2017 THE RETURN OF AN ICON. MAZDA RX7
 

Idk guy's you think this will compete with the 86 even though they say it's going to be priced a lot higher than a 370Z?! I also don't know if this existed yet I searched but couldn't find anything.

http://rotarypowercrew.com/2012/12/2...con-mazda-rx7/

Updated with Press Release

https://newsroom.mazda.com/en/public...0/151028a.html

http://www.blogcdn.com/slideshows/im...cept-001-1.jpg
http://www.blogcdn.com/slideshows/im...cept-006-1.jpg
http://www.blogcdn.com/slideshows/im...cept-010-1.jpg
http://www.blogcdn.com/slideshows/im...cept-015-1.jpg

Est. 300 hp, 2750 lbs, RWD, 2+2 configuration. Seems like Mazda is targeting the space directly above the BRZ. If Subaru doesn't release an STI version of the BRZ, Mazda will dominate that marketspace (lightweight, RWD, $35k and under).

This is good news if true. It will light a fire under Subaru's rear. Possibly Toyota's as well.

I remember the rumor date being 2013, car speculation is the worst speculation.

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/ma...new-turbo-rx-7

Also this:

http://jalopnik.com/5435351/report-m...s-the-new-rx+8

Oh gawwd!

seems legit and current

I supposed we should take this with several tablespoons of salt, but I hope just about everything mentioned in the article will be true, minus the 370z+ MSRP. Curb weight of the GT86 with a 300hp N/A 1.6L Wankel sounds like sports car heaven.

I was curious on the orginal price on the last gen RX-7, found a source that said it was $32,550. I'm assuming thats base.


This was 1994, i think the new RX-7 will be more in the mid 40K range.

I have been following this rumor for awhile. I think Mazda will bring back the RX series, but I they will have to get a more fuel efficient rotary, and it will need to be less troublesome to maintain. I would also love to see them focus on keeping all the frills and the price down to make it more competitive. There will be a limited market for the $35-45K range for this car I suspect. The beauty of the original RX-7 was it's simplicity and low cost. The same philosophy Toyota used with the FT86 platform. Give me a sub $30K RX-7 with a reliable engine that can get 22mpg in the city and 30 highway please :)

2017??? Ok I'm not going to get into waiting because I'm already sick of waiting for what the new NSX is going to be like lol.

2017 huh? Given Subaru's history of remodeling cars roughly every 4 years or so that would be just in time for the second generation of the 86. More choices are always good and competition improves the breed.

The 86 will be just about paid for by then....would be nice to step up to 300 hp, and have a nice new warranty...lets see what subaru does though....250+ hp stock might not be so terrible if the STI does indeed come with more power....

Approx. $35,000....

If it's turbo and doesn't look like ass, then I'm in.

If not, don't care.

There's no way Mazda can afford to build this car, they're barely hanging on these days after the split from Ford. They need another larger company (Fiat?) to share the chassis with and I'm not sure anyone else is looking to break into this market.

The only reason we're getting a new Miata is because of Alfa.

Might also be a tough sell put up against the new mustangs and camaros which will have significantly more power.

Well you make a good point. Mazda is doing better (actually profitable):
http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dl...EM01/130409934

But, a lot can happen. Mazda will need the 6 and 3 to be a hit like the CX-5 was. If the 3 is a big hit (and all indications are that it is at the top of it's segment) we could see another RX. But like I said, Mazda would be wise to follow what Tada did with the FT86 and make is a more affordable sportscar.

Or burn unnecessary amounts of oil, especially with emissions regulations they really need to develop the engine.

Considering the 1.3L RX-8 only got 16/22mpg with 250hp, i'm doubting the 1.6L with 300hp will get much closer to the 30mpg mark. Rotaries have always been too thirsty for my particular tastes, maybe i'm just a cheap skate :iono:

How do you guarantee your sports car will be a sales failure?

Answer: put a rotary in it!

If it comes in 2017 then my guess is $45K and no turbo.

If it passes emissions on 2017 that means it can't burn oil...they'll need to sort out some ceramic seal magic to make that happen.

They ought to just make a deal with GM and source out a bunch of LS engines. More power and better fuel economy. Best modification you can make to a rotary car!

:D

a rotary that meets todays global emissions is magic on its own. but i have faith in Mazda that their team found good solutions to horrible fuel and oil consumption that plagued the previous rotaries.

The issue with the oil consumption isn't that it's a problem, but that it is a 'solution' to the design limitations of the rotary.

The other problem is that they are inherently compression limited, and have poor combustion chamber shape. So the poor fuel efficiency is also a 'solution'. Running pig rich to get even fuel
dispersion.

However...

If they take a radical new approach to fight the natural weaknesses, who knows? But when you start hearing about experiments with laser ignition, well it's either outside-the-box thinking or crazy desperation with no regards to reliability (still...).

Mazda, just make a coupe that is as sexy and light as an FD and put a normal engine in it.

How do you guarantee you'll look like an ignorant retard on a car forum?
Answer: post something stupid about rotaries


The sales of the 1st gen RX-7 were nearly half a million
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_RX-7

http://2media.nowpublic.net/images//...c459add689.jpg

And they sold most of them before people knew better. Notice the last two generations combined sold less than the first. Word got out.

Rotaries had been on sale for nearly a decade when the RX-7 came out, and over 15 years in other countries. So if it was a matter of "getting the word out" the SA/FB RX-7 wouldn't have had such a successful run for so log, so that argument doesn't hold water.

The 1st gens and non-turbo 2nd gens have proven to be pretty solid for reliability.

The 2nd gen onwards became significantly more expensive than than the original during a time when sports car sales were declining in general (by the mid/late 90s, the miata was about the only Japanese sports car still for sale in the US)

Facts good, ignorance bad...

Laser ignition is pretty smart, I actually want to see it succeed. Spark plugs obviously have more problems in a rotary where they are in a recessed chamber, but laser plugs could help oversquare engines by allowing multiple ignition points without the bulk of multiple plugs. Igniting the mix early to get complete burn is horrible for efficiency; you probably lose more power to that (slow combustion) at high rpm than hypothetically recovering all blowdown losses.

For a rotary, being able to remove the spark plug recesses ups your compression ratio while decreasing surface area for heat rejection, it makes a ton of sense.

I don't think the fuel consumption isn't really because it runs rich, but in a way your statement is right. Because the engine runs like shit at low rpm, they have to try to run it at higher rpms to get it running smoothly, and you get worse fuel consumption as a result. The RX-8 is geared shorter than the S2000 when considering "displacement".

I don't get why they can't make a crazy V6 when they make something as crazy as a rotary though. Their K engines were super tiny, and in theory they could've revved the shit out of them no problem.

I think the new RX7 is going after the new Toyota/BMW Supra that'll supposedly be coming out the same time.

my first car was a rotary, my first track car was a rotary, my first race was a rotary, my first win was a rotary, and, oddly, so was my last. but ANYWAY, the rotary engine is a fantastic engine, though it had several inherent design flaws as mentioned.

What isnt mentioned here, is that with todays tolerances, and what is known about modifying the ports and reinforcing the seals, it would not be inconceivable for a 3 rotor 2l +- engine to break 300 with 25-30mpg. The real kicker and pain in the design, and its fatal flaw, is how to keep the seals lubricated. Yes, injecting oil works, or using 2stroke solution, however it is impracticle in todays market.

If you can figure out a way to keep the seals lubricated without injecting oil, you may revive the rotary.

and here you are all yapping about rotaries on a boxer forum, ironic...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cBZhHa2xyw...about-dogs.jpg

We're yapping about rotaries in a RX7 thread. Not really ironic.


I have to ignore the Rotary fanbois... sorry, there's just not enough of you for the economics of it to pan out and the rotary engine absolutely doesn't appeal to anyone outside your itty bitty demographic.

Hence the comment: Want to make sure it fails, put a rotary in it, holds true.

Mazda was smart to drop it and should keep it dropped. They are making massive progress forward with their SkyActiv lineup and for every 1 person you could find me that likes rotary Mazdas, I can find you 50 that that like non-rotary Mazdas and while were at it, I could find you many that can't wait for the diesels. The (under $80k) sports car demographic is very small to begin with, putting an undesirable power plant in one makes the economic equation that much worse. You can talk about the numbers all day long: "the engines revs to this, and sounds so good and makes this much HP"... but it just doesn't do the job it needs to well enough nor does it appeal to enough. Period, end of story.

From an economic stand point, the low budget sports car is already a mathematical struggle for these companies but a low budget sports car with a triangle... Does not compute.

Now if it's a high-budget sports car (80k+) with some really big triangles might be a better equation but then again, if I have 80k to spend on a sports car am I really buying a Mazda, am I really buying a triangle?

Would there be a market for a RWD SkyActiv 4-Cylinder Coupe based on the ND Miata that would compete against the FR-S/BRZ?

They actually downrated the hp figures several times over and finally ended up at 232 hp...even then many rx folks we're saying that figure was off :bonk:

An engine that has 3 moving parts and can fit in a backpack is very unique. If gas and oil consumption are priorities maybe a sports car isnt in the cards.

Which is cool and all, but I wouldn't build a car around it unless the major issues (fuel consumption, reliability/longevity) are mitigated.

To me, the first thing a *real* sports car should be is light weight. A small, lightweight, aerodynamic car should get decent fuel mileage. Not enough real minimalist lightweight sports or sporty cars on the market, too many oversized/overweight monstrosities.

I remember quite a while back that for years the highest observed fuel efficiency in the car spec summary in the back of road and track was a 1st gen Elise that they got 35mpg with.

I sincerely hope Mazda builds a new RX-7, but unless they can do some kind of magic with the rotary to make it fuel efficient, they should make that an optional powerplant. I've always thought they should make a rotary version of the Miata as well. Keep that part of the Mazda identity while allowing "normal" people to enjoy piston-engine versions at the same time.

Listen, i want a rotary. A I4 with a nice turbo on it isn't special anymore and hasn't been in a long time.

Do you think you should ask ferrari to build a *real* sports car? Their lightest is +3,200lb. And their flagship is +4,000.

I prefer light sports cars, but I realize many models easily overcome their heft.

Rotary heads get rx8s into the +200k, but if you treat it like a piston engine forget it.

Yes, I think they should build a car closer to the 206/246 Dino, that's less about maximum performance and more about real-world enjoyment of minimalist sports car ideals.

In terms of going fast and making numbers for people to gawk over, yes. But what's missing is the feeling of being in a small fun car.

For every 200k rotary, there are thousands of 500+k piston engines.
If you can't treat it with utter neglect and still get 150k+, it's not going to fly in the market, even if the fuel efficiency issue is "fixed" (not likely).