You summed it up.

 

My performance benchmark for a new Mazda Halo Sports car is and has always been the Porsche Cayman S.

It's simple. Excellent Mazda Chassis dynamics, 300 or more HP, sub 3000lbs dry...and will do laptimes comparable to the Cayman S.

Honestly if Mazda does not come out with something like this I think a Cayman S might be in my future...

They need to do it for half the price (roughly 40-45k)

 

Sensible, that's a good thing. No new rx-7 is going to be a C7 challenger. Cayman S is much more applicable.

 

Used to be you got an American car for muscle and it was crap for handling. Now the Anericans offer some options. Vette since C6 is a nice road race car and has muscle. Boss mustang is a good track car etc.

Maybe RX-7 has lost its corner on handling? No pun intended..

Make harder to compete?

 

In 1993, with older school tires the rx7 put down over .9 g's on the skidpad and set the second fastest factory car lap at streets of willow done by Motor trend ( I really wonder what the time was). With new modern tires, w/ Spirit R sized 17inchrims, it would probably still be the tip of the sword handling wise.

A lot of RWD track records are broken with FD's still today..

 

Recent data suggests that the a-holes sold the BMWs around the turn of the decade and are buying Audi. Audi's are the "****'s" car now...

We just bought a 328d, and i am head over heels in love with it...

 

So you wouldn't be biased in any way whatsoever then...

 

Handling was a niche market was my point. I know full well the FD's history. But today a new model would not automatically have the corner back on that market.

Many more car models with razor sharp handling like Lotus for example, also the Porsche Boxster Caymen was mentioned. The muscle cars also have serious track prowess now. The new Z-28 coming out is another and few mentioned previously.

It was RX-7 and Nissan Z cars who dominated this niche but its no longer a choice. You can have it all elsewhere. It could make for a difficult sell for a new RX model in this market.

 

Alot of those new cars use Gigantenourmus tires to give the car better handling .

to do what an FD with 225's did with old tire technology . and to anyone who races knows that tires .. are LIFE!


people argue about the handling of the 8 and the 7 , a friend of mine showed me how his 8 is a better handling car and showed me the test reports from a magazine compared to that of the FD .where the 8 was marginally better on a couple tests.

But think about it the FD had tires that were 10 years backwards technology wise.

tires like everything except the rotary engine . have evolved and given comperable rubber . I'm sure the FD still handles as well if not much better hten alot of those so called handling cars .

much less a more modern designed suspension .

 

that didn't really happen here... either that or everyone is an a-hole!

 

Never claimed not to be. But German AWD sedans and SUVs are kinda popular in Minnesota. We are after all a bunch of Norse and German heritage folks living in a frozen tundra...so it kinda make's sense.

 

its funny, we went to Sweden and Norway in 2011, and it reminds me a LOT of the midwest, its pretty obvious the norse settled in Minnesota, because it LOOKS like home, but the weather is better...

 

all motor 16X? a twin turbo better be made [;

 

Isn't it more just a simple physics equation? Take a MX-5, at say 2400 lbs, take a corner at nowhere near the limit at 40 mph. Now take the turn at just about the limit of adhesion, call it 83 mph. There is more force on the load-bearing side, no?

Wouldn't the same then apply to a 2800 lb FD and a 4000 lb M5 --- where they're both cornering at 9/10ths; there is more force on the almost 50% heavier car's components, no?

 

8's limits against the 7 (even with its tires being 2 decades old tech) will fall short. I'm not sure which magazine your buddy is pointing to, but whether slalom or skidpad the 8 will not carry the same speed through.

Therefore, he must be quoting someone who subjectively stated, maybe because of a slightly more neutral handling behavior, that the 8 handles better. If it did, it wouldn't be 2 classes below the 7 in auto-x, would it?

 

I think were the 8 excels is more in the feeling department. Unfortunately that feelings don't translate into world class numbers. Now the 8 at one point I believe had the highest emergency lane change speed when it 1st came out. Not bad for a car with 235 series tires so the chassis layout and suspension is most definitely doing something. I can't remember what magazine did the original test.

 

The 8 is 400lbs heavier than the 7 and has about 50rwhp less everywhere in the powerband..

The 8 shines in cornering mph while still maintaining the nimbleness of the much shorter wheelbase 7 due to superior weight distribution.

The 8 fails at corner exit due to power deficiencies.

I race both at auto-x and I feel the 8 has more potential due to chassis dynamics, but NOTHING looks as good as the 7 to me.

 

3000 - 2800 = 200 lb.

 

I'd honestly love to see what an 8 can do in SM ...with a properly setup REW swap , or 20b Swap .

 

edit

 

this is actually one of the huge problems with the 21st century, feelings are what make the car FUN.

in the 21st century, we have this notion that we should collect all the numbers, and bigger ones are better, but this isn't always true. too much is too much. also this isn't any FUN.

fun is when you can feel what the car is doing, and fun is when you're actually engaged in the experience of driving.

the most fun car i have ever had was my 1958 Tr3* it had no navigation, no backup camera, no stability control, no radio, it didn't even have windows. it was actually this lack of distractions that made driving a really engaging experience.

sadly this driving experience is just completely missing from any modern car, although the Rx7/Rx8/Miatas are close. which is why we like them.


*the Triumph Tr3 was the FD of its day, for the money ~$2600, it was the fastest thing you could buy in the early-mid 50's. if you have the coin...

 

Agree, x1000! For most "enthusiasts" today, the joy of owning a sports car is totally reduced to performance stats they can point to in a magazine.

So we end up with a bunch of oversized/overwrought supercars and "sports cars" that are nothing but 2-seat versions of luxury sedans with big wheels/tires and some power, but *very* few minimalist fun-to-drive-even-at-3/10ths sub-3000 lb. sports cars.

If I wanted Corvette performance in a brand-new street car, I'd buy a Corvette.
But I want something LESS. A *lot* less.

There are cars already on the market that have Corvette performance. What's lacking is a reasonably priced reasonable size/weight closed-roof sports car. It doesn't exist in the U.S.! It should...

If my ultimate goal was to have a fast track car, I'd get a winged formula car and destroy Corvettes/GTRs/Ferraris while having a lot more fun and spending less on consumables.

 

3000 - 2800 = 200 lb.

I used weights from my personal 7 and 8 on the scales.

My 2004 RX-8 (no sunroof) is a little over 3,100lbs and my '93 RX-7 R1 is a little over 2,700lbs.

 

I'm trying to think of post-2002 hardtop cars with RWD, light weight, independent rear suspension and fun to drive... it's a pretty short list.

 

Alfa 4C....

....Although it doesn't come with a manual