Originally Posted by Mazmart

Now dealing with known facts: The only thing that I can reveal about the next engine is that it is still maintaining a 9000 rpm redline. Let that swirl around in your head a little bit

Paul.

Originally Posted by shaunv74

This is what I wrote. In the event anyone cares.

Rotary turbo ~300hp+4 person seating+razor handling+light weight ~3000lbs+25 mpg min. highway. I don't think you can compete in the segment without these 4 things to start with.

If you did a 2 seat sportscar/ 4 person coupe option on the sam...e platform (ala Cayman Boxster). I think that would give you a solution for your entire market.

I could do with either a coupe style hatchback opening or a notchback with a wider opening than the RX8 so I can fit stuff the size of the trunk into the trunk.

The RX interiors have always felt unique, sporty, and upmarket for the segment. I think this a key attribute to continue. Some people may want a more spartan interior so give them the options to be a spartan racer or a more luxurious daily driver.

Last thing. Get the rotary seal longevity right. You've known how to do it since '91 but missed a few tried and true things in the S1 RX8 causing too many warranty engine replacements (I'm on my 2nd). You need to get this right to prove that you can make the rotary reliable for 150K miles like the FC's were.

Originally Posted by Mazmart

Now dealing with known facts: The only thing that I can reveal about the next engine is that it is still maintaining a 9000 rpm redline. Let that swirl around in your head a little bit

Paul.

Originally Posted by Mazmart

I agree with you most of the way. I hate the name 'R3' for the hopped up RX8 and would be upset with R4 for an RX9 if that were ever made. Since an RX8 was not supposed to be the successor to the RX7, why did they find it necessary to link it through this numerology. The 09 RX8 RS should have been called just that or R1 even; I don't get the thought process of Mazda North America's marketing people. I still desire to see two cars, RX7 and RX8, get developed. The RX8 would retain it's 4 passenger capacity and 3000 lb weight while using 16X and taller gearing. It would be more mature and take on the Lexus IS, Infiniti G37 and BMW 3 series and do well (I know Mazda can do it). The other car would weigh no more than 2500 lbs. I'm not calling for the return of the FD but in fact something more affordable and lightweight.

Paul.

Originally Posted by Mazmart

Now dealing with known facts: The only thing that I can reveal about the next engine is that it is still maintaining a 9000 rpm redline. Let that swirl around in your head a little bit

Paul.

Originally Posted by Phalkhan

Flame me if you want, but I wouldn't mind them making an RX and a MX Version of a new sports car. Put the turbo 4cyl in the MX and the 16x in the RX. Let the buyer decide which one he/she wants. Both should be between 300hp, both should have the option of a 6speed manual tranny, and both should be priced around the 30k range. I would also like to see a Mazdaspeed (turbo or 3-rotor)version of the RX with around 400hp and priced about the 45-50k range. I think the MX version would help keep the average mpg for the fleet up, as well as attract new buyers whom may not favor the wankel. No Mazdaspeed of the MX version because rotary is ftw.

Two seat or four, doesn’t matter. They should keep a base model with no traction control, and keep the weight around or below 3000lbs with a 50/50 wieght distribution.

Originally Posted by ccd

This thread shows the challenges any successor to the RX-8 will face: how do you sell a true sports car to a public that does not recognize or value the attributes of a true sports car? The hallmark of a sports car is great handling, NOT high hp! Car and Driver did a test last year of the best handling cars under $100,000. The RX-8 ranked 3rd behind the Porsche Boxster Spyder and Lotus Elise SC. Granted, the RX could use a few more ponies, but 300 hp would be more than adequate IF the weight is kept down.

Originally Posted by bse50

It's easier to use ponies than a chassis if you can't drive. HP makes up for driver mistakes. Entering a turn fast requires guts.

Originally Posted by reddozen

lol... and when can you tell us more?

Originally Posted by Mazmart

I know people who know EVERYTHING, from the top decision makers in North America to close to the top in Japan. I also know people working on the 16X. Apart from what THEY would choose NOT to discuss, I also am very respectful of their positions and grateful to be associated with them. Because of this, I ask very few questions and very appropriate questions. This leads to people putting more trust in me (Not a bad approach to business life where confidentiality may be involved). There are certain things I don't need to know.

I find out most things at the same time as most on this board and there are some very sharp people here who pick up great hints and patent applications and all sorts of things. I am privileged just to be on RX8Club as far as that goes

Do I know anything else that I have not told? I'm not telling .

Paul.

Originally Posted by Mazmart

I know people who know EVERYTHING, from the top decision makers in North America to close to the top in Japan. I also know people working on the 16X. Apart from what THEY would choose NOT to discuss, I also am very respectful of their positions and grateful to be associated with them. Because of this, I ask very few questions and very appropriate questions. This leads to people putting more trust in me (Not a bad approach to business life where confidentiality may be involved). There are certain things I don't need to know.

I find out most things at the same time as most on this board and there are some very sharp people here who pick up great hints and patent applications and all sorts of things. I am privileged just to be on RX8Club as far as that goes

Do I know anything else that I have not told? I'm not telling .

Paul.

Originally Posted by Icky Mettle

Touching upon some of the previous posts regarding start/stop technology to reduce fuel consumption...the other night I was thinking about the next RX-? and started to wonder, would there be any merit to something like a 2 --> 1 rotor management system where the engine limits itself to one rotor during idle or low power situations? You know, something akin to the 8-6-4 management systems in some piston engines?

Just one stupid thought with probably a thousand reasons why it wouldn't be feasible.