(stupid)
magnumP5 said:
The GTR was an appropriate comparison and honestly that's the only example I can think of where an "for-the-masses" brand is successful at selling a high-priced car.
Nonsense. The 300ZXTT, the FD3S, the 3000GT and the NSX were ALL over 40K when they were new. In early 1990's dollars. I guess BMW isn't considered a "for the masses" automaker, or do you not think they make high end enough vehicles?
magnumP5 said:
We're still not on the same page. Mazda doesn't care what its owners do to increase the power of their cars. Their cars aren't designed to be modified by the end user so to use "modability" as a measure of a car doesn't make sense; at least to manufacturers.
Nonsense. Mazda cares about their customer base. Their catch phrase is Zoom Zoom, they run the best, most expensive road course in America, and they revived the sportscar segment with the Miata...which they just completely redesigned.
there's also this and countless other articles saying the same thing. This one is from last week.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorsp...a-is-the-most-popular-race-series-in-america/
magnumP5 said:
Barring the early model RX-8's I don't see how the 13B-MSP is any less reliable than the 13B-REW, which is guaranteed to need a rebuild before 100k miles, even in stock form. I don't consider "modded" reliability relevant in this discussion; see above.
Nonsense. My FD3S, that I OWN, had 140k on it when I bought it. Original engine, turbos, everything. It passed smog and ran fine for over a year before I chose to rebuild it. The difference is the previous owner wasn't an idiot and took care of the car properly.
magnumP5 said:
And those advertisements are still probably correct. Star Mazda, USCR, CTSCC, all have direct Mazda corporate involvement. Also, consider the thousands of amateurs racing in SCCA, NASA, etc. under Mazda Motorsports contingency so I don't see how you can say their participation is coming down because they don't have a "halo car" or aren't making a new MS3.
lol Thanks for letting us know that Star Mazda has involvement from Mazda. No thanks for going out of your way to be argumentative while basically saying nothing.
magnumP5 said:
I don't see how Hyundai/Kai being from Korea is any different. They don't have a high market brand and their attempt to sell high market cars has had very limited success.
Japan doesn't have a "high market" brand either. Chevy has Cadillac and Honda has Acura. Same deal, and for the record I wasn't the guy comparing Hyundai to Mazda. That was you. Which "high market" brand from Korea didn't have much success? Please remind me. I mean if BMW isn't "high market" enough for you, which Korean car was better but didn't sell well?
magnumP5 said:
The new Corvette is nothing to blatantly disregard. Fully-spec'd versions are nearing, if not over $100k and race versions have more than proven themselves against Ferraris.
A new 2015 ZO6 casts 75K, I can show you plenty of 100K Mazda race cars, and where did I "blatantly disregard" the Corvette? I used the 'Vette as an example why Mazda should make a sportscar. So save it.
magnumP5 said:
People keep referencing Le Mans and seem to forget there were several circumstances leading to Mazda's win that year; design only being one of them. It isn't something to disregard but that doesn't automatically mean the Wankel engine is the best answer today.
There are several circumstances that led to Fangio being the greatest driver ever, and for Mercedes to win the last F1 race. Your point is?
I didn't say the Wankel engine is the best answer (to what question?). I said Mazda should keep it in development. It's worth keeping. It won Lemans and promptly got banned from competing there again. That says something.
In my opinion, I think Mazda needs a nice, FAST car to attract people that have a few bucks to spend and want something a little different. If you build it they will come. Sure that particular car may lose money, but it'll bring a different class of buyer into Mazda's showrooms. People with money. 
