I do not care what this car weighs. With the Z weighing about 3000 pounds and packing 350 HP, it will own this car; the F20 BMW 1 series will own this car.

COME ON MAZDA.....

 

I'd rather not get my hopes up based on Road & Track. I only say this because of the leak they obtain fourscore years ago with the white SC mazdaspeed version we all drooled over and it never came to past. Have a backup to your original plan in case predictions dont become reality.

 

Looks funny and 250hp? Should be atleast 300.

 

Yes, and than a gentle curve can come along and the z can go flipping end over end while the new mazda flies through that corner, than the next one, and than the next one.

 

The current Z has no problem beating the RX-8 around a track that isn't comprised of a parking lot and cones, the new Z will be even more capable.

 

hilarious. the e46 and e92 m3 are practically obese compared to the 8, and you wouldn't exactly call them shabby handlers, would you? neither is the z, which is a hundred pounds lighter than the e46, and even more so compared to the e92. considering i own an 8, i of all people appreciate good handling. but when camrys, accords, and maximas are rolling around with a hell of a lot more power than our cars, and every japanese and european luxury sedan is one hell of a lot faster in a straight line, you have to ask your self at what point do you get a little fed up with the fact that your car does one thing splendidly, and yet can't keep up with many sports sedans on the road? i love my car. and ill probably have an affinity for whatever rotary powered car mazda puts out in the future. but it will be properly disappointing if the car comes with anything less than 250 hp. and that's coming from an enthusiast who isn't a traditional consumer. in a few years the new z will be pushing somewhere north of 330 hp. that's one hundred more than we have. and you better be damn sure that z will blitz by whatever mazda puts out if half of this article is true. FI is the way to go...small turbo low boost, low lag. 275-300 hp, keep the weight down and you have a winner. people will forgive you for shitty gas mileage and higher oil consumption if every competitors car is in the rearview mirror...

 

Was merely a joke my friends I guess I didn't make my sarcasm clear enough. My bad

 

^^^ Exactly...

 

+1^^

i have to agree with u. good analysis!

and for some reason, why do i smell a "frankenstein" or a "hybrid swap" like how honda's have their LS/VTEC. since its a "evolution" of the 13B RENESIS, whats special about the 16X is just the stroker shaft, 3 oil injection nozzles per housing just to name a few differences.

i can't wait for this motor's/car's production since i'll be interested in swapping in the 16X's stroker shaft into our renny motor for its increase torque and M.P.G potential.

what will likely go hand-in-hand with using the 16X shaft if possible may be an drop in rev's. and i don't see turbocharging to go along in the beginning, like they stated. this can be due to the space taken for stroking the shaft and thinning out the rotor edges i imagine. unless they come out with some stronger rotors by then... think what happened to the S2000. A 2 liter switched to a 2.2 with a drop in revolutions from using an under square design, shorter rods-longer crank stroke, etc.

can't wait!

 

Something that is so easily forgotten by the people is that Mazda has NEVER had a sports car that was more powerful than it's competition. It has NEVER had a sports car that was as fast in pure acceleration as the competition. There was always someone faster and more powerful. What Mazda has always had is the most balanced sports cars and they ALL held their own against the competition quite well for being disadvantaged on paper in terms of power. The 3rd gen RX-7 wasn't as powerful as the 300ZX twin turbo or the Supra turbo yet it was the better handling sports car and it's track performance would show it. Supras are a joke now. They are dyno queens with zero practicality and the handling of a grounded aircraft carrier yet ricers get a hard on thinking about them. I'm not sure what was wrong with the Z back then. With 300hp it must have just been very heavy to have only given it's 15 second quarter mile times.

I'm not saying Mazda will come out with a new rotary sports car. I'd like to think they will but with gas prices the way they are now, even the most die hard mullet styled redneck is trading in his pickup for a scooter so who knows. One thing is for sure. It won't have more power than a 370Z. It will weigh far less than one though. It probably won't out accelerate it in a straight line. It will most certainly be every bit the RX-7 and RX-8 superior in terms of handling and agility though as this has always been the trend. If the new car wasn't better than the last, it wasn't built. Only time will tell what will happen but rest assured that the people that are concerned about the competition have always been pleasantly surprised and probably always will be. If all you care about are numbers on paper, I know of a couple of other cars that would be better suited. I can't guarantee their performance, agility, or capability though. Then again since we don't have a new car at this time, it's really a moot point anyways.

 

There is nothing compatible with the Renesis. You can't just install a "stroker" eccentric shaft in a rotary. That won't work. You'd also need to change your rotors and all of the housings. This is exactly what the 16X is. It's rotors are narrower and taller. The e-shaft is obviously different. All of the housings are different. You can either have one or the other but a hybrid of the 2 is impossible. You can't think in terms of piston engine parts compatibility.

To compare a Renesis to a 16X is like comparing a 1.6L Honda 4 cylinder with a 2.2L Chevy Ecotec 4 cylinder. Nothing is the same other than the fact that they both have 4 cylinders.

 

A couple gems from RG.

 

From what I have heard (which is just what me and my friends talk about at lunch when the teacher makes us put up our hot wheels ), there will be a new RX-7 that may co-exist with the RX-8. Mazda needs a purist sports car, turbo 16X RX-7, n/a 16X RX-7, 16X or 13B RX-8. That way if people bitch about not having enough power it'll just be their fault for not getting the most powerful model.

Even if the 16X makes 300bhp, which is really asking a lot, that isn't **** today. That's what the RX-8 should have been released with in 2004. They need to get the turbo and rotary reconnected. DISI Turbo 16X 400hp.

 

Thats no joke and you know what I po0ned a Maserati on the roundabouts

 

actually the quattroporte is quite the porker, the MC12 on the other hand.....

 

It would be sweet if someone would develop a shaft to make a 2.4L 3 rotor. This engine needs to be out now so R&D can start already =P

 

Thats some crazy Photoshoped crap ...

 

The year 2011 and if Mazda puts out an RX-7 that weights 3,000 pounds and only makes between 200HP to 250HP than they are truly insane to idiots.

Anything less than 330HP (though 350HP+ preferred) at 3,000 pounds and in comparison to the 350z/370z would be a big FAIL.

Mazda also needs to get with the "FI PROGRAM". Mazdaspeed, in regards to the RX-8, already = EPIC FAIL.

 

IF there was ever another RX-7, it'll most likely weigh closer to 2600-2700 lbs as all of the previous ones did. combine this with 280hp or so and it's actually pretty quick. The 3rd gen RX-7 was around 2600 lbs, had 255hp, and ran 13's all day long stock. Of course turbos make upgrades pretty easy. It'll probably stay naturally aspirated and I'm fine with that. However even a low boost (7 psi or so) system added on could give 400 hp so power wouldn't be too hard to come by if needed.

 

Agreeing with you but clarifying on one point: The FD actually weighed closer to 2800 lbs, so a 2600 lb RX7 would be quite impressive at 230 hp or 280hp. If they're kind enough to give us 300 plus at some point, I'm sure few of us would complain.

Seal.

 

ehh?? i think not, the furai is kinda long to begin with, and sqashed i think not, the furai is already under your waiste

 

I've concluded (From Japanese Mazda sources) that they are going to give us both an RX7 and 8. This is an assumption based on a conversation I had. I was not told this directly but rather took a statement to mean this. I asked no further questions regarding the topic, thereby allowing me to ask neat questions again in the future.

Seal.

 

Funny nobody complains about a Lotus elise which has a puny 190HP, but the car flies around the track and can keep up with cars tripple its HP. And its not to shabby in the straits to, 4.7-4.9 ticks 0-60.... but the key with that car is the very low weight.

If Mazda built a RX-7 that was 2500lb, had 255HP, I say bring it on! I bet any amount of money that car would be able to keep up if not best cars that have 300-350Hp in them and weigh in the range of 3000-3400lbs, and not to mention a RX-7 with those specs would flat out dominate on the track.

The RX-8 already proves that,race car drivers, pro drivers , car testers,enthusiast, myself,a pretty good driver with RWD vehicles that the RX-8 can hold its own when driven to its limits. From experience , I haven't been embaressed yet by anything with 350Hp and under. Straitaways, curves, 6500 rpm clutch dumps... the RX-8 hold its own. I hope Mazda keeps that formula of balance, it sad that so many car makers have strayed away from that. They think sticking a big HP motor in a portly chassis (3300+lbs), slap on a decent handeling suspension, and wah-laa you have a sports car.

Balance is everything.... I got a chance to drive a Cayman S, and I will tell you what,that car is pure balance and bliss, no earth shattering strait line perfomance, but what a great all around performer,sexy *** sound that wales behind you under WOT, and once again could hold its own when driven properly.

Imagine our RX-8 with a solid 30 more Hp and 2-300 lbs less. The RX-8 would really be a thorn in alot of peoples side.


P.S : Rotary God , that 15 sec for the TTZ was a very low number for that car, on the regular the TTZ would bang out 13.5-13.9 1/4 miles all day long as well. Not to mention 5.0 0-60 on good days and 5.7 sec on bad days. Still faster than the best attempts by cars of today. 3300 lbs was the weight on the TTZ, 96' was the heaviest and slowest, a portly 3450 lbs. Pre 95 TTZ were the best! Not only do I know this , I use to own one of these legendary beast!

 

Weight savings is also their best weapon against rising gas prices.

 

^^^
And a true 6th gear next time around for highway cruising.