DARKMAZ8

Thing is, safety is a huge factor in weight. something the earlier 7's never worried about. the fd still weighed in at 2700+lbs and it can't come close to the 8 in safety standards. Consider this and how much the 7 sacrificed for weight and still weighed in at 150lbs less then the 8. I think the 8 is the rx car of the future. There is no turning back.

RX-Hachi

Having owned all 3 gens of RX-7's when they were in their prime, I consider myself to be part of the RX-7 crowd. While your statement maybe true for the current crop of tuner boyz who have snatched up my old throw aways, it doesn't apply to me. I'll buy an RX-7 (or 9 - the name doesn't matter much, but I do prefer 7) if the performance is there and the car looks the way I hope a 4th gen RX-7 should look.

DARKMAZ8

even the fd came with a light weight spare.

zoom44

the last fd in the states is 10 years old. things change in 10 years.

DARKMAZ8

look, all I'm trying to say is that it won't be easy to make something better then the 3rd gen. Safety standards and other issues will bring the weight up. Unless, mazda is going for a turbo 7, it just can't compete with the "old" one. Gas prices aren't the same either. A new 7 with 15mpg just doesnt make sense.

zoom44

i would think it would be relatively easy for them to make a car like the 3rd gen, make it perform better and make it much more reliable. i dont know if they could make it look better. but just taking the current engine and dropping it straight into a 2seat chassis would make a car that gets better than 15 mpg and be quicker than the 8.

DARKMAZ8

It depends, If they make it with "NO" air bags, sunroof, cruise, pw, dsc, tc, a/c, bose, ect. and make it a true 2 seater coupe. Maybe they can get away with using the renesis all n/a w/ all the ms parts. I would most definately buy it.

A new 7 has to be hardcore like this or Mazda shouldn't bother and just move on IMO.

DreRX8

Exactly zoom44. They could put the Renesis as is in a lighter 2 seat car and it would get better gas mileage and acceleration numbers as well. "I don't think that the crowd would go for a N/A or supercharged 7"--Uh what? The 1st Gen was N/A and the 2nd Gen was N/A with turbo models added later.

DARKMAZ8

a couple hundred pounds wouldn't make a huge difference in mpg. yes, the 1st 7's were n/a but PROGRESSIVELY became turbo models. So you think that we should backtrack? You can't call it a 7 unless it's marginally better than the fd. An n/a 7 will not do it no matter what. It's a nice fantacy but leave it at that.

Again

no turbo=no 4th gen 7

RX-Hachi

The (Z33) 350Z is a Z and it performs slightly worse than the old (Z32) TT 300ZX. The Z crowd might be hoping for a Turbo 350Z someday, but everyone acknowledges it's a Z.

The RX-7 is no different. It's not a turbo that defines the RX-7, it's the rotary engine and having pure sports performance to best others in its class.

93RedX7

A 4th gen RX-7 makes perfect sense as long as Mazda does it right. Nissan seems to be doing pretty well have more than one model built on the exact same platform. They have the Z, the Skyline coupe, and sedan. The only reason Mazda put side curtain airbags was to alleviate worries about the safety of the freestyle doors. Calling it the RX-9 is ludicrous. RX-9 doesn't come to mind when anyone thinks of Mazda's greatest car. The 7 is the only RX car to carry through more than one generation. The Z changed their numbers to reflect the engine size, but it's always been like that. Rx-Hachi is right about Mazda always trying to save weight. It's just what they do. Making a fourth gen RX-7 is what people want Mazda to make.

DreRX8

Platform sharing is the key--it makes perfect economic sense for them to share the RX8 platform. We are just gonna have to disagree darkman--there is too much logic and evidence to support the development of the RX platform.

DARKMAZ8

which is why Mazda went with the 8 nameplate.

I would love a 4th gen 7 but it would have to be better stock vs. stock than the fd to get any respect from prior fd owners.

I believe it is the turbo that defines the 7. Without the turbo it will lose major street credibility.

DARKMAZ8

hence the new miata!

The new 7 will have to be FI. That is the only way they will sell them. Torque is key for the 7. Turbos have come along way in 10 years and I wouldn't be surprised if they use a single turbo like the one in the greddy kit.

93RedX7

No, Mazda went the number 8 because a 4-door 7 wouldn't be true to it's roots.

A turbo isn't what makes the RX-7 so amazing. Even so, why can't Mazda put a turbo on another 7? If they use lower compression rotors, and beef up the seals a tad-there's no reason why they couldn't

Styjan

You can never shake the faith of the true believers! Long live the 7!

m477

The new 7 doesn't necessarily need to be turbo.

I mean, the new Miata is built on the RX-8 platform and it's what, 2470 pounds? (IIRC) That means a new 7 could weigh ~2600lbs, so even with the exact same engine as the 8, it will have about the same performance as the FD. With the rumored 1.6L Renesis, it would be faster than the FD. Without turbocharging.

They will probably put a turbo on the Mazdaspeed version though.

DARKMAZ8

actually I read that the miata is closer to 2600lbs. A 1.6l would be the answer but who knows what kind of mpg it will get. Regardless, The renesis is short on torque compared to the fd. This is the main reason why the FD was supreme. An n/a 1.3l rotary won't cut it.

93RedX7

Dude, have you ever owned an FD? It makes less than 190 lb-ft of torque at the wheels in stock form. The FD was incredible because it was a no-nonsense sports car.

DARKMAZ8

DUDE, I have driven at least 10 fd's at my best friends dealership when they were brand new. Have you ever driven an fd or are you just another poser

So explain how you're gonna get 60lb torque at the wheels from the renesis all n/a. You won't !

Deslock

93RedX7: 190 lb-ft is still considerably more rw-torque than the RX8.

DARKMAZ8: Where did you read 2600 for the new Miata? The 6MT (starts at 2474 and tops out 2498).

93RedX7

Ooh, you've driven a few. I've owned one for almost three years. Did you miss my whole point? The RX-7 is not about torque, it's about all around performance. FD's greatest aspect is its balance. And if you think gobs of torque make a sports car, look at an S2000. My friend's puts 343hp to the wheels, and only makes 203 ft-lb at 11 psi. Even when it was stock, I loved driving his car around. If you want torque, drive a Mustang.

93RedX7

Here's my FD.

DARKMAZ8

I don't care that you owned one for 3 years. I have driven them many times and they were not ten year old molested ones like yours. I owned a t2 and a gxl and I'll tell you for the last time that you can't compare them. The t2 was much more fun. Your missing my point stooge. If mazda brings back a 4th gen, It better have more torque then the renesis puts out or else it will not compare to the 3rd gen.... get it A couple hundred pounds off a new 7 won't get it into the mid 13z with the renesis. According to you, Mazda should release a less powerful 7. This will not prove to be a good comeback car. I'm not asking for mustang torque either. 190-200lbs is more than enuff. 130lbs to the wheels is just pathetic for a car that is supposedly taking after the FD.

CERAMICSEAL

My opinion; not that it really matters, is that it wouldn't be a bad idea to bring out a 4th gen with a normally aspirated 13B renesis, especially if they can outdo the weight of the FD. They could also use a taller final drive ratio enhancing the fuel economy if it were light enough (4.1 for example). A forced induction version would also be necessary at some point to broaden even further the marketability.
I guess my angle on it is that in order to compete with the 350Z or the S2000 doesn't require having 300hp or over 200ft/lbs torque.
By the way, I presently have 6 Mazdas including 2 nice FDs and I love how an 8 drives. A balanced package is truly one of the most important factors in the Mazda sportscar philosophy.