No wonder people stopped buying rx8s
07-30-2015, 05:16 PM
#126
SARX Legend
iTrader: (46)
Yep, and it can happen from one day to the next as well with no signs. Sometimes when it goes it goes, and there is an old gearhead saying about how an engine always feel the strongest right before it goes.
07-31-2015, 02:23 AM
#127
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: FL
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
07-31-2015, 02:49 AM
#128
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: FL
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
akagc you seem to have your back up here. What you may not realize is that dealership service only is NOT the best to keep your '05 RX8 in proper shape. Dealers don't look over, inspect and replace many critical items as these cars age. ANY "05 could have an engine compression issue, even if you think it drives with full power. Without a proper rotary-specific compression test on a 10-yr old car, you are just guessing about the health of your engine. Just guessing ! And a dealer won't do a compression test unless you ask, or the car just stops running. You can't properly maintain a rotary car with just a dealer servicing once or twice a year.
I know, I have owned seven rotary Mazdas over the years.
You are living in a fantasy place if you think nothing possibly could be wrong, and you are reporting such poor mileage while cruising. Hopefully you came to this forum to get education from thousands of experienced and knowledgeable RX owners. If you choose to ignore our sincere advice and concern, then live with your sub-par mpg performance.
We can only go by what you tell us. And what you tell us points to issues with your car and/or your driving. Issues that are not being addressed by your dealer or you. And BTW manual owners are the ones getting the best mileage.
If it was my car, I would want to know why it doesn't get the mpg it should be getting, rather than getting all in a huff and saying your car is flawless. You can slowly lose compression and/or ignition and other component health over time and not really realize it.
I know, I have owned seven rotary Mazdas over the years.
You are living in a fantasy place if you think nothing possibly could be wrong, and you are reporting such poor mileage while cruising. Hopefully you came to this forum to get education from thousands of experienced and knowledgeable RX owners. If you choose to ignore our sincere advice and concern, then live with your sub-par mpg performance.
We can only go by what you tell us. And what you tell us points to issues with your car and/or your driving. Issues that are not being addressed by your dealer or you. And BTW manual owners are the ones getting the best mileage.
If it was my car, I would want to know why it doesn't get the mpg it should be getting, rather than getting all in a huff and saying your car is flawless. You can slowly lose compression and/or ignition and other component health over time and not really realize it.
Otherwise, 1 or 2 mpg off imo isn't grounds for concerns.
And yes, I'm happy in my fantasy world. My vehicles are all 04 / 05 under 60k miles. I've had them many years and they barely see 1 or 2k miles of driving per year each simply because I telecommute so usage / services is minimal. And yes, my 8 and others are flawless in my eyes. Not sure what to tell you there other than I'm not as worried as your are about it and probably won't lose sleep over it.
All I can say is when I start to feel like something is wrong, I will get it checked, for but now, let's leave it at that, but I do appreciate your feedback none the less. Cheers.
Last edited by akagc; 07-31-2015 at 02:51 AM.
08-26-2015, 10:34 PM
#130
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you run your business so well, invest in your own and let those share prices go up and your shareholders will be very happy with the price and dividends, if paid or available.
08-26-2015, 10:45 PM
#131
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe you should just go sit on the design team and see how quickly you get shot down. Every aspect of every part of cars are discussed pros and cons. They don't just put **** in there to put **** in there. Whether it be legal reasons things don't make the cut or longevity issues or safety concerns. This post is just silly.
Servicing the fuel pump assembly is easy to get to but, a pain in the rear to 'actually' get it out whereas, other cars, I have owned, not hard at all.
Getting to the front light bulb is a pain in the rear...
Getting to the blinker bulbs is a pain...
Changing the oil filter is a pain and hard to get to whereas the FB I have is simple and easy with no mess.
Changing out the radiator, just getting to it, is a PITA. My DSMs and FB, very simple...
I could go on and it is not silly to post this as, that is YOUR opinion.
08-26-2015, 10:49 PM
#132
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
all i have to say is my 8 could use a rebuild soon. its starting to run a little rough but its an 04 6 speed with 180,000+ on it. but premix and hitting 9k every time i drive it and i should be able to hit 200,000. most of the people that have a lot of problems with the 8 have an auto trans, drive like little girls or dont maintain them properly. what one are you?
9200 frequently. I premix as well. My car usually sees high rpms a good bit of the time and the oil changes to go with that 'spirited' driving as well.
08-26-2015, 11:04 PM
#133
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably...
My red talon has 215000 miles on it and has had 350 hp since 1999. It was broken down to put new bearings in it in 99. It has been running since and is not leaking any oil but, is leaking a little PS fluid and that is it. It had a 16g on it and now, it has an FP red boosted to 14 psi. I drove it to Pensacola and back and got 29.4 mpg, round trip. The car runs 12s in the 1/4. It is a 90 model with a LSD rear 3 bolt and 6 bolt motor.
My auto just got new bearings and is a stock motor. It was not leaking anything but, just rebuilt the motor anyway knowing that bearings are only good for so long in these cars. The trans went into limp mode but, motor is running fine and has an Evo 3 16g that can push 300 wph. My race car is an eclipse that is leaking nothing with a built 2.3L motor and pushes over 500 hp and put bearings in it and that was it.
I could drive all 3 (auto pending the trans fix) anywhere and know they will not have an issue mechanically.
I have an FB with the 12a motor and despite a slight oil leak, it is daily driven, premixed, and goes 40 miles round trip daily, no issues with it.
My 8 will start and run but, does not want to stay running til warmed up, pulled FP today and cleaned strainer and, still acting funny til warm and even then, if you floor it in neutral or with clutch pressed, it will hesitate and then accel.
I love my 8 as, the A/C works and it is fun to drive, trans is awesome but, the radiator is cracked, reservoir may be cracked due to being plastic, and something is wrong, electrically to keep it from running and the ecu gives me random codes that do not come back to trace the real issue.
In the above respects, I do not like the car... Many on here seem to think that, I am dissing the car and, that is not true in the sense they are thinking. If I hated the car or anything of the sort, I would have sold it long ago.
My red talon has 215000 miles on it and has had 350 hp since 1999. It was broken down to put new bearings in it in 99. It has been running since and is not leaking any oil but, is leaking a little PS fluid and that is it. It had a 16g on it and now, it has an FP red boosted to 14 psi. I drove it to Pensacola and back and got 29.4 mpg, round trip. The car runs 12s in the 1/4. It is a 90 model with a LSD rear 3 bolt and 6 bolt motor.
My auto just got new bearings and is a stock motor. It was not leaking anything but, just rebuilt the motor anyway knowing that bearings are only good for so long in these cars. The trans went into limp mode but, motor is running fine and has an Evo 3 16g that can push 300 wph. My race car is an eclipse that is leaking nothing with a built 2.3L motor and pushes over 500 hp and put bearings in it and that was it.
I could drive all 3 (auto pending the trans fix) anywhere and know they will not have an issue mechanically.
I have an FB with the 12a motor and despite a slight oil leak, it is daily driven, premixed, and goes 40 miles round trip daily, no issues with it.
My 8 will start and run but, does not want to stay running til warmed up, pulled FP today and cleaned strainer and, still acting funny til warm and even then, if you floor it in neutral or with clutch pressed, it will hesitate and then accel.
I love my 8 as, the A/C works and it is fun to drive, trans is awesome but, the radiator is cracked, reservoir may be cracked due to being plastic, and something is wrong, electrically to keep it from running and the ecu gives me random codes that do not come back to trace the real issue.
In the above respects, I do not like the car... Many on here seem to think that, I am dissing the car and, that is not true in the sense they are thinking. If I hated the car or anything of the sort, I would have sold it long ago.
08-26-2015, 11:11 PM
#134
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-26-2015, 11:20 PM
#135
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes, but find a car in 2003 with a metal radiator and a metal cap adaptor, its slim pickings.
I agree with you but, remember when thermostats were 175 to 180 and not 190 to 200 like today. What is going to stand up to today's higher pressure systems with higher operating temps to keep mpg up?? one word, metal.
you know whats better than a distributor? the Rx8ss Crank angle sensor, you put it on, and its correct, every time. Very true, my DSMs have sensors, as well and since they go on one way, always right and better. You are very correct here.
trust me, i have cars with carbs, and distributors, and they are fun, and they work well too, but the Rx8 crank sensor is just better. yep
i do agree with you here, look at all the progress the piston engines have made in the last 15 years, who is to say the rotary wouldn't have even larger improvements?
I agree with you but, remember when thermostats were 175 to 180 and not 190 to 200 like today. What is going to stand up to today's higher pressure systems with higher operating temps to keep mpg up?? one word, metal.
you know whats better than a distributor? the Rx8ss Crank angle sensor, you put it on, and its correct, every time. Very true, my DSMs have sensors, as well and since they go on one way, always right and better. You are very correct here.
trust me, i have cars with carbs, and distributors, and they are fun, and they work well too, but the Rx8 crank sensor is just better. yep
i do agree with you here, look at all the progress the piston engines have made in the last 15 years, who is to say the rotary wouldn't have even larger improvements?
08-26-2015, 11:28 PM
#136
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did you not know all this before purchasing the vehicle? Every car does have draw backs, and if you have been modding cars and have 550hp dsm then most the drawbacks on the 8 should be common sense fixes. No car is going to be the exact way every consumer wants it. You want a reservoir for oil? make one, it's not hard. You dont like the plastic coolant overflow? make a new one. This is why people modify cars....
Keep this positive, please. I intend on fixing the issues with my 8 and want to keep the car for a very long time. It will be a classic and is timeless, just like my FB and DSMs. I plan on getting another radiator for it but, not until this one goes out, which it did about 5 months ago (for the record, I have my fluids flushed every 30k miles, all the time except oil changes, of course and the car has never, ever, ran hot the least little bit but, the radiator has managed to crack on the plastic top). I plan on redoing a few things and somethings, I will have to live with as, there is nothing that can be done unless I want to spend huge amounts of money. I do not want to do that.
08-26-2015, 11:33 PM
#137
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to see what it will do one time, I drive like 'grandma' and got nearly 32 on half a tank but, cruised at 45 to 50 going from NC to GA down the mountains. That is the best I have ever done.
I usually get 21 to 22 with a decent amount of redline driving.
08-27-2015, 10:30 AM
#138
Why would you do that??? Same question... Why would you invest your money in another company if, you had every confidence in your own company??? See how that sounds...
If you run your business so well, invest in your own and let those share prices go up and your shareholders will be very happy with the price and dividends, if paid or available.
If you run your business so well, invest in your own and let those share prices go up and your shareholders will be very happy with the price and dividends, if paid or available.
08-29-2015, 02:51 PM
#139
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would you buy shares in a company that you are affiliated with or do business with and try to make the shares of that company go up when, you can put that money to use by paying down debt and doing good business yourself and have your own shares go up in value.
Ford wanted to buy out Mazda but, Ford could not do it by doing a 'hostile' take over by buying shares and owning enough of the company, through shares, to force Mazda to sell to them.
Ford was going that way but, Mazda did not fold and did not need money bad enough to put enough shares out there for Ford to try to buy to own enough to do that. Instead, Ford realized that, Mazda could hold its own, even when the economy went south and just sold all but 13% of Mazda's stock that they owned.
Ford, to this day, has never owned Mazda. Ford wanted to buy out Mazda but, when that did not work, they just kept shares in Mazda. In time, Ford will sell the rest of the stock in Mazda or, they will try to buy them out again in the Future but, not likely as, Mazda has control of that option.
Point, GM told Pontiac and Geo what do and how to do it. They could shut them down at any time and Pontiac and Geo could not do anything about it cause GM owned them. Ford cannot do this as, they do not own Mazda. There is a difference and, that is why I set the record straight when people say that Ford owns Mazda. They do not and never have. They may try to in the future but, for now, they cannot do anything to Mazda and, since they share platforms with one another, Ford is not going to do anything stupid cause, Ford cannot afford to.
The only reason Ford did not borrow money from the Gv't is because, they sold all but the 13% Mazda shares. They had 33 so they sold nearly 60% of their shares to not get a Gv't loan. Chrysler and GM went through their cash and assets and had no other way to get money.
Ford wanted to buy out Mazda but, Ford could not do it by doing a 'hostile' take over by buying shares and owning enough of the company, through shares, to force Mazda to sell to them.
Ford was going that way but, Mazda did not fold and did not need money bad enough to put enough shares out there for Ford to try to buy to own enough to do that. Instead, Ford realized that, Mazda could hold its own, even when the economy went south and just sold all but 13% of Mazda's stock that they owned.
Ford, to this day, has never owned Mazda. Ford wanted to buy out Mazda but, when that did not work, they just kept shares in Mazda. In time, Ford will sell the rest of the stock in Mazda or, they will try to buy them out again in the Future but, not likely as, Mazda has control of that option.
Point, GM told Pontiac and Geo what do and how to do it. They could shut them down at any time and Pontiac and Geo could not do anything about it cause GM owned them. Ford cannot do this as, they do not own Mazda. There is a difference and, that is why I set the record straight when people say that Ford owns Mazda. They do not and never have. They may try to in the future but, for now, they cannot do anything to Mazda and, since they share platforms with one another, Ford is not going to do anything stupid cause, Ford cannot afford to.
The only reason Ford did not borrow money from the Gv't is because, they sold all but the 13% Mazda shares. They had 33 so they sold nearly 60% of their shares to not get a Gv't loan. Chrysler and GM went through their cash and assets and had no other way to get money.
08-29-2015, 08:42 PM
#140
Oh, I get it. You just misread what I posted.
Let's bring it back from left field, shall we? The fact is that Ford execs ran Mazda for years and, among other things, cultivated relationships with Ford so that both companies would benefit.
Does that mean Ford RAN Mazda? Of course not.
Does it mean Ford INFLUENCED Mazda? Very obviously yes.
Let's bring it back from left field, shall we? The fact is that Ford execs ran Mazda for years and, among other things, cultivated relationships with Ford so that both companies would benefit.
Does that mean Ford RAN Mazda? Of course not.
Does it mean Ford INFLUENCED Mazda? Very obviously yes.
08-30-2015, 07:24 AM
#141
40th anniversary Edition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda#..._Motor_Company
The reality was, that under Japanese corporate laws, Ford's shares of 33% of Mazda allowed them to control Mazda and its Board of Directors ,and control Mazda's product development.
During that time when Ford made the product development decisions at Mazda, the rotary car development suffered as Ford did not think rotaries were a mass product. Ford and Mazda built the joint Ford/Mazda plant in Flint Rock, Michigan and they started sharing platforms and vehicles built there like the Mazda MX-6/Ford Probe; Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute ; Ford Explorer/Mazda Navajo, etc. with shared engines etc.
Eventually Ford wanted to invest more heavily in the European Car market. Ford divested much of its Mazda stock, and Mazda started buying back its stock, and thereby wresting control back of its product development . If that had not happened, there would probably have never been an RX8.
The reality was, that under Japanese corporate laws, Ford's shares of 33% of Mazda allowed them to control Mazda and its Board of Directors ,and control Mazda's product development.
During that time when Ford made the product development decisions at Mazda, the rotary car development suffered as Ford did not think rotaries were a mass product. Ford and Mazda built the joint Ford/Mazda plant in Flint Rock, Michigan and they started sharing platforms and vehicles built there like the Mazda MX-6/Ford Probe; Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute ; Ford Explorer/Mazda Navajo, etc. with shared engines etc.
Eventually Ford wanted to invest more heavily in the European Car market. Ford divested much of its Mazda stock, and Mazda started buying back its stock, and thereby wresting control back of its product development . If that had not happened, there would probably have never been an RX8.
Last edited by gwilliams6; 08-30-2015 at 07:43 AM.
09-01-2015, 05:38 PM
#142
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, I get it. You just misread what I posted.
Let's bring it back from left field, shall we? The fact is that Ford execs ran Mazda for years and, among other things, cultivated relationships with Ford so that both companies would benefit.
Does that mean Ford RAN Mazda? Of course not.
Does it mean Ford INFLUENCED Mazda? Very obviously yes.
Let's bring it back from left field, shall we? The fact is that Ford execs ran Mazda for years and, among other things, cultivated relationships with Ford so that both companies would benefit.
Does that mean Ford RAN Mazda? Of course not.
Does it mean Ford INFLUENCED Mazda? Very obviously yes.
It is like football and baseball.... Get tired of one person and fire them, another picks them up hoping they will work better with a change of scenery.
My whole point is, Mazda cannot be shut down by Ford like Mercury and Lincoln can be. Simply hiring another company's exec(s) does not mean that their former company is trying to get them into the new company to do their bidding either.
Ford does not own Mazda and never has. They do buy products from one another and share platforms on certain models to keep costs down just like other companies do. This is nothing new.
This all started from someone saying that 'Ford owned Mazda' which is not true one single bit. My point is, even if Mazda hired all former Ford execs, it does not mean a thing. They are now, Mazda execs and look out after Mazda and not Ford. They are former Ford execs due to not doing their job at Ford or Mazda offered them better benefits and pay and not a Ford conspiracy. Now, we are not in left field anymore and at home plate.
09-01-2015, 05:56 PM
#143
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda#..._Motor_Company
The reality was, that under Japanese corporate laws, Ford's shares of 33% of Mazda allowed them to control Mazda and its Board of Directors ,and control Mazda's product development.
During that time when Ford made the product development decisions at Mazda, the rotary car development suffered as Ford did not think rotaries were a mass product. Ford and Mazda built the joint Ford/Mazda plant in Flint Rock, Michigan and they started sharing platforms and vehicles built there like the Mazda MX-6/Ford Probe; Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute ; Ford Explorer/Mazda Navajo, etc. with shared engines etc.
Eventually Ford wanted to invest more heavily in the European Car market. Ford divested much of its Mazda stock, and Mazda started buying back its stock, and thereby wresting control back of its product development . If that had not happened, there would probably have never been an RX8.
The reality was, that under Japanese corporate laws, Ford's shares of 33% of Mazda allowed them to control Mazda and its Board of Directors ,and control Mazda's product development.
During that time when Ford made the product development decisions at Mazda, the rotary car development suffered as Ford did not think rotaries were a mass product. Ford and Mazda built the joint Ford/Mazda plant in Flint Rock, Michigan and they started sharing platforms and vehicles built there like the Mazda MX-6/Ford Probe; Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute ; Ford Explorer/Mazda Navajo, etc. with shared engines etc.
Eventually Ford wanted to invest more heavily in the European Car market. Ford divested much of its Mazda stock, and Mazda started buying back its stock, and thereby wresting control back of its product development . If that had not happened, there would probably have never been an RX8.
Ford never owned Mazda. Owning shares does not mean owning the company and Japanese law is non-existent in the USA. They follow our laws here. The rotary suffered due to the economy and not Ford. During the time that Ford owned 33%, the rotary was made the whole time and in Japan only. (made not sold in Japan only like the rx7 was after 96 to 2002). Mazda has not developed the rotary much due to economics and not Ford. Ford only votes it shares based on what the Board and Chairman present and not the other way around. I have voted due to owning stock in several companies. You vote your shares and, that is all you can do. Why do you and others, not understand that????
Ford and Mazda share platforms on certain vehicles due to keeping costs down. The rx7 and rx8 and miata share no platforms with other cars. All Rx cars were built in Japan, only. Sharing platforms and doing business with one another are not the same as owning one another. Influence is based on what you think and Ford and Mazda influenced one another, no doubt, just like Chysler and Mitsubishi in the late 80s and most of the 90s with the DSM cars (built in Illinois, by the way).
Ford may have influenced Mazda in general but, Ford does what Ford does and Mazda did what Mazda did and wanted to do. When it comes down to it, Ford wants Mazda out of business so they can absorb Mazda's customers. Ford works with Mazda cause Ford cannot make Mazda do anything. This is the reality and the legalities of it.
Even owning shares, you have common and preferred shares. Please look up how business works before making comments. Some Ford ***** on here.
09-01-2015, 06:22 PM
#145
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will tell you just like I told the rest....
Ford never owned Mazda. Owning shares does not mean owning the company and Japanese law is non-existent in the USA. They follow our laws here. The rotary suffered due to the economy and not Ford. During the time that Ford owned 33%, the rotary was made the whole time and in Japan only. (made not sold in Japan only like the rx7 was after 96 to 2002). Mazda has not developed the rotary much due to economics and not Ford. Ford only votes it shares based on what the Board and Chairman present and not the other way around. I have voted due to owning stock in several companies. You vote your shares and, that is all you can do. Why do you and others, not understand that????
Ford and Mazda share platforms on certain vehicles due to keeping costs down. The rx7 and rx8 and miata share no platforms with other cars. All Rx cars were built in Japan, only. Sharing platforms and doing business with one another are not the same as owning one another. Influence is based on what you think and Ford and Mazda influenced one another, no doubt, just like Chysler and Mitsubishi in the late 80s and most of the 90s with the DSM cars (built in Illinois, by the way).
Ford may have influenced Mazda in general but, Ford does what Ford does and Mazda did what Mazda did and wanted to do. When it comes down to it, Ford wants Mazda out of business so they can absorb Mazda's customers. Ford works with Mazda cause Ford cannot make Mazda do anything. This is the reality and the legalities of it.
Even owning shares, you have common and preferred shares. Please look up how business works before making comments. Some Ford ***** on here.
Ford never owned Mazda. Owning shares does not mean owning the company and Japanese law is non-existent in the USA. They follow our laws here. The rotary suffered due to the economy and not Ford. During the time that Ford owned 33%, the rotary was made the whole time and in Japan only. (made not sold in Japan only like the rx7 was after 96 to 2002). Mazda has not developed the rotary much due to economics and not Ford. Ford only votes it shares based on what the Board and Chairman present and not the other way around. I have voted due to owning stock in several companies. You vote your shares and, that is all you can do. Why do you and others, not understand that????
Ford and Mazda share platforms on certain vehicles due to keeping costs down. The rx7 and rx8 and miata share no platforms with other cars. All Rx cars were built in Japan, only. Sharing platforms and doing business with one another are not the same as owning one another. Influence is based on what you think and Ford and Mazda influenced one another, no doubt, just like Chysler and Mitsubishi in the late 80s and most of the 90s with the DSM cars (built in Illinois, by the way).
Ford may have influenced Mazda in general but, Ford does what Ford does and Mazda did what Mazda did and wanted to do. When it comes down to it, Ford wants Mazda out of business so they can absorb Mazda's customers. Ford works with Mazda cause Ford cannot make Mazda do anything. This is the reality and the legalities of it.
Even owning shares, you have common and preferred shares. Please look up how business works before making comments. Some Ford ***** on here.
The only reason the rotary will not stay viable is due to emissions. The 16x was going to be a GDI motor but, the motor will always require oil to be injected/mixed to keep running. The oil is what will cause the motor to go, in time. That time may be now but, I hope not.
On a side note, my pressure sensor went bad and my throttle body is not opening til the pedal is half way down.... another issue that does not happen when you have a throttle by cable and not by remote. Lastly, the pressure sensor is not sold alone and is about 300 or so dollars. If the TB goes out, you cannot get one of those at all except through Mazda or ebay (used). The motor/TPS is not rebuild-able either as it is riveted on. (SEE Thread name)
09-01-2015, 06:25 PM
#146
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very mature attitude there....
I guess we are, move along then.
I had some respect for you, as you had decent argumentative skills but, just lost all that.
Good day to you and hope you learn more about business and stocks for your own sake.
09-01-2015, 06:36 PM
#147
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda#..._Motor_Company
The reality was, that under Japanese corporate laws, Ford's shares of 33% of Mazda allowed them to control Mazda and its Board of Directors ,and control Mazda's product development.
During that time when Ford made the product development decisions at Mazda, the rotary car development suffered as Ford did not think rotaries were a mass product. Ford and Mazda built the joint Ford/Mazda plant in Flint Rock, Michigan and they started sharing platforms and vehicles built there like the Mazda MX-6/Ford Probe; Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute ; Ford Explorer/Mazda Navajo, etc. with shared engines etc.
Eventually Ford wanted to invest more heavily in the European Car market. Ford divested much of its Mazda stock, and Mazda started buying back its stock, and thereby wresting control back of its product development . If that had not happened, there would probably have never been an RX8.
The reality was, that under Japanese corporate laws, Ford's shares of 33% of Mazda allowed them to control Mazda and its Board of Directors ,and control Mazda's product development.
During that time when Ford made the product development decisions at Mazda, the rotary car development suffered as Ford did not think rotaries were a mass product. Ford and Mazda built the joint Ford/Mazda plant in Flint Rock, Michigan and they started sharing platforms and vehicles built there like the Mazda MX-6/Ford Probe; Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute ; Ford Explorer/Mazda Navajo, etc. with shared engines etc.
Eventually Ford wanted to invest more heavily in the European Car market. Ford divested much of its Mazda stock, and Mazda started buying back its stock, and thereby wresting control back of its product development . If that had not happened, there would probably have never been an RX8.
Chrysler and Mitsu did the same thing. Neither owned the other and neither 'controlled/owned' the other in any way. I will agree that, they worked with one another to seek each's interest and compromised on the shared platforms, just as DSM did, back in the day.
Development, no. To show that, the sideport rotary was achieved for the 8 during Ford's 33% stock ownership and the REW was as well for the turbo models.
Ford wanted to buy everyone out except the other 2 here cause that was not going to happen due to monopoly laws here, in the USA. If not for Chysler doing better than AMC in the late 70s and early 80s, the big 3 here would have been Ford, GM, and AMC instead but, Chrysler won and has been propped up by Daimler and Fiat since going bankrupt and almost going bankrupt 2 more times. This is why you see the 'dodge II' on the cars....
09-01-2015, 10:08 PM
#148
For example, one point was that a one-third holding constitutes a controlling stake under Japanese law. That alone means Ford had the ability to control Mazda with a 33.4% stake, which eviscerates your claim that Ford didn't control Mazda while it had that stake. All you did in response was repeat things you had already said, none of which was relevant.
You'll have to excuse me if I decline to accept your assessment of my argumentative skills.
