It was not the single cause, but just another iceberg that was sinking Mazda faster.

And as far as miserable sales go, at that time, Mazda was all engineering and no marketing. How many 3rd gen commericals have you ever seen? Mazda has spent a fortune marketing the 8 just to sell 2300 last month. The RX-7 was on its own.

 

Just to clarify something here, I didn't state or imply that the RX-7 was Mazda's first rotary car and I'm quite familar with the Rotary History.

I think we are not disagreeing on anything here other than that you blame the failure of Mazda solely on the development of the Rotary Engine with your statement "Mazda believed so much in it that it almost killed the company and it became a nice little target for Ford acquisition. "

And yes I was using a different time frame as a reference to my examples. The point I'm trying to make here is that their Rotary line was never significiant enough to be the single cause of their failure whether it was the 70's or the 80's and 90's.

 

I never said solely. However the post I used to back me up did so maybe that is the confusion. Please note my origional statement said:

And the reason why I wanted to clarify about my arguments being from the 70's and not the 80's or 90's is because the whole point was how Mazda got to where it was in 1979 when Ford bought into them.

 

I did say sport compact and i think you are the only person that ever put a cobra in that class. i wouldnt consider a contour a sport compact either. The ZX2 S/R and the Focus SVT are nice but not as fast or in my opinion as good looking as the 2nd generation probes.

If there is a flaming homoerotic fairie on this forum, it is you.

 

Get a freakin clue. Without the rotary engine, there never would have been a Mazda for you or me to speak of. In 1963, Toyo Kogyo (Mazda) was about to be assimilated thanks to the Ministry of International Trade and Industry. The only thing that saved their little company was Tsuneji Matsuda's spending a fortune of his own cash to develop "technological character". The R&D and ultimate production of the rotary engine was that technological character (Matras 17). Whether you think the rotary killed Mazda or not, the truth of the matter is that the rotary made Mazda first.

WORK CITED
Matras, John. Sports Car Color History: Mazda RX-7. Motorbooks International Publishers & Wholesalers. 1994. Pg. 17.

 

no one seems to grant due credit to the largest selling 2 seat roadster of all time, the Miata, for helping mazda stay afloat. That the technical expertise at Mazda is among the absolute best, goes without question in my mind. It just takes a while for some folks to "get it." The 6 will serve as yet another platform for Ford as will the 3 (Euro Focus, Volvo S40). But this is the way of the automotive world in a global economy. Mazda still develops the best small car chassis around, bar none including BMW! IMHO:D

 

Never said anything that would conflict with this statement.


Never said it didn't.

Never said killed I said almost. LISTEN UP here is my point and I will spell it out for you people that like to distort what I am saying MY POINT: A retrospective by KrustyKlown

"They were in a WEAK financial situation due to POOR SALES. Anything that wasn't as fuel efficient as the offerings from Honda and other Japanese companies were a hard sell especially to American consumers due to the OIL CRISIS. Mazda's WEAK financial situation made them a CHEAP BUY for Ford."

The End.


I love how people continue to change and morph what I said.

 

This is before the time frame I am talking about as well. I am talking about 75-79 because the whole discussion was about how Ford got involved.