so thats why the British car wasn't much faster than the Japanese car?

the MP4-12C has enough power, brakes (the P1 has brake rotors that are bigger than our wheels), and handling to pass us everywhere, its just that the average one needs more driver...

the point was that a 128.8/~2300lbs car needs a lot less driver than a 592hp/3200lbs car.

 

Equal drivers, there would be no comparison unless they were running on a kart track. On a fairly large track, the differences will be much larger. The Miata will struggle with it's power to drag ratio as compared to the McLaren. This was shown in great detail this year with the NASA Eastern Championships. The Honda S2000's which were very competitive throughout the year on the smaller Midwest tracks, weren't even close at Road Atlanta. The heavy cars with higher HP just took off on the long straights.

There is a video out there of Oli Webb (professional driver) in a Bac Mono running up the tailpipes of a McLaren P1 (driven by a non-professional driver). Granted, these "supercars" are not really track focused but that doesn't discount that the nut behind the wheel is still the most important part of a vehicle's performance.

 

Exactly 2 years after this thread was started, Mazda released their half-year financial results for FY2015 today, and they look good IMHO.

As it was said in an interview with Martin Benders (from Mazda Australia), the return of the rotary can only happen if Mazda's structural reform plan achieves its goals (listed at the bottom of the linked page) by march 31st 2016.
The operating profit target may be reached already this year, while the production volume target is further away. Current ROS is 6.4% for the first half of 2015, while it was 5% for the full FY2014. The target is 7%, so it's not that far off either.

To sum it up, go Mazda, go!

Andrea

 

http://www.autonews.com/article/20141110/OEM/311109962

Please close this thread it ain't happenin people

 

^ I think that's a little presumptuous coming from someone that just barely joined the party.

However you want to look at it, whether or not they make a new RX series is good news for us that already own one.

There's no real reason to close this thread when damn near every month Mazda changes it mind on what it's going to do or some other article to spurted out to contradict or reaffirm that one may be produced.

 

CEO says one thing but...

Mazda's chief designer Ikuo Maeda, son of RX-7 designer, says another...

give it a few weeks/months and a new rumor will pop up

 

Why would Mazda spend money on the rotary if they are going to abandon it? I'm thinking about the commissioning of an oil flow research that was seen a few months ago.
Why would they develop a rotary range extender if there were no other plans to use the rotary technology elsewhere? Wouldn't it be cheaper to go with a piston range extender in this case?

I stil stand by my previous interpretation: the CEO is simply trying to keep the hype under control.
A bluff in other words.

Andrea.

 

Advanced engineering group asks for money and gets it to keep them happy, but management won't approve money to convert those projects into a production intent-program. There's a political aspect to it. The people inside the company who want to bring it back don't have enough power, but to keep the peace they get a few resources.

I hope you are right, but it's looking less and less likely. If, as the CEO says, it's not in the cards right now, that means we won't get it in the next 4 years. The longer it stays out of production, the less likely it will ever come back. The same thing happened at Audi after the Ro80 went out of production. After that they had concept engines and prototype mule vehicles for a new rotary, even publishing papers on them (which I have), but ultimately the rotary was killed.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fmzambon View Post
Why would Mazda spend money on the rotary if they are going to abandon it? I'm thinking about the commissioning of an oil flow research that was seen a few months ago.
Why would they develop a rotary range extender if there were no other plans to use the rotary technology elsewhere? Wouldn't it be cheaper to go with a piston range extender in this case?

Just because the CEO says no new RX doesn't mean Mazda shouldn't spend money developing the rotary for applications where it is actually well suited.

Mazda's rotary generator fulfills a real gap in the market and the rotary is uniquely suited to it for its ability to run on any fuel and keeping the unit light and smooth.

If it also makes it into the Mazda2 EV as a range extender that is great, but I doubt very much they will dredge up the RX-2 name for it again.

IMO RX vehicles have the nuance of a rotary for added sportiness. Maybe it would get just the R like R 100 or R 130, or maybe nothing like the Parkway Rotary 26 bus.

Don't despair, if Mazda cranks out the generators in great numbers-
1) the parts will be available for people who want to make 4 rotor kits for automotive purposes.
2) it keeps Mazda in the rotary game even if it is on the back burner.

Last, Mazda has already shown us the Skyactive rotary- If the CEO wants to say no plans for an RX that is fine- use the rotary appropriately.

The last RX (RX-8) was a brilliant chassis that was only let down by poor application of the rotary.

If the RX-8 would have come with a supercharged V6 (like a further refined version of the Miller Cycle Mazda Millenia S) it would have been a hit out of the park for Mazda and shamed many exotic and more expensive cars like the FD did for Mazda in the '90s.

If Mazda extends the rotary range extender concept into an electric sports car to enable a lighter, smaller, cheaper battery pack than the current offerings they again have a chance for a hit out of the park.

They wouldn't call than an RX. Maybe R2E2 (Rotary Range Extended Electric)?

 

I can't help but be an optimist

There are quite a few point for a new rotary being in the works, although, admittedly, none of them is conclusive:

• Although the current CEO doesn't look like a rotary die-hard, there are other Mazda execs who are. Just to name one, think about sports car chief (Nobuhiro Yamamoto);
• Mazda is now in the best possible financial position to make such a rotary car. It posted a record profit last year, is on track for another record this year and there is nothing indicating that next year will be significantly worse. The situation is better than it was in the early 2000s, when the Rx-8 was released;
• When the Renesis was developed, its development was started by a group of engineers on their after-hours (or so I heard). In this case, what's preventing another group of engineers from working on a road version of the generator rotary in their after hours?
• There are many sources claiming that Mazda is aiming to become sort of a "japanese Alfa Romeo", or at least move upmarket. Can they do that with just a single low-powered sports car (the Mx-5)? I don't think so. A proper halo car is needed. It doesn't have to be a million-dollar-car, but for sure something more than the Mx-5;
• While the operating parameters of the RE range extender and those of a car engine are certainly different, several of the underlying engineering problems are common. Solving them for the generator can certainly help if a cenventional rotary powerplant will be developed. That is to say, Mazda already indirectly spent some development money toward a rotary powered car. And even more so if such a car will be based on the Mx-5 platform;
• I also believe that there were programs to introduce another rotary sports car (either a 2nd gen Rx-8 or another car) in the late 2000s or early 2010s, then the financial crisis came, and then Ford said goodbye, putting everything on hold. The unveiling of the 16X in 2007 would have been a teaser for what was coming. Now, with the financial situation improving, why not resume what was stopped?
• Mazda repeatedly stated that they plan on introducing their 2nd generation Skyactiv engines starting in 2018. But what will their powertrain engineers do in the meantime? They can't all work to develop the new engines, as I'm sure there are many steps in engine development that can't be parallelized (9 women can't generate a child in one month, you know ). As for new current-generation engines coming out, there is the 1.5 Skyactiv D (which should be more or less done by now), then the engine that will power the Cx-9 (and possibly MS3) and then? What will all those engineers do until 2018?

The cons list is shorter:

• The CEO said no;
• There is no undeniable evidence that anything is in the works

Point 1 may simply be hype control or a bluff, as I stated, while point 2 isn't very relevant IMHO. When were the first Mx-5 mules spotted compared to the unveil date? When was the first camoed car spotted?

Andrea.

 

i looked at the sales numbers of the NC miata and Rx8, and was surprised to see that the NC miata has only outsold the Rx8 by about 1,600 units.

keep in mind, it took Mazda a couple of years to get the Rx8 to even be able to start....

the Rx8 sold 30,000 units in the first couple of years, and the NC miata is like half that, its clear there is more interest in a rotary car than the miata, but yet we get new miata instead

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01...s-figures.html

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01...s-figures.html

 

Well, we will see about that with the introduction of an all new Miata.

Its understandable to me a Miata (NC) built off the RX-8 wouldn't be as hot a commodity as the RX-8 was (debut of new chassis).

I mean, they took a big car and tried to shrink it, so the NC was heavy- pissing off would be Miata buyers.

Plus, the NC is ugly whereas the NB was pretty and the NA was cute and the only thing in the segment.

Hard to view the NC as an upgrade over the NB in any way to me.

Also, Mazda actually spent a little money hyping the RX-8. Remember it was even in the X-Man movie!

The NC Miata was an exercise in meeting current crash standards/emissions while milking the Miata name for $.

Just look at Mazda's focus on advertising weight loss for new MX-5 and debuting the all new chassis first, its clear they knew the problems with the NC that caused ho hum sales.

 

The Rx8 was more practical and way more car for the money. It was also fun as hell to drive even though it was underpowered. In customers minds, I really doubt it had to do with the engine itself. The engine is the reason the Rx8 handled the way it did because Mazda was able to locate the engine so far back and down. This left more room for longer suspension components. You couldn't do that in that chassis with a wide V6. When I worked at Mazda, customers "especially women" always praised about how well their car handled.

 

there's an interview somewhere where they ask one of the guys involved in the development of the new MX-5 if there are more cars planned on the platform like a coupe Miata and he stated that even though he can't say anything specific they wouldn't develop a platform with just one car in mind...

 

article here

Indeed the Cx-3 will be revealed soon.

 

The engine is the reason the Rx8 handled the way it did because Mazda was able to locate the engine so far back and down. This left more room for longer suspension components. You couldn't do that in that chassis with a wide V6

How can you say that when people are putting V8s in RX-8s?

If the chassis was designed with the supercharged V6 in mind the only downside would be a couple hundred pound heavier motor.

It might not have handled *quite* as well as RX-8, but no one would be the wiser as that car wouldn't exist and it would still out-handle every just about other production car while having useable power and better mpg.

*sigh* no use arguing what could have been though. Just saying I do love everything about my 8 except the engine and I am a rotary loving guy!

 

Maybe Mazda could be like GM and Ford and offer crate engines for hot rod builders, prototype racing, airplanes, etc. I'm sure people would be interested in having a reliable, high-quality supply of 20B and 16X-style engines (enough for the operation to pay for itself, at least).

 

I like that idea of crate engines

 

someone posted the Top Gear test of the Rx-01, and i knew it was a 3 seater, what i didn't know, is that it was 2400lbs.

you have to think the 13B-MSP in a 2400lbs car would be pretty great. i have to wonder if it would be more reliable not having to haul around an extra 600lbs all the time too.

lemme know when you wanna chop a foot out of your Rx8

 

lemme know when you wanna chop a foot out of your Rx8

But honestly, I love the practicality of the 4 real seats with easy access and a big trunk.

I have spent some time possibly intoxicated in the back of my 8 as my friends drive me around and its nice back there.

Also, I can fit all four of my 18x11 295s in THE BACK SEAT if I don't want to drive my race tires to the track and its easy to put them in and get them out.

I have reclined the passenger seat and fit HUGE objects in the car through the b pillar-less opening.

I feel its better to fix the RX-8 engine, cause if I want a foot less of RX-8 (and all the impracticality that comes with it) I jump in the sexier FD.

 

i liked the Rx8 door setup right away, but initially i was a little disappointed that there wasn't a place to put the engine, like every other rotary car.

however i very quickly found that the Rx8 seems to be carefully designed to fit the parts it needs to, for instance the ski pass through is really for the cat, nobody in their right mind would take the thing skiing, but everyone will need to buy a cat and take it somewhere....

we did however discover the design flaw with the backseats, if say you're intoxicated, and then need to vomit, there is nowhere to go except the rotor shape hole in the seat in front of you....

 

I don't buy that it is not in the works. A few weeks back, I was again seriously considering placing an order for a Cayman S. Anyway, by coincidence I received a call from a friend, someone most everyone on here has heard of and would know has ties to Mazda Japan.

I asked a few questions, was assured nothing, but at the same time was told enough to leave the call with a big smile on my face, and haven't thought again about the Porsche...

 

we did however discover the design flaw with the backseats, if say you're intoxicated, and then need to vomit, there is nowhere to go except the rotor shape hole in the seat in front of you....

The down the front/inside of the shirt move should be reflex to car guy in a car. Yeah, you can't expect that much self sacrifice from everyone though...

Speaking of vomit- that new Supra though.

Mazda has another chance to shame them all again with the timeless beauty of bare, unadorned, functional simplicity with just a tiny drop of styling like they did in the early '90s.

 

Nope, the CX-3 is on the Mazda2 platform. I meant this interview with designer Peter Birtwhistle here: it starts at the 2:58 mark.

his exact words at the 6:30 mark: "can't tell you, all I can say is when we develop a car, we don't develop a platform just for one car, it's too expensive. That's my answer."

he could be hinting at variations of the MX-5 like PRHT or Coupe but maybe something else

 

I think that the CEO and engineer are on odd ends on the subject the CEO has the last word and obviously said no

But maybe the engineer spread the rumor in order to get the hype up and force the CEO to make a new rx or face disappointing Mazda rx fans around the world