engine gets only slightly better mileage in the real world than the much older NA 1.4l MultiAir in the same car.
The improved testing procedures for fuel economy (and thus CO2 emissions) that are under development could stop or at least slow down that trend.
So don't take the shift to FI engines as a given for the upcoming years.
They could use the profits of the new Mx-5 (however low they may be) to finance the Rx-7. And if they made both a 2 and a 3 rotor available, they could even have the smaller 2 rotor as a net money maker for them, further helping finance the halo 3 rotor.
The point is that Mazda's sports car program is not meant to make profits directly. It's meant to improve the brand perception, which in turn generates more sales of other Mazda models.
If they made only a 3 rotor available, then yes, they'd have to spread the development costs of the engine on very few cars, and so the price would be very high. If they also made a 2 rotor, however, the number of engines manufactured would be much higher, allowing for a significantly lower final price.
Andrea.
The question is: will they sacrifice some of that profit now in hopes of getting an even larger profit in the following years using the halo effect of the new 7?
That is related to the pricing and marketing of the product and, in no small part, to the unreliability of the rotary. In the early 90s, japanese manufacturers were still regarded as economy cars manufacturers, so any expensive sport car from one such company could not be expected to sell well.
Would you buy a 80k Ssangyong (or Great Wall or Tata or whatever other indian or chinese manufacturer) sport car today?
When you talk about large displacement engines, then I agree.
For smaller displacements, I think it's more of a way to cheat in the international testing procedures for both emissions and fuel economy.
Just one example I know about: the FIAT 0.9l TwinAir 2 cylinder turbo engine gets only slightly better mileage in the real world than the much older NA 1.4l MultiAir in the same car.
The improved testing procedures for fuel economy (and thus CO2 emissions) that are under development could stop or at least slow down that trend.
So don't take the shift to FI engines as a given for the upcoming years.
They could use the profits of the new Mx-5 (however low they may be) to finance the Rx-7. And if they made both a 2 and a 3 rotor available, they could even have the smaller 2 rotor as a net money maker for them, further helping finance the halo 3 rotor.
The point is that Mazda's sports car program is not meant to make profits directly. It's meant to improve the brand perception, which in turn generates more sales of other Mazda models.
If they made only a 3 rotor available, then yes, they'd have to spread the development costs of the engine on very few cars, and so the price would be very high. If they also made a 2 rotor, however, the number of engines manufactured would be much higher, allowing for a significantly lower final price.
Andrea.
Money can be made with sports car if the companies making them stand behind them and improve them..... as proven by Porsche.
MAZDA MOTOR CORP (7261:Tokyo): Financial Statements - Businessweek
01-24-14, 01:47 PM
#1269
Mazda is in BIG financial trouble. Sure they finally squeaked out a profit but they've had a really rough time recently.
Money can be made with sports car if the companies making them stand behind them and improve them..... as proven by Porsche.
MAZDA MOTOR CORP (7261:Tokyo): Financial Statements - Businessweek
Money can be made with sports car if the companies making them stand behind them and improve them..... as proven by Porsche.
MAZDA MOTOR CORP (7261:Tokyo): Financial Statements - Businessweek
01-24-14, 01:58 PM
#1270
Full Member
Mazda is in BIG financial trouble. Sure they finally squeaked out a profit but they've had a really rough time recently.
Money can be made with sports car if the companies making them stand behind them and improve them..... as proven by Porsche.
MAZDA MOTOR CORP (7261:Tokyo): Financial Statements - Businessweek
Money can be made with sports car if the companies making them stand behind them and improve them..... as proven by Porsche.
MAZDA MOTOR CORP (7261:Tokyo): Financial Statements - Businessweek
MAZDA:FY March 2014 | Financial Results
With the Yen getting weaker and weaker (helping their exports) and with their Mexico factory about to commence operations, I foresee quite a bit of money going in the direction of the Mazda headquarter.
Andrea.
01-24-14, 02:16 PM
#1271
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,804
Received 2,577 Likes
on
1,831 Posts
BUT that's not how mazda rolls, look at the miata that's been around for 25 years with no real improvement. Each new model gets a heavy face lift with a little more power to carry the weight. Clearly there's a market for it BUT if they build just another miata the sales will continue to plummet and mazda won't be building any sports cars at all.
the not true part is that spec miata, is like the most popular race class in the history of racing, and the miata cup cars are not slow. Mazda has actually won the 25 hours of thunderhill outright with one.
i'm sure you've heard the line "more than half of the cars at the race track on a given weekend are Mazdas", what do you think they are running? its mostly miatae.
that all being said, i do agree that a race track full of miatas doesn't exactly even make me notice that they are mazdas, let alone want to go buy a new car. they would get further by racing something with more presence
01-24-14, 02:24 PM
#1273
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
Yep the new 3 and 6 are very good cars
Also I was wrong about the yen and the dollar has been getting stronger recently so that's likely helped them. I just remember it was pretty bad a while ago, like it only took 70 yen to buy a dollar and now it takes over a 100 which means Mazda's should cost the us/US less dollars.
Mazda has proven over and over that they can build good cars but when you are going up against other manufacturers who can build similar cars for less with stronger reputations you are painting yourself into a corner. Building a badass RX7 would really help their reputation BUT only if they can actually build a good one otherwise as with the RX8 they are treading water and ultimately shooting themselves in the foot. Same goes for the Miata, if it's just another Miata, well it's not going to sell, it must be a big improvement to compete.
Also I was wrong about the yen and the dollar has been getting stronger recently so that's likely helped them. I just remember it was pretty bad a while ago, like it only took 70 yen to buy a dollar and now it takes over a 100 which means Mazda's should cost the us/US less dollars.
Mazda has proven over and over that they can build good cars but when you are going up against other manufacturers who can build similar cars for less with stronger reputations you are painting yourself into a corner. Building a badass RX7 would really help their reputation BUT only if they can actually build a good one otherwise as with the RX8 they are treading water and ultimately shooting themselves in the foot. Same goes for the Miata, if it's just another Miata, well it's not going to sell, it must be a big improvement to compete.
01-24-14, 02:49 PM
#1274
I remember being at a Mazda Sporstcar Club/MazdaDrivers track event at VIR years ago, when a Mazda rep came to see it and give a talk at the big dinner at the hotel on Saturday night.
This was BITD when there would be ROWs of highly modded FD's (they were called "3rd Gens" then) at these events, trailered from all over, with old school guys like John Eppley, Brad Barber, Wael, Robinette, etc.,. Stuff you'd only maybe see in Japan now. We'd have like 4-6 guys caravanning down from just our local club. I think Peter Farrel was there, Cam came up, brought their race cars, guys were installing roll bars in the hotel parking lot, etc.
The guy walked around all day, saw all this, and then came to the banquet and talked about how the "next RX7" would be much more practical, with a back seat, etc.
FAIL.
This was BITD when there would be ROWs of highly modded FD's (they were called "3rd Gens" then) at these events, trailered from all over, with old school guys like John Eppley, Brad Barber, Wael, Robinette, etc.,. Stuff you'd only maybe see in Japan now. We'd have like 4-6 guys caravanning down from just our local club. I think Peter Farrel was there, Cam came up, brought their race cars, guys were installing roll bars in the hotel parking lot, etc.
The guy walked around all day, saw all this, and then came to the banquet and talked about how the "next RX7" would be much more practical, with a back seat, etc.
FAIL.
Last edited by ptrhahn; 01-24-14 at 02:53 PM.
01-24-14, 03:17 PM
#1275
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,804
Received 2,577 Likes
on
1,831 Posts
another piece of semi useless info, is that Ford offers a turnkey racing version of the mustang, Chrysler offers a racing version of the challenger, and it looks like you may be able to get a C7 in race trim.
Corvette to Offer Customer C7.Rs - Sportscar365
that is a lot of product in a "niche" market. the ford and chrysler cars do not come with vins so they cannot be street driven.
the mustang is full roll cage, some hot rod engine, and its legal in some class (grand am?), right from the factory floor.
Corvette to Offer Customer C7.Rs - Sportscar365
that is a lot of product in a "niche" market. the ford and chrysler cars do not come with vins so they cannot be street driven.
the mustang is full roll cage, some hot rod engine, and its legal in some class (grand am?), right from the factory floor.