I know it sorta seems like an out of place question, but what sort of fuel efficiancy will the RX-8 get? I read somewhere that it was going to be something like 30% better then the RX-7, but what does the RX-7 get? I know that rotaries are supposed to be less efficiant then piston enginees, so far anyway, but still, where does that leave it?

I know it seems like a bit of an odd question seeing as how when buying a car like this, fuel efficiancy should not be the most important thing on ones mind, and its not. . . . But still I wonder.

Anyone have any clue where it going to land? I'm more concerned about freeway driving, because thats what sucks the tank dry. How do you think it will compare to other cars of its "class" (well except for the whole rotary part of course ).

 

if (engine == rotary);
then (gas mileage <= 20mpg);
else (racing mileage <10mpg);

anyway...enough being a computer dork

My 88 RX-7, non-turbo, was getting about 16 city and 24 highway...max.

 

Expect mid to high 20's MPG average (city & highway) with the more efficient Renesis.

 

Lord, I hope so. I can't get more than like 17 when I'm <b>really trying</b> in my 7.

matt

 

:D

 

I think one of Fords 'goals' was that it had to get like 20 mpg city/26 freeway miles or something.

 

That was probably Mazda's goal

Believe it or not, Mazda does have a good say in what it builds, and it can go against the wishes of Dearborn. For instance, Ford wanted Mazda to use a version of the Windstar as their new van. Mazda refused and built the MPV, which with its new 200hp engine is one of the best minivans on the market.

The Tribute was initalized by Mazda, going to only be a Mazda, then Ford found out, realized they could use something smaller than the Explorer, and decided they wanted in on it. Unfortunately, while the engine is a good one, Ford got too many of their parts stuck on that thing. While Mazdas have nice plastics, good fit and finish, and logical controls, the Tribute/Escape don't seem to be nearly as well put together, their plastics seem even cheaper than in the 626 (which for some reason is even worse than the entry level Protege), and its controls are silly (don't even get me started on the American A/C options. There should be a separate button for A/C, not simply a spot on the dial where you then cannot choose from where the air flows).

The RX-8 is all Mazda design. As is the rotary engine and the all new I4 engines. The new 6 is an all new Mazda platform and is designed by Mazda. I'm sure there will be some little parts on these new cars that come from Ford such as airbag sensors, fuses, wiper motors, but who really cares. They probably buy it from another company anyway and it isn't the heart of the car.

All in all, my guess is that there are more Ford's borrowed from Mazda than there are Mazda's borrowed from Ford. As long as they can use Ford's money, do their own engineering, and maybe share some less common parts, thats fine with me. Yes, Ford will be using those I4 engines, but without the valve timing the Mazda versions will get. So see, Mazda still gets the better end of the deal.

Ford is good for their money, which Mazda desparately needed. If it weren't for Ford, there would be no RX-8, and very likely no Mazda. Just be thankful Mazda won't turn into another Mercury. :D

The next few years at Mazda are going to be bringing some absolutely fantastic automobiles. The new 6 has been driven by a few sources, including a recent Autoweek, and the praise has been gushing. I hope the same will be said about the RX-8 and any future new Mazda's.

 

people diss Ford too much in the states... I guess Mercury, Taurus, old Escort and other failures led to that...

Mazda actually took a lot from Ford Mondeo platform (similar to 6), which is simply awesome for its driving dynamics...

its very good for Mazda that it can take bits and pieces and engineering and lots of money from Ford... next gen Protege will be based on next gen Focus platform... which is definetly not a bad thing... Ford Europe has some really good cars