Spin9k

The "We truly haven’t decided,” comment coming in 12/09 virtually guarantees no new car for several years. Without even a body style decided...wow... there's a long road ahead.

One can only imagine what Nissan, Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, Ford, BMW. etc., will have in production by then as sports car competition. Talk about being unfashionably late to the party...

So we get a warmed over (evolutionary) rotary with a mild bump in power/torque and some yet-to-be-determined sportie style.... geee... can't hardly wait to hear more....

HiFlite999

iTrader: (2)

One aspect of this that hasn't been discussed is the totally modern factory that presently produces ~7 models (including the RX8) on 3 production lines. I'm not saying that they can make money selling 5,000 a year, but I'm sure they don't have to make 50,000/year to come out ahead on a car that isn't updated very often. (This factory was totally copied by Ford for a new plant opening in Mexico.) The office revolution caused by cheap computers is well underway on production lines too.

For example, our design department can now send 3D "blueprints" directly to our machine tools. The machine operator loads the raw stock, pushes the button, and the part comes out. This has made for us a huge change in what we can afford to do. The cost per item for 1, 10, or 100 identical parts becomes remarkably similar.

The Mazda production line does essentially the same thing on a larger scale. Push 'the button' and a Mazda3 goes down the line; push another and it's an RX-8. Just as the internet and cheap computers redefined the economies of scale for book publication and distribution for Amazon, so will related technologies redefine "scale" for manufacturing. A great book for those interested in such things is "The Long Tail".

Huey52

iTrader: (2)

^ Thats a very good point. Modern CAD/CAM facilitates much faster design throughput to manufacturing and reduces re-tooling turn around time. So, once a design is approved it really doesn't take anywhere near what it used to, to bring it to model fruition (1.5 years on average now). The rub here appears to be that the 16X design itself is not ready for prime time.

If they make my personal 2012 deadline they'll get my money. If they don't, they won't. Simple.

RIWWP

iTrader: (2)

Interesting conclusion we can draw here...

If the world is supposed to end in 2012, just maybe it is a 16x Forced Induction Mazdaspeed Rotary that does it....

Huey52

iTrader: (2)

^ LOL I want to go out on the high road, whether that be a 16X or not ...

MattMPS

very good point

in order to "no decision made yet"....what about a launch of BOTH rx-7 (2 seater light sports 100% performance ) AND rx-9 ,basically a bigger 8 ,more "adult" and real 4 seater w/freestyle doors ...... same size of A5 or 3 series coupe?


just dreams?

RIWWP

iTrader: (2)

If they opt for 2 rotary models (ignoring the rotary hybrid MPV overseas), then I would expect 1 would be an RX-5 or RX-7 with a similar platform to the MX-5, probably 2-seat coup, with a redesign of the 8 to freshen it up and with the new rotary in it as the other.

I also expect that regardless, even if they go with a 'larger' version, it will lose weight compared to the existing 8, since that is a big driver within Mazda right now. I would also expect that any rotary offering will be NA, with the only FI option being a MS trim or model. They can't make FI standard and keep the price where 'common' people would buy it. Offering a FI MS version will capture that upper market quiet easily, and be the one every magazine would review (no one reviews the 3, just the MS3), without losing the sales of the lower priced standard NA version.

Pricing too high would kill it, and power costs more than anything else. Nice to dream about, but the 'standard' model can't have too much and still be affordable.


...Unless they went with a solid beam rear axle, blocky looks, terrible ride quality, terrible interior quality, and an exodus of class.

Spin9k

I don't buy that. The MSRP on the MS3 is what...$23,195. Aside from the engine itself, I doubt the manufacturing cost of the body and components is significantly different...4 wheels, suspension, interior and all the other stuff is pretty straightforward. The base rotary engine may cost slightly more to make, not really sure, but a low pressure turbo certainly isn't costly.

Already the top of the line 8 MSRP @$31,930 is $9K more than a MS3, that price range should allow a turbo wo/significant price pressure...IF they wanted to put one in the car. If there's any reason they don't it would be likely economy related - not price related.

arghx7

There's a lot of almost fixed cost involved regardless of the size of the turbo. It has to be certified for emissions. It will require a stronger drivetrain due to the increased torque. It will need a completely different ECU calibration and different engine internals (usually 4 port and lower compression rotors).

Spin9k

As did the MS3 over the 3, and they're selling it for $23 large, only a couple grand over the top std 3.

RIWWP

iTrader: (2)

You are still forgetting that power, in any form, costs money. And power for a piston engine is significantly cheaper than power for a rotary. I can't see it adding LESS than $5,000 premium, and that is an absolute minimum. Even that would immediately bump it's price range into corvette class competition, where it would still be seen as underpowered compared to it's competition.

You aren't paying for 232hp at $31,930. You are paying for the chassis, the suspension, the braking, and the 'fun' for most of that, with a token thrown in for the power. There is a reason that the $23,945 MS3 is $9,000 cheaper. It doesn't have the money spent on world class handling characteristics. Mazda had to drop those and put the money into the power in order to keep the price down that far. The right way to look at this is the power premium that the MS3 costs over the standard 3, $20,290. $3,655. Then you will have to consider the cost of FI on a rotary is more expensive than the cost of FI on a piston pumper, and bump the price to a bare minimum of $5,000. Then add that to the $31,930. You are a few bucks shy of $37,000

If you say that the $9k price gap from the MS3 to a GT/R3 8 is plenty of room for the cost of factory FI, then you are saying that the 8 is overpriced as it is right now.

And it isn't.

I say again, the only way they can increase the power to 'competitive' levels without going higher than the 8 already is, is to go ...
Or all of the above.

Any of which run completely contrary to Mazda's philosophy. They simply won't do that. Mazda has shown time and time again that they prefer to spend money on things OTHER than power. Power will be the first thing to go every time with them.


(And personally, I am 100% ok with that)

Spin9k

Oh contrare, mon frier - no one is paying list for an 8, in fact there are hefty rebates to the tune of $5,000 on the RX-8!

http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...=RX8&zip=03840.

Ergo, it most certainly is overpriced at its fake MSRP - and Mazda is telling us that explicitly. Sorry - your theories simply don't hold water.

Mazmart

iTrader: (12)

Forced induction and naturally aspirated would be a good idea for a future rotary car. That would possibly have been better for the 3rd gen as well. I suspect they could have sold a lot more if there was a lower powered version available as well with a reduced price.

Paul.

RIWWP

iTrader: (2)

Sigh.

You are falling prey to the biggest analysis mistake people make.

You aren't applying factors to both sides.

No one is paying list for the MS3 either, you can get them for $19,xxx (16% drop vs the Rx-8's 15% drop)

"MSRP" is overpriced on EVERY car. Not just the 8. I wasn't calling that out on the 8, because I would also need to call it out on every comparison, and that is alot of extra wording without changing the results.

Fine, drop every price mentioned by 15%.

You still have a price gap, FI on a rotary will still cost more than a piston, you are still paying for more in the 8 than you are in the MS3, just what you are spending your money on changes.

WTBRotary!

iTrader: (6)

agreed, I believe Mazda would make more money and appeal more to the public eye if the had a standard or NA model then they had their Mazdaspeed RX with FI for the rotorheads. That would go better for the public eye I believe...

J8635621

iTrader: (10)

I wish they had. Then maybe I could pick up a cheap nonturbo FD and throw a turbo on it when I got the money. I can only dream.

8 Maniac

iTrader: (1)

I had a long post typed out but decided I would hold off on some details since they might not be needed at the moment.

I believe it is slightly. When compared to some competing cars, it most likely looses sales due to price vs value.

The biggest cost increase of doing FI would be the fact that it's a production car. Mazda would either have to spend more on R&D (to make it more reliable) or anticipated warranty work.

If they had an FI option, a lot of people would be more satisfied. A lot of people dont like modifying their cars, let alone taking up the time, effort and money spent on a turbo. Plus, more people could afford to add on to their monthly payment (or at least feel they can) rather than saving up for a turbo and spending it all at once. They dont look at it the same even if the costs come out similar.

HiFlite999

iTrader: (2)

I'm pretty sure that the rotary engine per se is not any more expensive to produce than a piston engine, and may well be cheaper. The RX-2/3/4's were very price competitive with similar piston-engined cars of their time, but they were also ~110 hp machines. They were also produced in competitive volumes to their piston-engined competitors.

To get 200-250 hp without increasing displacement gets expensive. That 3 stage induction system we all have reeks of money. Going to a simple 3-rotor is another way to get hp for a reasonable cost, but gas mileage likely suffers (anyone know what a stock 20B runs in terms of hp and mpg?).

Another thing that drives up costs to some extent is that an 8 is not a corporate, parts-bin car like its competition (370Z, Camaro, Mustang, Genesis, G37, etc.). That's the main reason it handles so well and is 300-1000 lbs lighter. Other "light" "custom" cars such as the Lotus, Boxter, Viper, and Corvette (to some extent) are $50k-$100k.

Personally, I love the thing. Where else can you combine not only the rotary, but carbon fiber driveshaft, aluminum hood and doors, light weight tranny, aluminum suspension, etc in a package for ~$25k? I think that even with the present very low sales, it's a plus for Mazda. John Q Public hasn't heard much at all about rotary problems, but sure come out of the woodwork to chat about my batmobile when I drive up. Most of the other 'exotics', BMW's, Benzes and the like have serious 'ego emissions' (in the words of a series of short lived VW ads) that tend to limit such conversations. When I had my Volks wheels mounted, the whole working crew came over and asked questions. When I took a friend to a Nissan/Hyudai (sp?) dealer for a test drive in a Genesis coupe, all the salesmen came out for an inspection, and one wanted (and got) a test drive in my 8. (They kinda knocked it off when customers were paying more attention to the batmobile than the 370Z's it was parked next to.)

It's a special lil beastie.

olddragger

iTrader: (3)

imho Mazda has a coporate type schizophrenia when it comes to rotary cars. They are in their own reality.
Think about it.
The previous generations of rx7's should have taught them alot about heat, lubrication, and drive trains etc. But, apparently ---it didnt. How else do you explain fundomental mistakes that were made?
Such as---
1- reducing oil pressures/flow on a more powerful engine that had a higher rpm range and then mandating 5W/20 oil!---hello anyone home?
2- angling the radiator to the point that it has poor air flow and then blocking the rear of it with engine bay stuff so that the poor air flow is even reduced further! No one home at all?
3- giving the automatic cars only one oil cooler! Good God!
4- tuning the cars to the point they run pig rich, fouling expensive sparkplugs, gumming up the engine seals, intake valves and exhaust ports,
5- very poor crankcase ventilation to the point condesation and fuel contamients make it almost impossible to even check the correct oil level------Jesus!
6- had a high temp thermostat and was mated to an inadequete cooling system----say what?
7- didnt even put a magnet in the oil system anywhere. 1st rotary without one
8- giving it a transmission with poorly designed shift forks---yet the engine can go to 9K?---huh?
9- putting in a fuel pump assembly in which the assembly cup was not even designed for the car! whoops!
10--has cop ignition system to a 9K engine and the coils ground pigtail to a wire that is only as big as a thick pig hair! Who did that?!!
11 oil system makes it only possible to change 75% of the oil on a routine oil change schecule.
I could go on and on.
At least they made really good progress on the 09--models. I would buy and recommend the 09+ models.
FI makes sense --but with this pass way of thinking--it would scare me to death.
Best we can hope for IMHO again is a miata chassis and a renasis engine tuned a bit more.
No 16x engine coming.
OD
1-

HiFlite999

iTrader: (2)

Gotta agree with you on all that OD. As to why, I'd guess a generational shift that's pretty much everywhere. I see it at my day job (high tech research) where the old farts who grew up starting at day one with a much more reality-based experience than the people replacing them as they retire. Specifically, engineering and particularly American engineering, was at its best when its practitioners grew up on family farms. If the combine broke in the field with a rainstorm on the way, you fixed it yourself in the simplest, fastest way that got the job done. No CAD, no calling in the certified welder, no bean counters, and no "elegant" solutions. The engineers we get these days can sit in classes, pass exams, and type, but haven't a clue as to what's important and what's not.

Jeison

what does that accomplish just out of curiosity?

RIWWP

iTrader: (2)

Helps remove metal particles (and larger fragments from the oil stream, pinning them either to the drain plug or in the filter (depending on where you put the magnet). This in turn removes the chance that they will cause extra wear, seal problems, etc... Keeps the oil 'cleaner'.

It also can give you an idea of how much metal is being worn away between changes.

Huey52

iTrader: (2)

Metal on metal friction is with us, always (no matter how capable the lubrication) and therefore metal shavings are in even the best of filtration systems. btw: You can get a magnetic 'blanket' wrap for your oil filter.
A good reason to change your transmission and differential oil on a regular basis as well.

Razz1

Your funny! We don't have several moving metal parts that loose metal particles like a piston engine.

Magnet is not needed on a rotary.

All you really have is the Apex seals.


And the RX8 was not tuned pig rich. Last minute EPA changes forced Mazda to re-tune to save Obama's planet.

Global warming from Humans is a farce. Ever notice the Sun gets hotter everyday?

Huey52

iTrader: (2)

^ and apex seals have allot more contact surface area then piston rings. Nothing mechanical is perfect.