Anyone, PO'd about MS 3
03-28-2006, 10:13 AM
#76
Originally Posted by DailyDriver2k5
How so? I am sure the 3 and 6(excluding the V6) doesn't share any mechanical parts just like any other manufacture FWD variants. BMW makes a killing selling RWD cars , so what is there niche to sucess?
03-28-2006, 10:15 AM
#77
^noob
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: socal
Posts: 1,340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DailyDriver2k5
How so? I am sure the 3 and 6(excluding the V6) doesn't share any mechanical parts just like any other manufacture FWD variants. BMW makes a killing selling RWD cars , so what is there niche to sucess?
03-28-2006, 10:22 AM
#78
Glitchy Rotary Madness
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BMW's secret is to build a competent car, price it out of the reach of the regular folk, then market it at the image-concious guillible well-heeled consumer. Just like Benz, only I think the BMWs drive better.
The sick part is, I've driven a few 3-series, and while competent, they just don't feel like a sports car. Nice, solid, fast, quiet, tight, but heavy and a touch lethargic at the wheel. Still better than a benz or lexus. But nowhere near the "dancing with an angel on the head of a pin" feeling you get from a proper sporstcar.
Even their sports cars feel like a sedan...
The sick part is, I've driven a few 3-series, and while competent, they just don't feel like a sports car. Nice, solid, fast, quiet, tight, but heavy and a touch lethargic at the wheel. Still better than a benz or lexus. But nowhere near the "dancing with an angel on the head of a pin" feeling you get from a proper sporstcar.
Even their sports cars feel like a sedan...
03-28-2006, 02:07 PM
#79
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plus, even if Mazda did build a 3 series competitor, no way they could sell it for the same price as the current 3 series since lots of people would pick the BMW for the cachet value.
I used to own a 3 series and missinmahseven is right, they're tight and sporty for a sedan and miles beyond things like accords and camrys, but they're not sports cars. If I remember right, the new 330's are pushing 3500 lbs nowdays.
I used to own a 3 series and missinmahseven is right, they're tight and sporty for a sedan and miles beyond things like accords and camrys, but they're not sports cars. If I remember right, the new 330's are pushing 3500 lbs nowdays.
03-28-2006, 03:07 PM
#80
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Winnetka, IL
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The cost savings that come from FWD are not just in parts sharing. By putting the entire drivetrain in one small sub-component, the most difficult to manufacture and assemble parts of the car can be engineered separately.
It's far more efficient to manufacture a FWD car, but the drawbacks are significant, also. FWD cars are more prone to vibration, they are not as smooth, it's easy to unexpectedly exceed their limits, etc. These are the things that are leading manufacturers back to RWD since the customer wants a more comfortable vehicle and is willing to pay for it.
It's far more efficient to manufacture a FWD car, but the drawbacks are significant, also. FWD cars are more prone to vibration, they are not as smooth, it's easy to unexpectedly exceed their limits, etc. These are the things that are leading manufacturers back to RWD since the customer wants a more comfortable vehicle and is willing to pay for it.
03-28-2006, 03:31 PM
#81
Glitchy Rotary Madness
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^ that's how most FWD cars feel to me -- like the drivetrain doesn't belong with the car. o.O
Another reason for the sudden FWD thing was -- the typical driver, Joe and Jane Muggle and their 3.275 kids and 1.25 dogs is too .. unsaavy.. (would willfully ignorant be too strong a phrase?) to know how to properly handle a RWD car, especially a higher-powered RWD car. FWD was safer for Them.
Now we got computer controlled everything. A hot RWD car is now less of a risk for Joe and Jane Muggle.
They'll still wreck 'em, but not as easily.
Another reason for the sudden FWD thing was -- the typical driver, Joe and Jane Muggle and their 3.275 kids and 1.25 dogs is too .. unsaavy.. (would willfully ignorant be too strong a phrase?) to know how to properly handle a RWD car, especially a higher-powered RWD car. FWD was safer for Them.
Now we got computer controlled everything. A hot RWD car is now less of a risk for Joe and Jane Muggle.
They'll still wreck 'em, but not as easily.
03-28-2006, 05:01 PM
#82
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ely, UK
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a 1993 RS Escort... It torque steers like a mother. I really have to fight with the wheel when I get on it hard. I'm sure something is loose or something, because it is a 150 hp engine with 140 torque or so... But yeah, still goes all over (really bad on bumpy British roads).
I think most (90% or so) want FWD. If it snows, they don't want to worry about sliding all over. FWD has less driveline loss, and (not sure about this, but whatever) probably gets better gas mileage too. People don't want sports cars. They want dependable cars that can handle any conditions. That is what the Mazda 3 is. A car for all people.
I think most (90% or so) want FWD. If it snows, they don't want to worry about sliding all over. FWD has less driveline loss, and (not sure about this, but whatever) probably gets better gas mileage too. People don't want sports cars. They want dependable cars that can handle any conditions. That is what the Mazda 3 is. A car for all people.
03-28-2006, 06:16 PM
#84
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bloody hell a kia sedona is has more horsepower and torque than the RX8, but none of us are lining up to get that are we.
i doubt a MS3 will beat a RX8 on any autocross track. hell the 8'll even give the MS6 a run for its money - maybe even win more than a few circuits. the 8 has handling superior to all these cars. even the host of top gear said it was the best car he had driven so far on the show. it tied the BMW M3 on the autocross course as well, but i guess a lot of ya'll are more concerned with paper races vs actual races. several RX8s are winning and placing high in autocrosses all over the country - yet it's hp and torque numbers make you think it's a lesser car??? it's about who crosses the finish line first, not what's under the hood. i doubt anyone here has taken the car's performance to its absolute limits yet, so don't complain about power until you have.
not to mention both the MS6 & MS3 look like every other car on the road. i love the fact that my car is a head turner, and i get complements on it every day.
i doubt a MS3 will beat a RX8 on any autocross track. hell the 8'll even give the MS6 a run for its money - maybe even win more than a few circuits. the 8 has handling superior to all these cars. even the host of top gear said it was the best car he had driven so far on the show. it tied the BMW M3 on the autocross course as well, but i guess a lot of ya'll are more concerned with paper races vs actual races. several RX8s are winning and placing high in autocrosses all over the country - yet it's hp and torque numbers make you think it's a lesser car??? it's about who crosses the finish line first, not what's under the hood. i doubt anyone here has taken the car's performance to its absolute limits yet, so don't complain about power until you have.
not to mention both the MS6 & MS3 look like every other car on the road. i love the fact that my car is a head turner, and i get complements on it every day.
03-28-2006, 06:48 PM
#85
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,505
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Japan8
Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Willis?
Same difference. The mid-year released RX-8 (in NA) was a 2004, as was the fall release of the Mazda3 (in NA). Released early, not a different model year, and we ARE talking in terms of model year when it come to lifecycle.
And... it doesn't matter anyway. Mazda is pushing capacity to produce what they do in Japan (the RX-8 and Mazda2 are in the same plant... remember the plant fire). Given a business decision of going with the MS3 first or MS8... it's a no-brainer. Especially since less development is needed reusing the MZR DISI turbo engine (which also helps to futher amortize the development costs of that engine).
Sorry Ike, try again.
Same difference. The mid-year released RX-8 (in NA) was a 2004, as was the fall release of the Mazda3 (in NA). Released early, not a different model year, and we ARE talking in terms of model year when it come to lifecycle.
And... it doesn't matter anyway. Mazda is pushing capacity to produce what they do in Japan (the RX-8 and Mazda2 are in the same plant... remember the plant fire). Given a business decision of going with the MS3 first or MS8... it's a no-brainer. Especially since less development is needed reusing the MZR DISI turbo engine (which also helps to futher amortize the development costs of that engine).
Sorry Ike, try again.
03-28-2006, 07:54 PM
#88
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ZoomZoomH
also, fwd cars are still more cost effective to make than rwd cars..... need to make fwd cars if want to keep prices competitive....
03-28-2006, 07:58 PM
#89
Originally Posted by Japan8
More like FWD made great sense in Japan and Europe where you have tiny footprint cars (on tiny roads) that need to maximize interior space. FWD simply packages better than RWD, 4WD, and traditional AWD. The lack of a driev shaft and transmission running down the middle of the car (think of your RX-8) leaves more room for occupants.
03-28-2006, 08:01 PM
#90
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by StealthFox
pizz0wn3d!11111111uno
And Ike's comment wasn't a strawman argument?
The premise originally wasn't just that the 3 was released first, but that it has a higher priority. After Ike pointed out about the release dates (which I am still not sure are correct for JDM), I acknowledged that, but it still didn't invalid the whole argument.
03-28-2006, 08:05 PM
#91
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ZoomZoomH
agreed, for normal passenger car duties (aka point a to b, plus light duty cargo), fwd is actually the most 'efficient' design for a car...
03-28-2006, 08:09 PM
#93
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Japan8
Right.
And Ike's comment wasn't a strawman argument? The premise originally wasn't just that the 3 was released first, but that it has a higher priority. After Ike pointed out about the release dates (which I am still not sure are correct for JDM), I acknowledged that, but it still didn't invalid the whole argument.
And Ike's comment wasn't a strawman argument?
The premise originally wasn't just that the 3 was released first, but that it has a higher priority. After Ike pointed out about the release dates (which I am still not sure are correct for JDM), I acknowledged that, but it still didn't invalid the whole argument.
03-28-2006, 08:30 PM
#94
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,505
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i have to agree with ike(i hate doing this) but it makes much more logical sense to make a ms3 instead of a ms8.
a ms3 has a few major advantages
1. much larger market
2. ability to accept carrover R&D making it a much cheaper project
3. ability to transfer R&D spent on this project to others(specifically engine related)
a ms3 has a few major advantages
1. much larger market
2. ability to accept carrover R&D making it a much cheaper project
3. ability to transfer R&D spent on this project to others(specifically engine related)
03-28-2006, 08:58 PM
#95
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
I think you actually agreed with my argument. I was simply pointing out that they didn't decide to do the Mazda 3 because it was due and the RX-8 wasn't, I think they did it because it made more sense from a business standpoint. I also don't think we'll ever see a MS 8, but that's for a different thread.
I guess I just wanted to point out that it isn't because the RX-8 is a failure or whatever. Even if the RX-8 had sold better, I think the decision would have been the same... even in that situation the business case for a MS3 is still stronger.
03-28-2006, 08:59 PM
#96
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by StealthFox
i was saying your arguement was stronger than Ikes(of course in a rediculous and satyrically humorous way) not the other way around 
03-28-2006, 10:27 PM
#97
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,505
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Japan8
Did I? Did you? Kinda sorta...
I guess I just wanted to point out that it isn't because the RX-8 is a failure or whatever. Even if the RX-8 had sold better, I think the decision would have been the same... even in that situation the business case for a MS3 is still stronger.
I guess I just wanted to point out that it isn't because the RX-8 is a failure or whatever. Even if the RX-8 had sold better, I think the decision would have been the same... even in that situation the business case for a MS3 is still stronger.
03-29-2006, 06:13 PM
#100
Originally Posted by StealthFox
...it appeals to too niche of a crowd and they wont be able to make enough profit to justify r&d costs.