New Mazda RX Vision concept

[f0rge]

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.

[thill]

Originally Posted by f0rge

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.

[FRSBRZGT86FAN]

Originally Posted by LSxJunkie

You think by then they'll figure out how to make a rotary that doesn't spit out apex seals?

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

[Trashed675]

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

[rice_classic]

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

Answer: put a rotary in it!

[Rampage]

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

[serialk11r]

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.

[n2oinferno]

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!

[WingsofWar]

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.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by WingsofWar

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.

[reni]

Originally Posted by rice_classic

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

Answer: put a rotary 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

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by reni

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

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

[reni]

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...

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by Dimman

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.

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.