ZDan

That has not been shown. I have S2000 sales by calendar year and by model year, and here it is by month through July2008 S2000 | DrivingEnthusiast Blog

I only have FD RX-7 sales by model year: 9976, 3403, 500. Honda's best-selling model year outsold the FD's best model year. Do you have RX-7 sales by calendar year or by month?

Demand and sales for the FD plummeted in its 2nd year to less than 1/3 the 1st year, then fell off the face of the earth on the 3rd year, to ~5% of 1st year. It didn't stay around longer because the demand was not there. The S2000's sales increased in its 2nd and 3rd model years and remained decent through its 6th model year despite no performance improvement, and then tailed off significantly in model years 7-10.

Sales of the S2000 in the U.S. were far far better than for the FD. That is a fact whether or not the FD might have sold a few more units in its first/best calendar year.

You can say that the S2000's worst sales years were as bad as the FD's, but its nosedive came in its 9th and 10th years vs. 2nd and 3rd years for the FD! Also, the S2000's 9th and 10th years were right in the global financial meltdown.

The FD was relatively more expensive than the S2000, but the S2000 was closer in price to the Corvette than to the Miata.
The S2000 MSRP was 81% of Corvette MSRP, Miata was only 64% of S2000 MSRP.

The S2000's *real* "natural competitor" in terms of performance, chassis stiffness, and "luxury" was the Porsche Boxster and Boxster S. Very similar performance numbers to the Boxster S, but the S2000 was a relative bargain at 64% the Boxster S's price. That's why it sold relatively well (a LOT better than the FD) for a niche sports car with a Japanese name.

TwinCharged RX7

iTrader: (14)

Holy crap man. Go buy an S2000. Why are you constantly spewing **** about that girly POS car? No one here cares.

You are just like that other guy that only talked about vettes. You know what he finally did? Sold his fd and bought a vette, and finally stopped muddying up everyone's threads.

Tem120

iTrader: (5)

heh he has an S2k hence why hes defending it .

S2k is a great car reliable fun pretty high hp for the weight.

double wishbone suspension . and the motor itself is VERY good and take to boost very well .

Would I trade it for my FD . nahhhhh , But I respect them .. as what it is a fun roadster.

But it has alot of potential , its up there and has beaten the RE FD for 2 years in a row at World Time attack . since the FD , and S2000 had the same driver.

but the rx7 was supposed to be more then just a fun roadster it was supposed to be something that competed with some of the big guys Out of the box and if it doesnt do atleast that with the top trim model . then it will be a disappointment.

ZDan

I did, quite a while back...

If nobody had made absurd claims about how the FD sold better than the S2000 in the U.S., we wouldn't still be talking about it. Much...

If you're the kind of person who worries about being perceived as "girly" based on the car you drive, I don't know why you'd be interested in a little car with a 1.3 liter turbo...

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

The sales of the S2000, over the long run, amounted to more cars, so was better than the FD in that regard (and I never disputed that). BUT, as I've stated several times, in the best year, the sales were similar. Just around or just under 10k. A few hundred or even a thousand either way isn't really a compelling difference.

I would read the best year or early/first year (which are typically close to the same year) of sales as proof of concept —how many people really want the concept or the promise of the vehicle.

Subsequent years, or numbers over the long haul involve other factors (added to the concept). In the FD's case, abysmal reliability and factory quality control problems, exchange rates, economic environment, etc., all conspired to drive down sales.

The S2000 was born in comparatively better financial times, and is a perfectly reliable pleasant vehicle with nothing not to like really, convertible, was comparatively less expensive, slower, and more real-world livable, and yet, in any given year, it didn't really sell any better than the FD.

So, I would conclude based on that—and the other sales numbers I quoted—that making a Mazda S2000 (i.e.: making it lame/slow to chase sales) isn't necessarily going to work. They'd be better of making a reliable, quality-controlled modern FD that sells for more, has the potential to sell just as many at the peak, and would be more likely to maintain closer to peak sales numbers in subsequent years than was the original FD. You're just not going to sell 40,000 cars a year like you did in the 80's with the FB.


Yup, as stated, the majority of the S2000's run was in relatively better financial times—and dropped once it wasn't so good.


I doubt anyone driving a Corvette or Boxster of the era considered the S2000 a competitor, but to your point, the Corvettes and Miatas of the era both sold much better, and the Boxter had a similar yearly high (just under 10k) but probably overall sold fewer but never had the lows that the S2000 did.

Again, I don't see this as a ringing endorsement of the concept. A car that's significantly cheaper than the Boxter, can't really pull much better numbers. It's basically an expensive Miata or a slow/small Corvette depending on how you want to look at it.

Mazda sold more RX8's, both in a single year and over the long haul.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

Dan,

You've worn me out

The s2k is a great car that handles better than the FD.

The boss mustang is a heavy weight POS that only an idiot who doesn't appreciate fine sports car would want.

I think we've all seen this page after page but I love to talk car so it's just another chance to say a light weight 10 to 1 car isn't what I want and isn't going to work in todays market because it didn't work in yesterdays market and as I've repeatedly said the future market will be even more competitive so there's no effing way anyone including Dan is going to buy said car. I'm sure he'll argue with himself for a few months after it's released and will ultimately decide that his S2K is the better car because it handles slightly better.

YEP, brilliant car at a very, very good price but it still is a heavy weight with poor steering vibe/feel but I'll likely have to get over it because it just keeps getting better and better.

So, one more time the S2K market is a very small market and not a market Mazda should play around in.

The Corvette, Mustang, Camaro, 997, viper, m3, m5, Audis..on and on and on...........HUGE market with one very big problem. All the cars are heavy weight monsters.

Someone needs to fix that or fill that gaping hole in the market and if they do it I believe that car company would do well with THAT CAR and the RX7 is the perfect car to do that because it was THAT CAR back in 1993 and I would love for it to be THAT CAR again!!!! THAT'S MY STORY AND I'M STICKING TO IT

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

I think the message is, world-class handling, light weight, exquisite balance, razor sharp turn-in, high lap-time potential—all the things we want—only become relevant, or more relevant once you've crossed the straight line performance litmus test.

It's gotta be reasonably fast/powerful by modern standards before you can start interesting people in those other things. That's the first question they are going to ask, and if you fail, they aren't going to ask many subsequent questions.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

Just imagine how well the S2k would of done if in the second year they were forced to raise the price 7k because of the yen to dollar

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

If you can't beat or even remotely compete with the 40k boss go back to your little corner of the sand box to play by yourself because nobody is interested in your toy.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

Look what the cat dragged in. Where the hell have you been during this 70 plus page thread.

Umm, surprise, surprise, you want what I want and what most everyone in the frikken world wants and yet no effing car company has the sense to build the effing car, EFF!!!!!!!!!!

ZDan

OK, I'm with you.

Yep. Also at the time it was up against the Corvette, 300ZX-TT, and Supra-TT. Stiff competition at the same price category. In the end, Americans went with the Corvette vs. arguably better Japanese cars at the same performance and price levels. This is a critical lesson...

Any given year? How about the 2nd or 3rd model years

The S2000 was definitely a lot cheaper.
The S2000 was not slower than the FD. Both were right around 14-flat at 100mph in the 1/4, give or take. I've seen both test on either side of that ET and trap speed.
The S2000 WAS slower relative to the only real benchmark car to compare against. Early-S2000-era C5 Corvette was good for low/mid 13s at 105-107mph. Significantly quicker, yes.

I don't think competing head-to-head with the Corvette at a similar price with a "Mazda" badge is going to work out, even if the reliability and quality control are there.

I think a better approach is to aim for a different segment of the market that is soft and has an opening, which is what the S2000 did. So Cayman S performance at 1/2-2/3 the price.
With an optional turbo or extra-rotor model that would compete vs. Corvette performance, of course!

Agreed.

Corvette, no. Boxster/Boxster S and Z3/MRoadster, absolutely. Thousands of people cross-shopped those cars.

It is easier to sell a sports car to a lot of people if it has a Porsche or BMW badge on it, that's for sure.
Offering equivalent performance to the Boxster S at less than 2/3 its price was critical to S2000 sales.

Contrarily, offering Corvette performance at a Corvette price won't (I don't think) work for Mazda to move any appreciable volume of cars. It has to be a lot less expensive or people will gravitate to the established dominant brand name.

I wouldn't characterize it as either of those. It's competition was the Z3/MRoadster/Z4 and Boxster/Boxster S. None of those cars ever relied on Corvette performance to sell btw...

There you have it then: they should do another RX8 obviously!

neit_jnf

iTrader: (17)

RX-8：　191,026 units　（As of the end of Nov 2011）

ZDan

All of those handling attributes are totally relevant, in fact MORE relevant in lower-powered sports cars. In fact, you will have to give up some razor-sharpness, turn-in, and apex speed the more power you have. Superpowerful cars will typically have longer wheelbases, slower steering ratios, and much more forward-biased roll stiffness vs. lower-powered cars. Also, you need bigger/heavier wheels and tires and brakes. All of those take away from razor-sharpness. You also have to give up some apex speed to get more ability to feed massive power to the rear wheels on corner exit. Fast Miatas usually have faster apex speeds than equivalently track-prepped Corvettes. The line for a superpowered car will be more pointy and slower at the apex, while the lower-powered car can carve away a larger radius at higher speed without having to account for the massive LAUNCH between apex and trackout.

Personally, I find higher-powered cars to be extremely fun and challenging to drive, but I can also appreciate carving around in a lower-powered car.

On the street, a lower-powered sports car can and should be/feel more tight and responsive and razor-sharp.

Montego

iTrader: (1)

I wouldn't put it like that Fritz. Just because he HAS to have the last word it doesn't mean that he won the discussion. If anything, I doubt that over 1% of the forum agrees with his views.

Tem120

iTrader: (5)

So lets scrap this whole S2k junk and I've been wondering .. with all the research and development and knowledge which has been gained in the last few decades on rotaries and turbos .. is a turbo really so out of the question. I mean turbos is the easy way out .. better economy , better power ... the downside is reliability as we all know .

BUT has mazda not learned anything from all its time some way to make a reliable turbo car?

isnt that what most companies are doing going away from NA powered big displacement to smaller displacement with a eco snail .

I'm wondering what would mazda have to do in order to make a boost friendly rotary that will last just as long as piston motors ..

now before you guys get all angry most mazda speed 3's when modded only last about 120k if not less . I have quite a few ms3 owners with engines that go boom after they reach the 100k mark . ofcourse they are running alot more boost then stock . but still haha has nothing been devloped in order to keep the turbo rotary alive?

because lets face it .. a turbo rotary is just easy power. turbo 3 rotor would have more then enough power to compete with big V8's and V10's .

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

I'm talking relevance in sales. Not enough people care solely about the things you're talking about, as evidenced by the sales of cars like the S2000, Elise, and BRZ/86/Scion. They are saleable qualities, sure, but not if the car is slow. I think there are enough people who will accept that it isn't as fast as a 630 hp Z06, but it's still got to be fast. 250/2600 isn't fast by modern standards, so I don't think too many people will give two ***** about how nice the turn-in is. Self included.

I hate to belabor the point, but the car you're talking about is already made or will be by 2016 in the form of a 2400 lb, 200 hp Miata. I don't see a 2600/250 hp car that is less reliable, more strange, (maybe less torquey) and more expensive being a compelling enough difference.

Mods for Miatas are CHEAP, and plentiful. You'd really be in a situation where somebody could spend a few thousand dollars on bolt-ons or maybe a supercharger, and suspension mods and be blowing away the stock flagship RX7 for similar overall investment and probably still greater reliability. You'd need a lousy 30 additional HP to run with that theoretical RX7.

Again, not to belabor the point, we aren't talking about "super powerful". The threshold you're talking about where cars fundamentally change is significantly north of 350 hp. Stop saying "Corvette", we're not even in that league.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

The miata and corvette comment is laughable. You really have no idea how good a corvette is. I'm trying my best to believe you know what you are saying but it's difficult because a track prepped miata is not faster than a track prepped corvette anywhere on the track

After the miata comment I have to revisit the S2K thing with this question. I think the Rx7 is classed higher than the S2k in the SCCA stock vs stock is that true and why is that?

Mag guys love handling #s etc... as much as car enthusiast but at the end of the day the consumers want power so as soon as they see one car with a 4 second zero to 60 and another with a 5.2 and the price is pretty close, guess which one they buy. Again check the BRZ thing which I am excited about because at least it's a step in the right direction but those cars aren't breaking any sales records and they are more affordable/practical than the car you desire.

I can appreciate any car but a 10 to 1 car is a bore/snoozer when you are used to a light weight 7 to 1 car. At this point I'd have a lot more fun trying to get a powerful heavy weight to go fast than I would a light weight low powered car. I know we disagree on this but I'm over the light weight low power challenge.

Exactly a light weight car is always going to be difficult to beat for feel and handling...... That's a no brainer which is why WE ALL want a light weight car. On any forum I visit the 1st question is power and handling followed closely by weight but once again as Pete said you have to get by the 1st question for the subsequent question to be relevant to appease the avg car enthusiast.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

He knows I'm being sarcastic.

He also owns both cars but maybe it's because one has a v8 in it

Again I've owned the S2k and I also know it's a really nice handling car but in my book the FD is the easier to drive, more fun to drive car. They are super, super close though so possibly the S2k is the better handling car and it's the power delivery of the FD that makes it faster so it's really a tight argument for sure but there's no arguing which car is faster on a track or at an autocross, stock for stock

neit_jnf

iTrader: (17)

The problem is the owners that increase the boost beyond what was intended, blow the motor and call it unreliable.

unless Mazda designs, tunes, and tests it for 25psi boost then sell it running 12psi so that when owners go crazy with boost it will automatically adjust for it and last...

and sad to say it but up to 2009 when they redesigned the engine oiling and omp systems the RX-8 engine was wearing out faster than piston engines and it's NA...

ZDan

OK I see what you're saying now.

Wow. And you don't mind $75k price, so why not just get a Z06?
I care about turn-in and responsiveness. I care a LOT! On the street, that's way *way* more important to me than being able to do whatever-mph in the 1/4, which is pretty much irrelevant to me in a purely street-driven car.

That sounds like about 20% less power to me... And a convertible, where I'd prefer a fixed roof coupe. We'll see how it turns out, it will definitely be on my radar.

350hp in a 2600-lb car would indeed be in Corvette performance territory.
But the same meatheads who only judge cars by numbers printed in a magazine will obviously choose the 450hp Corvette because "moar powah!".

2600 lb. with 350hp in a small, responsive, well-balanced fixed-roof sports car would be about PERFECT for me as a street/track car! Street only, 250hp totally fine for me (and realistically for most people whether they realize it or not).

But Corvette performance, with 100 less horsepower from a rotary engine, with Mazda badge, sold at a Corvette price, I just don't know if that would fly.
IMO it would be foolish not to have a lower-priced lower-powered variant.
No reason not to hedge bets...

Tem120

iTrader: (5)

I can answer this . and thats gains .. even though stock for stock they may be similar in ET . The FD has MUCH more potential . most SCCA even STOCK , allow for exhaust work . put an exhaust even at stock boost levels on the FD and you gain a ton of Power , put an exhaust on the S2000 and you gain what ? 5hp ??

gains and potential kick the FD into a much higher category . the S2000 is in Bstock ,while the RX7 is in A stock along with the C5 z06

djseven

iTrader: (56)

If the car doesnt thrill me in a straight line when I hammer it in 2nd gear I could care less what it does when I turn the wheel. Perfect example is the rx8, did nothing for me when I drove it. My buddies 81 911SC with suspension and wheels handled excellent and had looks that rivaled or even beat the FD. However, as soon as you came out of the corner and hit the gas pedal the 185hp just left too much to be desired even in that 2600lb car. The car was just plain boring in a straight line. Even the FD with downpipe/catback making 260rwhp(300+flywheel hp) gets boring quickly. It takes 320-350rwhp running the twins at 12+lbs before the car really gets exciting.

I'm not a guy chasing HP numbers but I do want some thrill when I got WOT. My DD family sedan breaks traction from a 60mph roll, I need my sports cars to at least spin the tires in 1st.

Tem120

iTrader: (5)

maybe . until people realize that the lightweight from the RX7 would make it handle better then the heavier vette or then the heavier Boss mustang . Also rotaries have always taken well to flow mods except the rx8 .. , But if the rx7 by any miracle does take well to flow mods like older rotaries 350 turns into 375 / 380 and hoping results will speak for themselves ..

speaking of which . Im curious what the new vette would do against fritz's 350 hp monster.

But I got another bone to pick with mazda Hah , power gains . You can upgrade cams and exhaust on a vette and make more power.. We cant exactly open up a motor to port it to make it get more power as easily as swapping cams LOL .


SO another thing is I hope that the car is 350 out the box . but once uncorked it has the potential to make more power . just like the FD exhaust and a couple psi of boost and you are making 80 WHP more then you were before .

NA ofcourse it wont be so easy . But hopefully it will be enough .

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

That 350/2600 number for theoretical 2016 RX7 get's you very close to the 2014 base Corvette 460/3300, but given a vast torque discrepancy, you can plan on the Vette being faster in a straight line in real world situations with real world drivers.

It's also not working that hard, and is very moddable by the owner or the factory without compromising much (plan on the 2016 version making at least 485 hp). Realistically, it'll be a lot easier to further lighten the Corvette (or add power) than it would the theoretical RX7.

Forget about the Z06.

I think at that level, you'd be able to sell a smaller, lighter, slightly slower but superior handling/braking/feeling RX7 for $40-$45k.

Flying_solo

iTrader: (7)

I totally agree and was thinking about this yesterday. I have an RX8 I bought on the cheap as an experiment and to autox last year while I rebuilt my 7. It's handling is great. But, when I step on the go fast pedal and it does nothing, I'm left wanting. I recently also picked up a lightly modded Golf R for my daily. It cannot out turn the 8 and weighs a good 300# more, but it puts a good 100 HP more to the wheels and I find myself enjoying it more for a daily driver. I drove both yesterday and found myself enjoying the R more simply because it's got the HP to gettyup and turns well enough to be fun. It really makes me want to get the FD back on the road so I can have my cake and eat it too.