The RX-7 confirmed to be in the pipeline for 2017---RX-Vision Unveil!!
02-14-14, 12:50 PM
#1651
You guys need to get with this decade/reality.
350hp doesn't make you a "power maven" or a meathead or a "Japanese Corvette" anymore. That's 450-700.
350 is just par for the course—and it's certainly not the sort of number that's going to weigh a car down. Exige's are 260 hp, but they're also 2000 lbs, too small for two adults, and pretty much hand built kit cars. You're fooling yourself if you think that what worked in 1981 will work now.
And as far as the RX7 being lighter than a Miata, forget it. Please.
350hp doesn't make you a "power maven" or a meathead or a "Japanese Corvette" anymore. That's 450-700.
350 is just par for the course—and it's certainly not the sort of number that's going to weigh a car down. Exige's are 260 hp, but they're also 2000 lbs, too small for two adults, and pretty much hand built kit cars. You're fooling yourself if you think that what worked in 1981 will work now.
And as far as the RX7 being lighter than a Miata, forget it. Please.
02-14-14, 12:52 PM
#1653
Recovering Miataholic
What are the sources for supporting a story about a 1.2L rotary? What happened with the all-aluminum 16X? And where is the advantage of a 1.2L over the 13B?
02-14-14, 01:16 PM
#1655
also, narrower rotor is better for more complete combustion and apex seal durability (shorter is stronger)
IF (colossally gigantic IF) they make it with a thicker center plate with independent equal size side exhaust ports and make it so that it is modular they could build 3 or 4 rotors easily.
250 hp 2-rotor
375 hp 3-rotor
500 hp 4-rotor
all naturally aspirated which also adds reliability vs forced induction
02-14-14, 01:49 PM
#1656
And as far as the RX7 being lighter than a Miata, forget it. Please.
Here is the problem.
Mazda is backed into a corner as the new 2,400lb MX-5 chassis will be shared with Alfa by contract and they will most likely put a variant of the 4Cs 240hp four cylinder in it.
Mazda needs a response to the MX-5 Alfa and the new rotary MX-5 variant is the response. I just hope they make a fixed roof variant.
02-14-14, 02:01 PM
#1657
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
What I love about my s2000 is that it is MASSIVE fun to drive even just piddling around! And of course when you get on it it has another personality above 6000rpm 
No, it's not FAST, but it is FUN!
That doesn't change the rack ratio. It will still require the same amount of turns at the wheel. That's what I hate about it. 16.6 is TOO SLOW. Smaller wheel would reduce the distance my hands have to travel, but for sharp turns I'll still have to go hand-over-hand much sooner than in the S2k.
Currently have a 350mm steering wheel (same diameter as stock S2000), ~30mm smaller in diameter than stock. Afraid smaller might block gauges...
Both cars were good for ~101mph in the quarter, bone stock (usually see between 98-101mph in tests of either car). The FD weighed ~2850 lb. with fuel, AP1 S2000 about 2800.
Using the somewhat-trusty hp equation: hp = (trap speed/234)^3 x weight, and assuming 180 lb. worth of driver and gear, I get 243hp for the FD, 240hp for the AP1.
Stock vs. stock, they're damn close...
Obviously with the turbo, there's a LOT of improvement that can easily be had with the FD.
But that's all beside the point ON THE STREET. Do you REALLY use a car's full power regularly on the street? Because 99% of the time it's just not possible without officially "driving like an ****"!
Again, how often are you at maximum power on the street? And in any case, I've driven VERY powerful 3600 lb. cars and to me a Miata is WAY more fun.
You have to ask yourself, are you *really* a small lightweight sports car kinda guy, or are you a musclecar kinda guy. From the statement above, obviously you're a musclecar guy!
So get a used GT500, throw on a smaller pulley, add nitrous and be done with it!
Or get a C6 Z06 and supercharge it!
There is no way on earth you are driving like that on the street more than 0.1% of the time.
There are already a NUMBER of cars on the market for those who care a lot more about outright acceleration performance than light weight.
Frankly I have no idea why with your criteria you would be interested in even a 350-400hp RX-7.
No, it's not FAST, but it is FUN!That doesn't change the rack ratio. It will still require the same amount of turns at the wheel. That's what I hate about it. 16.6 is TOO SLOW. Smaller wheel would reduce the distance my hands have to travel, but for sharp turns I'll still have to go hand-over-hand much sooner than in the S2k.
Currently have a 350mm steering wheel (same diameter as stock S2000), ~30mm smaller in diameter than stock. Afraid smaller might block gauges...
Both cars were good for ~101mph in the quarter, bone stock (usually see between 98-101mph in tests of either car). The FD weighed ~2850 lb. with fuel, AP1 S2000 about 2800.
Using the somewhat-trusty hp equation: hp = (trap speed/234)^3 x weight, and assuming 180 lb. worth of driver and gear, I get 243hp for the FD, 240hp for the AP1.
Stock vs. stock, they're damn close...
Obviously with the turbo, there's a LOT of improvement that can easily be had with the FD.
But that's all beside the point ON THE STREET. Do you REALLY use a car's full power regularly on the street? Because 99% of the time it's just not possible without officially "driving like an ****"!
Again, how often are you at maximum power on the street? And in any case, I've driven VERY powerful 3600 lb. cars and to me a Miata is WAY more fun.
You have to ask yourself, are you *really* a small lightweight sports car kinda guy, or are you a musclecar kinda guy. From the statement above, obviously you're a musclecar guy!
So get a used GT500, throw on a smaller pulley, add nitrous and be done with it!
Or get a C6 Z06 and supercharge it!
There is no way on earth you are driving like that on the street more than 0.1% of the time.
There are already a NUMBER of cars on the market for those who care a lot more about outright acceleration performance than light weight.
Frankly I have no idea why with your criteria you would be interested in even a 350-400hp RX-7.
For the street I'd still take a 2700 lb 300 HP twin turbo FD over ANYTHING out there TODAY. The twins coming on beats the pants off the vario cam s2k thrills.
I do like having power because there's nothing more gratifying to me than getting the most out of a car. In an SM car you can get 90% there in weekend. In a 350 hp FD it takes years.
02-14-14, 02:32 PM
#1658
And as far as the RX7 being lighter than a Miata, forget it. Please.
Here is the problem.
Mazda is backed into a corner as the new 2,400lb MX-5 chassis will be shared with Alfa by contract and they will most likely put a variant of the 4Cs 240hp four cylinder in it.
Mazda needs a response to the MX-5 Alfa and the new rotary MX-5 variant is the response. I just hope they make a fixed roof variant.
Why can't Mazda just put a 240hp four cylinder in their "answer" if Alfa can? I'm all for a Rotary MX-5/RX-5, but again, they could've built that car 10 years ago, and why wouldn't the $28k car buyer just want a nice, reliable, fuel-efficient piston motor?
Also, that's not an RX7 as far as I'm concerned.
02-14-14, 03:35 PM
#1659
Senior Member
As am I! But for my STREET car, 240hp in the S2000 is perfectly fine. Even 150hp keeping it below 6000rpm is fine on the street for me 99% of the time.
On the track, while I do appreciate momentum cars and the skill of momentum drivers, I prefer to have excess power just about everywhere
Keeps things, urm, "interesting"! I found that tracking the S2000 was making me lazy, and when I'd take the 255rwhp 2300-lb 240Z out I would totally have to step up my game.
Hence the big power/weight street car replacement for the S2000! Only it replaced the 240Z instead...
VTEC, not "variocam" (Porsche's variable valve timing)! There's a difference...
Personally, I prefer NA power. I like for the throttle to be a torque rheostat that gives me the torque I want INSTANTANEOUSLY depending on throttle position.
I love to be able to rotate the car by abruptly getting off the throttle and then getting back on it with no lag/delay in power delivery.
Hmm, maybe a supercharger for the S2000 would wake it up a bit at the track...
For a track car, I agree. For a DD street car, no good reason for big power levels, except to engage in d-bag behavior!
If Mazda builds a new RX-7, it will be a trackable STREET car. 250hp is FINE (except for the "street-racer" d-bags, or those who have to point to numbers in a magazine to appreciate their car). Even for most trackhounds, that power level in a 2600 lb. car would be FINE. I can't tell you the number of track guys in my club who have "graduated" from turbo 911s, Vipers, Corvettes etc. to Miatae. Dozens!
For me, I am with you and Peter, I want EXCESS POWER in my track car. Though 500+hp is admittedly a lot more than I can make full use of! Esp w/ no rear aero :O
ANYWAY, I would love to see both. The 250hp version would be fine with me for my street car, and would have a TON of appeal to a broad range of buyers, at its lower price point. For the track, of course I'd want the 350-400hp...
On the track, while I do appreciate momentum cars and the skill of momentum drivers, I prefer to have excess power just about everywhere
Keeps things, urm, "interesting"! I found that tracking the S2000 was making me lazy, and when I'd take the 255rwhp 2300-lb 240Z out I would totally have to step up my game.Hence the big power/weight street car replacement for the S2000! Only it replaced the 240Z instead...
For the street I'd still take a 2700 lb 300 HP twin turbo FD over ANYTHING out there TODAY. The twins coming on beats the pants off the vario cam s2k thrills.
Personally, I prefer NA power. I like for the throttle to be a torque rheostat that gives me the torque I want INSTANTANEOUSLY depending on throttle position.
I love to be able to rotate the car by abruptly getting off the throttle and then getting back on it with no lag/delay in power delivery.
Hmm, maybe a supercharger for the S2000 would wake it up a bit at the track...
I do like having power because there's nothing more gratifying to me than getting the most out of a car. In an SM car you can get 90% there in weekend. In a 350 hp FD it takes years.
If Mazda builds a new RX-7, it will be a trackable STREET car. 250hp is FINE (except for the "street-racer" d-bags, or those who have to point to numbers in a magazine to appreciate their car). Even for most trackhounds, that power level in a 2600 lb. car would be FINE. I can't tell you the number of track guys in my club who have "graduated" from turbo 911s, Vipers, Corvettes etc. to Miatae. Dozens!
For me, I am with you and Peter, I want EXCESS POWER in my track car. Though 500+hp is admittedly a lot more than I can make full use of! Esp w/ no rear aero :O
ANYWAY, I would love to see both. The 250hp version would be fine with me for my street car, and would have a TON of appeal to a broad range of buyers, at its lower price point. For the track, of course I'd want the 350-400hp...
Last edited by ZDan; 02-14-14 at 03:38 PM.
02-14-14, 03:55 PM
#1661
unfortunately they're the ones who usually wind up wrapping their car around a tree, attempting to show off.
i usually give a verbal warning to customers when power increased by 100 or more, a number on a page doesn't translate into some people's minds until it's already too late.
i usually give a verbal warning to customers when power increased by 100 or more, a number on a page doesn't translate into some people's minds until it's already too late.
02-14-14, 03:58 PM
#1662
20 years ago there were no production cars making +400HP. NO PRODUCTION CARS WHAT SO EVER. So what happened? That's simple: Car manufacturers evolved and stepped up their game.
So tell me this: if chevy, nissan, BMW, ford all have been able to pump out +400HP production cars then why can't mazda? Why must mazda be a paltry low power sporty car brand? Why is it that too many people can't picture a company growing and therefore pigeon hole them into a category that they were 20 years ago? Seriously it's not like Chevy/BMV/Nissan/porsche SPAWNED +400 HP cars from the day their first car rolled off the assembly line. No they evolved to what they are today.
I think most us that are wanting a new Rx-7 would agree that if we wanted an LS motor we'd simply buy a vette. Especially now that the new stingrays have been proven to be pretty ******* awesome.
my $0.02
So tell me this: if chevy, nissan, BMW, ford all have been able to pump out +400HP production cars then why can't mazda? Why must mazda be a paltry low power sporty car brand? Why is it that too many people can't picture a company growing and therefore pigeon hole them into a category that they were 20 years ago? Seriously it's not like Chevy/BMV/Nissan/porsche SPAWNED +400 HP cars from the day their first car rolled off the assembly line. No they evolved to what they are today.
I think most us that are wanting a new Rx-7 would agree that if we wanted an LS motor we'd simply buy a vette. Especially now that the new stingrays have been proven to be pretty ******* awesome.
my $0.02
Viper 400hp, 993 Turbo 400HP, 456GT 436HP, 512TR 428hp, 512M 440HP, Diablo 492HP, ZR-1 405HP, 600SEL 405HP.
There are more to this list.. BTW
Also Stingray DOESN'T have an LS motor... Just wanted to mention that.
But I do like the C7.
02-14-14, 04:04 PM
#1663
notice how none of them were japanese cars, which is probably why people tend to forget about the roots of 90's super cars. mortals couldn't afford those cars but now they can squeak by with a GTR, viper or vette stingray. the original vipers HP figures also seemed a bit tweaked, like most other mainstream manufacturers to try and sell cars. it's the japanese that have started to try and make attempts to play with the big displacement boys. but no matter what, you still are paying the price of a small fixer upper house for one of these cars.
Last edited by RotaryEvolution; 02-14-14 at 04:07 PM.
02-14-14, 04:13 PM
#1664
Ok yeah you got me with the cars that the non average person can afford. I was talking about average run of the mil vehicles but failed to state that. Such as the vette, cobra, camaro. I have a feeling that you knew that but still decided to be a knit picker lol
Last edited by Montego; 02-14-14 at 04:15 PM.
02-14-14, 04:27 PM
#1665
Senior Member
The kind of men who think they need 400-500hp in their street car are likely compensating for something. Maybe their mamas didn't love them enough.
Anyway, long/short, not every "sports" car should follow the Mustang/Camaro/Corvette/GTR/M3 models (IMO, the Corvette is the only one in that group that could even be considered a sports car, but it's really more of a "supercar"). To me, RX-7 doesn't and shouldn't fit in with those cars. It should be a much smaller and lighter-weight sports car.
A 350, 400, 450hp version is fine! But there should also be a more minimalist real-world-fun base version as well. Having a less-expensive ~250hp NA 2-rotor model will allow a LOT more people to enjoy a legitimate sports car and would double, triple maybe quadruple sales.
02-14-14, 04:31 PM
#1666
TRUTH.
That whole Drivers school/HPDE thing about "you can just let off on the straights, that's not what this is all about" is bullshit. I don't need to have 700 hp, but I expect to be still accelerating at the end of the straight before I dump on the brakes, and I expect to have to balance the car coming out of the corner on the power.
Driving a car where you're flat everywhere and need to really carry speed is it's own challenge, and I respect it, but not what I'm looking for.
That whole Drivers school/HPDE thing about "you can just let off on the straights, that's not what this is all about" is bullshit. I don't need to have 700 hp, but I expect to be still accelerating at the end of the straight before I dump on the brakes, and I expect to have to balance the car coming out of the corner on the power.
Driving a car where you're flat everywhere and need to really carry speed is it's own challenge, and I respect it, but not what I'm looking for.
You guys need to get with this decade/reality.
350hp doesn't make you a "power maven" or a meathead or a "Japanese Corvette" anymore. That's 450-700.
350 is just par for the course—and it's certainly not the sort of number that's going to weigh a car down. Exige's are 260 hp, but they're also 2000 lbs, too small for two adults, and pretty much hand built kit cars. You're fooling yourself if you think that what worked in 1981 will work now.
And as far as the RX7 being lighter than a Miata, forget it. Please.
350hp doesn't make you a "power maven" or a meathead or a "Japanese Corvette" anymore. That's 450-700.
350 is just par for the course—and it's certainly not the sort of number that's going to weigh a car down. Exige's are 260 hp, but they're also 2000 lbs, too small for two adults, and pretty much hand built kit cars. You're fooling yourself if you think that what worked in 1981 will work now.
And as far as the RX7 being lighter than a Miata, forget it. Please.
The cars get bigger and heavier not smaller and lighter. That just makes it an insult to injury if you detune it
But I agree with pretty much everything else you say.
Lets get matching tattoos. After all its Valentines day.
As am I! But for my STREET car, 240hp in the S2000 is perfectly fine. Even 150hp keeping it below 6000rpm is fine on the street for me 99% of the time.
On the track, while I do appreciate momentum cars and the skill of momentum drivers, I prefer to have excess power just about everywhere Keeps things, urm, "interesting"! I found that tracking the S2000 was making me lazy, and when I'd take the 255rwhp 2300-lb 240Z out I would totally have to step up my game.
Hence the big power/weight street car replacement for the S2000! Only it replaced the 240Z instead...
VTEC, not "variocam" (Porsche's variable valve timing)! There's a difference...
Personally, I prefer NA power. I like for the throttle to be a torque rheostat that gives me the torque I want INSTANTANEOUSLY depending on throttle position.
I love to be able to rotate the car by abruptly getting off the throttle and then getting back on it with no lag/delay in power delivery.
Hmm, maybe a supercharger for the S2000 would wake it up a bit at the track...
For a track car, I agree. For a DD street car, no good reason for big power levels, except to engage in d-bag behavior!
If Mazda builds a new RX-7, it will be a trackable STREET car. 250hp is FINE (except for the "street-racer" d-bags, or those who have to point to numbers in a magazine to appreciate their car). Even for most trackhounds, that power level in a 2600 lb. car would be FINE. I can't tell you the number of track guys in my club who have "graduated" from turbo 911s, Vipers, Corvettes etc. to Miatae. Dozens!
For me, I am with you and Peter, I want EXCESS POWER in my track car. Though 500+hp is admittedly a lot more than I can make full use of! Esp w/ no rear aero :O
ANYWAY, I would love to see both. The 250hp version would be fine with me for my street car, and would have a TON of appeal to a broad range of buyers, at its lower price point. For the track, of course I'd want the 350-400hp...
On the track, while I do appreciate momentum cars and the skill of momentum drivers, I prefer to have excess power just about everywhere
Keeps things, urm, "interesting"! I found that tracking the S2000 was making me lazy, and when I'd take the 255rwhp 2300-lb 240Z out I would totally have to step up my game.Hence the big power/weight street car replacement for the S2000! Only it replaced the 240Z instead...
VTEC, not "variocam" (Porsche's variable valve timing)! There's a difference...
Personally, I prefer NA power. I like for the throttle to be a torque rheostat that gives me the torque I want INSTANTANEOUSLY depending on throttle position.
I love to be able to rotate the car by abruptly getting off the throttle and then getting back on it with no lag/delay in power delivery.
Hmm, maybe a supercharger for the S2000 would wake it up a bit at the track...
For a track car, I agree. For a DD street car, no good reason for big power levels, except to engage in d-bag behavior!
If Mazda builds a new RX-7, it will be a trackable STREET car. 250hp is FINE (except for the "street-racer" d-bags, or those who have to point to numbers in a magazine to appreciate their car). Even for most trackhounds, that power level in a 2600 lb. car would be FINE. I can't tell you the number of track guys in my club who have "graduated" from turbo 911s, Vipers, Corvettes etc. to Miatae. Dozens!
For me, I am with you and Peter, I want EXCESS POWER in my track car. Though 500+hp is admittedly a lot more than I can make full use of! Esp w/ no rear aero :O
ANYWAY, I would love to see both. The 250hp version would be fine with me for my street car, and would have a TON of appeal to a broad range of buyers, at its lower price point. For the track, of course I'd want the 350-400hp...
I know you have a swapped FD and its truly a different car then a CZ06. Swapped FD's are an insane visceral experience. If these haters ever got behind the wheel of my car they would convert.
It's already happened to one of them that test drove my car.
So quit voting Demorcrat, everyone needs a 500HP car.
And yes a truly powerful N/A car with torque everywhere is what everyone wants, even if they don't know it yet.
Driving a Corvette isn't as exciting.
02-14-14, 05:09 PM
#1667
I haven't read all 69 pages of this thread and excuse me if this point has been made already, but the cost to produce another RX-7 will need to come from the success of Mazda as a whole. I suspect had it not been for the U.S. government giving GM a big financial crutch, you would not be seeing the latest Camaro and Corvette iterations. It may have been the equivalent of a Mustang II-type effort (i.e., we couldn't build the Corvette we wanted to but consumer maybe you'll accept this POS instead if we call it a Corvette).
Mazda does not have the U.S. government giving them a financial safety-net to fall into if the next RX-7 is a net loss to produce. It will have to come from within and that is what the latest crop of corporate mongers is telling us. I fear that the era of the little rotary that could is going to emerge more as an RX-8 effort instead of a dreamed-of, prayed-for, 300 hp, light-weight, super car. But . . . . . . another RX-8 effort will surely kill the rotary if it hasn't already.
Mazda does not have the U.S. government giving them a financial safety-net to fall into if the next RX-7 is a net loss to produce. It will have to come from within and that is what the latest crop of corporate mongers is telling us. I fear that the era of the little rotary that could is going to emerge more as an RX-8 effort instead of a dreamed-of, prayed-for, 300 hp, light-weight, super car. But . . . . . . another RX-8 effort will surely kill the rotary if it hasn't already.
02-14-14, 06:01 PM
#1668
But we understand now. I think. Lol
The FD was just as expensive as the ZR-1 MSRP if not for the Dealer mark-ups. I think the ZR-1 was about $5k more if memory serves. The ZR-1 was also a more car. It really set the bar on performance for the dollar and in many cases comparable at any $$.
Having driven plenty of Corvettes I can tell you the FD is more fun to drive.
If you never understood why guys swap LS motors into FD's then you are not listening to yourself, Fritz and Dan.
The FD is a special car, a Corvette is not a replacement as far as I am concerned. I could own a CZ06. It is everything you could need on paper.
So why do we still want a 20 year old car over say a GT3, Z06, GTR or any other manner of machine?
My best friend owns a C6Z06 and he is wildly enthusiastic about driving my FD over his Corvette. He also has a Supercharged BMW and a modded GT500.
How could a 20 year old car be so loved compared to today's performance leading cars?
You won't like the answer, it's not the motor.
You have 2 guys in here talking about the car that have LS swapped FD's that Race them and the passion for the car is still there.
02-15-14, 02:01 AM
#1671
Full Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Firstly, a note on rising weight. Weight is not a function of adding power. Rather, adding power is a function of extra weight. The extra weight comes from the push for safer cars, in particular the ANCAP ratings and chassis stiffness requirements. All that extra luggage to make cars safer comes at a cost, the cost is weight. Power is added to compensate for the weight, but the power also comes at a weight cost. Thus it appears that you have to add weight, because power, but in reality it's the other way around.
Why is reducing weight and power a thing? It's the new 'in'. BRZ/86, Nissans new Z etc. The Jap emphasis is moving towards minimising rather than maximising. A good think IMO.
To put a roof on a miata/mx5 SHOULD reduce the weight. A cage is a much stronger structure than an open top and requires much less material mass for rigidity. If Mazda engineers can't reduce the weight of the miata when putting a roof on it, they should be taken out the back and shot and new engineers hired with the knowledge of the consequences of failure.
Not at all... How much power does the C7 have? Mid 400 from memory? 6.2L v8? But I digress...
It's a kinda minor piece of legislation called Euro 6, which comes into effect in this year. A naturally aspirated 2 rotor 13b couldn't pass emissions back when. Even with all the tricks pulled, if, IF, a 2 rotor engine can get back under emissions limits, I'd be surprised if a turbo'ed one can - though that's where reduced displacement comes in. A 3 rotor won't cut it. Definitely not a 3 rotor turbo. That's where the 400 hp is, in the land of hopes and dreams. Bare in mind that the company we are talking about is the frontrunner in fuel efficiency and emissions technology. A functional mass produced 14:1 compression ratio!! Just incredible. They aren't amateurs at this game.
And considering that, I haven't even mentioned the credit bills and broken dreams of people trying to get 500 hp out of their 13b, for an engine that really doesn't match pistons for daily use longevity.
Just quickly... The answer is right there in what you've written. Chev, BMW, Ford, Dodge, Nissan, Porsche, Merc, VW, Audi, Ferrari, Koenigsegg, Scania, Mack, Mitsubishi, Freightliner, Isuzu, Hino, Mazda. What do they all have?
Competition.
They are all fighting each other to innovate, design, adapt, plagiarise from each other. Every single ICE engineer on the planet is trying to stretch the piston engine as far as it will go. This pushes technology development at an incredible pace. As engines got cleaner, they could get bigger and so more powerful.
Mazda are the only company working on the rotary - reality is BMW and Audi aren't and even if they were anything they come up with would be kept in house without a patent because there's no competition. Because of the fundamental differences between piston and wankel combustion chambers, it's not simply a matter of application transferal. A bunch of blokes over on the weekend to play with the 'other' engine in their spare time is simply not going to compare with every ICE engineer in the world.
I completely agree. If I wanted 400-500 horsepower in a good package, I'd buy a vette. It's a no-brainer. Unless I bought the Jag. Which I probably would do.
Why is reducing weight and power a thing? It's the new 'in'. BRZ/86, Nissans new Z etc. The Jap emphasis is moving towards minimising rather than maximising. A good think IMO.
To put a roof on a miata/mx5 SHOULD reduce the weight. A cage is a much stronger structure than an open top and requires much less material mass for rigidity. If Mazda engineers can't reduce the weight of the miata when putting a roof on it, they should be taken out the back and shot and new engineers hired with the knowledge of the consequences of failure.
And considering that, I haven't even mentioned the credit bills and broken dreams of people trying to get 500 hp out of their 13b, for an engine that really doesn't match pistons for daily use longevity.
Why must mazda be a paltry low power sporty car brand? Why is it that too many people can't picture a company growing and therefore pigeon hole them into a category that they were 20 years ago? Seriously it's not like Chevy/BMV/Nissan/porsche SPAWNED +400 HP cars from the day their first car rolled off the assembly line. No they evolved to what they are today.
Competition.
They are all fighting each other to innovate, design, adapt, plagiarise from each other. Every single ICE engineer on the planet is trying to stretch the piston engine as far as it will go. This pushes technology development at an incredible pace. As engines got cleaner, they could get bigger and so more powerful.
Mazda are the only company working on the rotary - reality is BMW and Audi aren't and even if they were anything they come up with would be kept in house without a patent because there's no competition. Because of the fundamental differences between piston and wankel combustion chambers, it's not simply a matter of application transferal. A bunch of blokes over on the weekend to play with the 'other' engine in their spare time is simply not going to compare with every ICE engineer in the world.
I think most us that are wanting a new Rx-7 would agree that if we wanted an LS motor we'd simply buy a vette. Especially now that the new stingrays have been proven to be pretty ******* awesome.
my $0.02
my $0.02
Last edited by Bwarrrrrp; 02-15-14 at 02:09 AM.
02-15-14, 02:32 AM
#1672
Full Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can appreciate coming out of an 50 corner and running it up to 75 or so (maybe from 50 up to 65-70 would be the equivalent in a car - it happens rather faster on a bike) but there quickly comes a point where the only difference power makes is how hard and early you have to brake at the end of the straight.
The only time when I had the vfr400 that I wished for more power was when overtaking on uphill mountain passes.
Last edited by Bwarrrrrp; 02-15-14 at 02:40 AM.
02-15-14, 11:42 AM
#1673
We all seem to want the same thing from the rx7. Camaro mustang corvette acceleration in a smaller more nimble car. My 2002 Camaro SS was similar in shape to my FC but my FC is small and fun while my Camaro was like driving a fast school bus. The car was too f*#%ing big.
On a road course a smaller car would not need as much power to be as fast as the big Camaro but when you drive on the street you miss that powerful feeling.
The rx7 needs to bring the best of both worlds together.
On a road course a smaller car would not need as much power to be as fast as the big Camaro but when you drive on the street you miss that powerful feeling.
The rx7 needs to bring the best of both worlds together.
Last edited by ghost1000; 02-15-14 at 11:53 AM.
02-15-14, 12:22 PM
#1674
All out Track Freak!
iTrader: (263)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlottesville VA 22901
Posts: 10,672
Received 412 Likes
on
250 Posts
We all seem to want the same thing from the rx7. Camaro mustang corvette acceleration in a smaller more nimble car. My 2002 Camaro SS was similar in shape to my FC but my FC is small and fun while my Camaro was like driving a fast school bus. The car was too f*#%ing big.
On a road course a smaller car would not need as much power to be as fast as the big Camaro but when you drive on the street you miss that powerful feeling.
The rx7 needs to bring the best of both worlds together.
On a road course a smaller car would not need as much power to be as fast as the big Camaro but when you drive on the street you miss that powerful feeling.
The rx7 needs to bring the best of both worlds together.
02-15-14, 01:09 PM
#1675
Yeah, whoever is equating the desire for horsepower with a personal issue is just full of ****. Sorry.
Horsepower is FUN. Acceleration and power are FUN. That has nothing to do with personal insecurity, so get over yourself. I'm not going to martyr myself with some low power piece of **** just to (dis)prove something.
I just got a chance to drive a friends 1500 hp (yes) GTR. It's absolutely frightening, but also thrilling in a way that no Miata will ever be. Cars get faster because people seek that thrill. Time to get with the modern era.
Horsepower is FUN. Acceleration and power are FUN. That has nothing to do with personal insecurity, so get over yourself. I'm not going to martyr myself with some low power piece of **** just to (dis)prove something.
I just got a chance to drive a friends 1500 hp (yes) GTR. It's absolutely frightening, but also thrilling in a way that no Miata will ever be. Cars get faster because people seek that thrill. Time to get with the modern era.