Rxmfn7

iTrader: (4)

Unfortunately I think the rotary just cant compete in todays market, with everything having the power and fuel efficiency that it does. People have come to expect that. When even a base model mustang or camaro comes with a 300+HP V6 getting 30mpg, and the v8s well over 400 with mileage not too far off it will be hard to justify a rotary vehicle that would get half of that mpg, with lower torque. Now granted, most of us are not cross-shopping camaros, but its just a reality of todays market that the power is almost a given. I for one would be happy with a coupe loosely based of the Mx-5 or Rx-8 chassis, with a ~300HP N/A 3 rotor. IMO the extra rotor is needed. Even the 16x will most likely not have the torque that is lacking and everyone complains about. Id love for them to build some world beater $70K+ car, but in reality I dont think it would sell well ( I couldnt afford it, anyway) and while I dont want a car you see on every corner, Id like it to do well enough to encourage affordable and plentiful aftermarket support.

MisterX

As much as I'd love a 3 rotor (turbo mandatory) I think its time has passed. A couple of years before the FD debuted I remember R&T mag speculating it'll be a 230ish hp 3 rotor; yet, thinking back the sequential 13b was the right choice. Now, if they had had a higher version of the car with a turbo 3 to supplement the "base" car, then hell yeah; but as a standalone N/A 20b with less power (and torque) than the engine we got, no thanks. Not when NSXs/300ZXs were up near the magic 300 mark.

BTW, what's this about heim joints being lousy . . . someone's idea of sarcasm?

ZDan

Not lousy, just not a good idea for a production car for the mass market. People expect suspension joints to last over 100k miles without wearing and starting to clunk/creak/groan.

MisterX

I thought it was the job of the bushings (rubber or metal) to prevent the creaking and slop associated with the movement.

Rxmfn7

iTrader: (4)

I like your enthusiasm Gordon, and I may be way off base.. but in todays reality of emissions control systems I really dont think anywhere near that high of a power output is feasible. I think a 3-rotor version of the renesis could be well into the 300-350HP range, and upping the displacement using 16x , direct injection, etc.. possibly pushing 400. For me, in a nimble ~2600-2800ish lb chassis at a good price point Id be a buyer. I understand some want more though.

MisterX

GMonsen: But comparing tuners to factory is not apples to apples.

Last page you wrote that because the racing 26b was 175hp/L then Mazda could do 125hp/L. But you're not taking into account the fact that factory engines are mostly detuned - for longetivity concerns as well as emissions - and much more so than their race cars.

We know Honda's F1 engine (last year before they left the sport, 1992) was in the 770 hp range (3.5 L V12). That = 220 hp/L ; yet N/A factory piston engines were not even half that, so based on that formula if there was a production 20b making half the power as its race counterpart, you'd be looking at around 135 hp/L (basing on 1991's wankel outputs).

Edit: if the 787 lemans engine was 700 hp and 2.6 L that would give it 270hp/L, and not 175 like you mentioned.

Rxmfn7

iTrader: (4)

MisterX: To be fair you also keep going back to 90s rotary tech in your arguments, which really isnt valid anymore when speculating on a brand new production engine. Honestly, none of us really know anything for sure so we're all talking out of our asses.. but I think for a good idea we can look to the renesis and whatever small details have been released on the 16x to see where Mazda is heading. P-ports are most likely dead, and IMO turbocharged rotaries from the factory died along with them.

MisterX

^The 90s comparison to rotary race engines is the only comparison we have, as the FIA outlawed them and so did IMSA(?) before we hit the mid 90s.

I'll say this though - owning a RX-8 , and having owned a 2nd gen the leap in power was not minute; then again, we're talking 1991 to 2003, so I'd hope that the next variant of the renesis would yield the same type of bump.

MisterX

If attaining 125 to 140 hp per rotor, still being street-able, with engine life comparable to the current 1.3 (no snickering renesis haters), I say great. A proportionate drop in fuel mileage will certainly take us to <15 combined, which would be a redlighted project. So then we're back to hoping for a 16X . . . . . a pretty much torque-less wonder.

Rxmfn7

iTrader: (4)

I wouldnt count it out yet. I think direct injection will be a saving grace for both emissions and fuel economy for the rotary. A 3 rotor version of the 16x (2.4L) with DI would be a great engine. We can only hope.

REAmemiya_fan

How could a larger displacement engine be torque-less? (Comparatively to the 13B)

thewird

iTrader: (8)

A 3 rotor isn't going to happen, its just not feasible in anything but a supercar which Mazda will not build.

Mazda knows what their building and they aren't going to change it. We already know its going to be based on the 1.6X; that is direct injection, all aluminum housings, and laser ignition system. We've known this since they released the motor years ago but every time a DIY blog makes an article, everyone jumps on the bandwagon and thinks new information has been released. What we don't know is what they are putting it in or what its going to be called.

It's not going to be torqueless, the primary focus of this design is to improve torque and fuel economy. They're aiming for a 50% increase in both accounts. That is why they delayed the R&D for the 16X, it wasn't achieving their goals and they ran out of R&D money due to skyactive.

thewird

Rxmfn7

iTrader: (4)

^ Quit ruining our fun with all of your facts!

thewird

iTrader: (8)

It definitely will not come in whatever they are making atm. I think if Mazda somehow makes one and designs a car to put it in, it wouldn't be released in North America . It would probably be a Japan only car.

A 3 rotor based renesis would make 350 bhp and Mazda never made one. A 1.6X based 3 rotor would easily be over 400 bhp. Too bad we will never see any of it though...

thewird

ZDan

If we're keeping bushings, where are the heim joints? Tie rods and trailing arm only? I had thought replacing major pivot bushings with heim joints was what had been referred to, because more "racy". So I was just pointing out that heim joints aren't a good idea for a production car where consumers will expect the suspension components to last many years and over 100k miles.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

I think there's a big disconnect between what we enthusiasts think Mazda could/should build, and what they will build. I'm sorry, but Mazda sucks now. I wouldn't expect any 3-rotor Corvette competitor. I'd expect a big-grinning "sporty" car without enough power to pull the skin off a grape, and a Nardi steering wheel.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

YEP It'll be another cool little rotary car with a nardi steering wheel (i love that) but nothing that truly excites anyone or in other words just another Mazda and the FD will continue to live on as the one thing Mazda did right. My apologies to all the FB, FC, RX8 and Miata lovers I know those are cool cars I'm just a little biased hehe.

They got lost and then ford led them down the wrong road and clearly it's really hard for them to turn the ship around at this point. The sad thing is VW is leading porsche down the wrong road and BMW "just wow" hell there won't be any cars worth buying soon. Reality is we are just getting old; no good movies, music or cars left LOL. Viewers raved about Beyonce and her half time performance I was completely confused and wasn't sure if I was watching a stripper or a singer.


The dream of an all aluminum 3 rotor with new technology (16x rotors/direct injection/etc..) that makes 400 FWHP and gets 25mpg, weighs 2700 pounds and cost only 65k now that would be a worthy upgrade to the legendary FD and leave all the other car makers scratching their heads

How about Logan, you, me, Peter, Lenny, Mike etc.... put some funds together and have our own all aluminum 13b REW style 3 rotor engine swap kit made for the FD and after we start crushing everyone on track we'll have orders for all kinds of cars LOL.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

LOL, The Nardi wheel is a game-changer.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

YES!!!!!...........Immeasurable amount of WIN in the Nardi steering wheel

ZDan

They were at least able to SELL those cars and make some money on them! That should be a prerequisite for any new 7. It has to be a viable car to sell in semi-decent numbers.

FD was/is a great car. It was also something of a failure in the market. Again I have to wonder how much better they might have done if there'd been an NA base model...

For Mazda's sake, I would hope that a new RX-7 (should it happen) will be a success in the marketplace. For my sake, my first and foremost hope is that it is lightweight and not too expensive. It is easier to add power to an underpowered car than it is to subtract weight from an overweight car! And expensive cars are irrelevant to me.

For me, the logical approach would be to keep it simple. This serves the lightweight aspect (as far as I'm concerned the single most important characteristic of a true "sports car") and the lower-cost aspect.

A naturally-aspirated 2-rotor coupe weighing in at ~2500 lb. without requiring exotic/expensive materials or manufacturing techniques would, to me, be a fantastic base model, and should be possible at an MSRP of ~$30k.

A more-powerful version making 300-360hp giving potentially C7 power/weight could surely be done for $40k.

Speaking for myself, $65k makes it irrelevant.

I also worry about sports cars evolving to become supercars. Along with the price, there are significant weight ramifications. A more powerful engine weighs more. The rest of the driveline has to be built to take it, more weight. Wheels/tires/brakes also get bigger and heavier. So you can apply more exotic materials in an effort to keep weight gain in check, but then there are further cost increases.

IMO, there are PLENTY of 3000, 3200, 3400, 3600+ lb. supercars on the market. What has been sadly lacking are reasonably quick sports cars less than ~2800 lb.

Even a 240-250hp base RX-7 would be reasonably quick at ~2500 lb., and could be made for reasonable bucks. And for 99% of my street driving, I'm in my S2000 at below-VTEC rpm. Essentially, it's a 150hp 2800 lb. car. And it is FUN to drive like that on the street.

I LOVE fast cars, but IMO, concentrating on keeping up with all the countless overpriced/overwrought supercars on the market would be a mistake for a new RX-7. Bring back the reasonably-attainable lightweight FR FUN. I can add the fast to it later if I so desire

ThUnDeRbErK

Why do you want 3 rotor ? Why don't you think weight distribution ? Need more power or lightweight so important ? Yes lightweight is more important than power.

If effects fuel comsumption, better suspensions, brakes etc. etc.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

beating the dead horse

Dan, mazda and the majority of the world want an improved FB but some us want an improved FD it's that simple and it sucks to be on the losing side of it

However as mentioned IMO Mazda can no longer afford to compete with the rest of the world and they should be marching to their own drummer and this would be a great opportunity to lead their company in a new daring direction.

ptrhahn

iTrader: (9)

I think it's easy to say the FD version of the RX7 wasn't successful in the marketplace because it was too high end, but it's a bit over simplified.

They sold 10,000 the first year, and something like 2500 or less the second two. The cars had a lot of teething/dealer service issues (which isn't a fault of the concept or price point). It was an ambitious project, that probably needed another year or so of development. That was also just the US market. They continued to develop and sold through 2002 in Japan and elsewhere. Also, where was the marketing and leveraging of the LeMans win? Most people today don't even know what my car is, or that Mazda EVER build anything like it.

The market is different now too. Nissan is selling high-$$ GTR's, and Chevy is selling high-$$ Corvettes. Like I say, Mazda is ball-less and will probably go the safe route building small cheap sporty cars, but it's hard for me to believe that a brand that is building so much into it's racing heritage and sporting character has no real flagship car to go big-time racing with. Really, the "RX8's" that were out competing with GT3's in GrandAm, etc., were tube-framed 3-rotor p-port racecars not really built on anything stock the way the GT3 Cup cars are. That's sort of sad. Back in the day of the Bridgestone SuperCar or SpeedGT series, production based FD's actually competed.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

Dan,

The FD failed for many reasons least of which were the cars fault. After all there's a good reason it was produced in Japan for 10 years 92 to 2002 not to mention the car is a legendary import.

Value of the yen to dollar
Fuel cost
Poor dealer service (service tech were clueless/not trained to work on it)
etc....

The RX8 failed because it was 100% the cars fault and it ABSOLUTELY was a huge compromise as a sports car the car had 4 doors and back seats for christ sake I'm glad they were able to make some improvements to the next rotaries chassis and interior after 10 years.... cudos to mazda BUT it's hard to build a family car that's a sports car that doesn't get good gas mileage they don't go hand and hand and Mazda should of focused their attention on upgrades like the 16a to improve both the power and the mileage along with a turbo in the R model it's damn shame when you come out with a race model with equal power Tough to keep selling a car that doesn't get even minor improvements year after year......blah blah blah

Lets face it Mazda has let us down and I'm getting so worked up I'm ready to start picketing at the local dealer

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

YES!!!! to all this I'm seriously getting pissed at Mazda and I'm now off to the Gym to work out some aggression LOL