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 mooted to appear in 2012, however according to Edmunds Inside Line we may now see it as early as 2011.
Written By

Steve Davies
Steve is an investor, private equity advisor and former Partner at KPMG, PwC and Bain. Most importantly he's a life-long car enthusiast, mountain biker and active sports enthusiast. He designs and builds technology platforms and is the architect behind Transmission.
Try These Next
Stories we think you'll enjoy
15 Comments
Add comment Cancel reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
They should keep and morph the RX-8 into a small, premium sport sedan. If Hyundai can make and sell a Lexus competitor, why can’t Mazda compete against the 3-Series? (Besides the badge?)
They should keep and morph the RX-8 into a small, premium sport sedan. If Hyundai can make and sell a Lexus competitor, why can’t Mazda compete against the 3-Series? (Besides the badge?)
I struggle with Mazda’s insistence on using the rotary wankel engine – from a practical end-user perspective it offers a unique character, potentially lower centre of gravity and an ideal front mid-engined balance, but there are several other ways to achieve this without the RX-8s penalties (thirsty consumption and gutless low-end torque).
It’s great to see a manufacturer innovating, but only where that innovation actually adds value to the customer rather than just being ‘different’. Look what happened to Saab. Unless the customer actually values your innovation then what’s the point?
I would love to have seen Mazda build a mini-Furai, or better still do you remember the Kabura Concept? This was supposed to be powered by a 2.0-litre version of Mazda’s MZR DOHC 16-valve engine.
I struggle with Mazda’s insistence on using the rotary wankel engine – from a practical end-user perspective it offers a unique character, potentially lower centre of gravity and an ideal front mid-engined balance, but there are several other ways to achieve this without the RX-8s penalties (thirsty consumption and gutless low-end torque).
It’s great to see a manufacturer innovating, but only where that innovation actually adds value to the customer rather than just being ‘different’. Look what happened to Saab. Unless the customer actually values your innovation then what’s the point?
I would love to have seen Mazda build a mini-Furai, or better still do you remember the Kabura Concept? This was supposed to be powered by a 2.0-litre version of Mazda’s MZR DOHC 16-valve engine.
I blame GM for Saab; just look at what they did to Lotus. It’s a shame that different doesn’t always work. For example, I’d much rather have a Microsoft Zune HD vs an iPod Touch, just because it is NOT an iPod. However I would buy the Apple product (I can’t specifically say I’d buy an iPod, that’s a dirty word), because it is a more rounded product.
I blame GM for Saab; just look at what they did to Lotus. It’s a shame that different doesn’t always work. For example, I’d much rather have a Microsoft Zune HD vs an iPod Touch, just because it is NOT an iPod. However I would buy the Apple product (I can’t specifically say I’d buy an iPod, that’s a dirty word), because it is a more rounded product.
I agree with you Mike. I have always tended towards the more unique or unconventional and I admire Mazda for its persistence, I just don’t see where it’s taking them.
When the Kubara concept was shown several years ago I had just sold my Brabus Smart Roadster (see silver car below) which was a great little car, apart from the fact that it used a paddle-operated automated manual box which was a bit rubbish.
I just hope that Mazda choose to innovate in areas that matter most and compare favourably with other choices available. Subaru have persisted with their Boxer engine (great character but very thirsty), so perhaps Mazda can do likewise with their Rotary engines – but it seems like a long shot.
I agree with you Mike. I have always tended towards the more unique or unconventional and I admire Mazda for its persistence, I just don’t see where it’s taking them.
When the Kubara concept was shown several years ago I had just sold my Brabus Smart Roadster (see silver car below) which was a great little car, apart from the fact that it used a paddle-operated automated manual box which was a bit rubbish.
I just hope that Mazda choose to innovate in areas that matter most and compare favourably with other choices available. Subaru have persisted with their Boxer engine (great character but very thirsty), so perhaps Mazda can do likewise with their Rotary engines – but it seems like a long shot.
mooted, not muted; I hope.
mooted, not muted; I hope.
Well spotted. :-[
Well spotted. :-[
RX8 is likely to be under sales when RX7 is up in the market with high power and performance engine.