|
I'm holding out for the TSE turbo kit for the ND!
|
Originally Posted by Erat
(Post 1169811)
I'm holding out for the TSE turbo kit for the ND!
|
Originally Posted by Full_Tilt_Boogie
(Post 1169812)
Dont worry, TDR will be on it. |
Originally Posted by bremaine
(Post 1169790)
True, but this also is what can make people harp on horsepower (see FRS)
A stock NC has similar power-to-weight to the twins on paper, but it's waaaay more interesting because it doesn't sound like a wheezy Corolla and has some sort of crescendo and/or sense of occasion to the power delivery, even if the delivery quantity is modest. Anyway, the ND will likely have a smidge more than the 155 HP the Mazda3 engine has. Let's just hope/pray the sense of occasion is just as strong as the previous Miatae.....and that it can be boosted, LOL |
Originally Posted by Ryephile
(Post 1169860)
To totally derail the thread, the FR-S/BRZ isn't a victim of lack of power, it's the sound and torque curve that's utterly snore-inducing. I had a BRZ on order actually, but got my deposit back after 2 test drives when the car arrived because I couldn't get over how boring the engine was, despite seeing the gauges moving.
A stock NC has similar power-to-weight to the twins on paper, but it's waaaay more interesting because it doesn't sound like a wheezy Corolla and has some sort of crescendo and/or sense of occasion to the power delivery, even if the delivery quantity is modest. Anyway, the ND will likely have a smidge more than the 155 HP the Mazda3 engine has. Let's just hope/pray the sense of occasion is just as strong as the previous Miatae.....and that it can be boosted, LOL I'm waiting to see what the mid-cycle update is going to be. |
I will not consider the ND unless it is literally able to leap over the top of Mustang GTs.
|
Originally Posted by z31maniac
(Post 1169908)
I don't know, a BRZ + unequal length header sounds pretty tasty to me.
I'm waiting to see what the mid-cycle update is going to be. I'm hoping Mazda quickly announces the retractable hardtop Miata, because that's the best of both worlds IMO. No utility-knife car jackings via soft top, and car looks nicely coupe-ish with top up, yet top goes away when motoring. |
US is getting the 2.0L Skyactiv, the rest of the world can get fucked with the 1.5L.
|
Was that confirmed somewhere?
|
Originally Posted by Dunning Kruger Affect
(Post 1172209)
US is getting the 2.0L Skyactiv, the rest of the world can get fucked with the 1.5L.
Originally Posted by Monk
(Post 1172212)
Was that confirmed somewhere?
2016 Mazda Miata Will Have 2.0 SKYACTIV Engine In USA, 1.5 Elsewhere |
In for 2.5L SkyActiv-G swap from a Mazda 6
|
Originally Posted by Monk
(Post 1172212)
Was that confirmed somewhere?
In Europe aren't there there regi$tration $aving$ to be had for smaller capacity engines? In Australia it's based on the number of engine cylinders so there's no difference between the 1.5 and 2.0L engines with regard to that. Unless there's a turbo-charged 1.5L ND available, I doubt the 1.5L ND will be saleable in Australia beyond the initial introduction. |
So it seems the 1.5 is the BASE model everywhere, with the 2.0 optional.
The USA ONLY gets the 2.0l. I really, really hope it makes more than the 155hp in the mazda 3... I was hoping to have the ND be just at 200 from the factory but I think my dreams are being crushed now :( |
Wait... has anyone actually seen this Paris Auto Show press kit? I see one reference to a tipster talking to Jalponik and absolutely nothing from anywhere else. The information super highway seems to be pretty fucking terrible at providing sources and documentation.
To refer to a comment earlier in the thread, how do we know this isn't just more blogspam and speculation again from the kids uncle who totally works Nintendo? |
someone posted it on the internet
must be legit |
1 Attachment(s)
|
Originally Posted by Lokiel
(Post 1172259)
Wheels magazine Australia, one of the better-informed rags, stated that Australia would be getting the 2.0L version so I'm guessing the 1.5L version is mostly destined for Europe.
In Europe aren't there there regi$tration $aving$ to be had for smaller capacity engines? In Australia it's based on the number of engine cylinders so there's no difference between the 1.5 and 2.0L engines with regard to that. Unless there's a turbo-charged 1.5L ND available, I doubt the 1.5L ND will be saleable in Australia beyond the initial introduction. Not really surprised. The 1.5L is just not going to cut it here in the US. And yea...just under 200hp from factory is pretty wishful. Lets drop 200lbs and add 20hp real quick. Factory 10:1 weight to power for the NE! |
A few people have called up Mazda USA and it's been confirmed from Mazda that the US is getting a 2.0L engine.
I think it would be great if the ND had 200HP, but it's not going to happen so there's no use crying over milk that wasn't even poured into a glass to be later spilled. |
If the weight comes in at 2250lbs and 155hp, it will still have a better power/weight ratio than the NC. However I would think it would be easy enough to put slightly bigger cams in the 2.0L to bump it up to the 167hp the NC made. That would give it 13.5 lbs/hp or so, right around the Toyubaru.
|
While making significantly more torque than the Toyobaru. :party:
|
I wouldn't be surprised if they could extract 170-180hp from the ND with a 91+ octane only tune and a few simple performance modifications. That would make it really competitive.
|
Originally Posted by thenuge26
(Post 1172352)
If the weight comes in at 2250lbs and 155hp, it will still have a better power/weight ratio than the NC. However I would think it would be easy enough to put slightly bigger cams in the 2.0L to bump it up to the 167hp the NC made. That would give it 13.5 lbs/hp or so, right around the Toyubaru.
The 2.0 will most probably have a listed figure a few hp over the 2.0 in the NC, the actual measured difference can be whatever. Or it will have a similar power boost as the Mazda3 got (11bhp) going from MZR to Skyactiv. :) I have no problem with a 127bhp 1.5 in the EU, since the 2.0 will be sold as well. Only having a version with worse power/weight than a 1994 NA would not be smart marketing. |
Ahhhhh . . . good to be in the land of open roads and climate-change deniers.
|
Originally Posted by hornetball
(Post 1172397)
Ahhhhh . . . good to be in the land of open roads and climate-change deniers.
|
Hush now! Obamacare can whup Ebola!
|
Hmm, EcuTec tuners may be able to help with upgrades (will just cost some "kaboom"s while learning the limits).
Learning something new every day... |
Oh man, the ouroboros of awfulness has just come full circle on mnet. People whining about premium gas being so expensive are arguing with people who are expecting 180+ HP out of the ND.
|
2 Attachment(s)
I took a dyno chart from a 155hp/150tq 2.0L SkyActive engine, converted it to Excel, and then manual played with the torque curve to shift it 600rpm higher in the rev range. I did this because a higher redline really suggests that Mazda would use more appropriately tuned intake and exhaust dimensions to support that extra RPM, and possibly cam differences.
It produces a pretty compelling number at ~154whp, which is about 170hp at the crank with the Mazda3's drivetrain losses. The ND's losses will be higher due to RWD vs FWD, driveshaft and all, but it should still make at least the 167hp mark of the NC if the 600rpm northward torque shift is anywhere close to accurate. If I underestimate the torque curve shift, it could easily climb up another 5-10hp. https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...1&d=1412346074 |
Originally Posted by Dunning Kruger Affect
(Post 1172632)
Oh man, the ouroboros of awfulness has just come full circle on mnet. People whining about premium gas being so expensive are arguing with people who are expecting 180+ HP out of the ND.
|
Originally Posted by hornetball
(Post 1172397)
Ahhhhh . . . good to be in the land of open roads and climate-change deniers.
Only our government could create a "market" for things they don't actually make, to protect the environment they have no control of, for a problem that doesn't exist. |
Originally Posted by cordycord
(Post 1172666)
Apparently the eco-weenies in 2015 are going to tack on 70 cents per gallon to our already crap fuel in California. It's the beauty of "carbon credits" for the mythical carbon "marketplace".
Only our government could create a "market" for things they don't actually make, to protect the environment they have no control of, for a problem that doesn't exist. I wish I could +prop this post a few more times amen |
Take it to the political forum if you want to whine about shit that isn't the ND Miata.
|
Originally Posted by Dunning Kruger Affect
(Post 1172668)
Take it to the political forum if you want to whine about shit that isn't the ND Miata.
|
You know, I was actually talking about the USA (2.0L only choice ) vs. the rest of the World (1.5L and maybe a 2.0L option) when I mentioned open roads and deniers.
Interesting that it was understood as TX vs. the rest of the USA. LOL. |
Originally Posted by cordycord
(Post 1172666)
Apparently the eco-weenies in 2015 are going to tack on 70 cents per gallon to our already crap fuel in California.
|
|
Originally Posted by cordycord
(Post 1172747)
|
I like the suggestion at the end. Lets tax people, then give it back to them as tax credit on their income tax.
Math tells me, its better to do nothing. Save some money... |
Originally Posted by Seefo
(Post 1172792)
Math tells me, its better to do nothing. Save some money...
|
1 Attachment(s)
|
Come on guys, if I wanted to read people bickering about stupid off-topic shit I'd read the m.net thread.
|
Hmmm, what makes them Euro-peeuns so different than us that their market would get a smaller engine? Whatever they've got over there, I sure hope it doesn't catch on...:facepalm:
|
Originally Posted by thenuge26
(Post 1172803)
Come on guys, if I wanted to read people bickering about stupid off-topic shit I'd read the m.net thread.
Originally Posted by cordycord
(Post 1172810)
Hmmm, what makes them Euro-peeuns so different than us that their market would get a smaller engine? Whatever they've got over there, I sure hope it doesn't catch on...:facepalm:
More powerful Green political movement. Punitive taxes on engine sizes that exceed 1.6L. Other than that . . . . |
Originally Posted by hornetball
(Post 1172812)
But we're not bickering. We're making smart ass comments and entertaining ourselves given the lack of real ND news. That's the mt way.
|
Originally Posted by yenadar
(Post 1172634)
I took a dyno chart from a 155hp/150tq 2.0L SkyActive engine, converted it to Excel, and then manual played with the torque curve to shift it 600rpm higher in the rev range. I did this because a higher redline really suggests that Mazda would use more appropriately tuned intake and exhaust dimensions to support that extra RPM, and possibly cam differences.
It produces a pretty compelling number at ~154whp, which is about 170hp at the crank with the Mazda3's drivetrain losses. The ND's losses will be higher due to RWD vs FWD, driveshaft and all, but it should still make at least the 167hp mark of the NC if the 600rpm northward torque shift is anywhere close to accurate. If I underestimate the torque curve shift, it could easily climb up another 5-10hp. https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...1&d=1412346074 |
Originally Posted by cordycord
(Post 1172817)
Will it all go back to piggyback systems?
|
Someone on mnet is claiming to have been in a focus group session:
I just came back from automotive survey featuring 2 ND miatas, one with soft top right hand drive like the one we saw in Monterey. One with targa/power retractable hardtop concept. They are being comparing against Audi TT, BMW Z4, Toyota FRS and Mini copper convertible. The final number for miata is 155hp with 148ft/lbs and 2300lbs for soft top and 2400lbs for retractable hardtop concept. Retractable hard top / targa has panorama roof like the SLK. The interior of the new ND feel smaller than my current NC. The door is higher or the seat is lower than current NC. Six speed manual is standard with keyless start stop. Navigation is on the Japanese model but doesn't know if American model have the navigation option. The navigation display is the Same as the new Mazda 3. Soft top starting price in 30,495 and retractable hardtop/targa is 32,985 |
If base price is over $30k it'll probably be DOA. It'll sell in S2k numbers at most.
|
Yikes. People compare hp and price when they shop for cars. 155hp at 30k sounds awful.
|
Originally Posted by asmasm
(Post 1173103)
Yikes. People compare hp and price when they shop for cars. 155hp at 30k sounds awful.
|
I'm taking it with a grain of salt because it's a random dude off of mnet that isn't Mark Booth.
|
If the above is to be believed
ND ~ 155hp/148ft-lbs ~ 2300lbs ~ $30,000 And they are comparing it to... Cooper S Convertible ~ 181hp/177ft-lbs ~2800lbs ~ $28,700 BMW Z4 sDrive28i ~240hp/260ft-lbs ~3300lbs~ $48,950 Scion FRS ~ 200hp/151ft-lbs ~ 2758lbs ~ $25,470 Audi TT ~ 211hp/258ft-lbs ~ 3340lbs ~ $43,350 (These are "starting at" MSRP prices and specs from the manufacturers websites for current models, so I assume 2015 at this point in the year) I did some meaningless quickie back of the napkin calculations... Dollars per HP: ND - $193.5/hp CS - $158.6/hp Z4 - $203.9/hp FRS - $127.3/hp TT - $205.4/hp Power to weight (hp/lbs): ND - 0.067 CS - 0.065 Z4 - 0.073 FRS - 0.073 TT - 0.063 Then Mazda has a LOT of work to do |
Originally Posted by EO2K
(Post 1173118)
Dollars per HP:
ND - $193.5/hp CS - $158.6/hp Z4 - $203.9/hp FRS - $127.3/hp TT - $205.4/hp Power to weight (hp/lbs): ND - 0.067 CS - 0.065 Z4 - 0.073 FRS - 0.073 TT - 0.063 Then Mazda has a LOT of work to do Dollars per HP: $73.56 Power to weight (hp/lbs): 0.117 Not an apples to apples comparison between these sports cars and and a heavy american sports coupe, but even still, for $32k you can have a 435 hp V8. $30k is not a Miata price. Shit is nuts. |
Originally Posted by cordycord
(Post 1172810)
Hmmm, what makes them Euro-peeuns so different than us that their market would get a smaller engine? Whatever they've got over there, I sure hope it doesn't catch on...:facepalm:
|
Originally Posted by Filipe Dias
(Post 1173137)
The fact that our tax over the car price is based primarily on the displacement of the engine and CO2 ;)
|
Originally Posted by cordycord
(Post 1173153)
Boy, that type of regulation would seem to take all the fun out of driving...or at least make it really expensive. Yep, I sure hope it doesn't catch on here. :facepalm:
Unfortunately Australia has traditionally preferred larger torquey engines but we're slowly moving towards smaller engine cars due to the fact that petrol is about 3-4x more expensive than in the US. Weirdly though, 4WDs are becoming extremely popular family cars? |
Originally Posted by Lokiel
(Post 1173162)
In the land of "There's no substitute for cubic inches!" I doubt that will ever happen.
Unfortunately Australia has traditionally preferred larger torquey engines but we're slowly moving towards smaller engine cars due to the fact that petrol is about 3-4x more expensive than in the US. Weirdly though, 4WDs are becoming extremely popular family cars? I suppose the shaky auto industry in Detroit would really be hurt as well (big cubes and all), even if most of it is now owned by the Italians...:facepalm: |
Originally Posted by cordycord
(Post 1173193)
3x-4x more expensive?! Crap!
|
Originally Posted by Savington
(Post 1173200)
Crap indeed. I'd like to discuss an exciting bridge-buying opportunity with you. :party:
|
Like it or not....agree with it or not...government regulations have a direct correlation to what we end up driving. It's not that I advocate bringing back unrestricted two stroke engines for cars, but this stupid government crap does have a bearing on what type of engine will end up in the ND.
By the negative props being given out, apparently some people don't want to even admit this. And they certainly don't want opposing viewpoints. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:51 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands