I wouldn't rule out evolutions of current platforms. Your theory of a median spot for the 7, I think is spot on, my guess:

Rx9: evolution of the 8 in which it becomes more of a GT car preserving it's freestyle doors concept.

Rx7: true 2+2 with a rakish profile and more track friendly sports car.

Mx5: Only convertible in Mazda's lineup, only lighter.

+1

i still believe on an hybrid powertrain on rx-9 (tecnology flagship....the '10 Cosmo)

I don't know why they'd rename the RX-8 the RX-9 if they're sticking with the same 4-door concept. I'd assume that if they ever go to an RX-9 they'd want it to be significantly different from the 7s and 8s.

Putting out a 2-door RX-7 and a 4-door (suicide doors or normal B-pillar doors) RX-8 both using the same engine makes sense.

Save the RX-9 for the next Cosmo with a >2 rotor engine IF sales of the new 7s/8s help Mazda grow.

Frankly the mid-priced sports car market is compressing which is the perfect time for Mazda to grow. Nissan seems more targeted to the American muscle car segment leaving Mazda to take over the current slot.

Other way around -- the RX-8 was built on an extended MX-5 chassis.

IMHO, these new RX-7 and RX-9 models will be built on extended versions of the next gen MX-5 platform. I think that's the "new platform" of which they speak. The new MX-5 is due out in ~2010/2011 and I read that Mazda is trying to go back to the orginal formula used in the orginal 1989 miata - lightweight.

Take this new platform, extend it slightly and modify it to work with the 16X renesis and you get the 2 seat RX-7. Extend it some more and you have the 2+2RX-9. It takes 100's of millions of dollars to devleop a completely new platform, so Mazda will definitely want to spread the cost of this platform development across as many models as possible.

Personally, I'm sold. These new RX-7/RX-9 models are going to be great and I won't be afraid to buy a 1st year car as Mazda has some of the best customer service in business!

Mazda likes to have a corporate look in their product line. I bet the front will look alot like the 2010 CX7 that they have released pictures of.
I would believe your close except the RX7 would be a 2 seater as appose to a 2+2. With the RX9 you wouldn't need a car in the line up with the extra seats.

What I like about this, and Mazda in general, is that the platform sharing that takes place is with a light nimble car like the MX-5. The entire sports line-up benefits from this, as opposed to other companies that platform share between sedans and their sports car offerings.

If they were to make a completely new model designation (9 vs 8), then my guess is that it would be a traditional sedan instead of the suicide doors. However, that doesn't makes sense either because they already have the 3 and the 6.

My best guess would be that they would do something similar to the FC, which had both 2-seater and 2+2 versions, only this time the 2-seater would be the 7 and the 2+2 would be the 8.

True, I stand corrected :icon_tup:

yes

exactly

no he was right. rx-8 came first then the chassis was shortened for the MX-5. then slightly lenghtened for the Kabura Concept.

The RX-8 came out for model year 2004. The NC (third-gen) MX-5 arrived for MY 2006. Early test mules for the NC were cut-down RX-8s. The NC is based on the RX-8, not the other way around. Incidentally, the NC and RX-8 share no parts with the NB MX-5 (which shares most parts with the NA) so the RX-8 is not based on the NB.

By the way, the ND Miata is expected around MY 2011 or 2012. It was just facelifted, with some minor but positive mechanical changes, for 2009. 2012 is more likely date for the new car, with the economic downturn. Mazda has stated specifically that they plan to reduce the weight of the car by 10% (about 250 lb), and that they plan to take the car "back to its roots" (or something like that). I interpret that not only to mean weight reduction, but also a return to the more go-kart-like feel of the NA and NB, compared to the NC. Mazda has also expressed interest in different powerplants to reduce fuel consumption. They are apparently considering hybrid, diesel, and turbocharged small-displacement petrol designs. For weight reasons, I think a tubo petrol I4 of 1.6 to 1.8 liters makes the most sense.

The idea of building the RX-7/9 on extended versions of the ND's chassis makes sense, in terms of spreading out the costs. I'm not sure how different the ND chassis will be. The major motivation for the new car seems to be more stringent offset side-impact standards going into effect in, I think, 2011. If the car isn't ready by then, we may see a gap in production, much like how there is no 1998 Miata.

I agree that, if there is going to be a larger RX car with 4 seats (an RX-8 or RX-9) I'd guess that the 7 would only have 2. However, I could also see Mazda trying to broaden the appeal of the '7 by making it a 2+2. I hope they don't, since small rear seats, without doors to access them, are not too useful. The '8's rear seats are quite usable, thanks to the freestyle doors.

It would be fun to see the RX-9, if it is indeed a larger car, powered by a "24X" 3-rotor Wankel, but I doubt that we'll see that, at least right away. Too much development. It would also be neat to see that car called the Cosmo, but only one Mazda has a name in addition to its alphanumeric designation (not counting the Escape-based Tribute): the Miata. Mazda tried to get rid of the name, but everyone in North America just kept calling the car that, so they more-or-less had to bring it back. I don't think "Cosmo" has the same brand value in NA, so we are unlikely to get the name here. The name might be applied in Japan, though, the same way that the RX-7 was called the Savannah.

If I were running Mazda---and sadly I'm not---I'd like to see the models lined up this way, for maximum differentiation:

• MX-5 Miata. Turbo-I4-powered. 2 seats and only a convertible. (Although I personally would like to have a coupe MX-5.) 2250 lbs for soft top. 77 more for power retractable hard top. Same length as the NA, with the wheelbase and track of an NC.
• RX-7. 16X-powered. 2 seats. Coupe or hatchback only. 2650 lb. Wheelbase of about 99 in.
• RX-8/9. 16X-powered. 4 seats, with either freestyle doors---call it the RX-8---or 4 regular doors---call it the RX-9. Coupe/sedan only. No more than 2900 lbs.

Mazda, like many companies, is moving to having similar styling for all their cars, as someone said above. I hope they move away from the big smile and toward Nagare. If the RX-7 looks like a front-engined version of the Furai, I think I may swoon.

Like chiketkd, I'm sold. If the cars are anything like I'm thinking/hoping they will be, I wouldn't mind having 4 rotors in my garage. And my wife can have the Mazdaspeed3 she has her eye on.

Michael

Must be a slow day at Inside Line....

BTW, the MX-5 chassis is based off the RX-8. Remember, the rx-8 came in 2003 and the mx5 was 2 years later. But I am sure Mazda designed this platform with both cars in mind. But rx-8 came out first...

Does anyone have specs for the lengths of the 16X and the 2.0 MZR in the NC MX-5? If Mazda bases the ND, "FE", and RX-9 all on the same chassis, as we discussed before, I wonder if it would be easy to drop in a 3-rotor "24X" later in the product cycle.

I know that's complete fanboy nonsense, and it won't happen, but it's fun to think about.

Michael

the problem for me, if both of these come to live, is which one to buy. i'd want both :p

the rx-7 is a no-brainer. whether a 2-seater or 2+2, it's fairly obvious what it'll be like. but it sure is intriguing to speculate about what this "rx-9" would be. first of all, there *technically* was an rx-9 a long time ago; i think it might have just been a rebadged luce legato or something like that for oceania. but that's a minor problem. that it would be a proper 4-door is intriguing. would this mean a small rear-drive sports sedan much in the vein of altezza/lexus is, and rx-2/rx-3? this would be super awesome. HOWEVER, being that in the US market this kind of car only exists as a near-luxury yuppie car (is, g35, 3-series), this route seems unlikely to me. if this happens, i think mazda would feel they'll have to take it upmarket, which seems iffy. on the other hand, mazda has a knack at being bold and creating new segments, so if they want to make a 4-door rotary rwd sedan, i'm all for it. if that's the case, i'll definitely have to get that car over the 7, if not just to support their boldness

rx7/rx9 = 370z/g37 ??

Or maybe RX-7:RX-9 :: 370Z:G35 sedan, but 600 pounds lighter.

what an eye opener!

:SHOCKED:

my mind is blown

Is 20/25 MPG going to be enough? And will EPA numbers look anything like actual numbers? Remember the EPA test doesnt shift at 9,000 like we are temped to do.

^ sure is good enough for me

I am in agreement with Michael here. RX7 would be a hardcore sports car tuned for handling. RX9 would be a grand touring 2+2 tuned for both ride and handling combo like the current RX8.

I like redlining my Renesis but still have no difficulty exceeding the EPA numbers, especially since their test was adjusted to be more real-world.

This is a VERY good reason that I didn't think about before. We really have no idea what the output of the 16x will be like, perhaps it keeps (reliably) putting out power up to and above 10k rpm's. If they can have a tranny to allow it to fully rev up, and it has to be a fancy 2-clutch one, then so be it. S2000's have a 9k redline, so do huge V8 ferarri's; sadly we're not *that* special in the high-rev's department. Just speculating, but if this tranny allowed it to rev significantly higher, 10k+, then I'm all for it.

Otherwise....6spd manual all the way

Huh? Was that in an earlier version of the article? Or are you just connecting the dots?

same as renesis

well dots but its clear to me from the way he wrote the article that it was a supplier leak. add what we know about the tranny developement to what he said about the tranny in the article....

Thanks. I'm also thinking that a supplier of auto transmissions might not really know about or bother to talk about a manual transmission option.