No, it was called an MX-5, because it was only offered in markets outside North America 
I like the sound of this, but I'll believe it when I see it. I'm still waiting for the 2006 Mazdaspeed MX5 with the MS3 engine that the Internet invented. I pay no attention to rumors of this sort.
In reply to RexSeven:
The ms3 engine is the mzr/duratec with a turbo and direct injection. So they are at least 4 rwd trans; 2 manuals and 2 autos. Ford Ranger and NC Miata
Keith wrote: I pay no attention to rumors of this sort.
I'll try not to pay attention but how can I? A proper 1800lb sports car that will be priced like a Mazda? It might not sting so hard to lose the Elise/Exige. Even if its just a fantasy I can cling to.
Yeah, I don't buy this. However, I'll take a 2300 lb miata with a more fuel efficient engine for the next gen.
I would love it if they could hit 2100 pounds. I might buy one too...
I'd call that plausible. I know that lighter and smaller with a small turbo engine is the goal. We'll see how Mazda does. Remember the RX7s? Well, it's time for that purist third generation...
I will believe that when my E36 M3 turns purple and smells like rainbow sherbet.
Look at it this way, if they aim for 1760#'s and hit 1900#'s, it will still be a factory 1900# freaking Miata!!! 
Weight loss is a great thing!
Never happen. Mark my words. It'll never happen. They may be able to get it lighter, and that smaller engine will probably happen, but I don't think it'll get sub-2200 or whereabouts. It's just that we expect too much standard equipment and power everything. I don't think it can be done.
They could do it but not keep it cheap. A lot of composites would help.
RexSeven wrote: In reply to paul: MS3 engine won't fit, IIRC. Too tall/wide and no longitudinal transmissions have been fitted to it. A Sky-G or Sky-D engine would kick some ass, even in the current NC Miata. If they're slated to get 40mpg in the 3000lb-ish Mazda3 and be close to the old 2.3L N/A in performance, then imagine the performance and economy in a 2400lb or lighter car!
I doubt the economy will change, unless they stop gearing the Miata like a tractor. RWD also doesn't help.
ProDarwin wrote:RexSeven wrote: In reply to paul: MS3 engine won't fit, IIRC. Too tall/wide and no longitudinal transmissions have been fitted to it. A Sky-G or Sky-D engine would kick some ass, even in the current NC Miata. If they're slated to get 40mpg in the 3000lb-ish Mazda3 and be close to the old 2.3L N/A in performance, then imagine the performance and economy in a 2400lb or lighter car!I doubt the economy will change, unless they stop gearing the Miata like a tractor. RWD also doesn't help.
Hogwash. RWD and FWD have jack nothing to do with fuel economy.
93EXCivic wrote: I will believe that when my E36 M3 turns purple and smells like rainbow sherbet.
Well if you drink enough red & blue slushies you might get 1/2-way there. 
In reply to Javelin:
I believe the reference to poorer fuel economy is because transferring power 90 degrees at the ring gear in a RWD car is less efficient than parallel power transfer path in most FWD cars. I say it is a contributing factor, but not an absolute determining factor. Too much other important stuff going on.
Javelin wrote: Hogwash. RWD and FWD have jack nothing to do with fuel economy.
Not true at all. Bevel gears required change the rotation axis of the power by 90 degrees are very inefficient. And some other factors like rotating mass come into play as well.
In reply to ProDarwin:
To keep this tangent going I ask: How much less efficient are CV joints at transferring power when at the extreme angles required by FWD cars compared to RWD cars? (Not being snarky, I am actually asking)
MrJoshua wrote: In reply to ProDarwin: To keep this tangent going I ask: How much less efficient are CV joints at transferring power when at the extreme angles required by FWD cars compared to RWD cars? (Not being snarky, I am actually asking)
No idea. I doubt its anything significant.
However, to add to my above post... an engine that is used in RWD and FWD cars, but is otherwise the same will dyno higher in the FWD application.
ProDarwin wrote:Javelin wrote: Hogwash. RWD and FWD have jack nothing to do with fuel economy.Not true at all. Bevel gears required change the rotation axis of the power by 90 degrees are very inefficient. And some other factors like rotating mass come into play as well.
But would the driveline loss/inefficiency really offset the Miata's lighter weight that much? I won't deny it will have an effect, but a 700lb difference between a 2011 Mazda3 sedan and a 2011 Miata is pretty significant and would be even more so if the next Miata loses weight and the MZ3 doesn't.
i'm just happy there's going to be another miata at all, and that light weight is still a priority.
RexSeven wrote: But would the driveline loss/inefficiency really offset the Miata's lighter weight that much? I won't deny it will have an effect, but a 700lb difference between a 2011 Mazda3 sedan and a 2011 Miata is pretty significant and would be even more so if the next Miata loses weight and the MZ3 doesn't.
Probably, but steady state fuel economy isn't affected by weight (well, it is but it is very minimal). Which car do you think will have the lowest CdA?
Again, hogwash. There is far more than the driveline setup involved there. A FWD transaxle still has a ring and pinion gear. Some transaxles (like the one in our Grand Prix) have a 180* power transfer to place the final drive ahead of or behind the motor, as there's not enough room to do it side-by-side.
Javelin wrote: Again, hogwash. There is far more than the driveline setup involved there. A FWD transaxle still has a ring and pinion gear. Some transaxles (like the one in our Grand Prix) have a 180* power transfer to place the final drive ahead of or behind the motor, as there's not enough room to do it side-by-side.
A traditional FWD transaxle does not have a bevel gearset. The rotation at the wheels is parallel to the crank of the motor. The Grand Prix may be a different story, I am not familiar with it.
Osterkraut wrote: Mazda will aim for 1760lbs, end up around 2000. It's good to set the bar high.
Exactly what I was thinking. All I know is--their mind is in the right place.
This will really bring attention to the Miata.
They must be pretty excited to see this rumor absolutely blow up the internet and be met with such excitement.
I dunno. I really look at it more as they need to pull 450lbs out of the Mazda 2 (2250lbs 4-door 4 seater with hatch correct?). Which I think its plausible if they as has been stated make the Miata smaller, shorter, narowwer and with the 1.4L out of the 2. Think a 2 with half an interior, no rear doors, no roof, no spare/glove box etc.. If they run small 14"/15" wheels, smaller aluminum intense brakes, supensions, subframes, develop and all aluminum diff I think it could be done and could be the most "pure" car in the last 20 years.
The Smart is what 1900lbs, the Lotus is ~2000 and the MR-S was 2100ish. It's just a question of if they would go through with it. Cuz you know americans must have leather heated/cooled/powered seats and Power retractable hardtops 6 disc changers and a million other things..
In reply to nocones:
Hatchbacks are usually lighter than verts.
You'll need to log in to post.
