neit_jnf

iTrader: (17)

Well the CEO has the final word if the board agrees, no? and he can always be replaced.

HiWire

I agree. Not in denial, but CEOs come and go.

j9fd3s

iTrader: (3)

that is something they did so well for so long, my exterior consultant calls it retro future.

look at the SA22, really look at it, its like a 70's italian car in the future, its even on campagnolo wheels, and nobody noticed.

later on the FD and early miata, are timeless.

bit of trivia: in the ND miata launch video, the Durans play 3 songs, but my brother sent me a clip, and they are playing another song, so they played at least 4.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

Love all that talk about wind in your hair etc.....

I doubt this thing is going to sell over 10k units even during the 1st year unless it has 200 HP or very close to it.

You want fun. Drop the hammer on a 435 HP 40k mustang GT and that's what's going to sell............AGAIN! Along with Camaros etc.....

t-von

iTrader: (8)

Mazda designed the Rx8 completely around the engine placement. They wanted as much weight towards the center of the chassis as possible. They also wanted the engine as low as possible because they wanted a low polar moment of inertia. I did a ton of research years ago during the development stages. The Mazda engineeres made a similar statement themselves so its not just me saying that.

Think about how wide a rotarys block is compared to a V-block piston engine. The rotary is as wide as the transmission and only about 13" tall. They wanted the engine behind the front tire centerline. Once they got the engine where they wanted, they built an exhaust tubing intake. This allowed them to build a narrow pocket in the center of the firewall to accomodate where the engine and intake were sitting (which is practically next to your feet). The engines narrow dimensions also minimized the passenger footwell protrusion. They then moved the gas tank towards the front of the rear wheels and placed them under the rear seats. When you have this much weight inside both front and rear tires, the car reacts instantly to steering wheel inputs.

Now you try to stick the front of a V-block 6 piston engine in the exact same place as the renesis, not only would you have to modify more of the upper firewall to accomodate the width, the longer engine would push the dash furthure into the cabin. You have to have a certain amount of clearence behind a dash for all the components behind it. You would also have half the engines exhaust manifolds right next to the inner foot wells (which are now much narrower). The only true way to make that piston engine work in the Rx8 chassis and retain the perfect handling traits of how Mazda designed it is to lengthen the wheel base. With the front wheels moved furthure forward, now you can move the wide engine furthure away from the cabin while keeping everything behind the front tire center line however, now you have a new problem because longer wheel base means a heavier/longer chassis (not to mention heavier engine). Mazda set a goal to build the Rx8 at 3000lbs. They got very close and that weight target would have gotten very close to Supra territory with a v6 piston engine.

t-von

iTrader: (8)

One more thing, Chrysler and Gm are the only domestics that are mimicking Mazda's style of engine placement. The new C7 Corvette finally has its engine behind the front tire center line and also the Srt Viper. Due to these engines lengths, and my reasons above, Gm has had to slowly stretch the wheel wheelbase to get its v8 behind the front tire center line. The c5 wheel base was 104", C6 is 105" and the C7 is now 106". Guess what???? the two seat C7 has the exact same wheel base as the true 4 seater Rx8 at 106". The Viper with its even longer V10 manages to operate with a much shorter wheelbase 98". They make it work because the rear tires are moved towards the front. That's why these things have zero space behind the seats and such a cramped interior.

BLUE TII

iTrader: (9)

From what I understand a V6 is a lot like a V8, but a cylinder shorter on each bank. Which makes it the length of a 13B.

If yahoos in their garages can do this, I think Mazda could have done it better.

fmzambon

Does anyone have any idea about what would the development cost be for a rotary car?

I did a little research and came up with this article from 2010. It indicates a range of 1 to 6 billion USD, depending on how much can be leveraged from other existing vehicles.

Given that the platform should be one of, if not the, most expensiva part, and given that a new Rx would almost certainly use a modified Mx-5 platform, that cost could be deleted. The big thing is, obviously, the rotary engine itself.

So I'd say 2 billion USD development costs to make a new Rx-something.

That's 232 billion Yen at the current exchange rate. Mazda is expecting 160 billion Yen of net profits for the current fiscal year. Given that the development expense would be spread over several years, it sure looks doable to me by just reinvesting part of the profits for a few years, say 60 billion per year for 4 years.
This is assuming that, in the meantime, Mazda keeps spending the same amount of R&D money on other projects. If some of this R&D money could be saved somehow (for example because all you have to do is facelift existing models for a couple years), then the rotary would be even easier to pull off financially.

What do you think?

Andrea.

t-von

iTrader: (8)

It's not just the length but the overal bulk or foot print. Non of those examples place the engine where Mazda put the renesis. I challenge any of those yahoos to do what Mazda did. Hell I could probably put a cummins in the bay if I wanted. Just because it fits doesn't make it ideal. If all people care about is power, then that's something else. 14 years ago, Mazda had specific goals when designing the 8 and non of those goals had anything to do with the hp wars we have today. Also I'm pretty sure Mazda never expected the Renesis to be as unreliable as it was. I mean the rotarys single omp nozzle system was always adequate. They even went as far as adding a 2nd nozzle per housing to add even more lubrication so this engines "should" have been bullet proff but it wasn't. Moving the nozzels away from the center of the housings caused all kinds of accelerated wear problems when theoretically it shouldn't have. Also having the side exhaust doesnt allow for the carbon to escape as easily as it did with peripheral exhaust. The S2 8 had a 3rd omp nozzle added back to the center housing and Mazda started putting a special coating on the rotors to help reduce the carbon buildup. Well these additions worked as the S2 has the reliability Mazda originally wanted. Sadley however, the reliabilty reputation of the S1 has tarnished the engine in general.

t-von

iTrader: (8)

Some visual aids always helps. Also see the benefits here.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-engine_design

BLUE TII

iTrader: (9)

14 years ago, Mazda had specific goals when designing the 8 and non of those goals had anything to do with the hp wars we have today.

No, I understand how the rotary helped make the RX-8 the awesome handling car it is.

What I am saying is- almost no one cared.

Put a real engine in it, give up a tiny bit of the handling and they would have had a home run.

If it had some engine in it, they could have put some wheel/tire under it. For example, I put 18x11 and 295 from my FD on my stock RX-8 and race it no problems.

Now, if the RX-8 had some S/C V6 power and all that grip from Mazda it would have slayed most everything in performance and no one would have been thinking "if only we could put a lighter engine with less power in it and skinnier tires this car would be perfect".

Well, actually- some people would have driven the S/C V8 RX-8 and thought "I prefer the Miata". That is fine, they already offered that car to be bought.

When they released the NC Miata built on the shortened RX-8 chassis and with a 170hp 2.0 4cyl engine it topped the RX-8s performance and handling. Sad sad sad day for the rotary.

Now, the Miata would have even better with the 13BMSP for all the reasons you provide AND no deficit in power.

I just believe the RX-8 chassis was too big and capable for what the 13BMSP had to offer.

arghx

iTrader: (3)

^ depends if it's a 60 degree or 90 degree V6. A 90 degree V6 is a V8 with 2 cylinder cut off. They have poor balance and don't run well unless it's a split pin crankshaft. It's very much the opposite of a rotary.

rx7 SE

iTrader: (5)

Source behind this statement?

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

LOL

The NC was barely quicker than the NB because of the weight

The new miata better have at least 170 hp then it might actually be close to the RX8 performance level.

Sucks to see the rotary bashing on this forum combined with people talking about stuffing v6s and v8s into rotary cars with so much enthusiasm. Guys take your v6 and v8 prowess and shove that sh#t up your asses. Go buy a VETTE, Camaro, Viper, Mustang etc.... but please stop stuffing those engines into rotary cars as if doing so makes them perfect. If you don't like or appreciate the rotary engine please try to contain your disdain for it on this site because you are not going to converts us we love the f#cking rotary engine. Are we hard headed effing douche bags sure but we don't like to be reminded of it There is no other engine that feels like the rotary which is why we put up with the BS. If you don't get it sorry but for us it's clearly a powerfully addictive super cool engine.

The piston peeps have lots of car choices and forums while us poor rotary guys don't have any choices right now and probably won't again. So stop being Effing A-HOLES on this forum!

PS and the RX8 isn't that bad so show some damn respect

j9fd3s

iTrader: (3)

they won every miata cup race....

seriously though, they did win the 25 hours of thunderhill outright with the NC miata, when you put the cup stuff on it, it is quite fast. the Rx8 does very well in endurance racing too, the miatas are just faster

BLUE TII

iTrader: (9)

Yes, the RX-8 started losing out to the Miata in magazine performance testing/track testing when the NC Miata was released.

I love the rotary- I want Mazda to use it appropriately!

Would you put a 13BMSP in your tow vehicle? In a Corvette? No. Well, I am telling you the RX-8 was let down by the 13BMSP as well.

13BMSP could have been an improvement in the Miata.

People wouldn't have complained the 13BMSP was such a dog of a motor if it as in the 2,300lb NB Miata or 2,400lb NC Miata and it would have made those cars handle EVEN better.

Thedrwebmonkey

Rotary Miatas would be great. How about a 25th anniversary miata rotary option would be great.

Not likely due purely to emissions and Corporate Avg Fuel Economy in the US.

A new RX-7 would be a very low production car due to the price of $10K over the Miata. I'd still try to get one...

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

PLEASE

Back this up with proof because I'm not buying it

230 hp and 3k pounds in a better chassis vs 170 at 2400 pounds

BS

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

We both know it's pretty much about power and weight but the RX8 chassis is the better chassis so something is wrong with whoever built the RX8 race car if the mx5 race car is beating it with 60 less HP

Please explain

I've heard that RX8 race cars run 2:14 laps at VIR likely 2:12 now with the repave I'd be very surprised to hear the mx5 ran that time.

j9fd3s

iTrader: (3)

no its not, the Rx8 and the NC miata have the SAME chassis, biggest difference is the wheel base. the miata is a bunch lighter in cup form too.

they also put a lot more time/effort/emphasis on the miata, the miatas had a long winded cup spec, and the Rx8's were basically stock (assume coilovers), and the 8's are only a second slower, at most.

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

Yep the wheel base is a big deal especially at a fast track

So if you set up the 8 it's the faster car correct. Sure if you have better aero, susp and take out more weight you can make one car faster than the other but equal setup and it goes to the rx8

j9fd3s

iTrader: (3)

at thunderhill the miata is faster by about a second than the Rx8.

the JDM tuners have gone much further with the Rx8, i guess they have them down to 2300lbs. HP depends... highest hp out of the renesis is 280, they went between the flowbench and the dyno for 6 months.

ThUnDeRbErK

I am sure RX-8 has potential and always be. This is my car and it goes with s2k's easily who says renesis is garbage ? But RX-8 needs weight reduction about 100-150 kg if i am going to weight reduction i will share what it does

Fritz Flynn

iTrader: (263)

Gotcha it sounds like you are saying that if the Rx8 is built into a decent race car it might be able to beat the mighty MX5 LOL

getgone

iTrader: (2)

Sometimes this **** giggering gives me a headache--"if this, this and this". Face the facts folks ... Mazda is not the size and shape of company that can absorb a halo car in its loss column. The car must make money for the company or it cannot happen. Mazda is not Toyota, or Honda, or GM (whom the government gods just blessed with a big bailout). If Mazda went off the deep end financially, it would simply be the end of the company. Ergo, all the wishing in the world is not going to make a rotary car happen unless it makes economic sense. I don't think even if every member on this forum signed a guarantee that they will buy the next RX, it would be enough to make financial sense to Mazda. Will they survive just making the mid-range, Skyactive line they do now?, I have my doubts. Nevertheless, no CEO is going to put the financial stakes of a company on the line by putting everything on "No. 7".