New Mazda RX-7 may replace slow selling RX-8


Recommended Posts

Mazda are preparing a replacement for the slow-selling RX-8, ready to combat the forthcoming Toyota/Subaru FT-86 and Hyundai’s Genesis Coupe. Rather than sticking with the RX-8 name, reports coming out of Japan say that the company is keen to revive the RX-7.

The new model will use Mazda’s next-generation Renesis 16X rotary engine which was shown at the 2007 Tokyo Auto Show in the Taiki concept. The 1600cc twin-rotor Wankel engine (800cc x 2) is larger than the current RX-8’s 654cc x 2 configuration and is rumoured to be capable of producing nearly 350 bhp and 215 lb-ft of torque, compared to the RX8’s more modest 227 bhp and 159 lb-ft of torque.

Earlier reports had suggested that Mazda would utilise the full potential of the new Renesis 16X engine, enclosing it within a body that took its styling cues from the Furai Concept, but we now hear Mazda are steering towards a more conventional design that evokes the original RX-7 and can be priced aggressively against its new competitors.

Choosing an output of nearer 250 bhp would enable Mazda to focus on lowering the weight of the engine itself, improving reliability and lowering fuel consumption, which would address some of the issues found with the current RX-8’s 13B rotary engine.

The RX-8 replacement was originally muted to appear in 2012, however according to Edmunds Inside Line we may now see it as early as 2011.

source: http://www.skiddmark.com/new-mazda-rx-7-ma...w-selling-rx-8/

It was bound to happen if you ask me.

First, Nissan brings back the GT-R. Then Hyundai created an affordable Genesis Coupe RWD car. Then Toyota decides to work on an affordable RWD competitor, and now a new RX-7? God dammit Honda, what are you waiting for? Soichiro Honda would be dissapointed :hmmm:

Sadly, I don't see Honda doing anything :(

They seem like they are lost, they were working on the NSX replacement with a V10 which got "deleted" due to the state of economy.

Then there is the HSV-010 Honda is going racing with, but I think they have said they aren't going to produce it.

Plus if they have us begging they should at least release something more Hond-ish like a V6. Leave the V8 for Ferrari :D

But they are not focusing on fast sports car anymore it seems.

The RX8 chassis is amazing, but that engine is just too underpowered. If this new RX7 does indeed produce 350hp with a NA rotary, it will be a very interesting car.

Then there is the HSV-010 Honda is going racing with, but I think they have said they aren't going to produce it.

Plus if they have us begging they should at least release something more Hond-ish like a V6.

Have you heard the damn thing? The V8 sounds like an F1 car and looks like it corners pretty fast as well :pinch:

The RX7 is the only other car(MSP) Mazda has made that I actually like. It had better have a turbo option again, that was what made it so craved for tuners vs the competition.

The 8 would have been nice had it not barely been able to out run a Ford Escort.

Edited by HouseOfLeaves
NooooOO! I love the RX-8's design and they are going to get rid of it. :( The RX-7 (current) is UGLY and unless they make it as good looking like the RX-8 I am still going to hate it. :(

there is no current RX7... it was discontinued a while ago, and the "current" (aka 3rd gen) RX7 is a master piece, way ahead of its time. Similiar to the Supra.

Am I missing something? The RX7 and Supra have been long dead and they're both horrible, horrible jellymould designs.

The RX8 has been out a few years, and is a wonderful car to drive; even if it isn't the most powerful. I really hope they don't get rid of the current design with the suicide doors :o

The RX8 chassis is amazing, but that engine is just too underpowered. If this new RX7 does indeed produce 350hp with a NA rotary, it will be a very interesting car.

Have you heard the damn thing? The V8 sounds like an F1 car and looks like it corners pretty fast as well :pinch:

I doubt it will produce 350HP. It will have lower mpg than a mclaren f1 lol

It makes sense for the Honda to sound like an F1 car but I'd rather have the V10 NSX! Or a high-revving smaller engine. (of course I'll probably won't be buying it so they can ask someone who will actually buy one lol)

Great news. As a long time RX-7 owner I have been waiting for this ever since they stopped making the 3rd gen for the US market. There were rumors back even before the RX-8 that it would be returning. I just hope they make it an actual dedicated RWD, 2 door, 2 seater sports car and keep the weight low. I have high hopes as Mazda is one of the few that actually believe in lightweight cars anymore. I would also hope a few years down the line a turbo version would also be offered. 350hp from a NA is achievable. The old 1.3 could pull off 200ish in NA using 1970's technology and build. Even if they use the newer RX-8 based 2.0 Renesis engine instead of its own independent engine they should be able to get close to 350. Using the new 16x engine there is even more room to work with.

All 3 previous generations were great looking and I hope this one would be also.

Uh, wouldn't it make more sense to simply call it the second generation RX-8 or if it needed a name change, the RX-9? Reverting to the RX-7 just sounds awkward.

As for Honda, I agree with revvo that they desperately need to get next generation versions of the NSX as soon as possible. Also, they should get an S2000 successor.

I think they really need to chuck out the rotary that was in the RX-8 and give us something new. The RX8 was a great looking car, but the ****ty engine killed it when compared against the 350z and other cars in the same category.

I am a self acknowledged rotary fanboy so let me put that on the table right up front. I think too much was made of the failings of that engine. It was after all pushing 230hp out of a 1.3 liter. And it did win several engine awards. Most of the "failings" of that engine could be attributed to poor or improper maintenance. And those people that wanted great fuel economy from a rotary and out of a sports car were looking at the wrong car to begin with. That is like buying a small framed 44 mag and complaining about recoil.

Keep in mind that pretty much only Mazda is doing rotary engine and has really only put out a handful compared with the thousands of different piston and cylinder engines that have been done during the last 100 years. The Wankel engine is still in closed beta by comparison. It is rumored though that the new rx7 will be using the 16x engine though so the point is probably moot.

The comparison between the 350z and the RX8 is unfair also. The RX8 in 09 listed for about 24k base and the 350z listed for about 34k. Given 10k I am sure you could close the performance gap between those 2 cars. I am not trying to elevate the RX8 too much either. I vastly prefer even a 2nd gen RX7 to it, nor am I looking to denigrate the Z as they are great cars as well. It is just that the comparison is not fair.

I am a self acknowledged rotary fanboy so let me put that on the table right up front. I think too much was made of the failings of that engine. It was after all pushing 230hp out of a 1.3 liter. And it did win several engine awards. Most of the "failings" of that engine could be attributed to poor or improper maintenance. And those people that wanted great fuel economy from a rotary and out of a sports car were looking at the wrong car to begin with. That is like buying a small framed 44 mag and complaining about recoil.

Keep in mind that pretty much only Mazda is doing rotary engine and has really only put out a handful compared with the thousands of different piston and cylinder engines that have been done during the last 100 years. The Wankel engine is still in closed beta by comparison. It is rumored though that the new rx7 will be using the 16x engine though so the point is probably moot.

The comparison between the 350z and the RX8 is unfair also. The RX8 in 09 listed for about 24k base and the 350z listed for about 34k. Given 10k I am sure you could close the performance gap between those 2 cars. I am not trying to elevate the RX8 too much either. I vastly prefer even a 2nd gen RX7 to it, nor am I looking to denigrate the Z as they are great cars as well. It is just that the comparison is not fair.

You pretty much summed up everything I thought when going through the posts.

The wankel engine is as you said in its very early stage and there is a lot of room for improvement. I hope the advantages it has as a hydrogen engine will bring it a bit more interest in the automobile world so progress will be faster and other makers than mazda research this otherwise genius engine.

my opinion: bring back the original rx-7. It's still a great looking vehicle, still a great car in every respect (aside from maybe the engine, it could use some updating), and there's tons of aftermarket support for it.

Which one? I mean I love all three, but the third is a much more upmarket car than the first two. The third was undoubtedly the better performing car but it had the price tag to go with it too. I would hope they stay with the philosophy of the first 2 of making a good but affordable sports car. If they can squeeze me in the looks and performance of the third I won't complain one bit.

Which one? I mean I love all three, but the third is a much more upmarket car than the first two. The third was undoubtedly the better performing car but it had the price tag to go with it too. I would hope they stay with the philosophy of the first 2 of making a good but affordable sports car. If they can squeeze me in the looks and performance of the third I won't complain one bit.

They should re-release the third. They will have no r&d costs and if they kept the old tooling, they will not have to make new moulds. This will significantly reduce the cost.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • This is why science is the only path to truth. It isn't rigid in its beliefs, rather it changes its views based on scientific discoveries.
    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
    • Just to understand: your solution to getting rid of an online password manager is...another online password manager?
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      164
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      92
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!