Mazda CEO officially rules out RX rebirth- again
11-19-2013, 06:14 PM
#101
Who's 'they' ? A small, rapidly shrinking contingent within the company. And they have very little power, because the guy calling the shots said no. He's allowing the advanced engineering team to have some budget to keep it going, mostly for PR and internal politics. No sense in totally crushing people's morale. Meanwhile, the tooling and manufacturing facilities will be repurposed so that people can keep their jobs.
Eventually the guys who are working on it will shift to other projects, leave Mazda for another company, or retire. A few more people might come on here and there, but when it's a distant enough memory Mazda will quietly pull the plug. That's how it happened at Audi.
The big boss doesn't want to be the guy who put the company in the red to satisfy a few diehards in the company and some people on the internet who can't wait to buy a rotary sports car when it's a depreciated used car. If he screws up, people lose their livelihoods. Mazda isn't "too big to fail," and the rotary engine nearly killed the company back in the 1970s. Can you really blame him? Why even do a rotary for a hybrid when you can just do a small turbo 3 cylinder?
I want the rotary to come back, but we have to face up to reality here.
Eventually the guys who are working on it will shift to other projects, leave Mazda for another company, or retire. A few more people might come on here and there, but when it's a distant enough memory Mazda will quietly pull the plug. That's how it happened at Audi.
The big boss doesn't want to be the guy who put the company in the red to satisfy a few diehards in the company and some people on the internet who can't wait to buy a rotary sports car when it's a depreciated used car. If he screws up, people lose their livelihoods. Mazda isn't "too big to fail," and the rotary engine nearly killed the company back in the 1970s. Can you really blame him? Why even do a rotary for a hybrid when you can just do a small turbo 3 cylinder?
I want the rotary to come back, but we have to face up to reality here.
11-19-2013, 06:30 PM
#102
Registered
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 16,684
Likes: 0
Received 239 Likes
on
109 Posts
"They" = Mazda, not just the division.
I am not really sure why people keep bringing up the 70s. Why not bring up Katrina? The Tsunami? Ford? World War 2?
They are all challenges, challenges that Mazda has hurdled before. Sure the company will face challenges in the future, but to tell them that they "can not" or "must not" is telling them that they shouldn't have been able to survive prior challenges either. Well, they did. THAT'S reality.
And regardless of what challenges are ahead, the reality that I believe is in a group of people within Mazda in positions of power that love the impractical engine, and that when the time is right, they will bring it back.
Yeah, Mazda isn't "too big to fail", no company is. It's a good thing how small they are. They aren't too big to have lost sight of the passion that they started with.
"We are the first and only manufacturer to commercialize the rotary engine. In that respect, we have some responsibility," Kogai said. "So please allow us to continue our research."
They are all challenges, challenges that Mazda has hurdled before. Sure the company will face challenges in the future, but to tell them that they "can not" or "must not" is telling them that they shouldn't have been able to survive prior challenges either. Well, they did. THAT'S reality.
And regardless of what challenges are ahead, the reality that I believe is in a group of people within Mazda in positions of power that love the impractical engine, and that when the time is right, they will bring it back.
Yeah, Mazda isn't "too big to fail", no company is. It's a good thing how small they are. They aren't too big to have lost sight of the passion that they started with.
11-19-2013, 06:38 PM
#103
You gonna eat that?
iTrader: (1)
Nothing is over!
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
NO!
Sorry, I just had to.
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
NO!
Sorry, I just had to.
11-19-2013, 08:49 PM
#105
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Dearborn Heights, MI
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It makes sense that the new CEO will sound cautious seeing as how the company just posted a profit and is trying to rebound. Telling the media that they are planning on dumping a bunch of money on a risky venture like the rotary won't appeal to future investors or partners (Alfa). Mazda is trying to find itself still. I'm hopeful that the company won't give up on the rotary.
I first saw this story on Jalopnik and reading the comments on that site irritated me. Too many ignorant people who have never driven a rotary talking about how it's the worst engine ever and it should be allowed to die. "My neighbor's second cousin's ex boyfriend's daughter had one and it burned a lot of oil." Had to come on this site to remove myself from the rotary hate.
11-19-2013, 08:57 PM
#106
Registered
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 589
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think a lot of people here are pinning hope over practicality. I joined this forum- hard to believe - 10 years ago, and I owned a lovely, well equipped 2006 GT.
We have two problems with this engine design.
It's filthy. I remember having to often clean the soot off of my tail pipe extensions. This is WITH catalytic converters. Ever notice that on new cars with some mileage on them, even the INTERIOR walls of the pipes are clean? Making this thing comply with that combustion chamber shape is not going to be easy, or workable.
Secondly, of course, is the mileage. While it wasn't too much of a big deal at first, 10 years time has REALLY advanced combustion efficiency and Buicks are getting 36 MPG on the highway. Again, the combustion efficiency isn't there, and it's part of the basic design. We all know even if you baby the throttle, it barely makes a difference in MPG. There's no "hypermiling" a rotary. These flaws are baked into the fundamental configuration of the design.
Hydrogen power may change that equation in the future, but even optimistically, we're 10 years away from that.
These were remarkable cars. In terms of the combination of handling, ride, acceleration and comfort, there were few cars that matched it at almost any price point. It could smoothly cruise the highway like a Cadillac, attack corners like a Mini, it could scream, and it could be silent. Driver and passenger sacrificed nothing in comfort or convenience for all this. It did what you wanted it to do, when you wanted to do it.
The logical successor to this car is the BRZ/FZ series, IMHO. Maybe that is the direction Mazda could have taken.
We have two problems with this engine design.
It's filthy. I remember having to often clean the soot off of my tail pipe extensions. This is WITH catalytic converters. Ever notice that on new cars with some mileage on them, even the INTERIOR walls of the pipes are clean? Making this thing comply with that combustion chamber shape is not going to be easy, or workable.
Secondly, of course, is the mileage. While it wasn't too much of a big deal at first, 10 years time has REALLY advanced combustion efficiency and Buicks are getting 36 MPG on the highway. Again, the combustion efficiency isn't there, and it's part of the basic design. We all know even if you baby the throttle, it barely makes a difference in MPG. There's no "hypermiling" a rotary. These flaws are baked into the fundamental configuration of the design.
Hydrogen power may change that equation in the future, but even optimistically, we're 10 years away from that.
These were remarkable cars. In terms of the combination of handling, ride, acceleration and comfort, there were few cars that matched it at almost any price point. It could smoothly cruise the highway like a Cadillac, attack corners like a Mini, it could scream, and it could be silent. Driver and passenger sacrificed nothing in comfort or convenience for all this. It did what you wanted it to do, when you wanted to do it.
The logical successor to this car is the BRZ/FZ series, IMHO. Maybe that is the direction Mazda could have taken.
11-19-2013, 09:03 PM
#108
SARX Legend
iTrader: (46)
The BRZ/FRS is 10 years newer and is still a yawn factory, how anyone thinks it is a successor just makes no sense to me. And why anyone who buys a Sports Car and gives a **** about gas mileage is beyond me as well.
11-19-2013, 09:21 PM
#110
The FRS is no better than a 10+ YO car in terms of performance or handling? How is that a successor? Successors improve on and expand the abilities of their forerunners, not maintain the status quot.
11-19-2013, 09:29 PM
#112
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 30-35k segment is where the battle would need to be fought and won.
11-19-2013, 09:32 PM
#113
SARX Legend
iTrader: (46)
Exactly. The Supra TT, 300ZTT, and FD all priced themselves out of the market. A local guy here has a 1993 300ZTT that has been stored since new and the sticker price on it is over 35k.
11-19-2013, 09:42 PM
#114
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And I'm sure he'll eventually sell it to someone with more money than sense, which is kind of what those cars are all about anyway. Make no mistake, I love me some FD, but I wouldn't pay the prices they command...either brand new or even as a 20 year old rolling chassis.
11-19-2013, 09:46 PM
#116
Registered
But I always bite because it's fun.
I agree. A Civic never qualifies.
To me a sports car is purpose built from the ground up to be one, ie, RX-8, RX-7, NSX, S2000, Z car, BR-Z/FR-S, Corvette, F458, 991, Ford GT, etc.
Modified mass 'transport' models don't qualify, ie, WRXs, LanEvos, IS-F, most BMWs, etc.
I'm on the fence about GT-Rs, but inclined to class them as sports cars.
11-19-2013, 10:35 PM
#117
A can of worms this.
But I always bite because it's fun.
I agree. A Civic never qualifies.
To me a sports car is purpose built from the ground up to be one, ie, RX-8, RX-7, NSX, S2000, Z car, BR-Z/FR-S, Corvette, F458, 991, Ford GT, etc.
Modified mass 'transport' models don't qualify, ie, WRXs, LanEvos, IS-F, most BMWs, etc.
I'm on the fence about GT-Rs, but inclined to class them as sports cars.
But I always bite because it's fun.
I agree. A Civic never qualifies.
To me a sports car is purpose built from the ground up to be one, ie, RX-8, RX-7, NSX, S2000, Z car, BR-Z/FR-S, Corvette, F458, 991, Ford GT, etc.
Modified mass 'transport' models don't qualify, ie, WRXs, LanEvos, IS-F, most BMWs, etc.
I'm on the fence about GT-Rs, but inclined to class them as sports cars.
11-19-2013, 11:06 PM
#119
E92 puts down a solid 8:05, The only NSX that beat it is the NSX-R and the Z06 vette. Obviously the ford GT and most of the porches will rapeeeee
But the E92 holds its own pretty well.
11-19-2013, 11:12 PM
#120
SARX Legend
iTrader: (46)
Oh, you picked the most recent M3 I see Why not the E36, that would be more fair to compare against the NSX. The C6 grand Sport and the base C7 are also quite a bit faster than the E92.
Why not the E36, that would be more fair to compare against the NSX. The C6 grand Sport and the base C7 are also quite a bit faster than the E92.
Last edited by 9krpmrx8; 11-19-2013 at 11:19 PM.
11-20-2013, 12:37 AM
#123
Registered
It would definitely be a smart idea for mazda to just lay off the rotary for a bit. They definitely want to maintain and build on their current infrastructure being an independent company now. After creating great products and prove to they can sustain the demand and make profit, that's when i would begin to expand the rnd for the rotary a bit as we all know that rotary engines are in mazda's blood line now. The thing that i would personally do differently though is resurrect the Efini brand and use this brand to make low volume rotary vehicles. Of course you would have to maintain Mazda's profits but having a new "brand" would help remove negative impacts it may cause to Mazda as a whole and reinforce to share holders that Mazda is definitely going in to the right direction and hopefully isolating the Efini brand's negative public relations due to the rotary engine.
I would imagine that definitely being a good route to take to maintain brand image while still making the rotary, just got to isolate it. I'm saddened to hear that the RE is going to be on hold for the time being and hopefully Mazda picks up some momentum to bring it up. Even though i'm saddened by this new, i'm proud to be an owner of two rotary powered vehicles and hopefully will pick up a couple of more. Future projects may be dead but luckily you can get all their predecessors and enjoy the uniqueness of the rotary engine and their vehicles.
I would imagine that definitely being a good route to take to maintain brand image while still making the rotary, just got to isolate it. I'm saddened to hear that the RE is going to be on hold for the time being and hopefully Mazda picks up some momentum to bring it up. Even though i'm saddened by this new, i'm proud to be an owner of two rotary powered vehicles and hopefully will pick up a couple of more. Future projects may be dead but luckily you can get all their predecessors and enjoy the uniqueness of the rotary engine and their vehicles.
11-20-2013, 12:55 AM
#124
Arguing whether there will be an other rotary engine car is just mental masturbation. You go back and forth and not get anywhere. I think there will be, but I'm not going to get involved in a discussion where the facts are in conclusive.
