RX26b

I, for one, am glad they eschewed the same principles they had for the 1st gen when they designed the FD. Lame? I think a ride in any generation of the car preceding the 3rd describes your label to a T.

Want a lightweight, average-looking, cheap 2 door/2 seater to compete against same-priced Eclipses and all the other garbage out there in that class? Fine, make that car a Kabura. The RX-7 lineage should continue on from what the 3rd gen was - a world-beating, timeless-looking, true sports-car-experience machine that belied its price. Yeah, people gripe that stickers in the mid to high 30s made it not so affordable; but along with that, at least you didn't pass 5 of the same car on your 10 mile ride to work. What the car offered, minor reliability issues excepted, should be continued in the 4th gen. A 450+ hp/2800 pound true sports car vs. most 3500 to 3800 lb GT porkers out there is something Mazda can count on me buying. Even at 50 big ones.

Renesis_8

I don't think the higher MSRP will be a problem as much as it was back in the early 90s. The consumers put so much money into cars nowadays that its completely different from back then. Also Japanese brands gained popularity rapidly in the last decade, of course you would still find small towns with only GM cars. Nissan will definitely be able to sell every one of their GTR at above MSRP.

Mazda still needs a little more time to get more brand recognition, but their bread and butter lineup is doing a great job. Mazda3, 6, CX-7 and CX-9. While there are those of us that will always appreciate the MX-5 and RX-8. It should be a good timing to release the rumored RX-7 in about 2011 or 2012.

I would shell out 30k+ for a next gen RX-7, much the same way people are now willing to pay a lot for the GTR. Also consider sales in other markets as well, the NA does not represent the whole world, as much as we self centered north americans would like to think. I would still be happy for Mazda if they release a next gen "world-beating, timeless-looking, true sports-car-experience" RX-7 that won't ship to NA.
________
Asiansexslave

refugeefrompistons

But how much can you afford? Yes the batches of GTR's are gonna sell above MSRP but how many batches until they are stuck on the lot? 2 years of car sales? Same problem with an extremely expensive 4th gen Rx-7. I'll express this again. 40k is the perfect cost for a new Rx-7. Granted, it is not cheap but it does allow for good performance. 40k is around the price of a fully loaded Cx-7 and 2/3 the price of the 3rd gen rx7 adjusted for inflation.

zoom44

but they already have

http://autos.yahoo.com/mazda_mx_5_mi...p-specs/?p=ext

weight for the 2008 MX-8 with the retractable hardtop and manual tranny is 2573

the next rx-7 will be built on the same basic chasis but with the new weight savings they have found and with a lighter engine and without the motors etc for a retractable hardtop. that prht, while admirably light, weighs about 60lbs total.

2500 lbs my freind

LionZoo

Mark my words, the GT-R will have a shelf life of about a year. It was pure idiocy badging that car as a Nissan.

Design1stCode2nd

I hope you are right, that means they will depreciate nicely and I can get one after 3 years. I don' think that will be the case but I can hope.

Icemark

A failure is a car that was projected to sell 100,000 for it whole lifespan and only sold 1/4 of that.

Mazda admits that the car was a **** up... they even started designing its replacement within 6 months of initial sales. (RX-01 and the P007 [which became the Evolve and then the FE]).

They read the market wrong and built something that they couldn't sell.

It is not some high art... it is selling a product.

Too make it simpler for you. If GM only made it's trucks in Pink... how many would sell? Probably sales would drop to less than 25%. Why? Because people wouldn't want the pink truck.

Same thing happened with the FD. People didn't want a super car... they bought the Miata instead... a light weight, affordable, sports car.

But the FD fanbois don't get that (well lets face it half of them, never even drove one or were near old enough to buy one new)... they think of the FD as the pinnacle, when it was really the very near death for the rotary powered sports car.

All because it was not what the first two gen RX-7's were.

actually the FD in today's dollars would be around $60K... not too many people would buy it now anymore than then...

Lets face it.. would you spend $60K on a 280hp Mazda???

something that would be soundly trounced by the 3500 lbs 2008 M3 that has 400+ HP and not even a LSD for $10K less than that. The people spending $60K on a car are not looking at a Mazda... they are looking at a Porsche, or a BMW, or a Lexus, or a Benz.

BigRed

^im not sure you are right. my dad had an fc, and loved the way it drove etc. He also envies the fds... Not saying that my statements makes every old fc owner like the fd, but it shows that a 53 old fart still likes the fd...

Icemark

I still have a FC myself... a 88 10th Anniversary Edition and have owned 6 FC's.

But only 2 FD's...

and a SA and a FB and I still own a FE.

But then I think the FD looks rather dated now too... Especially the back end.

Most people that like the FD, have never owned or driven a FD. The FE is night and day a better car.

BigRed

who cares about the look really being dated? everything will get dated, its just a matter of how quickly. frankfly, imo, i dont care about how dated it will look or looks. i care about if i like the style, not whether the style is new or not. the performance was always there though^

Rootski

iTrader: (1)

Yeah, it was such a terrible mistake they decided to keep selling it for nine years. Buncha masochists, they are.

You argument still falls short because you haven't said how exactly the FD failed to be like the first 7's. The only factor I can see is price.

Icemark

selling almost 1000 a year for 10 years is not much of a win, when the car was supposed to sell a minimum of 100,000 for it's projected life span.

Now if they had designed it to be a low volume sports car from the start...well that would have been on thing... but they didn't.

And if you know anything about the history at Mazda you would know that Leach would never have allowed Mazda to stop making the rotary power car... they kept selling the FD in small number in the home market, just so they could say they still were making a rotary powered car.

Yep, price and poor dealer support is what killed the car in North America (although I personally think that interior size also had an effect since the car didn't really fit anyone over 6' in a idea drivers position either).. see IMO it was really just a number of things... but all of them related to mis-judging the market, and design problems with the car. Then toss in poor initial reliability and dealers that couldn't service the car... (Mazda fixed that one for the FE as well, they just swap motors- I guess they learned that from Porsche after having near 50% of the first year Boxsters that had to have their engines replaced, but people still love the car).

Now if they had instead come out with a base non turbo FD version that was nearer to the $20K mark, instead of the near the $40K mark that the late 95 FDs were getting near; they probably would have kept selling the car for another 5 years here in the States. Of course it probably would have been a lot more reliable as well.

But then already the typical 1st and 2nd gen RX-7 buyer was already put off enough by the FD, and bought the 112hp Miata or some other product by another manufacture instead. See, it appears you don't get that. Sports car... not super car is what the market wanted. The first two gen RX-7s were sports cars... the FD was a super car.

The FD was too pricey for the typical RX-7 owner, and too unreliable and too small for the typical premium coupe/sports car owner.

Hench Market Failure!

Mazda figured they could place the entry level RX-7 buyer into the MX-3... but those buyers didn't want FWD. So it tanked

Mazda figured it would place the mid level RX-7 buyer into the Miata (which they did and Mazda sold 500,000 Miatas in the first 8 years).

And they figured the premium RX-7 buyer would buy the FD... but they priced the FD out of the range of the premium RX-7 buyer, so they only sold a token amount. Not even getting near the FC turbo sales figures in 10 years of production.

There is a reason that the RX-8 sells for less than $30K on average and it is not some $65K super car that all the FD fanbois claim that they want. It is because Mazda wanted to sell a car that they could make a profit on. They knew that a $65K FD replacement wouldn't sell.

It is simple commerce... not high art. It's a car.

rotarygod

The FD was the pinnacle of rotary sports cars. It was just highly overpriced. That's was it's problem and why it didn't sell. With the exception of the Miata, the 90's were the death of the Japanese sports car market in the US for over a decade. It's only starting to rebound now. The price of them just didn't work. Especially considering what power you could get from an American car for the same money.

The styling was very nice for it's day. Sure it's getting dated but only because we've been looking at it for 15 years. A more modern approach to it would have sharper lines rather than the rounded look it had.

Too many shortcuts were made with that car. The cooling system and twin turbo system are two of the biggest issues. If Mazda wants to be successful with a pure sports car that is worthy of the RX-7 name, it can't be priced too high. I personally think it should stay under $30K but $35K at the absolute max for the top model. To hit this pricepoint, they definitely wouldn't use turbos but that's fine as the new engine appears to be plenty capable. The RX-7's were all pretty light so that trend would have to continue. I don't see why they couldn't hit this goal with a 16X and a chassis based on the MX-5 platform. A 2700 lb car with 275 hp would be pretty fun. It doesn't need to have more power than the competition. They have always been less powerful.

Keep price reasonable and concentrate on reliability. That's what will make it work. A mid engined 3 rotor supercar priced at $80K+ would be a waste of time and money. It would be cool but it's not going to happen. Mazda knows this. They don't build supercars. They build fun practical cars. A fantasy rotary car will only happen if someone builds one as a private kit.

RX26b

The main flaw with keeping RX-7 pricing constant generation after generation is that you lose those enthusiasts whose salaries actually rise and who aspire to have a car with "more acceleration, more performance". Yeah, there'll always be a new flow of fresh rotary enthusiasts; but what do you do with those people who want more - send them to Nissan for a GT-R? Tell them to buy the new NSX, because we at Mazda only make sportscars in the crapbox price range? They can have a rotary car in that class, and its name can be Kabura.

Every car company out there moves their models upmarket - the examples are endless: Civic is now the size the Accords used to be only a couple gens prior; BMW 3 series used to be the tiniest of their line, now the 1 fills that slot; Lexus LS400s were a mid to high $30K car, now they're $65K to $100K(?)+. Back in the FD's production time Ferrari's 355 and 512 TR were $120K to $200K, now their successors are easily 50% more than that. Whoever said there has to be a freeze on pricing?

Having a 3 rotor exotic-car-competitor RX-7 basically comes down to 2 things: make it look the part (like Honda did with the NSX), and marketing. Incidentally, the $60,000 NSX in 1991 is a tick over $90,000 in today's money. Yet, they were able to move over 3000 units in the U.S. its first year before the market crashed for all cars of that type. You can't tell me that if Mazda basically brought out a 7 that was hotter looking, almost twice as powerful as its predecessor there wouldn't be a line of at least 15,000 disgruntled S2000 owners (that are tired of seeing their cars sit at the 240 hp barrier for a decade) who make real money and want real performance without having to shell out $110K for a 911 GT3. A line of at least as many former FD owners and interested newfound rotary enthusiasts with cash burning holes in their pockets that would love to see a $50K-ish car that can compete on so many levels with the exotics from Italy priced at $200,000 to $300,000. There are buyers, Mazda. You just need to set your sights higher than embarrassing POS Eclipses and Hyundais, for that act essentially proves nothing.

LionZoo

A couple flaws in your argument. First of all, while car size has grown, I think you'll find that adjusting for inflation the price of a Civic has stayed relatively the same throughout the years. Nobody is suggesting that Mazda sell a $30,000 rotary sports car for all of eternity, but having the next rotary car start at a shade under $30,000 makes it about the same price as that of the base RX-8 back in 2004.

While you might think there's a market for a Mazda supercar, you're applying incredibly flawed logic in your assumption. How many S2000 owners want a convertible? How many won't buy anything about Hondas? Your reasoning is like the "If I sell a pair of shoes to everyone in China" reasoning that some people have. Well, what if they don't want your shoes for whatever reason?

Mazda in the marketplace doesn't even have the brand strength of Honda and there's a reason Honda, Toyota, and Lexus created separate brands for their cars that start at higher price points. While you might assume a certain amount of people will pay for a Mazda or Nissan with supercar performance at a more bargain price, keep in mind even most sports car customers aren't real sports car people. The actual sports car buyer that buys for the driving experience is relatively small; mostly it's about the image. I know a bunch of people that have the ability to pay cash for the GT-R and not even blink at the dent that makes in their bank accounts. They can pay cash for a Ferrari as well, but they generally drive cars around the $50,000 mark. However, they express absolutely no interest at the GT-R. The way it's phrased, it's because it's a Nissan, not an Infiniti. At that price people want the status of the badge, but they also want to feel special. Going to a Nissan dealership, being subjected to Nissan service, and waiting with other people who own Nissans is not on their list of things to do. The EXPERIENCE of owning a Nissan and that of owning an Infiniti is very different. At that price point, you better have a premium brand and Mazda isn't one. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the day the GT-R was announced as a Nissan, it was doomed to sales failure.

Finally, as much as we like the rotary engine, it tends to be a negative for most car shoppers. That doesn't help when you're in premium car prices.

ASH8

^^ While I understand and agree with most of your points, here in Australia (and we have one of the largest brand/marque bases of any country in the world) Mazda is viewed very much in the middle to higher bracket for customer satisfaction, quality and image.

Sure it is not in the Mercedes, Audi, BMW or even Lexus group however it does have an extremely good reputation and image for a Japanese brand.

A Mercedes or BMW in Germany is their every day "dare I say cheap" car like a Holden or Pontiac or a Ford.

Price has a lot (if not everything) to do with image (snob value) for people with a high disposable income.

Lets face it a Lexus or Infiniti is just a glorified Toyota or Nissan with more creature comforts and features with a higher price tag sold in up market showrooms and service departments.

Mazda in the US appeals to a far younger generation, where in Australia it has been the 30-40-50 plus age group. Now though younger buyers consider a new Mazda because of their Zoom ZOOM sporty look and Fun To Drive perception and reality.

Mazda/Eunos tried the up market approach around similar times as Lexus/Toyota and Nissan/Infiniti. Both Eunos and Infinifi failed.
Not so much because of their model range but more to do with their marketing.
Toyota's Lexus was and is the sole Japanese "luxury" survivor here in Australia.

refugeefrompistons

I respect that opinion, but i again think that the cap is 45k. I mean currently a fully loaded CX-9 costs around that price. A new gen (FF? bad name...) can push the envelop in that aspect. But I without a doubt agree it must must be under the 60k adjusted the FD was.

O, and honestly, at this time and age, the car really needs to push 300 hp. Honestly, its not just that other cars are above that but just need to see that evolution of horsepower from a 1.6.

Renesis_8

Not only Australia, I think their domestic market Japan as well. Which is the most important market to a Japanese brand.

Also for Nissan, the brand image is much better in Japan, and its important to stick to the GTR's roots so thats why its branded as a Nissan. Didn't they considering it badging it as an Infiniti? That'd upset the JDM crowd, and they're more important than the rest of the world.

I gotta assume the dealership experience is MUCH better in Japan than in North America. They treat you real nice in small stores in Japan, hack even the Japanese language is very polite (Is there no swearing words in Japanese?). Besides, owning cars is a luxury in Asian countries, not an necessity, since they have real public transit systems.

ASH8, its true that only Toyota could pull it off with the Lexus brand. They are viewed as more luxurious in Asia than a Mazda. Especially in Japan with the Crown brand.

If Mazda does make a 450hp 3-rotor midengine, it could possibly sell a few in Asia and Europe, but I really doubt they'll do well in North America due to poor dealership experience and the brand strength.
________
Silver vaporizer

rotary crazy

This is something thats happening to me right now, I love rotary cars and mazda but they are not selling what im looking for, I was hopping for a R-tune rx-8 with turbo or 3 rotors but it wont happeng, every day I have to pass by a porche dealer and Im really tempted to go to the dark side, my brother has the same problem

Lets say mazda makes a 3 rotor rear engine GTR fitther, use the rx-8 chassis, better brakes better tires, re tune suspension, make 10,000 like the eunos cosmo, cant they do that?

Im sure they would sell 3,000 just in japan

is mazda going to sit back while nissan an the others get all the atention?

rotarygod

This says it all about the 3rd gen.

Mazmart

iTrader: (12)

Here's my two cents (For what little it's worth). They should give us an RX7 and RX8. The RX7 should come in two power levels, 300 and a 400 hp MPS version, NA and FI respectively. That's one of the mistakes with the FD IMHO, some would have loved to pay $25k for an NA version. If we can get the NA version for$29k and the MS version for $36k to $40k they could cause real trouble for the Z car and Corvette.

The RX8 should then be focused on dethroning the BMW3 series and causing trouble for the Lexus IS and Infiniti G35.

Paul.

refugeefrompistons

Mazda just does not have the resources to go that far. It is the fourth largest Japanese automaker, nowhere near Toyota, Nissan/Renault, and Honda in revenue and sales. Ford can't help them that much and I am sure Ford wouldn't be that pleased with not one but two sports cars from Mazda vs the Mustang.

Renesis_8

That would make an interesting lineup.

But I think the 8's chassis is too small to turn it into a luxury sports car/sedan.
________
Head Shop

zoom44

why? its already got more rear room than the 3 series

Mazmart

iTrader: (12)

Amen!!

It's not that far of a stretch for the 8 to compete in that market. As long as it's not being targeted there, it will be viewed as a somewhat lame sports car wanna be for kids. With an RX7 back in the equation you can position the 8 where it should be, as a classier more up-scale competitor. That, in turn, helps raise the entire brand image and even the image of the rotary.

Paul.