djseven

iTrader: (56)

Nissan makes a GTR and a 370z, they didnt make a cheap non turbo GTR to water down the name. They can make two rotaries for all I care, just dont put rx7 on the rear bumper unless it is made to compete with the heavy hitters or at least not be laughed at by them.

fmzambon

Sales numbers for the 300ZX were around 3:1 for the NA vs the turbo. Interestingly for the Mk4 Supra, the turbo version sold somewhat more than the NA version. Perhaps it had something to do with the pricing (which I don't remember at the moment). Notice that I could only find the US and Canada sales numbers, it would be interesting to know about the worldwide split.

A 250hp 2 rotor and 370hp 3 rotor Rx-7 lineup could get a similar split, 75% of sales for the 2 rotor and 25% for the 3 rotor. And most likely, with both models available, the 2 rotor would sell significantly more than if the 3 rotor was not available (halo effect).

That's why I think a 2 engines lineup is the most likely scenario if a new 7 is released at all.

Did the NA mk4 Supra water down the Supra name? Or did the NA 300ZX water down the 300ZX name?

Andrea.

djseven

iTrader: (56)

Yes. Anytime someone tells me they had an MK4 or Z32 and then tell me it was NA I just shake my head. Not even remotely the same care. Like owning an automatic FD........ I kid I kid.

HiWire

My brother almost bought a MkIV Supra with an automatic. It was a black TRD edition, but we lost interest after we found out that it didn't have a turbo.

He got a '97 Mitsubishi Eclipse GSX with a manual transmission, instead. Big mistake – in retrospect, the NA Supra would have suited him better. Parts kept falling off the DSM.

ZDan

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...rx-8-specs.pdf
15.1 @93 new, 14.6 @ 96 at 40,000 miles

Both making 220rwhp, my money's on the 180 lb. lighter NA car for higher trap speed. ET might be close...

Weight: It matters!

arghx

iTrader: (3)

Even though fuel efficiency and power/torque can work together, achieving a higher maximum horsepower requires hardware designs that are not conducive to meeting emissions. The perfect example is exhaust manifold on an n/a engine. The longer runners for tuned manifolds make catalyst light off very difficult. Top end power requires port/valve timing designs that aren't typically good for emissions. A lot of it has to do with how much spark retard the engine can tolerate to light off a cat. The first 10 seconds of the test cycle are what we're talking about here, that's what usually makes or breaks whether it passes or not.

From the perspective of a turbo, well the turbo is big heatsink that really hurts catalyst light off. An electric wastegate can help a lot (because it opens during cold starts), but the turbo is still there.


There's a chart of vehicle speed vs time. Within that vehicle speed is a tolerance, and when you are outside the tolerance you get a "driver error" like an error in baseball or something. Too many errors and you fail. Rarely does a trained driver get an error, but variation in driving style can affect enrichment under load for CO emissions and deceleration for NOx breakthrough. It comes down to how much the driver is paying attention and how much margin is built into the emissions calibration.

See above comment about hardware compromises needed to make power. Look at the new Mercedes 2 liter in their 4 cylinder AMG car. It has a long runner turbo manifold. I doubt they will be able to get away with that to meet Euro 6C. The other aspect, on a piston engine anyway, is intake port and chamber design.

As for unthrottled GDI engines: that's a bit of a myth. They're unthrottled in specific speed & load points. Operating unthrottled in some areas (MAP is 90kPa or more, basically a couple inches of vacuum) doesn't mean you could ever get rid of the throttle valve, even in non failsafe conditions. A lot of times the combustion can't tolerate unthrottled operation because of misfire and slow burn rates. The only way to make it tolerate the unthrottled operation is to make a more restrictive intake port (referring to piston engines here) with more tumble or swirl. You can also use expensive and restrictive things like tumble control valves or expensive hardware like offset valve lifts.

On a rotary you don't have that flexibility with variable port timing like a piston engine can do with valve events. The staging of the intake ports is not as advanced as cam phasers and continuously variable valve lift, unless Mazda has something up their sleeve for a new rotary.

Stratified combustion without fully dethrottle without continously variable valve lift capability or some very extreme valve timing, at least in the few stratified engines that have made it to production. I don't know how much this applies to a stratified rotary engine because none have ever been put into mass production.

arghx

iTrader: (3)

Yes I agree, advances in rotary combustion are generally going to help either implementation, hybrid or non hybrid.

The test cycles are a lot different. Look up the proposed WLTP cycle for Europe, and then look up a US FTP cycle and a US06 cycle. And then they are weighted differently. Also, the particules are calculated differently for Europe versus the US. US has much stricter OBD requirements. The standards are close between US, Japan, and Euro 6C in many ways but not close enough.

Those are all positive developments. The question is, are they "good enough" for say a 350 horsepower turbo model to make it into production? Or is all that required just for something that makes as much power as the old Renesis but with better emissions and fuel economy? One other issue for non-US markets is, what displacement will the rotary be regulated as? If it's twice physical displacement (1.3 liters regulated as 2.6) then the taxes are higher. There's a reason why Audi sells 1.4, 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0 turbo engines now. It's all displacement driven due to taxes.

You're on the right track with your ideas, and if you look through papers and patents Mazda has published over the years you will see that they have tried a lot of this stuff. They've done weird passages in the rotor housing, laser ignition, prechamber injection, 3 spark plugs per rotor, etc. We just don't know how much each technology helped, and whether it was worth the cost and reliability risk.

Montego

iTrader: (1)

I had not seen this post...

Dude now you are beyond knit picking… lol
Yes that is all fine and dandy but what does that have to do with driving the speed limit on your way to work? Nothing.
The problem is you are misinterpreting advantages over need.
What is your morning commute like a nascar race? Lol. You know the best way to prevent an accident is to obey all traffic laws. It’s that simple.


To recap:
If he actually obeys traffic laws like he claims he does, then those sport car attributes that he so much enjoys disappear.

Responsiveness- Why is he so heavy on the pedal? Its against the law. Exhibition of speed.

Cornering- If one is feeling some lateral g’s then one is speeding through that corner. Whether it is a freeway off ramp or an intersection, if one takes a particular corner at the posted speed limit you should barely feel any g forces. Streets are engineered that way.

Breaking- Seriously WTF? If one is in constant need to hit the brakes abruptly then they are either following too close (2 second rule) or are speeding. Which both violate traffic laws.

So I still stand by my statement. He is claiming that no one needs/or should want 500 hp cars for the street because the only reason for it is to drive like an asshat. Well guess what? if he has an S2000 and is actually enjoying its sportcars attributes, then he is very likely driving like an asshat as well. He just doesn't want to admit it.

j9fd3s

iTrader: (3)

a 2012 Rav 4 does the quarter in 14.4@92mph, so its almost as good as the FD right?

ZoomZoom

iTrader: (2)

Do you really own an FD or is it cover for you trolling on a sports car enthusiast forum?

You refusal to recognize equipment improvements in stopping distance and handling capabilities and how they translate into counter measuring real world emergency traffic situations is disheartening. I thought logic might hit its mark with you. You really are digging your heals in but now its turned to bloviating.

Your arguments come off as disengenious because you drive these types of cars yourself for the same reasons we do.

I have a 500hp car and I don't drive it like an asshat. I do like to drive it too and from the track though.
I think Dan, Fritz and myself are all over 40. We all have a lot to lose by driving like some teenager in his jacked up Nova in the school parking lot doing donuts.

djseven

iTrader: (56)

I don't know why I bother but I do. If you think my power band comments were related to only the 1/4 mile this conversation is hopeless. Not many people are getting excited about a 220rwhp/130rwtq 2600lb NA rotary with high compression rotors and side port exhaust. Just the same that very few got excited about a 170rwhp 1900lb lotus with near exotic looks and better power to weight ratio than the theoretical rx7 we are discussing. The FD wasn't winning any power battles in its day but it also wasn't stuck with under half the HP of its competitors. If Mazda releases a new rx7 that can't trap 110+ from the factory and get out of the 14s then I'd rather them name it something else.

fmzambon

Ok, thank you very much. That's what I was curious about

That's the key question, totally agree.

I don't think that displacement is such a big issue nowadays. I mean, Wankel engines have been around for decades, so laws to handle them are already in place. And pretty much any new sports car will pay fairly high taxes regardless. Even more: the switch to turbo engines is slowly pushing laws to use power or emissions as the key value to base tax calculations on, rather than displacement (here in Italy it's already like that, only insurance still somewhat depends on the engine displacement).

Only the engineers in Hiroshima know for sure. We can only hope

Andrea.

fmzambon

Ok, that I agree with. But I meant my previous question a little differently:

Whenever someone mentions, say, a Mk4 Supra without specifying the details of the car (NA vs TT, auto vs manual and so on), do you immediately think about the lower power NA models or do you automatically think about the twin turbo one?

For me, whenever someone mentions a Supra for example, I always think about the 300hp twin turbo one, and I suspect it's the same for many other people.

Andrea.

djseven

iTrader: (56)

You are correct I instantly think of the turbo models. I'm mostly just stirring the pot in this thread as the forum is a little slow right now. Glad to see a thread with this much activity.

ZDan

If the only one that came out was 250hp/2600 lb., or even 2800 lb., for $30-35k, I would most likely buy it. I would FOR SURE buy it before getting a V8 Mustang or Camaro, and it wouldn't bother me that those cars could beat me in a straight line. The Camaro and Mustang are just so big and heavy that I'm not even interested in them. At all.

In 2000, you could buy an F-body that would do 107 in the quarter for a lot less money than an S2000 that would only do just over 100mph. But there was still a market for the s2000. Not everybody is only interested in outright performance numbers! There are plenty of drivers, even enthusiast drivers, who are not interested in big/heavy cars no matter how quick they are.

The new Camaro and Mustang are both MUCH bulkier and quite a bit heavier than the old F-bodies (3850 lb, 3650 lb vs. 3400 lb.). A lot of *sports car* enthusiasts want something a lot smaller/lighter-weight, even if it's slower.

The reports were that it was going to be significantly smaller and 400 lb. lighter than the old Mustang. But as it has turned out, it's the same size and will almost certainly be about the same weight.
http://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/f...irst-look.html
Remember all those rumors that the 2015 Ford Mustang was going to be smaller, tidier, dramatically more shrink-wrapped? Just plain wrong, on all counts.
Weight reduction measures have been minimal. Aluminum fenders replace the current car's steel, but otherwise the 2015 Mustang employs a steel-intensive unibody construction. Ford's lips are sealed regarding curb weight other than to point out that the new car has a lot more feature content than the old car, which is code for "It's heavier." Our guess is that the new car will gain about 100 pounds, which would place the GT model in the low 3,700-pound range.
Ah, I gotcha! I'll still take my chances in the Lotus!

ZDan

Never said I "obeyed traffic laws", only that I drove like a normal human being on the street. I do. Usually 5-10mph over the limit, which is safe as long as you aren't drawing attention to yourself.

I don't know where you get the idea that "sports car attributes" *disappear* at normal speeds. They don't. Driving a good sports car like an S2000 at precisely the same speeds around town vs. a Prius is a *totally different driving experience*.

"Responsiveness" doesn't mean pedal-to-the-metal. When you tip in the throttle in a responsive car, the car RESPONDS. Tip in the throttle in a Prius and you get the "being-pulled-with-a-rubber-band" feel, a bit of lag. Also, "responsiveness" isn't just about the throttle pedal. It's about how a car responds to steering inputs and brake inputs as well. It's also about how the handling balance changes with MINOR changes in throttle position while cornering.

Drive a Prius and an S2000 back to back around the same streets at the same low "normal human being" speeds and then tell me if there wasn't a subjective difference. A driver would have to be quite numb to what a car is doing to claim that there's no difference. To me, the difference is ENORMOUS!

If your inner-ear g-meter only has a resolution of 0.5-g, don't assume that applies to the rest of us.
Driving on the street, I bet I rarely exceed 0.5-g or even 0.3-g. How a Prius responds to inputs at even low g-levels is very very different from how an S2000 responds.

I drive to minimize brake usage on the street. Again, we're talking about how the car feels driving at the same speeds, same deceleration events, and the S2000 is much more responsive to braking and much more linear in its responses as well. The Prius brake pedal has a wooden feel and there's an initial weirdness where the regenerative braking acts that feels quite unnatural as well.

I drive probably a *little* faster than most on the street, but I also drive very smoothly and give others plenty of room. I haven't had a ticket in over 10 years (fingers crossed). I know I can't realistically get anywhere near the 9.5-10.5/10ths range you need to be in to *really* be "performance driving" on the street, so I don't even bother to go beyond about 7/10ths even on empty backroads. In town or on the highway in traffic, never above about 4/10ths, almost always in the 1-3/10ths range. Even driving like that, there are MAJOR differences in how different cars respond/react/FEEL.
If you can't tell the difference, don't assume that others can't either!

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

Man, disappointing news regarding the weight

VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door coupe

PRICE AS TESTED: $49,990 (base price: $49,990)

ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection

Displacement: 302 cu in, 4951 cc
Power: 444 hp @ 7400 rpm
Torque: 380 lb-ft @ 4500 rpm

TRANSMISSION: 6-speed manual

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 107.1 in
Length: 188.1 in
Width: 73.9 in Height: 55.1 in
Curb weight: 3641 lb

C/D TEST RESULTS*:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.7 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 25.9 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 4.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.7 sec @ 114 mph
Top speed (drag limited): 161 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 150 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.96 g

Those are impressive #s for a car that cost 50k and that's what the competition is and I believe the next RX7 will have to beat those numbers by a wide margin especially in 2016 because I THINK the 2015 mustang boss will be at least 100 pounds lighter with a stronger engine better grip etc.....

Again I don't think it's wise to build an s2k replica in 2016 because it won't sell.

The S2k is a brilliant car but it lacked the one thing a buyer in todays sports car world must have and that's power.

I want a light weight no frills sports car like the s2k, FD, BRZ, 260z, 993 etc...etc... but with some effing ***** I don't think I'm the only one and I think it would out sell the mustang, the camaro, the corvette etc.... if some car company wakes up and builds the sports car the majority of people would fall in love with and the minority (you and me and the other 10k car enthusiast) want.

Tem120

iTrader: (5)

HP wars... .

A 250/2600 rx7 may be a faster car at a track with its light weight and probably advanced suspension system . probably much more grip when coming out of a corner to .

in a track it may beat a more expensive V8 version of the mustang.

But howmany people REALLY take their cars to the track? think about it I see vettes , and mustangs and camaro's by the dozen . But they only understand the numbers on their brochure .

Not until that 1/10 mustang / camaro drivers take their car to the track out of some crazy whim and they get beat by a 120 hp miata . do they realize WTF ??? being light is important?? no ONE told me this !

when I tell alot of car guys with 400 / 500 hp cars that I dont drag race come to an auto cross and lets have some real fun its cheap its safe no tickets no cops . win win . 90% of the time the answer to that is my car is to powerful for that or How can going under 100 be fun .

this is the same mentality you will get from 90 % of the people in the USA

I get asked this alot lol, people ask oh how much HP do you have . i say about 300 . they look so dissapointed LMAO

Same thing will happen if mazda ONLY releases a 250 hp version of the next GEN rx7 .

People will drive it but its not like mazda will have an auto-x course for RX7 test drives where they will see the car shine . or a track <--- definitely not a track because cars will end up in walls haha

they will drive it on the road and be dissapointed when they compare it to that 350 hp genesis with backseats and much cheaper price tag and no bad history of reliability ,

same with the stang and camaro .

power is a selling point . specially in USA .

j9fd3s

iTrader: (3)

lol, no there are 74 pages of it. the fact is that we like the Rx7's for reasons other than its trap speed in the quarter mile, although this seems to be our metric for some reason.

if the quarter mile WAS important, we might as well drive Toyota Suvs, the magazines were in the mid 14's the private owners are in the 13's....

actually the Rav4 has a CD of .33, and is 3600lbs, 270hp.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

I just don't think that making the new RX7 cheap/lame in the name of chasing sales is really going to work.

Let me explain. The BRZ/FRS twins are only really selling a combined 25k or so units. That's for a very mainstream car accross two brands at a low price point. The supposedly too expensive and temperamental FD did about half that in it's first year. I don't think you can make the new rotary lame/cheap enough to suddenly sell a ton more than that. You're just not going to sell 40,000 low-hp RX7's like you did in the early 80's. Like my Duran Duran mullett, that's gone and it's not coming back.

They're selling about that many Vettes at a few times the price, and they're selling 70-80k Mustangs for more money as well. Because those cars DELIVER. Make it deliver, and the price will seem worth it. You're NOT going to sell a ton of them either way, so make it something that elevates your brand and helps sell the other cars you CAN do volume with.

250/2600 is a snoozer.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

Eric, check those #s out it's not just about power, .96 Gs, 150 feet braking, cooling upgrades, big brake rotors etc......

The boss Mustang (stock) lapped laguna seca in 1.40 and guys it's not a nervous hard to drive car it feels good The SM record at laguna seca is a 1.45 or 1.46.

I think the cayman s did 1.41

My point is the boss mustang is no joke and it gets respect because it deserves respect.

No fawking way am I buying an s2k type car when there's a boss mustang, a used corvette, a used single turbo FD, cayman or more specifically a used s2k that cost 15k with huge ins and tax saving to boot.......blah blah blah.

Again 250hp in 2600 pound car that cost 35k does not interest me in the slightest, as Pete says "SNOOZE!!!!!!!"

Tem120

iTrader: (5)

hey hey! boss 302 doesn't count HAHA those are monsters I meant the stock GT or v6

And I meant objectively as a commercial standpoint . Honestly I wouldnt buy one either. My FD at 300 whp its about 350 crank HP which is what gets sold as, and I dont think my car is anywhere NEAR FAST . a 250 hp 7 assuming mazda makes a good chassis which i'm sure it will if all it has is 250 hp it wont be winning any sales competitions unless it can atleast be faster then the v6 camaros and mustangs . in straight lines

and the 3 rotor needs to compete with the big v8 versions and whats also is important is the possibility for improvement ..

if there is no 350+ hp version it would be a huge disappointment because like I said at 300 whp I think the FD is fun , but not insane , Someone like you can take my 300 hp fd and probably destroy 350-400 whp mustangs at a track .

but for the average person . they will see a 350 hp FD , and a 400 hp mustang . and they will shoot for the stang

fmzambon

Every time I read this thread, I hope to find some link to an official Mazda statement, or a post by Mazmart or someone in the know about the new rotary.
It's gonna be a long wait till 2016/2017, and even longer for me as I'll have to wait even longer to save up. Where's hybernation technology when you need it???

Andrea.

fmzambon

What the FRS/BRZ lacks (and needs) is a halo car and possibly a name, like Rx-7, Supra, Z, etc. If a 300hp version of the FRS/BRZ was available, the 200hp model would sell significantly more than it does now.

Andrea.

fmzambon

And then some not strictly rotary related news: Mazda is to unveil a new 1.5 liter diesel engine at the Geneve motor show in March, together with the Hazumi concept. link

That's important IMHO, as it will significantly boost sales of the 3, 6 and CX-5 here in EU, where diesels are very sought after, but where the 2.2 liter is on the large side. More sales = more money available for the rotary

Andrea.