The RX-7 confirmed to be in the pipeline for 2017---RX-Vision Unveil!!
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 31,837
Likes: 3,234
From: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
i have the feeling though, that the EU has some sliding scale with grams of emissions/fuel used, and that the US does not.
the difference is that the EU engines can run in stratified charge, and the NOX goes up, but fuel used goes down, so its a net decrease in pollution, and in the US we have an absolute limit, so we generally don't get the stratified charge mode because it fails NOX.
With the strengthening of diesel emissions standards we have developed NOX catalyst options that don't involve the old style of just dumping fuel into the exhaust as diesel manufacturers and Mazda has done in the past to meet NOX standards with the rotary.
Is a stratified charge lean burn rotary feasible with Selective Catalyst Reduction (NOX cat and DEF)?
Is a stratified charge lean burn rotary feasible with Selective Catalyst Reduction (NOX cat and DEF)?
Full Member
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 222
Likes: 1
From: Reggio Emilia, Italy
i don't know, and a 30 second google search didn't come up with anything that was relevant.
i have the feeling though, that the EU has some sliding scale with grams of emissions/fuel used, and that the US does not.
the difference is that the EU engines can run in stratified charge, and the NOX goes up, but fuel used goes down, so its a net decrease in pollution, and in the US we have an absolute limit, so we generally don't get the stratified charge mode because it fails NOX.
i have the feeling though, that the EU has some sliding scale with grams of emissions/fuel used, and that the US does not.
the difference is that the EU engines can run in stratified charge, and the NOX goes up, but fuel used goes down, so its a net decrease in pollution, and in the US we have an absolute limit, so we generally don't get the stratified charge mode because it fails NOX.
I did try to find info about the US limits, but got lost with all of the PLEV, ULEV, WTFEV and so on
. That's why I asked about anyone knowing of a comparison table between the standards.There is also an average limit of 130 g/km of CO2 scheduled to come online in 2015, that, for gasoline vehicles, equates to roughly 41mpg. But what I said earlier still holds: as long as many small cars are sold to keep the average under control, a manufacturer can afford to sell a few polluting cars.
Originally Posted by BLUE TII
Is a stratified charge lean burn rotary feasible with Selective Catalyst Reduction (NOX cat and DEF)?
In fact I suspect that if some specific device is needed to keep NOx emissions in check with a rotary, then a NOx trap would be better suited than a full fledged SCR catalyst with DEF injection. The high exhaust temperatures would help keep the trap clean during normal driving even without having to artificially adjust the engine tuning to heat up the trap, or at least without having to do it as often.
Andrea.
Then we agree, I suppose. I was only pointing out that there is some hope that they may make it, given how much potential lies in the freedom of a completely new design.
In fact, up to some time ago, whenever someone from Mazda talked about the future rotary, the main roadblock was emissions. Now, in the last few instances (last year's Tokyo motor show and these months' articles about the rumored 600cc 250hp engine), it became a profitability matter.
In fact, up to some time ago, whenever someone from Mazda talked about the future rotary, the main roadblock was emissions. Now, in the last few instances (last year's Tokyo motor show and these months' articles about the rumored 600cc 250hp engine), it became a profitability matter.
If this shift is accurate, my guess is that emissions are now under control and they are starting to think about selling the product, now that they know they can get it to work.
An additional proof is the Mazda 2 RE hybrid: they wouldn't have spent money to develop it if they knew the generator would not be able to pass existing emission standards.
By the way, does anyone know of a detailed comparison of worldwide gasoline emission standards? I found one for diesel engines, and it seems that US, Euro and Japan standards for diesel emissions are converging. And I also happened to hear that japan is planning to harmonize its emission standards with the Euro standards.
If this is happening for gasoline regulations too, then the idea of not selling the car in some markets to circumvent the regulations becomes moot.
Andrea.
If this is happening for gasoline regulations too, then the idea of not selling the car in some markets to circumvent the regulations becomes moot.
Andrea.
There's also an effort towards a harmonized and more realistic drive cycle, which is basically modified version of the current European cycle. If I get you the actual numbers for US LEV III and Euro 6C they will mean nothing to you. Grams per mile of Non Methane Organic Gas in a Federal Test Procedure is a very esoteric measure, as are Particulate Mass vs Particulate Number measurements.
With the strengthening of diesel emissions standards we have developed NOX catalyst options that don't involve the old style of just dumping fuel into the exhaust as diesel manufacturers and Mazda has done in the past to meet NOX standards with the rotary.
Is a stratified charge lean burn rotary feasible with Selective Catalyst Reduction (NOX cat and DEF)?
Is a stratified charge lean burn rotary feasible with Selective Catalyst Reduction (NOX cat and DEF)?
I have no idea, even though I wondered myself. However I see no obvious reason why it should not be feasible as long as the peak exhaust temperature can be kept under control not to melt the whole thing.
In fact I suspect that if some specific device is needed to keep NOx emissions in check with a rotary, then a NOx trap would be better suited than a full fledged SCR catalyst with DEF injection. The high exhaust temperatures would help keep the trap clean during normal driving even without having to artificially adjust the engine tuning to heat up the trap, or at least without having to do it as often.
In fact I suspect that if some specific device is needed to keep NOx emissions in check with a rotary, then a NOx trap would be better suited than a full fledged SCR catalyst with DEF injection. The high exhaust temperatures would help keep the trap clean during normal driving even without having to artificially adjust the engine tuning to heat up the trap, or at least without having to do it as often.
The big problem is going to be the particulates. You know all that lovely black smoke that comes out of the tailpipe on a rotary, and even piston engines with direct injection? In 2017 the rules get much tighter, and particulate filters will be introduced on gasoline engines.
arghx, can you clarify something for me?
Emissions testing is performed over a defined cycle, such as FTP75, in which all accelerations are defined to a specific ramp rate. This being the case, how does maximum horsepower make any difference to the test results? If all accelerations take place at a maximum of 3.3 MPH/s then won't an 800whp vehicle and a 200whp just be operating at different load positions? Is the difference just the extra efficiency from high load operation? I would assume on an unthrottled GDI engine this should be much less of an issue than it used to be?
On a separate note, FWIW, I think you guys are arguing all over the place about horsepower, but missing the point. It isn't that you need XXX amount of power to be considered fast nowadays, it is that you need to make the numbers just to sell the car, because most people never use their cars anywhere near the limit, so they don't even have a concept of what XXX horsepower means.
I own an FD, a 911, an RX8, and a Lotus Elise. The Lotus has the least power of the group by a pretty decent margin (192bhp), but is scary fast on a road course, and has about the same straight line acceleration as the others. Lotus never made any money in the US, because most buyers walked away as soon as they found out it had less than 200hp. Those are the guys I pass on the track every weekend in their Corvettes and Mustangs.
Just because race car guys will buy a car, doesn't mean Mazda can sell enough of them to make a profit if all the teenagers and posers don't buy one, especially after they spent the last few years selling an RX8 that was a half-baked piece of ****. That said, I hope they make a case for it, because I will order one as soon as it is announced.
Emissions testing is performed over a defined cycle, such as FTP75, in which all accelerations are defined to a specific ramp rate. This being the case, how does maximum horsepower make any difference to the test results? If all accelerations take place at a maximum of 3.3 MPH/s then won't an 800whp vehicle and a 200whp just be operating at different load positions? Is the difference just the extra efficiency from high load operation? I would assume on an unthrottled GDI engine this should be much less of an issue than it used to be?
On a separate note, FWIW, I think you guys are arguing all over the place about horsepower, but missing the point. It isn't that you need XXX amount of power to be considered fast nowadays, it is that you need to make the numbers just to sell the car, because most people never use their cars anywhere near the limit, so they don't even have a concept of what XXX horsepower means.
I own an FD, a 911, an RX8, and a Lotus Elise. The Lotus has the least power of the group by a pretty decent margin (192bhp), but is scary fast on a road course, and has about the same straight line acceleration as the others. Lotus never made any money in the US, because most buyers walked away as soon as they found out it had less than 200hp. Those are the guys I pass on the track every weekend in their Corvettes and Mustangs.
Just because race car guys will buy a car, doesn't mean Mazda can sell enough of them to make a profit if all the teenagers and posers don't buy one, especially after they spent the last few years selling an RX8 that was a half-baked piece of ****. That said, I hope they make a case for it, because I will order one as soon as it is announced.
On a separate note, FWIW, I think you guys are arguing all over the place about horsepower, but missing the point. It isn't that you need XXX amount of power to be considered fast nowadays, it is that you need to make the numbers just to sell the car, because most people never use their cars anywhere near the limit, so they don't even have a concept of what XXX horsepower means.
I own an FD, a 911, an RX8, and a Lotus Elise. The Lotus has the least power of the group by a pretty decent margin (192bhp), but is scary fast on a road course, and has about the same straight line acceleration as the others. Lotus never made any money in the US, because most buyers walked away as soon as they found out it had less than 200hp. Those are the guys I pass on the track every weekend in their Corvettes and Mustangs.
Just because race car guys will buy a car, doesn't mean Mazda can sell enough of them to make a profit if all the teenagers and posers don't buy one, especially after they spent the last few years selling an RX8 that was a half-baked piece of ****. That said, I hope they make a case for it, because I will order one as soon as it is announced.
I own an FD, a 911, an RX8, and a Lotus Elise. The Lotus has the least power of the group by a pretty decent margin (192bhp), but is scary fast on a road course, and has about the same straight line acceleration as the others. Lotus never made any money in the US, because most buyers walked away as soon as they found out it had less than 200hp. Those are the guys I pass on the track every weekend in their Corvettes and Mustangs.
Just because race car guys will buy a car, doesn't mean Mazda can sell enough of them to make a profit if all the teenagers and posers don't buy one, especially after they spent the last few years selling an RX8 that was a half-baked piece of ****. That said, I hope they make a case for it, because I will order one as soon as it is announced.
Are we really sure that "the number" itself is the real reason though?
I can see some people shying away due to lack of potential for internet bragging rights for sure, but I wouldn't overlook the simple fact that the Elise is ridiculously small for Americans. Not just in physical dimensions, but in the fact that your passenger will literally be crammed against your shoulder, and have to move his/her knee so you can shift. It's also VERY spartan for American tastes—there isn't even any carpeting. Also the few I've seen had gaps the size of a finger between the side windows and the canvas top at the corners.
That's a lot to put up with for a car that really isn't THAT fast despite the ultra light weight. It's certainly no normally-modded FD in straight line acceleration, and I've NEVER been passed by an Exige on track let alone an Elise. Cool car though.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,672
Likes: 413
From: Charlottesville VA 22901
arghx, can you clarify something for me?
Emissions testing is performed over a defined cycle, such as FTP75, in which all accelerations are defined to a specific ramp rate. This being the case, how does maximum horsepower make any difference to the test results? If all accelerations take place at a maximum of 3.3 MPH/s then won't an 800whp vehicle and a 200whp just be operating at different load positions? Is the difference just the extra efficiency from high load operation? I would assume on an unthrottled GDI engine this should be much less of an issue than it used to be?
On a separate note, FWIW, I think you guys are arguing all over the place about horsepower, but missing the point. It isn't that you need XXX amount of power to be considered fast nowadays, it is that you need to make the numbers just to sell the car, because most people never use their cars anywhere near the limit, so they don't even have a concept of what XXX horsepower means.
I own an FD, a 911, an RX8, and a Lotus Elise. The Lotus has the least power of the group by a pretty decent margin (192bhp), but is scary fast on a road course, and has about the same straight line acceleration as the others. Lotus never made any money in the US, because most buyers walked away as soon as they found out it had less than 200hp. Those are the guys I pass on the track every weekend in their Corvettes and Mustangs.
Just because race car guys will buy a car, doesn't mean Mazda can sell enough of them to make a profit if all the teenagers and posers don't buy one, especially after they spent the last few years selling an RX8 that was a half-baked piece of ****. That said, I hope they make a case for it, because I will order one as soon as it is announced.
Emissions testing is performed over a defined cycle, such as FTP75, in which all accelerations are defined to a specific ramp rate. This being the case, how does maximum horsepower make any difference to the test results? If all accelerations take place at a maximum of 3.3 MPH/s then won't an 800whp vehicle and a 200whp just be operating at different load positions? Is the difference just the extra efficiency from high load operation? I would assume on an unthrottled GDI engine this should be much less of an issue than it used to be?
On a separate note, FWIW, I think you guys are arguing all over the place about horsepower, but missing the point. It isn't that you need XXX amount of power to be considered fast nowadays, it is that you need to make the numbers just to sell the car, because most people never use their cars anywhere near the limit, so they don't even have a concept of what XXX horsepower means.
I own an FD, a 911, an RX8, and a Lotus Elise. The Lotus has the least power of the group by a pretty decent margin (192bhp), but is scary fast on a road course, and has about the same straight line acceleration as the others. Lotus never made any money in the US, because most buyers walked away as soon as they found out it had less than 200hp. Those are the guys I pass on the track every weekend in their Corvettes and Mustangs.
Just because race car guys will buy a car, doesn't mean Mazda can sell enough of them to make a profit if all the teenagers and posers don't buy one, especially after they spent the last few years selling an RX8 that was a half-baked piece of ****. That said, I hope they make a case for it, because I will order one as soon as it is announced.
I've instructed a few students in lotus elise/exiges and drove a friends exige (NA) for a 4 or 5 laps and they are fun cars but they don't have any top end speed and are nervous/jumpy little buggers once they start sliding around or reaching their traction limits (9/10nths so to speak).
From my experience If your elise is passing corvettes the pilots should be bumped to a slower group
Here's a very fair list of lap times on the extremely twisty 4.2 mile VIR grand course and you can see the Elise is in the back of the pack: Virginia International Raceway lap records - FastestLaps.com
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 682
Likes: 4
From: Pawtucket, RI
For my *street* car, 250hp 2600 lb. would totally fit the bill! More power and lighter-weight than my S2000, which I *LOVE* on the street, but with the massive improvement of having a fixed roof (wind noise in the S2000 is *very* fatiguing on the highway, and probably responsible for the slight ringing I have in my ears now
)I feel more strongly than ever that if Mazda should build such a car, there should be a more modestly-powered base version.
Also feel more strongly than ever that they *SHOULD* build this car, and that if they can't meet emissions with a rotary, they should do it with a ~2.5 liter V4, with 250 NA hp and 350-400 turbo hp.
I'm sure they are paying close attention to this thread
so there you have it, Mazda, make it so!
I've instructed a few students in lotus elise/exiges and drove a friends exige (NA) for a 4 or 5 laps and they are fun cars but they don't have any top end speed and are nervous/jumpy little buggers once they start sliding around or reaching their traction limits (9/10nths so to speak).
But I had more fun in those cars than in a friend's massively faster GT-R!
Enjoyment of cars is a subjective experience. Not everybody, not even all trackhounds, wants a car that just posts quick lap times.
Personally, I'd like to see a lot more sports cars on the market that are more minimalist, and more focused on FUN than on 0-60, 1/4-mile, Nurburgring or VIR laptimes.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,672
Likes: 413
From: Charlottesville VA 22901
And it's not going to replace my 463rwhp 2850 FD, either! The vast majority of any new RX-7 would not be track cars but street cars. And for more than half of those that would be tracked, the owner/driver would be better off with "only" 250hp on tap than with 350-400!
For my *street* car, 250hp 2600 lb. would totally fit the bill! More power and lighter-weight than my S2000, which I *LOVE* on the street, but with the massive improvement of having a fixed roof (wind noise in the S2000 is *very* fatiguing on the highway, and probably responsible for the slight ringing I have in my ears now )
I feel more strongly than ever that if Mazda should build such a car, there should be a more modestly-powered base version.
Also feel more strongly than ever that they *SHOULD* build this car, and that if they can't meet emissions with a rotary, they should do it with a ~2.5 liter V4, with 250 NA hp and 350-400 turbo hp.
I'm sure they are paying close attention to this thread so there you have it, Mazda, make it so!
I've had a couple of students with Elises, and those cars are fun as all fawk! They are NOT particularly fast, though. Not even as fast as their modest power/weight suggests.
But I had more fun in those cars than in a friend's massively faster GT-R!
Enjoyment of cars is a subjective experience. Not everybody, not even all trackhounds, wants a car that just posts quick lap times.
Personally, I'd like to see a lot more sports cars on the market that are more minimalist, and more focused on FUN than on 0-60, 1/4-mile, Nurburgring or VIR laptimes.
For my *street* car, 250hp 2600 lb. would totally fit the bill! More power and lighter-weight than my S2000, which I *LOVE* on the street, but with the massive improvement of having a fixed roof (wind noise in the S2000 is *very* fatiguing on the highway, and probably responsible for the slight ringing I have in my ears now
)I feel more strongly than ever that if Mazda should build such a car, there should be a more modestly-powered base version.
Also feel more strongly than ever that they *SHOULD* build this car, and that if they can't meet emissions with a rotary, they should do it with a ~2.5 liter V4, with 250 NA hp and 350-400 turbo hp.
I'm sure they are paying close attention to this thread
so there you have it, Mazda, make it so!I've had a couple of students with Elises, and those cars are fun as all fawk! They are NOT particularly fast, though. Not even as fast as their modest power/weight suggests.
But I had more fun in those cars than in a friend's massively faster GT-R!
Enjoyment of cars is a subjective experience. Not everybody, not even all trackhounds, wants a car that just posts quick lap times.
Personally, I'd like to see a lot more sports cars on the market that are more minimalist, and more focused on FUN than on 0-60, 1/4-mile, Nurburgring or VIR laptimes.
I'm not going to spend 30 to 60k on a new car that's fun to go to the grocery store but a bore on track.
I'd suggest you bolt a hard top and turbo to the S2k (dd car) and put a wing on the FD with some massive sticky tires and go GT3 hunting with me and Peter until some car manufacture gets off its *** and builds a FAST minimalist sports car that's as fun to track as it is to go to the grocery store in.
Yes of course the lotus is more fun to drive than a GTR which is possibly the least interesting sports car (it has out performed the evo and STI to now be the worlds least interesting car to track and it's the anti minimalist car) in the world to drive UNLESS you drive the **** out of it which unlike the lotus it will make you look like a hero and not a zero
PS Also the grand course is a very fair course for all size cars but the smaller lighter cars probably have the overall advantage.
^ sorry guys, not trying to start a Lotus vs FD debate, just using it as an example.
I think if you look at other lightweight cars with low power numbers you sill see the same lack of sales. Even the BRZ isnt selling well, and all the ricer kids were super worked up about those, although IMO that is even too low on the power/weight scale for me. The miata is not only iconic, but by all accounts (including mine) a wonderful, fun, and reliable car, and while they do sell fairly well, they have never been a huge volume car either.
Still like I said before, if they make a new car similar in looks and design philosphy to the FD, I will buy one regardless of how much power it makes. I think another good point is that many car companies nowadays are taking some effort to make it easy for the aftermarket to build power. If you can buy a 250hp new RX7, and everyone knows that you can contact a couple of vendors who can make a reliable 400hp no problem, that works great for most enthusiasts, and it takes a lot of the regulatory pressure off Mazda. IMO that was part of the problem with the RX8, is it was already pretty optimized from the factory, so everyone who thought they could double the power as easily as the FD was pretty unhappy.
I think if you look at other lightweight cars with low power numbers you sill see the same lack of sales. Even the BRZ isnt selling well, and all the ricer kids were super worked up about those, although IMO that is even too low on the power/weight scale for me. The miata is not only iconic, but by all accounts (including mine) a wonderful, fun, and reliable car, and while they do sell fairly well, they have never been a huge volume car either.
Still like I said before, if they make a new car similar in looks and design philosphy to the FD, I will buy one regardless of how much power it makes. I think another good point is that many car companies nowadays are taking some effort to make it easy for the aftermarket to build power. If you can buy a 250hp new RX7, and everyone knows that you can contact a couple of vendors who can make a reliable 400hp no problem, that works great for most enthusiasts, and it takes a lot of the regulatory pressure off Mazda. IMO that was part of the problem with the RX8, is it was already pretty optimized from the factory, so everyone who thought they could double the power as easily as the FD was pretty unhappy.
If you don't feel a HUGE difference between driving a Prius around town at exactly the same speeds vs. an S2000 (or FD, or MIata), then you will NEVER "get it".
BTW, in town turning a corner at the posted speed limit is often not possible. Speed limit 35, try taking a hard turn onto a narrow side street at that speed.
Not at all, but I am able to FEEL what the car is doing and how it responds to my inputs at 2-3/10ths as well as at 9-11/10ths.
You take a corner, even a low-speed corner in a Prius, you have to crank in more steering angle, and have to initiate somewhat sooner to carve the same arc vs. an S2000. You get a LOT more body roll and more push. You begin to feel a loss of incremental grip with increasing cornering load and steering input WAY sooner. When you begin to add power exiting the corner, when you'd begin unwinding the steering in the S2k, you have to maintain more steering angle in the Prius or you get more push. Accelrating out of the corner in the Prius you have to give more initial input at the pedal because of the "being-pulled-with-a-rubberband" feel of the CVT. Throughout the corner entry/apex/exit experience, you get zero feel from the steering wheel.
IT IS A FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT DRIVING EXPERIENCE.
If you can't feel or even imagine the difference, your brain must have been wired for something else.
You don't care, possibly can't even feel how a car responds to your inputs. Why would *you* drive a sports car in that case?
Every car I own is also a track car. But even if it weren't, I want a lightweight and responsive car to drive every day, even if I never get beyond 6-7/10ths of its performance capabilities.
S2000 is currently on low-grip winter tires. It is STILL massive fun to drive around town and on backroads, even with only ~0.8 or so maximum gs lateral grip.
If you can't feel what a car is doing and how it responds to your inputs, fine. I am keenly and acutely aware of how the car I'm driving is responding to my inputs at all times. I appreciate the Prius as a technical achievement, and it was cool to average 37mpg averaging 90mph on a road trip I took in one, but that car is totally dead-feeling to drive (apparently on purpose). The S2000, driven similarly, is constantly giving gobs of feedback, turns in eagerly, can be steered with the throttle, corners flat, responds to subtle inputs, it just does all the right things and rewards driver attention, even way way way below handling limits. It is a DRIVER'S car, vs. the Prius which is very much a "car as A-to-B appliance".
If you can't tell the difference, even driving at non-douchebag speeds around town, well that's too bad...
BTW, in town turning a corner at the posted speed limit is often not possible. Speed limit 35, try taking a hard turn onto a narrow side street at that speed.
Not at all, but I am able to FEEL what the car is doing and how it responds to my inputs at 2-3/10ths as well as at 9-11/10ths.
You take a corner, even a low-speed corner in a Prius, you have to crank in more steering angle, and have to initiate somewhat sooner to carve the same arc vs. an S2000. You get a LOT more body roll and more push. You begin to feel a loss of incremental grip with increasing cornering load and steering input WAY sooner. When you begin to add power exiting the corner, when you'd begin unwinding the steering in the S2k, you have to maintain more steering angle in the Prius or you get more push. Accelrating out of the corner in the Prius you have to give more initial input at the pedal because of the "being-pulled-with-a-rubberband" feel of the CVT. Throughout the corner entry/apex/exit experience, you get zero feel from the steering wheel.
IT IS A FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT DRIVING EXPERIENCE.
If you can't feel or even imagine the difference, your brain must have been wired for something else.
You don't care, possibly can't even feel how a car responds to your inputs. Why would *you* drive a sports car in that case?
Every car I own is also a track car. But even if it weren't, I want a lightweight and responsive car to drive every day, even if I never get beyond 6-7/10ths of its performance capabilities.
S2000 is currently on low-grip winter tires. It is STILL massive fun to drive around town and on backroads, even with only ~0.8 or so maximum gs lateral grip.
If you can't feel what a car is doing and how it responds to your inputs, fine. I am keenly and acutely aware of how the car I'm driving is responding to my inputs at all times. I appreciate the Prius as a technical achievement, and it was cool to average 37mpg averaging 90mph on a road trip I took in one, but that car is totally dead-feeling to drive (apparently on purpose). The S2000, driven similarly, is constantly giving gobs of feedback, turns in eagerly, can be steered with the throttle, corners flat, responds to subtle inputs, it just does all the right things and rewards driver attention, even way way way below handling limits. It is a DRIVER'S car, vs. the Prius which is very much a "car as A-to-B appliance".
If you can't tell the difference, even driving at non-douchebag speeds around town, well that's too bad...
I seriously wonder if you truly believe your own bullshit. lol
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 682
Likes: 4
From: Pawtucket, RI
Dan we are on the same page with the one exception being acceptable power level and YES I want a minimalist sports car BUT I'm not going to buy a 250 HP car in a 2600lb range and I think you are in the minority so I don't think it will sell very well versus other cars/choices on the market in 2016.
How did Chevrolet's C6 Corvette sales work out? Which did they sell more of, the least-expensive ~425-436hp models, the more-expensive 505hp Z06 models, or the still-more-expensive 638hp ZR1 models?
What about Mustangs? Do they sell more 300hp V6s or more 414hp V8s, or 660hp GT500s?
Camaros, more V6s or more v8s or more supercharged ZL-1s?
*IF* they are to build a new RX-7, they will sell MASSIVELY more of them (at least 2x more) if they have a more-than-reasonable-for-95%-of-the-population 250hp base model.
I'll go buy an S2k AGAIN or better keep my DD FD but no way am I buying a 250 HP RX7 that's going to get creamed by the new mustang and I mean smashed. The new 2015 mustang will have 400 plus HP and weigh 3300 pounds with better handling than the current car which BTW isn't bad.
But *anyway*, speaking for MYself, obviously I'm a BIG fan of speed, but I'd still MUCH rather have a new 250hp/2600 lb. RX-7 than even a 500hp/3300-lb new Mustang.
I'm not going to spend 30 to 60k on a new car that's fun to go to the grocery store but a bore on track.
I'd suggest you bolt a hard top and turbo to the S2k (dd car) and put a wing on the FD with some massive sticky tires and go GT3 hunting with me and Peter until some car manufacture gets off its *** and builds a FAST minimalist sports car that's as fun to track as it is to go to the grocery store in.
Probably going to go with 255/275 NT01s this year on the 8.5"/9.5" track wheels I have. Ultimately will move the 9.5s to the front and get 10.5+ for the rear...
Yes of course the lotus is more fun to drive than a GTR which is possibly the least interesting sports car (it has out performed the evo and STI to now be the worlds least interesting car to track and it's the anti minimalist car) in the world to drive UNLESS you drive the **** out of it which unlike the lotus it will make you look like a hero and not a zero
I'd rather drive the Elise even if I look like a slow-*** idiot than the GTR even if it makes me look good.
ZDan,
People who buy lesser models of the cars you stated are because its price prohibitive. Do you really believe they pushed the ZR-1 away from the negotiating table and said "Don't come back here unless you give me a lower HP model"
No... There were puddles of drool and nose prints all over the ZR-1 and they settled on the C6 because it was half the price and it fit a budget.
People WANT what's hanging on the wall poster size since they were kids.
What they BUY is what they can afford.
People who buy lesser models of the cars you stated are because its price prohibitive. Do you really believe they pushed the ZR-1 away from the negotiating table and said "Don't come back here unless you give me a lower HP model"
No... There were puddles of drool and nose prints all over the ZR-1 and they settled on the C6 because it was half the price and it fit a budget.
People WANT what's hanging on the wall poster size since they were kids.
What they BUY is what they can afford.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 682
Likes: 4
From: Pawtucket, RI
A lot more people can and will buy a $30-35k 250hp/2600 lb. sports car than will buy a $45-50+k 350-450hp version of the same (or similar) sports car.
That was the primary sales failing of the FD. There was no semi-reasonably-priced base model, they were all turbos.
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 31,837
Likes: 3,234
From: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
i really like the sound of 250/2600lbs, its just right
the GTR looks purposeful, but it is NOT good looking
lol, there are so many sales failings its hard to hang your hat on just one... they didn't even advertise it!
than the GTR even if it makes me look good.
lol, there are so many sales failings its hard to hang your hat on just one... they didn't even advertise it!
When you consider only 23000 Corvettes were produced in 1993 the FD wasnt exactly a failure the first year from a sales point. All things considered they did really well. It was all the early issues that plagued the car and it may have been a little too "race car" like for your average owner at the time. The Supra and 300zx are way nicer touring sports car compared to the FD. I'm happy how it turned out, I'm glad the FD is not a dime a dozen and you dont see them rotting away in fields like FBs and FCs. The car is still extremely competitive which has been discussed to death already in this thread. The reason myself, peter, fritz and others are so insistent the next RX-7 be so impressive and competitive compared to the lower end super cars is the fact that is what Mazda already did once with the FD. No need to take a step back in the other direction. Build a contender or let the rx7 name die, don't shame us with another rx8.
If it has the same power band as the Renesis but more rwhp it still wont compare to a stock FD. I think the fastest 1/4 mile time I remember for a stock rx8 is in the 14.2-14.4 range. That is one full second slower than some guys were able to do in a bone stock rx7. I dont think shedding 400 lbs is going to make that much difference. The torque/power curve on a bone stock sequential FD is still very impressive. The 220rwhp is nothing crazy but it was the fact you had the instant torque and the power carried from 2500rpms all the way to redline. Its probably all just wishfull thinking. It would be great to see another turbo rotary from the factory but with emissions challenges I know it is unlikely.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 682
Likes: 4
From: Pawtucket, RI
The reason myself, peter, fritz and others are so insistent the next RX-7 be so impressive and competitive compared to the lower end super cars is the fact that is what Mazda already did once with the FD. No need to take a step back in the other direction. Build a contender or let the rx7 name die, don't shame us with another rx8.
Would you rather not get the car you want at all, or get *exactly* the car you want but for there to also be a less expensive more "real-world" oriented 250hp 2-rotor NA model? I get the distinct impression that you guys would actually prefer the 1st option! Which is kinda f'd up...
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 682
Likes: 4
From: Pawtucket, RI
I dont think shedding 400 lbs is going to make that much difference.
Losing 400 lb. by itself would be the equivalent of gaining 35hp.
Losing 400 lb. vs. the RX-8 while gaining 25hp would make the proposed 250hp/2600 lb. new car 10mph faster in the quarter, ~105mph vs. 95mph. That is HUGE!
Last edited by ZDan; Feb 20, 2014 at 02:14 PM.
An na 220 rwhp rotary car weighing 2600lbs isnt outrunning a 2780lb 220rwhp sequential FD.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,672
Likes: 413
From: Charlottesville VA 22901
ZDan,
People who buy lesser models of the cars you stated are because its price prohibitive. Do you really believe they pushed the ZR-1 away from the negotiating table and said "Don't come back here unless you give me a lower HP model"
No... There were puddles of drool and nose prints all over the ZR-1 and they settled on the C6 because it was half the price and it fit a budget.
People WANT what's hanging on the wall poster size since they were kids.
What they BUY is what they can afford.
People who buy lesser models of the cars you stated are because its price prohibitive. Do you really believe they pushed the ZR-1 away from the negotiating table and said "Don't come back here unless you give me a lower HP model"
No... There were puddles of drool and nose prints all over the ZR-1 and they settled on the C6 because it was half the price and it fit a budget.
People WANT what's hanging on the wall poster size since they were kids.
What they BUY is what they can afford.
Which is also why Dan's right it would be smart for Mazda to build both a fast RX7 and moderately fast RX7 but if the only RX7 to choose from is barely beating the v6 mustang and getting stomped by the V8 nobody will want it including Dan. He just can't admit that
No doubt most sports car enthusiast who own the BRZ, mustang, camaro etc.... are compromising they aren't buying them because it's the sports car they dream of, they are buying them because they are the sports cars they can afford. The BRZs are not selling that well because people are buying cars that out perform them like the v6 mustang and the v6 camaro etc......and cost less to boot which is why I don't feel a 250hp RX7 will compete in either sales or performance in 2016.
It goes like this; the avg joe goes for a test drive in a new FRZ and once he mashes the gas peddle he wonders what all the fuss is about and decides to walk next door and test drives the v8 mustang, mashes the gas pedal and is blown away so he either spends a little extra and gets the v8 mustang or chooses to settles for the still faster v6 mustang and save a few bucks. This is exactly what would happen if mazda builds a 250 HP RX7 in 2016, not too mention the mag reviews will be down right embarrassing.
Please Mazda don't make the RX7 that guy/car that gets outperformed by the mustang and camaro
Full Member
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 222
Likes: 1
From: Reggio Emilia, Italy
Hybrids, at least "strong" hybrids like a Prius, are weird in their technical hurdles to meet emissions requirements. They are run at a narrow range of speed and load points and are not started up in a conventional way. If it works in a hybrid it might not work as a prime mover, and vice versa.
This is a huge topic and I have a pile of stuff. I'll have to see if any of it can be posted publicly. Here's some basic information. Most of the world follows one of the Euro standards (Euro 4, 5, 6, etc). US and Japan have their own test cycles. For 2017 model year, US gets Tier 3 (California LEV III) and you begin phase-in of Euro 6C emissions. Lots of stuff changes, like test fuels with ethanol, much stricter gasoline particulate emissions, new way of calculating total emissions, and regulation of things like N2O and formaldehyde. The US also has "footprint" CO2 emissions standard, where the CO2 limits are based on the physical dimensions of the vehicle and certain arcane definitions. For example, a small SUV is regulated like a car if it's FWD and regulated like a truck if it's AWD.
There's also an effort towards a harmonized and more realistic drive cycle, which is basically modified version of the current European cycle. If I get you the actual numbers for US LEV III and Euro 6C they will mean nothing to you. Grams per mile of Non Methane Organic Gas in a Federal Test Procedure is a very esoteric measure, as are Particulate Mass vs Particulate Number measurements.
There's also an effort towards a harmonized and more realistic drive cycle, which is basically modified version of the current European cycle. If I get you the actual numbers for US LEV III and Euro 6C they will mean nothing to you. Grams per mile of Non Methane Organic Gas in a Federal Test Procedure is a very esoteric measure, as are Particulate Mass vs Particulate Number measurements.
Needless to say, the first situation is preferrable, both for us and for manufacturers.
This may sound counter intuitive, but stratified combustion actually makes the exhaust temperatures lower (at least on production piston engines). So the problem becomes keeping the cat light off. The other, and almost opposite, problem is that the NOx catalyst can't tolerate high temperatures, so more enrichment is required at heavy loads. BMW's stratified charge engines were exactly like this--low temps in stratified zone, rich under full load. I would be very surprised if Mazda used stratified combustion in a rotary for the near future.
The big problem is going to be the particulates. You know all that lovely black smoke that comes out of the tailpipe on a rotary, and even piston engines with direct injection? In 2017 the rules get much tighter, and particulate filters will be introduced on gasoline engines.
The big problem is going to be the particulates. You know all that lovely black smoke that comes out of the tailpipe on a rotary, and even piston engines with direct injection? In 2017 the rules get much tighter, and particulate filters will be introduced on gasoline engines.
On the other hand a late ignition at low loads could help light off the cat, even in stratified charge mode.
Particulates could be dealt with with a GPF, as you say, and here the high EGT could help keep it clean.
I'm by no means an expert of engine design, but there could be some more creative stuff, like injecting cold air into the critical parts of the exhaust path (after the cat) to cool them off when needed. Or having a valve in the exhaust that only switches the precat into the exhaust path when it's safe to do so, allowing one to keep it close to the engine for idle and low load operation, while excluding it when it would risk being burned by excessive temperatures (leaving only the later catalysts to do the job).
Maybe all this is I wrote nonsense, but who knows, maybe some clever solution was found in Hiroshima in teh last months...
Andrea.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,672
Likes: 413
From: Charlottesville VA 22901
But you don't speak for the majority of car buyers. Most car buyers are not anything like you! In terms of disposable income, driving talent and actual "need for speed".
How did Chevrolet's C6 Corvette sales work out? Which did they sell more of, the least-expensive ~425-436hp models, the more-expensive 505hp Z06 models, or the still-more-expensive 638hp ZR1 models?
What about Mustangs? Do they sell more 300hp V6s or more 414hp V8s, or 660hp GT500s?
Camaros, more V6s or more v8s or more supercharged ZL-1s?
*IF* they are to build a new RX-7, they will sell MASSIVELY more of them (at least 2x more) if they have a more-than-reasonable-for-95%-of-the-population 250hp base model.
Guaranteed the V8's weight is going to be a lot closer to 3600 lb. than 3300. Lighter weight and smaller size were promised, but the new Mustang is going to be the same size/weight as the outgoing model.
But *anyway*, speaking for MYself, obviously I'm a BIG fan of speed, but I'd still MUCH rather have a new 250hp/2600 lb. RX-7 than even a 500hp/3300-lb new Mustang.
So get the 350-400hp optional version with turbo(s) and/or additional rotor(s)!
Sounds like a good plan! FD is definitely getting a '99+ spec rear wing. Obviously the car needs a LOT more than that, but it is a street car and I don't want to festoon a big track wing on it...
Probably going to go with 255/275 NT01s this year on the 8.5"/9.5" track wheels I have. Ultimately will move the 9.5s to the front and get 10.5+ for the rear...
Too old to care what I look like anymore!
I'd rather drive the Elise even if I look like a slow-*** idiot than the GTR even if it makes me look good.
How did Chevrolet's C6 Corvette sales work out? Which did they sell more of, the least-expensive ~425-436hp models, the more-expensive 505hp Z06 models, or the still-more-expensive 638hp ZR1 models?
What about Mustangs? Do they sell more 300hp V6s or more 414hp V8s, or 660hp GT500s?
Camaros, more V6s or more v8s or more supercharged ZL-1s?
*IF* they are to build a new RX-7, they will sell MASSIVELY more of them (at least 2x more) if they have a more-than-reasonable-for-95%-of-the-population 250hp base model.
Guaranteed the V8's weight is going to be a lot closer to 3600 lb. than 3300. Lighter weight and smaller size were promised, but the new Mustang is going to be the same size/weight as the outgoing model.
But *anyway*, speaking for MYself, obviously I'm a BIG fan of speed, but I'd still MUCH rather have a new 250hp/2600 lb. RX-7 than even a 500hp/3300-lb new Mustang.
So get the 350-400hp optional version with turbo(s) and/or additional rotor(s)!
Sounds like a good plan! FD is definitely getting a '99+ spec rear wing. Obviously the car needs a LOT more than that, but it is a street car and I don't want to festoon a big track wing on it...
Probably going to go with 255/275 NT01s this year on the 8.5"/9.5" track wheels I have. Ultimately will move the 9.5s to the front and get 10.5+ for the rear...
Too old to care what I look like anymore!
I'd rather drive the Elise even if I look like a slow-*** idiot than the GTR even if it makes me look good.
My hero and zero comment was more in line with if you are a complete wild man you will likely have more fun in the GTR (do things you never thought a car could do) and the lotus will end up in the tire wall.
