R&T: Mazda wants to make the MX-5 lighter, not more powerful
R&T: Mazda wants to make the MX-5 lighter, not more powerful
I wasn't a Mazda fan when I bought my RX-8. Pretty sure I am now, and for a damn sight more reasons than my car.
Mazda Engineers Want to Build a Lighter Miata, Not a More Powerful One
"[A turbocharger] really doesn't fit in with the ethos of that car," Coleman said in an interview with Road & Track. "There's plenty of room to try to make the car lighter and better that way."
As for how or when we might see an even lighter version of the Miata, Coleman said that the details are all still very much up in the air. "We honestly don't know how, but the long-term plan for the car is to keep taking weight off somehow—hoping we'll find the technology to do that at a reasonable cost," he said.
"It could be that we just figure out a way to make all the cars lighter," he continued. "Next time you see a facelift, it could come with a haircut and a shave too."
Mazda Engineers Want to Build a Lighter Miata, Not a More Powerful One
Originally Posted by Chris Perkins, R&T
"[A turbocharger] really doesn't fit in with the ethos of that car," Coleman said in an interview with Road & Track. "There's plenty of room to try to make the car lighter and better that way."
As for how or when we might see an even lighter version of the Miata, Coleman said that the details are all still very much up in the air. "We honestly don't know how, but the long-term plan for the car is to keep taking weight off somehow—hoping we'll find the technology to do that at a reasonable cost," he said.
"It could be that we just figure out a way to make all the cars lighter," he continued. "Next time you see a facelift, it could come with a haircut and a shave too."
Registered
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,134
Likes: 1
From: Sheboygan Falls, Wisconsin
Why is Mazda always implying you can only have one or the other, and not a car that is lightweight AND powerful? Why can't there be a balance between the 2?
Last edited by 77mjd; May 12, 2016 at 11:02 AM.
Registered
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 273
Likes: 17
From: DFW TX
They specifically explained this, though. Two things:
1. Big power adders also add weight.
2. More power means you need bigger brakes and a stiffer chassis, which means... more weight.
Registered
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
These are my assumptions:
The engineering part has to do with the mission of the car and the driving experience it delivers. Being nimble, high strung, and responsive to driver inputs is the top priority. With turbos come lag and while the added torque make it easier to drive it out of corners, you can't explore the upper half of the rev range very often on the street so the car would have to be driven with some restraint.
The marketing/business part is the added CO2 emissions wouldn't jive with the Skyactiv motif. However, I suspect that one day (sooner rather than later), they'll follow FIAT's footsteps and add a downsized turbo engine.
The engineering part has to do with the mission of the car and the driving experience it delivers. Being nimble, high strung, and responsive to driver inputs is the top priority. With turbos come lag and while the added torque make it easier to drive it out of corners, you can't explore the upper half of the rev range very often on the street so the car would have to be driven with some restraint.
The marketing/business part is the added CO2 emissions wouldn't jive with the Skyactiv motif. However, I suspect that one day (sooner rather than later), they'll follow FIAT's footsteps and add a downsized turbo engine.
My problem with this is that they have no idea how to make it lighter. The engineer said they "hope" they find new technology. This seems like they are going to pour R&D money chasing weight savings. Doesn't sound like a good idea when it's relatively easy to add power. I'd rather see them spend that R&D on the next rotary engine
Registered
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,134
Likes: 1
From: Sheboygan Falls, Wisconsin
So they couldn't have put the 2.5 in the new MX-5 without having to add a lot of weight? That's BS. I'm not saying their cars need tons more power, but there's room to do better than they are without having to sacrifice anything.
There are already plenty of cars for people who are okay with the compromises that turbos introduce. Probably even more than that, given that damn near every car is turbocharged these days.
If you're buying an MX-5 (or an RX-8), you're not buying it for its dominant numbers or straight-line speed. You're buying it for its reflexes, its behavior, and its ability to make fun accessible. Those things are rare these days. They're also what make other Mazdas worth buying against their competitors.
I know for a fact that I can't speak for everyone here, but I hope the modestly-powered, narrow-tired, turbo-free MX-5 is here to stay. And I hope Mazda brings back something like the RX-8 so those of us who need back seats can have the same fun, because everyone else seems to be moving in the opposite direction.
If you're buying an MX-5 (or an RX-8), you're not buying it for its dominant numbers or straight-line speed. You're buying it for its reflexes, its behavior, and its ability to make fun accessible. Those things are rare these days. They're also what make other Mazdas worth buying against their competitors.
I know for a fact that I can't speak for everyone here, but I hope the modestly-powered, narrow-tired, turbo-free MX-5 is here to stay. And I hope Mazda brings back something like the RX-8 so those of us who need back seats can have the same fun, because everyone else seems to be moving in the opposite direction.
Previously, all engines in a given family had the same external dimensions, because they were really just the same block with different internal machining and parts. Skyactiv engines are made differently (CNC machined blocks etc., IIRC), so that the combustion chambers all have similar dimensions and geometry. Bigger displacement therefore means a physically bigger and heavier engine.
So, because the MX-5 was actually designed around the 1.5, and the 2.0 is already shoehorned in.... an even bigger engine wouldn't really be feasible.
Another thing to keep in mind: in a car that weighs just over 2300 lbs, adding even just 50 lbs to the front end would make a noticeable difference. Some reviews are already saying the 1.5L car is arguably better than the 2.0 because of its lighter front end, and that it's a shame we don't have that option in the US. I don't think an even heavier engine would move things in the right direction. This ain't a Mustang we're talking about.
Registered
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,134
Likes: 1
From: Sheboygan Falls, Wisconsin
I just wish there was something that could be done to make these cars quicker off the line. In cars like the MX-5 and RX-8 it's the lack of torque that bothers me more than anything.
Super Moderator
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 10,880
Likes: 339
From: Australia
Yep the good old 'Power to Weight Ratio'...which is never discussed much by the so called 'expert' journalists these days...
As for the MX-5 well it is already very light weight wise.
As New Yorker said, by quoting Australian Colin Chapman.
But can also be meaningless if the owner/driver is personally overweight, every 10 Kg's or 22 Lbs added to any car makes a huge difference to handling and power and speed and times.
Mazda for ''a'' mass market and automotive product is way out in front when compared to any other mainstream car brand, and good journalists are noticing the difference in Mazda's superb handling and track performance.
Mazda are going the extra mile (and cost) with light weight High Strength Steel and SHSS.
As for the MX-5 well it is already very light weight wise.
As New Yorker said, by quoting Australian Colin Chapman.
But can also be meaningless if the owner/driver is personally overweight, every 10 Kg's or 22 Lbs added to any car makes a huge difference to handling and power and speed and times.
Mazda for ''a'' mass market and automotive product is way out in front when compared to any other mainstream car brand, and good journalists are noticing the difference in Mazda's superb handling and track performance.
Mazda are going the extra mile (and cost) with light weight High Strength Steel and SHSS.
Super Moderator
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 10,880
Likes: 339
From: Australia
Also not related but wanted to get my 10,000 post up...
Mitsubishi Motors (Japan) looks like it is being bought out (as a controlling interest) by Nissan Japan @ 34%.
Remember Renault (France) purchased controlling interest in Nissan Japan a few years ago.....so....@ 43%.
Mitsubishi Motors (Japan) looks like it is being bought out (as a controlling interest) by Nissan Japan @ 34%.
Remember Renault (France) purchased controlling interest in Nissan Japan a few years ago.....so....@ 43%.
05 GT
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
155hp is what you'd expect from an early 90s car.. I'd agree the 2.5l ought to go in there nicely. I'm also not sure it'd even actually weigh more? What is it, slightly longer stroke? That doesn't necessarily translate to an appreciable weight gain...
Rockie Mountain Newbie
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,601
Likes: 29
From: Denver, CO
And the 2017 Cayman now has 300 hp from a turbo flat 4.
The bar keeps moving while Mazda twiddles it's thumbs.
BC.
The ND MX-5 represents a LOT of effort and development, and it is what it is on purpose. All well and good to argue that it misses the mark somehow; I can see that argument even though I disagree strongly. But to say Mazda has been lazy or complacent is just objectively false.
Regarding Porsche....
Not only do they have VAG's resources behind them, but they also have HUGE economies of scale. They make all their sports cars with the same basic set of parts and tooling, and their other vehicles share a lot with VWs and Audis.
Mazda, meanwhile, is a tiny independent company. They have the know-how to make a Porsche rival, but no way in hell could they do it for less money without serious compromises. The last Mazda that tried was the FD, and we all know how that went.
As an aside... If you have to compare a car to a Cayman to make it look like it's coming up short, that's not exactly an insult. Just sayin'.
Not only do they have VAG's resources behind them, but they also have HUGE economies of scale. They make all their sports cars with the same basic set of parts and tooling, and their other vehicles share a lot with VWs and Audis.
Mazda, meanwhile, is a tiny independent company. They have the know-how to make a Porsche rival, but no way in hell could they do it for less money without serious compromises. The last Mazda that tried was the FD, and we all know how that went.
As an aside... If you have to compare a car to a Cayman to make it look like it's coming up short, that's not exactly an insult. Just sayin'.
Last edited by IamFodi; May 13, 2016 at 06:37 PM.
Rockie Mountain Newbie
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,601
Likes: 29
From: Denver, CO
The ND MX-5 is a great car, for someone looking for a fun, SMALL roadster.
The ND MX-5 is not a full on sports car for shoppers in the market like myself.
That's why last year when I was in the market for that shiny new sports car, I had no options at Mazda, so I went knocking on Porsche door for my custom ordered 2015 Cayman.
Yes, I know Mazda has all the skills and know-how to build a Grade A sports car, but they are reluctant to do it in this current market. And I can understand why. The sports car market is tight, and slowing.
We know Mazda has the ability to take a platform like the ND, make it slightly longer so that the cabin has just a bit more room in it, give it a tighter suspension and make it a damn coupe. We all have owned RX-8's. We all know that they CAN do this.
But, they don't want to.
The only car in the market the above car would directly compete with, the BRZ/FRS, sold a combined 15k cars in the US market last year. Add an additional 2100 cars to cover the Canadian market. They would have to put the 2.5 Sky-G in it to compete with that car.
If they put the Turbo Sky-G engine from the CX-9 into that car, they would then be able to compete with the Nissan 370Z, which sold nearly 7400 cars in the US, and under 700 cars in Canada. But we know that Mazda will not put that engine into a car body, they were reluctant to build that engine for the CX-9 in the first place. They can't certify the Sky-D engine for the US market, so that's out.
So what is Mazda to do?
They've boxed themselves into a small little corner in the market place, and refuse to either expand their lineup to get other buyers, or put the more powerful engines into their current cars to get the power hungry buyers who are willing to spend a bit more money.
Mazda doesn't want enthusiast drivers right now, it's that simple.
They are willing to stretch their arm out just a little bit for the small roadster crowd, but right now, as far as anyone can tell from their product roadmap, and recent releases, they just want to be a simple car company that has an odd customer base of people willing to pay a very small premium for entry level cars and suv's in the market place.
And even that strategy is plagued with slow product releases.
The new CX-9 should have been on the showroom floors at the end of fall/beginning of winter last year. The MX-5 should have been on the showroom at the end of winter, beginning of Spring last year. The Mazda CX-3 sales can't hold a candle to the last several years of sales that the Mazda 2 had, yet they refuse to sell the Mazda 2 in North America. What the hell?
Regardless, Mazda doesn't make a sports car I want to buy right now.
And I already have my CX-5 and Fiat 500 Abarth, so I'm happy in those 2 purchase segments, though my wife is very interested to see the Fiat 124 Abarth when it hits the dealer down the road from us.
It's 9.7 miles to the closest Mazda dealer, but 16.5 miles to the closest Fiat dealer. I'm looking forward to the day when I can test drive both the MX-5 and the 124 back to back.
BC.
The ND MX-5 is not a full on sports car for shoppers in the market like myself.
That's why last year when I was in the market for that shiny new sports car, I had no options at Mazda, so I went knocking on Porsche door for my custom ordered 2015 Cayman.
Yes, I know Mazda has all the skills and know-how to build a Grade A sports car, but they are reluctant to do it in this current market. And I can understand why. The sports car market is tight, and slowing.
We know Mazda has the ability to take a platform like the ND, make it slightly longer so that the cabin has just a bit more room in it, give it a tighter suspension and make it a damn coupe. We all have owned RX-8's. We all know that they CAN do this.
But, they don't want to.
The only car in the market the above car would directly compete with, the BRZ/FRS, sold a combined 15k cars in the US market last year. Add an additional 2100 cars to cover the Canadian market. They would have to put the 2.5 Sky-G in it to compete with that car.
If they put the Turbo Sky-G engine from the CX-9 into that car, they would then be able to compete with the Nissan 370Z, which sold nearly 7400 cars in the US, and under 700 cars in Canada. But we know that Mazda will not put that engine into a car body, they were reluctant to build that engine for the CX-9 in the first place. They can't certify the Sky-D engine for the US market, so that's out.
So what is Mazda to do?
They've boxed themselves into a small little corner in the market place, and refuse to either expand their lineup to get other buyers, or put the more powerful engines into their current cars to get the power hungry buyers who are willing to spend a bit more money.
Mazda doesn't want enthusiast drivers right now, it's that simple.
They are willing to stretch their arm out just a little bit for the small roadster crowd, but right now, as far as anyone can tell from their product roadmap, and recent releases, they just want to be a simple car company that has an odd customer base of people willing to pay a very small premium for entry level cars and suv's in the market place.
And even that strategy is plagued with slow product releases.
The new CX-9 should have been on the showroom floors at the end of fall/beginning of winter last year. The MX-5 should have been on the showroom at the end of winter, beginning of Spring last year. The Mazda CX-3 sales can't hold a candle to the last several years of sales that the Mazda 2 had, yet they refuse to sell the Mazda 2 in North America. What the hell?
Regardless, Mazda doesn't make a sports car I want to buy right now.
And I already have my CX-5 and Fiat 500 Abarth, so I'm happy in those 2 purchase segments, though my wife is very interested to see the Fiat 124 Abarth when it hits the dealer down the road from us.
It's 9.7 miles to the closest Mazda dealer, but 16.5 miles to the closest Fiat dealer. I'm looking forward to the day when I can test drive both the MX-5 and the 124 back to back.
BC.
Registered
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,134
Likes: 1
From: Sheboygan Falls, Wisconsin
The ND MX-5 is a great car, for someone looking for a fun, SMALL roadster.
The ND MX-5 is not a full on sports car for shoppers in the market like myself.
That's why last year when I was in the market for that shiny new sports car, I had no options at Mazda, so I went knocking on Porsche door for my custom ordered 2015 Cayman.
Yes, I know Mazda has all the skills and know-how to build a Grade A sports car, but they are reluctant to do it in this current market. And I can understand why. The sports car market is tight, and slowing.
We know Mazda has the ability to take a platform like the ND, make it slightly longer so that the cabin has just a bit more room in it, give it a tighter suspension and make it a damn coupe. We all have owned RX-8's. We all know that they CAN do this.
But, they don't want to.
The only car in the market the above car would directly compete with, the BRZ/FRS, sold a combined 15k cars in the US market last year. Add an additional 2100 cars to cover the Canadian market. They would have to put the 2.5 Sky-G in it to compete with that car.
If they put the Turbo Sky-G engine from the CX-9 into that car, they would then be able to compete with the Nissan 370Z, which sold nearly 7400 cars in the US, and under 700 cars in Canada. But we know that Mazda will not put that engine into a car body, they were reluctant to build that engine for the CX-9 in the first place. They can't certify the Sky-D engine for the US market, so that's out.
So what is Mazda to do?
They've boxed themselves into a small little corner in the market place, and refuse to either expand their lineup to get other buyers, or put the more powerful engines into their current cars to get the power hungry buyers who are willing to spend a bit more money.
Mazda doesn't want enthusiast drivers right now, it's that simple.
They are willing to stretch their arm out just a little bit for the small roadster crowd, but right now, as far as anyone can tell from their product roadmap, and recent releases, they just want to be a simple car company that has an odd customer base of people willing to pay a very small premium for entry level cars and suv's in the market place.
And even that strategy is plagued with slow product releases.
The new CX-9 should have been on the showroom floors at the end of fall/beginning of winter last year. The MX-5 should have been on the showroom at the end of winter, beginning of Spring last year. The Mazda CX-3 sales can't hold a candle to the last several years of sales that the Mazda 2 had, yet they refuse to sell the Mazda 2 in North America. What the hell?
Regardless, Mazda doesn't make a sports car I want to buy right now.
And I already have my CX-5 and Fiat 500 Abarth, so I'm happy in those 2 purchase segments, though my wife is very interested to see the Fiat 124 Abarth when it hits the dealer down the road from us.
It's 9.7 miles to the closest Mazda dealer, but 16.5 miles to the closest Fiat dealer. I'm looking forward to the day when I can test drive both the MX-5 and the 124 back to back.
BC.
The ND MX-5 is not a full on sports car for shoppers in the market like myself.
That's why last year when I was in the market for that shiny new sports car, I had no options at Mazda, so I went knocking on Porsche door for my custom ordered 2015 Cayman.
Yes, I know Mazda has all the skills and know-how to build a Grade A sports car, but they are reluctant to do it in this current market. And I can understand why. The sports car market is tight, and slowing.
We know Mazda has the ability to take a platform like the ND, make it slightly longer so that the cabin has just a bit more room in it, give it a tighter suspension and make it a damn coupe. We all have owned RX-8's. We all know that they CAN do this.
But, they don't want to.
The only car in the market the above car would directly compete with, the BRZ/FRS, sold a combined 15k cars in the US market last year. Add an additional 2100 cars to cover the Canadian market. They would have to put the 2.5 Sky-G in it to compete with that car.
If they put the Turbo Sky-G engine from the CX-9 into that car, they would then be able to compete with the Nissan 370Z, which sold nearly 7400 cars in the US, and under 700 cars in Canada. But we know that Mazda will not put that engine into a car body, they were reluctant to build that engine for the CX-9 in the first place. They can't certify the Sky-D engine for the US market, so that's out.
So what is Mazda to do?
They've boxed themselves into a small little corner in the market place, and refuse to either expand their lineup to get other buyers, or put the more powerful engines into their current cars to get the power hungry buyers who are willing to spend a bit more money.
Mazda doesn't want enthusiast drivers right now, it's that simple.
They are willing to stretch their arm out just a little bit for the small roadster crowd, but right now, as far as anyone can tell from their product roadmap, and recent releases, they just want to be a simple car company that has an odd customer base of people willing to pay a very small premium for entry level cars and suv's in the market place.
And even that strategy is plagued with slow product releases.
The new CX-9 should have been on the showroom floors at the end of fall/beginning of winter last year. The MX-5 should have been on the showroom at the end of winter, beginning of Spring last year. The Mazda CX-3 sales can't hold a candle to the last several years of sales that the Mazda 2 had, yet they refuse to sell the Mazda 2 in North America. What the hell?
Regardless, Mazda doesn't make a sports car I want to buy right now.
And I already have my CX-5 and Fiat 500 Abarth, so I'm happy in those 2 purchase segments, though my wife is very interested to see the Fiat 124 Abarth when it hits the dealer down the road from us.
It's 9.7 miles to the closest Mazda dealer, but 16.5 miles to the closest Fiat dealer. I'm looking forward to the day when I can test drive both the MX-5 and the 124 back to back.
BC.
Unfortunately, I think you are 100% correct. As most people who post on here want a full on sports car from Mazda I guess it's just time to face the fact that Mazda doesn't have any intention of building one and they don't want our business. I've struggled with this personally since I love my RX-8 so much, and I would have thought after 12 years, I'd be able to upgrade to something better from Mazda.
So how did you spec your Cayman? I've been thinking about a Cayman for a couple of years now and it's probably just time go pull the trigger. It's really the only logical car that is similar enough and an upgrade to the RX-8.