Very Little Money compared to FD ...don't know if I am happy or not....

 

The RX-8 as large as it is (compared to the FD) with 2+2 doors and good space for 4 people is pretty light at 2900-3060 lbs depending on model. If Mazda offered a shortened wheelbase 2 door 2 seat coupe RX-8 and made the engine all aluminum it could have reached 26-2700 lbs.

In the new Miata chassis a coupe version RX-X with aluminum rotary could easily be 21-2400 lbs don't you think?

 

No because cars having been getting heavier throughout the years due to safety regulations. So its extremely unlikely you'll see anything under 2,600 lbs. Full race trim NB/NC miata's still weight around 2,300 lbs. Our rotary powered NB miata's weight about 2,300 lbs without driver.

thewird

 

the Rx8 does look weird, but the rear door/seat is actually hugely practical in the real world. its also way more rigid than the FD, although shortening it would probably make it even more so

the mileage is the worst thing about the car.

 

well the 2014 Mazda3 is about 2800 lbs, the 6 3200 lbs and the CX-5 32-3500 lbs.

these are large cars compared to the FD, RX-8 and Miata and comply with all safety regulations and got TopSafety+ ratings. Mazda is good at keeping cars light.

Also a coupe body is inherently lighter than the same convertible model so if the new Miata ends up being 2400lbs a coupe version could be the same or lighter.

 

look at this:

Toyota stalling FR-S engine upgrade due to poor sales? | New and Used Car Reviews, Research & Automotive-Industry News & LeftLaneNews

A Toyota executive may have doused cold water on hopes of a turbocharged Scion FR-S/Subaru BRZ, citing poor sales in all markets.

"A faster version of that car would be at the top of most people's wish lists, but like the cabriolet, it is hard to justify a business case to push either model into production based on the current sales," Toyota's VP of European R&D, Gerald Killman, told Auto Express.

 

In a modern car with ABS, launch control is a no brainier and should cost the manufacturer effectively nothing to implement

 

I think it will be an interesting next few years to see where the industry is moving too because on the one hand, the safety regulations are getting stricter so cars are getting heavier, but on the other hand the vast majority wants better mileage so weight management plays a huge roll. We'll just have to wait and see. I'm not gonna speculate about what a corporation is planning, it never makes sense to us logical ones anyhow.

 

I went to look at an RX8 when they first came out. I was not able to sit in the back seat without my head being up against the roof. I'm just over 5' 10". I dont agree with good space for 4 people.

I'm not really sure why the RX8 is part of this discussion. It isnt anything like an FD, and wont be anything like the next RX7.

 

Rinse and repeat. This has been stated for 6 decades.

 

The Porsche Cayman S is a good example of the modern driver's car (2,910 lbs, 325 hp / 273 lb-ft).

The Porsche 911 Turbo S (991) has 560 horsepower and 516 lb-ft of torque and goes 0-60 mph in 2.9 seconds.

Now imagine a Cayman with a turbo engine (yes, I know there are tuning companies that do this).

Why doesn't Porsche make the Cayman Turbo? Money. Notice they don't fret about emissions or their poor fuel economy, either – Porsche cars are efficient in terms of power and displacement, each new engine features lower emissions, and their business model is profitable.

My buddy is looking to replace his Hyundai Genesis Coupe with a BMW 235i. He's an even more hardcore driver than I am – he tried the Scion FR-S and found the engine power deficient. Mazda doesn't make anything he wants.

To me, handling is the #1 criteria in a car. That doesn't just mean slalom speeds, g figures on the skidpad or some other benchmark number – I mean it has to drive the way I like. The FD does that and it goes fast, stops hard, and looks like a million bucks.

In other news: I saw the new Corvette Z06 (with Z07 aero package) at a car show and it left me cold, aesthetically. The SRT Viper is much more exciting to me, even though it has that large lump of an engine under the extra-long hood.

 

different builds I guess. I'm a little over 5'8" and fit just fine in the back of the drivers seat after adjusting it myself as the driver... so 4 250lbs 5'8" or so people can fit comfortably.

RX-8 discussion came about because there seems to be a lot of hate for it and the rumors indicate a light NA 250ish hp next rotary so it fits the discussion.

it's also light for the size and space so it can be used as a base to imagine a future RX-anything if you make it 2 door 2 seat shorter wheelbase.

same as using an imagined elongated coupe miata to come up with a possible weight size for the next RX.

 

That's a surprising statement given that FR-S sold over 11,000 & over 18,000 in calendar year '12 & '13, respectively. The BRZ 's numbers are far less : 4100 and 8600. Total 'em up and in the second year they did about 27,000 cars in the U.S. market. Afterall, they weren't expecting Mustang-like sales were they?

 

For comparison

Ford Mustang:

2005 - 160,975
2006 - 166,530
2007 - 134,626
2008 - 91,251
2009 - 66,623
2010 - 73,716
2011 - 70,438
2012 - 82,995
2013 - 77,186


Nissan 240SX:

1989 - 68118
1990 - 60582
1991 - 34534
1992 - 27033
1993 - 21471
1994 - 1391
1995 - 25114
1996 - 7334
1997 - 3655
1998 - 2178

The market is out there, but you have newer players with wildly different platforms like Subaru, Hyundai, and even Mini getting their share. There is still some crossover with the "sporty coupe" as well. The Acura Integra, Mitsubishi Eclipse, and Toyota Celica may be gone, but people still buy things like the Altima Coupe for some reason.

 

You must have a long torso. I'm 6' and my head didn't hit. I actually found the back seat of the Rx8 more comfortable than my cousins 2012 5.0 Mustang.

 

they never have advertised this, but the rotary cars have all had top safety ratings. even the FC is 4 star, like its contemporary Volvo's.

my dad has an older Boxster, and they don't advertise this either, but it gets 30mpg on the freeway.

my pro boxster thinking is that, it looks like a Porsche, smells like a Porsche*, sounds like a Porsche, and the top goes down, what more do you want in a car?

my anti boxster thinking is that back to back my FC convertible was better put together, and more reliable, and with the FD we used to seek out Boxsters, because the owners always thought they were fast, but the FD will just decimate a Boxster, or Boxster S.


* the garage smells like leather, its a low mile car, give it another year and it'll be mixing that with burning oil

 

Because 911.

 

I wonder if the styling is going to be based off this " Hazumi " Concept that will be on display
at the Geneva show next month.

Mazda Hazumi previews new supermini - Telegraph

 

When I see it I will believe it. Until then I ain't holdin my breath.

 

Mazda would love to sell with the same numbers they saw in the FB and FC glory years... it's important to remember that the RX has to appeal to rotary lovers and newcomers alike:

From this thread: https://www.rx7club.com/general-rota...uction-162883/

RX-7 production numbers:

1st Generation (FB)
1978 72,683
1979 71,617
1980 56,317
1981 55,321
1982 59,686
1983 57,864
1984 63,959
1985 33,562


2nd Generation (FC)
1985 29,543
1986 72,760
1987 52,204
1988 34,592
1989 37,624
1990 29,411
1991 15,648
1992 245


3rd Generation (FD)
1991 975
1992 26,654
1993 6,801
1994 5,962
1995 5,202
1996 4,762
1997 3,556
1998 1,423
1999 4,151


Total 1st Gen 471,009
Total 2nd Gen 272,027
Total 3rd Gen 59,486 (as of the end of 1999)

Grand Total 802,522


Source: Brian Long, RX-7: Mazda's Rotary Engine Sports Car, 2001

 

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

 

In a modern car with ABS, launch control is a no brainier and should cost the manufacturer effectively nothing to implement

I love how Mazda implemented the Dynamic Stability Control in the RX-8. That is they made it always on at start up so they could get on with designing a car that didn't understeer like a pig in order to "be consumer safe" and fully defeatable.

My stock RX-8 has less understeer than my stock class FD did (though it had Gab R shocks- maybe stock R1 shocks were better?). I could never solve the stock class FD understeer.

I agree that launch control is the next step.

 

The understeer is alignment

More camber less caster in the front and boom you have a car that will turn in. However with that said the 8 had a longer wheel base with equal susp setup and the engine was further back from the front axle so it will turn in better overall.

 

Well, ofc I had the front camber maxed.

Perhaps the FDs problem was it would get on/close to the bumpstops braking with slicks and then bam on the outside bumpstop on turn in.

The RX-8 might have this problem as well, except I am masking it by being on the gas on turn in lifting the front back up since it doesn't have any torque to upset the handling with early throttle on.

Plus, I am sure the 8s longer wheelbase and superior chassis dynamics help as you say.

I guess I would have to drive an FD R1 on original tires to make the claim it had some understeer designed in for safety.

However the fact it had dynamic toe sliding bushings seems to indicate that Mazda did try to make it a little "easier to drive" and that isn't defeated as easily with a switch.

 

I only run about 2.4 front camber on my track car with slicks/275 hoosiers so possibly too much camber

What size and kind of tire did you have to make you decide to go with max front camber?