I guess that could be the case, I was figuring 60-70k for it, hopefully less than the GTR.. I figure that would be the sweet spot for it but who knows.

 

1.6 n/a could make ~280hp. That would be good for ~109mph in the 1/4 in a 2600 lb. car, ~106mph in a 2800 lb. car. Significantly better than most V6 sedans!

 

edit: Posting after 1am isn't always a good idea.

 

I think we all know the answer.

As Pete said, not many buyers other than rotary die hards for a 2600 lb 250 HP rotary car when they can have a 2400 pound piston car for 5k less with 200 HP. Or they could buy the upgraded piston boosted alpha with 250hp for 5k or 10k more etc.....

Possibly a hard top (with strengthened b pillars so no roll bar required/now I'm dreaming for sure hehe) miata with a rotary in it and call it an RX5 (R for rotary and racing hehe), it could weigh 2300 pounds or even 2200lbs with 250hp and cost 2k more, now that would work and I'd buy one to shuttle around in if it looks like the latest miata designs I've seen (classic looking not modern BS). The whole block should absolutely be aluminum and put a frikken oil pan on that doesn't leak. High revving little light weight rotary, think lotus for 1/2 price. Also have an even lighter weight version with options for no AC, radio, PS, lighter seats etc..... yummy

 

Alfa Romeo 4C is going to be $60-65k in the US. $35k more than a Miata, $40k more than a 2600 lb. 250hp rotary sports car could/should be.

ME TOO!!!

 

The Supra seems more aimed between the GTR and NSX. That's where the Japanese big three are. Admittedly Mazda isn't there as a company to make and sell a $75k modern muscle car—but I think they could be building something that is a "competitor" in the giant-killer sense. Something that'll embarrass those cars on a technical road course or autocross, and be respectable (and moddable) in straight line performance for a bit more reasonable price.

I just don't think Mazda's vision is big enough (neither are their *****), and maybe not their design/engineering staff. I don't know about Japan, but it doesn't seem like Mazda has a close enough connection to it's rotary enthusiasts and tuning shops to understand what's going on either.

 

Meant to say $30k more for the 4C vs. 2600/250hp rotary, not $40k! Too late to edit...

 

According to this post 130 https://www.rx7club.com/3rd-generati.../#post11687212

The new 7 will be more around 2800 lbs .. not 2600 and with that in mind I think that a 250 hp rotary is EVEN LESS JUSTIFIED ... The only real option to make the new 7 SPECIAL .. is adding an extra triangle... THAT is something I would buy ...

 

Adding 3 more apex seals, another bearing and 4 more coolant seals seams like a terrible idea. A turbo 2 rotor would have a broader powerband and much more mod friendly like the GTR. Lets be real, no one is buying GTRs to leave them in stock form. NA in any form would be a disappointment to me.

 

NA is all your gonna get. Mazda doesn't want to turbo the next engine. As it stands, the side seals on the side exhaust can't reliably take the heat (claims the boosted Rx8 crowd). There's a reason Mazda never boosted the Rx8 over its 8 year life span. So with that bring the case, if you want more power, your gonna have to add displacement plain and simple.

 

I think Mazda is capable of engineering a supercar (hello – FD?), but they have to be willing to accept low sales volumes (NSX/GT-R) or they have to sell a lower-cost (e.g., naturally-aspirated 2-rotor) model based on the same platform.

What they should know is that they can't base their sales projections on a car like the MX-5 or even the RX-8. A low-power, 2-seat convertible is not an appropriate comparison, despite its popularity, nor is a 4-door, 4-seat rotary.

The RX-7 is a lightweight, 2-seat, 2-door sports car. Its RWD competitors:

Hyundai Genesis Coupe
Scion FR-S/Subaru BRZ
Ford Mustang
Chevrolet Camaro
Nissan 370z
Chevrolet Corvette
Lotus Evora
BMW M4
Jaguar F-Type
Porsche Cayman

All of these cars have weaknesses that Mazda can exploit, whether it is weight, high price, ugly design, or poor handling. Modern sports cars are mostly fast (the FR-S/BRZ is the obvious exception) by objective measures, but there are gaps in the market here that you can drive a truck through.

P.S. Completely off-topic, but the McLaren 650S shows the kind of performance focus you need to get sports car enthusiasts excited:

http://www.evo.co.uk/news/geneva_mot...and_video.html

http://youtu.be/DndWTkwCNpc#aid=P-Mk-om3k9U

 

Or add rpm

 

N/A 3-Rotor (or larger displacement), current displacement + boost, or some combo of the two would all work. Smaller displacement N/A most certainly will not in anything other than a 2200 lb. "RX5" Miata—and even then I don't see why, at that price point, you don't just get the piston version and boost that. I also don't think spinning it out to 12k (or whatever) to make power will really be viable on a street car.

 

Rpm isn't that easy. You have to think about all the other components that support 9k+rpms. Intake and exhaust design transmission shifting capability, oil pressure and flow, clutch, much tighter bearing clearences, much stronger stationary gears, etc. Logan (Defined Autoworks) had a really nice list of things that needed to be done for reliable operation at stratospheric rpm levels. More rpm also just wears your engine out sooner. With my personal NA 20b project, I'm trying to get the most out of the engine while staying in streetable rpm levels. It's definetly a challenge and I hope to have some results very soon.

 

Not easy, but not impossible either. If the 16x was still a 9000 rpm engine (as Mazmart said here), the lighter internals of a 1.2 liter rotary hint at it being able of more than 10000 rpm. And if the engine core can take it, then all of the other problems can be overcome IMHO.

Provided the will is there, of course.

Andrea.

 

WOW, I like their ambition but I don't see that little joker selling for 50k much less 60k plus..........

LOL........I was thinking like 35 or 40k max and you'd have to really want the car. I must be vastly underestimating it.

At 60k it will have to beat the boxster s in most categories and I don't see that happening.

 

OK.......I'm dreaming

Base model:
2500 pounds, 2 rotor 250 NA aluminum block

Race model:
2600 pounds

3 rotor NA aluminum block and don't care if it's only 315 HP (high revving, buzzing little bee)

Sick design as good as the FD

After I wake up I'll send the one of my FDs somewhere for a 3 rotor NA conversion LOL

 

The 3-rotor should have healthy torque, too.

Regarding design – it should make people say "Wow!" Too many contemporary cars are just handsome (yes, even Ferraris). I want a car design that is beautiful.

 

If it's a 3 rotor I will have a tough time not buying one, we can only hope

 

Okay, I'll give you that if those power & weight figures stand, along with a price around 30K, that it might be somewhat of a hit sales-wise (moreso than FD; but selling 10K units a yr might not hold such a high appeal to Mazda in the end). The thing is, the time we're living in is not the late 70s when the 1st gen came along - sports cars back then were all deficient in the power department; there were no advanced AWD/4WS/DSC to harness 400, 500, 600 + hp engines. Studies show that kids these days would rather have a new gadget than a new car. Yeah, amazing as that is! So who would be the target buyer of the 2600 lb/ NA 1.2 or 1.6 (no torque, of course) 7? The guy who owned a 3rd gen and wants a good bit more power, along with low weight hopefully utilizing aluminum and maybe carbon fiber? Probably not. If Mazda were to state that there are two choices
1) 2600 lb, 1.2 with 250 hp @ $30K base price

or

2) 2800 lb, 3 rotor turbo with 480 hp @ $65 to 70K

I'd suspect more members here would choose the latter.

 

As amazing as a 300+hp rotary would be in a new car, I just can't imagine it happening.

A bit more realistic, but still far fetched, it'd be cool to see Mazda build something a bit more competitive with the market. Some sort of higher revving V8 in a brilliantly handling chassis with 400+hp would be perfect. Option it with a performance minded automatic that locks the converter clutch(like the IS-F and the new skyactivs), and make it look stunning, and keep it under $75k and under 2800lbs. Positioned in the market as a modern FD equivalent.

But this is Mazda, and we only build 4 cylinders.

 

If that's true and I'm suspicious, than maybe the new generation is smarter than us. A $500 phone you don't need or $35000+ car you don't need. I will admit that I have a car sickness that rationalizes irrational choices like owning an FD.

 

Guys, I came back and read a couple days worth, and it occurred to me that maybe we should look at this whole thing from a different angle:

We all want to see a new version of the FD, and we all want to see Mazda continue with the rotary. We have lots of different ideas about what would make that marketable and what the competition is, but maybe that isn't the point.

If we start off assuming that this hypothetical new car has a rotary engine, then it really only makes sense if they design it around the strengths/weaknesses of said engine.

I think we all can agree that the advantages are: High power density (small weight/size per horsepower), low engine CG, Wide power band with high redline, and 'coolness factor' due to the novelty of the rotary.
Similarly disadvantages are pretty obviously: Poor fuel economy, Relatively high cost, difficult emissions, and low average reliability (both due to design issues and lack of owner/mechanic understanding).

Given these strengths and weaknesses, the car that really makes sense is a relatively small, lightweight sports car with more of a bias towards handling than ultimate power, and styling which both plays on the history and accents the novelty of the car/engine.

If we start trying to imagine a car that is going to be a high volume, low cost, direct competitor of the Corvette, we are already going in the wrong direction, because we will never get there. There are plenty of people out there who want something different, and plenty who care about handling. Not saying power isn't important, but if we start talking 3000+lbs and 4xxhp, if you want that, just go buy a vette. The one thing we have over the V8 guys is the ability to make decent power in a small package that still has a low CG and handles awesome.

What really always made the RX7 work was the fact that the 13B is small and lightweight, so it can be mounted low and behind the axle in a car that still has great proportions without a 6' long hood. We never had the power of a Supra or a Corvette, but the car was lighter and handled better, so we could still smoke those cars at the track. Why not continue the trend?

What I would really like to see, is a car that is similarly sized and styled to the FD, with an updated all-aluminum 16X or similar. Make that car with ~300HP, and update it with some modern materials, and it could weigh 2600lbs or less. In other words, similarly fast to a modded FD, which is still good enough for most people today. If we need some more novelty factor, there is no reason it can't have a 3 rotor, or for that matter, why not switch to stainless rotors (tried and proven by Curtiss Wright) and bump the redline to 12k? One of the first things people always ask me is how high the RX7 will rev, which to me means that one of the most prolific positive ideas about the rotary is that people think it is cool that they are high revving, and let's face it, when there are production V8s that redline at 8k, our 9k RPM redline isn't very exciting anymore.

The one real clincher here is that it would have to be reliable. We can't have any of these stupid mistakes like the hose melting twins on the FD or the long list of RX8 problems. It doesn't have to be a 300k mile car or anything, but it damn sure would need to run 60-70k miles without abnormal service. Otherwise the rotary engine will probably be dead for good. If that means I have to wait an extra year or two for development to finish up, I'll take it.

More importantly, I think Mazda would have to find a racing venue or some other way to showcase such a car and prove the performance and reliability.

Even if all that makes the car more expensive, I think the RX8 proved that a 'practical' rotary sports car was a bad idea, so pretty much nobody is going to buy this as a primary vehicle anyway, and if it performed right, looked right, and didn't break down after 5k miles, I would be willing to shell out a few more dollars, and I bet the rest of you would too. We may not be able to afford a Ferrari, but lots of people buy Corvettes and 911s for $60k+, so trying to make a $25k RX7 is going to be a mistake IMO.

 

The will is one thing... The cost of everything else to work with that high reving engine is something else. Dog gears and tranny whine isn't something I'm looking forward to on a street car.

 

the rx8's tranny revs to 10k and its fine , which i think it shares with the S2k . granted it would need to be beefed up a bit but..


its not gonna be that expensive...