In reply to Nick (Bo) Comstock:
Ok. I thought similarly until I drove a bone stock CRX. Talk about fun! Plus it was so much more enjoyable to be in compared to my American cars of the same vintage. That said, I don't lust after very many Hondas, but one shouldn't write off an entire car company as there are likely to be something worthwhile to play with.
I mean, look at GM.
codrus wrote:Schrödinger's Flight Service wrote: I lost all hope for them after the Miata transmission Hayabusa incident.How so?
I am making the assumption you read the story.
Hyabusa transmissions have off the shelf parts to handle much more than what they were putting through that set up. They created a problem that didn't exist.
The Miata transmission was never designed to spin that fast.
They also wanted reverse and there are a dozen different solutions for that problem, including one that would have aligned the driveshaft with the rear diff better.
The solution for a "flywheel" or whatever that thing was they had to add a retention ring on was just silly. They didn't understand the design criteria for a critical part, which shows they were completely out of their scope. As builders, they should have known better, as engineer's they are criminally liable to know better.
Now I knock no one for trying something new to learn. This wasn't presented as that. This was presented as they knew all these problems existed and they were the ones to fix them. When in truth, they had no clue what they were doing. If it was presented as the former I would have just given it a pass, but as the latter it was reckless.
After that, I relegated them to eager forum junkies that learned what they were talking about after instead of knowing what they were talking about in the beginning. They have authority on nothing except on what they have documented and presented.
Wait a minute....
In reply to Schrödinger's Flight Service:
It's not about power, it's about load. Modified power against a 600 pound bike is not the same as even stock power against a 2000 pound car. The transmission input would never exceed 7000rpm, easily within the capabilities of a Miata gearbox. I've only seen a couple of reverse solutions worth pursuing, but even then you're still stuck with the motorcycle style gear ratios that are far from ideal for many (most?) car applications. And honestly, I don't see anything wrong with their use of a steel band on the clutch basket...Of course, I also don't recall it ever being presented (stated or implied) as anything other than "trying something new to learn" either.
In reply to Driven5:
Then we read completly different interpretations as what was stated from the story, as far as transmission loads, I worked for a transmission company.
The Hayabusa solutions are perfectly within a reasonable margin of safety
Yeah, I read the motoiq article, although it's been a while. I just went back to re-read the first bit.
I don't see "reckless" or "criminal liability" in there. It's not a marketing piece to drum up a bunch of pre-orders for a kit that didn't exist (at least, not AFAICT), it's an engineering project to build something that didn't exist as a hobby. With the benefit of hindsight the tone seems somewhat overconfident in the first part, but they stated a perceived problem (unreliable motorcycle transmissions for that weight of a vehicle, lack of an inexpensive reverse solution), proposed a solution, and set out to implement it. They show you all of the stuff they did, all of the roadblocks along the way, what worked and what didn't.
As far as the need for the project vs existing off-the-shelf solutions, I don't have any personal knowledge. Note though that the author of that piece (Dave Coleman) is a vehicle development engineer at Mazda (at least, I'm pretty sure it's the same guy), so he's probably got some professional experience with that kind of thing.
I don't necessarily disagree with the decline of Honda, Toyota & Nissan when it comes to making interesting, sporty cars.
However, the article is attacking Japanese cars in general, but mysteriously not mentioning Mazda or Subaru.
I think current Mazda is at the top of their game. The ND Miata seems to be a success and is a riot to drive! Even their more mundane sedans like the Mazda 3 & 6 are good looking class leaders, with an emphasis on fun.
Say what you want about Subaru, but the current gen WRX is the best one they've ever made. Between my wife and I we've owned a 2004 WRX, a 2006 STI, a 2013 WRX, a 2015 WRX & a 2016 WRX... I've driven every gen they've made & the current one is the best to drive- most willing chassis/best handling, best steering feel, nicest interior, etc, despite their current lack of a hatchback (grumble, grumble). Sure, the new STI could use a motor replacement, but they sure haven't lost their way.
A lot of people associate the Frisbee twins/GT86 mostly with Toyota, which is something I don't understand. It's based on the Impreza chassis, with a Subaru FA20 engine & transmission... I viewed it as more of a Subaru project that Toyota helped fund. Same way I look at the Mazda / Fiat partnership on the ND.
In the realm of inexpensive driver's cars, the ND & BRZ are hailed as 2 of the best on the market right now. Hard to say current Japanese cars aren't catering to enthusiasts when the current ND, frisbee twins & WRX/STI have booming after-markets and cult-like followings.
It's not that "Japanese cars suck", it's just that Mike at MotoIQ is looking at the wrong Japanese brands.
Japanese cars, with a few exceptions, have always sucked in the appearance category.
The exceptions would be the Goertz influenced Toyota 2000GT and the 240Z, and probably the original NSX.
The turbo Supras were formidable cars, but they frankly looked like fat jelly beans with handles on them.
Honda S2000 is just OK, and the last gen RX7 has kind of grown on me - I could probably own a turbo if one came along that hadn't been buggered about (which is about as likely as finding a 240Z with stock steel wheels on it).
They do drivelines pretty well, they just need to hire some stylists for the new century. On the whole I agree with the article.
Kojima has done one too many articles where he spent a ton of money and preached the holy gospel of THE WAY (trademark) and then either gone slower or gotten his butt kicked by dudes with a quarter of the budget. See the Spoon Civic or basically any of the time attack cars. Also, having his minions kiss his ass in their articles constantly ... grrr.
Motoiq should be my exact cup of tea, but Kojima is so arrogant I don't read them any more.
roninsoldier83 wrote: A lot of people associate the Frisbee twins/GT86 mostly with Toyota, which is something I don't understand. It's based on the Impreza chassis, with a Subaru FA20 engine & transmission... I viewed it as more of a Subaru project that Toyota helped fund. Same way I look at the Mazda / Fiat partnership on the ND.
I'm agreed that the latest offerings from Mazda and the Twins are a pretty far cry from a decline!
As far as Toyota being tied to the FR-S/BR-Z, it is my understanding that Toyota was the one with the vision and was driving the idea, while Subaru was really reluctant until the point where they actually had some running early prototypes. I followed the Twins pretty closely and own an FR-S, and AFAIK, the chassis is loosely Impreza based, the engine was jointly developed based on Subaru architecture, but with Toyota's help on cylinder head, intake/exhaust tuning, and fueling. The transmission is not Impreza-based, rather an Aisin AZ6 variant (related to the Altezza six-speed) and I'm pretty sure the rear differential is Toyota/Lexus. Electrical is pretty much all Subaru.
Combine the development history with fifteen years of Subaru branding saying, "AWD sedans! AWD sedans! Subaru is AWD sedans!" and the Toyota connection the public has makes more sense.
In reply to ae86andkp61:
I guess I learn something new everyday! I figured Toyota helped with the dual port & direct injection fueling, but I didn't know the rest. I wish they would use the multi-port fuel setup on the WRX to help stave off carbon buildup.
I guess I don't see the same Mazda that you guys see. Ten years ago, you could buy a Mazdaspeed3, a Mazdaspeed6, a Miata and the RX-8. Today, only the ridiculously over-priced Miata remains. 
Subaru is the only japanese car manufacturer that still produces interesting (if ugly) products...and people have noticed because they have been the fatest growing Japanese manufacturer for the last couple of years.
That article is lacist.
In reply to fanfoy:
Disagree on Mazda and Subaru.
Subaru has been positioning itself as a lifestyle brand for quite some time. It's now starting to pay dividends and, while they do have some interesting offerings, there's a reason the Impreza is distinct from the WRX now.
I suspect you'll see them become softer and softer in the next 10 years.
Mazda, and I do love Mazda, has found that Zoom-Zoom attracts a cult following but doesn't sell to the Camry crowd. Unfortunately the reliable, drives, and comes in blue crowd is the one that drives new cars sales. Mazda appears to have started moving in the direction of becoming the Japanese BMW. Provide a nice place to sit and have interesting driving dynamics then build the brand off that momentum.
There won't be any 'light your hair on fire in the tall grass' models until that shift is complete.
I'd argue that Mazda needs to go in that direction to survive at this point. Lexus and Infinity have failed pretty miserably at the Japanese BMW thing so that gives Mazda a sandbox to play in by themselves. As much as I'd love an RX9 or another stupidly over-powered hatchback Mazda simply needs move enough volume to justify them.
Didn't the NA Mazda president call Mazdaspeed childish a bit ago anyway? Probably not the best culture to try that in currently.
Now the Korean brands on the other hand. They seem to have their E36 M3 together as of late.
The Koreans are going to do to Japan, what the Japanese car companies did to us. Just watch.
You'll need to log in to post.
