mx5cartalk.com

Following my drive of the Mazda 3 at Tom Kerr motors I was talking to one of the salesmen who has an SE. He told me the dealer principal was in Japan recently, a guest of Mazda along with a few select others. They were taken into a room and shown the upcoming Mazda 2 due for release sometime later in the year. Then.....they were taken to another room and shown a new roadster under a wrap. Top secret, said the Mazda rep but fairly obviously the upcoming 5. When asked, the rep said that, as the next 5 was being shared with Alfa, there was concern Alfa would outgun Mazda in the engine department. Asked if the rotary was a possible hero engine the answer was ...well, the rotary is not dead. Read into that what you will but the dealer principal was left with the distinct impression it will go into an MX5 chassis in one form or another.

Or RX9? That would be good


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mx5 with rotary engine will be nice, but stick with tradition is even better since rotary engine is hard to modify and service. No point to kick out amateur car player like me.

I doubt it'd happen but then again..
Toyota just named their new star sports car.
Subaru built the BR-Z.
Nissan, already leading with the R35.
It's about time Mazda stepped up.

My money will be on 1.5 Skyactive with 90kW.

here's hoping that Mazda gives me a good reason to trade in my NA

Blesif wrote:Asked if the rotary was a possible hero engine the answer was ...well, the rotary is not dead. Read into that what you will but the dealer principal was left with the distinct impression it will go into an MX5 chassis in one form or another.

Yep not dead, but unlikely to go into a MX5 chassis, or any other chassis as the sole powerplant, as not commercially viable.
It's being used as a range extender for the Mazda 2 electric vehicle. A 330cc single rotor putting out 22kw. snore..

Will skip the turbo's as that's a pick your own horsepower adventure and no real reflection on a good engine as such.

NA

1989 1.6 980 kg and 86 kW at the brochure
1994 1.8 990 kg and 98 kW at the brochure
1996 1.8 990 kg and 99 kW at the brochure (Power to weight of 10 kg per Kilowatt)
1996 1,6 980 kg (est) EURO SPECIAL 66 kW

NB

1998 1.8 1065 kg and 104 kW at the brochure
2001 1.8 1065 kg and 113 kW at the brochure (Power to weight of 9.42 kg per Kilowatt)

NC

2005-This Week 2.0 1100-1170kg and 118 kW at the brochure (use 1130 kg Power to weight of 9.57 kg per Kilowatt)
2005-This Week 1.8 1100-1170kg and 94 kW at the brochure

I know the later engines are better than the horsepower indicates but for 25 years of progress this is basically ZERO

The same can be said of lots of manufacturers though as the step you're missing in the equation is fuel economy and emissions.

Honda's B16A made 118kw in it's first iteration in 89, and was up to 138kw by 96. Then the K20A which replaced it, despite growing in displacement by 25%, made 147kw in 2001 and 184kw in 2007.

Comparing 25 year old engines against current emissions regulations is never going to be a fair fight.

Not to mention we aren't see the power curve and torque gains made to make the car more drive able.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not to mention Mazda aren't trying to make their own Shelby Cobra, they are pretty good option if you want a two seater convertible with an overpowered chassis.

Having owned two Rotary Mazdas, my response is a resounding "No thanks".
They found reliability after I finished with mine but they never found fuel economy.
I always thought they would but it hasn't happened.
I loved my Rotaries but only because fuel was cheap in the '70s and I sold them both before the motors blew up.
I am very happy with what's in my NB. Well, maybe just a few more Kw would be nice.