RFs seem to be selling...

[Mr Morlock]

let face it- the rotary was a failure-( it sent the original developers into a financial decline or was that just plain bankrupt- they Mazda never got it right) and it's a wonder of wonders that Mazda did not go broke. Today smallish turbo engines crack out lots of power and good economy. Will Mazda put a really capable engine in the MX-5 and how is the 1500 going?

[RBH58]

let face it- the rotary was a failure-( it sent the original developers into a financial decline or was that just plain bankrupt- they Mazda never got it right) and it's a wonder of wonders that Mazda did not go broke. Today smallish turbo engines crack out lots of power and good economy. Will Mazda put a really capable engine in the MX-5 and how is the 1500 going?

Agree that the Wankel engine is a pretty dumb idea that Mazda should probably have abandoned years ago.

And yes, small turbo engines CAN put out lots of power with good economy but not if you exploit the power. The run to small capacity has been dríven by flawed emissions testing regimes that test unrealistic driving conditions.

Case in point, we’ve got an Abarth 124 and an ND RF GT 2.0 in the garage. On paper, the Abarth is more economical and has lower emissions. In the real world, the RF is about 10% more economical than the Abarth. The RF is easy to hit the official numbers with, and without resorting to any special driving technique. With the Abarth it’s almost impossible unless you drive like you have an egg under the accelerator.

The dumb Euro tests allow this sort of driving in their test cycles so we are getting this rush to small capacity turbo charged engines. Ditto, manual gearboxes are discriminated against in testing with autos being allowed to find an optimal gear and manuals forced to old a single ratio. The testing is completely flawed but has steered the entire automotive world in a particular direction.

I think the current Skyactiv-G is a terrific MX5 power plant, and Skyactiv-X looks very promising. But if you think Fiat’s small capacity turbo 1.4 Multiair approach is better than Skyactiv in an MX5, you are mistaken. The 1.4 is a one-trick “it’s all about mid-range” pony. It doesn’t have the Skyactiv’s low end torque. It doesn’t have the Skyactiv’s top end. It doesn’t have the Skyactiv’s instant response (it’s quite laggy which is not great in a sports car). And in the real world it doesn’t match it for fuel consumption (and therefore emissions too I’m guessing).

[ianoz]

i find most people who 'hate' rotaries have never actually owned a nice extend port (ie not stupidly brap-brap wild) with light flywheel etc. It's an experience.. Not really for every day, but a great toy.

[NitroDann]

Its the CR500 of the car world.

[Lokiel]

Curious as to the thoughts of others on this:

10 years from now, if you wanted to buy a 2nd hand ND, would you purchase the convertible or the RF?

For me, the charm of an older convertible far exceeds that of an older targa-top.

ie. IMO, 2nd hand ND convertibles will be valued more.

[StanTheMan]

I'd probably opt for NC with a hard top

[madmort]

I'd like an ND with a PRHT that worked without problems. Best of both worlds.

[Mr Morlock]

I am in STM's camp- the NC concept was very good- folding stuff and a then it's a real convertible. I wonder if the ND is ever going to get a PRHT- maybe the size of the car and shape will not work. Reality is that coupes outsell convertibles- always will do because so many drivers and passengers prefer to be pampered and be open to the air.

[RBH58]

I am in STM's camp- the NC concept was very good- folding stuff and a then it's a real convertible. I wonder if the ND is ever going to get a PRHT- maybe the size of the car and shape will not work. Reality is that coupes outsell convertibles- always will do because so many drivers and passengers prefer to be pampered and be open to the air.

It’s never going to happen. Mazda looked at packaging PRHT on ND and couldn’t make it fit on what was a smaller car. So the RF got developed as the compromise. As I’ve said before, I’d have preferred an MX5 Coupe with a hatch and some useable load space. But the RF does me as a compromise. I drive top up 98% of time. I find convertibles a bit embarrassing.

[JBT]

I find convertibles a bit embarrassing.

But targa top inbetweeners are not?

[RBH58]

I find convertibles a bit embarrassing.

But targa top inbetweeners are not?

Not if you keep the roof in place.

And I’ll clarify embarrassing. When you are young and hot looking they are maybe okay. When you are about to turn 60 they start to look a bit tragic.

[KevGoat]

.And I’ll clarify embarrassing. When you are young and hot looking they are maybe okay. When you are about to turn 60 they start to look a bit tragic.

... 'cause I'm 60 ... and I drive it for me.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[JBT]

..and I'm more than happy to still be embarrassed driving an open sports car at 68. Feels pretty much as it did 50 years ago - only the car is 1000% better.

[RBH58]

Okay....I’m not comfortable driving a convertible. I never have been.

[Mr Morlock]

Another good thing about a convertible MX-5 apart from a close connection with the world , is that the visibility is so good. Motorcycles also have a great feeling but you have to dress in armour like the knights on their great steeds. In the convertible you can step into the coffee shop looking cool not armour plated.