Would you buy a MAZDASPEED2?
- Thread starter Antoine
- Start date
Well, the thing is: of all those people who voted for msp2 - did they all really vote for the same thing?
As obvious from the posts on this thread - no, they didn't. Some would want 200+ hp head-heavy N/A 2.3L - some argued for forced induction and light engine. Some wanted lotsa cool stuff - some would argue it'd make the car too expensive. Some wanted it bold - some argued that'd cut into MSP3 territory. And so on.
And that's likely what's going on -- if Mazda is thinking about msp2 (and I would argue they probably do -- why not at least entertain the idea?), it's also likely that there's no clear vision what it might be like, and what would be the exact market niche for it.
I'd argue that tricking the 2 just a bit - small turbo, stiffer springs, thicker sway bars, disk breaks all around, 16" wheels -- all that could, probably, keep the price under 20K -- would be a logical step. But then, would that car really deserve an honor of being called Mazdaspeed?
As obvious from the posts on this thread - no, they didn't. Some would want 200+ hp head-heavy N/A 2.3L - some argued for forced induction and light engine. Some wanted lotsa cool stuff - some would argue it'd make the car too expensive. Some wanted it bold - some argued that'd cut into MSP3 territory. And so on.
And that's likely what's going on -- if Mazda is thinking about msp2 (and I would argue they probably do -- why not at least entertain the idea?), it's also likely that there's no clear vision what it might be like, and what would be the exact market niche for it.
I'd argue that tricking the 2 just a bit - small turbo, stiffer springs, thicker sway bars, disk breaks all around, 16" wheels -- all that could, probably, keep the price under 20K -- would be a logical step. But then, would that car really deserve an honor of being called Mazdaspeed?
The big, front-heavy, tricked version of the 2 would probably cut into 3 territory. The torque steer and plowing might also make it a bit crude feeling.
If they went for something more in the spirit of what the 2 already is, a nimble, bare-bones car with a lot of spirit, they might intrude upon the 2 itself. They've been pushing their new B-spec series. Their spec kit includes mostly suspension mods (you bring the safety gear and slicks). The only real power train change was a cat back pipe. If they created a mazdaspeed2 that was 4-wheel disc brakes, maybe a mild TQ/HP increase, up to 175 or something...then you'd have a 2 with no franchise. It might actually damage, or at least make more difficult, their goals for the base 2.
That being said, 4 wheel discs, a bit more torque/power to use and a bit less commuter suspension, and they'd have a great street machine. I don't know if that would be a proper MPS though. It reminds me of the GLI trim that VW used to have to bridge the gap from Base to GTI. Those mki and mkiis were a blast to drive, and they had the same strut/torsion suspension too.
I'd definitely be interested in a mazdaspeed2 though...wish list: 4-wheel discs, bluetooth, a bit more power, FI or displacement, whichever is lighter really. keep the dash and controls simple! fancy, functional pedals, nice bolstering.
Though as a street machine, it could compete with the cooper S and 500 abarth.
If they went for something more in the spirit of what the 2 already is, a nimble, bare-bones car with a lot of spirit, they might intrude upon the 2 itself. They've been pushing their new B-spec series. Their spec kit includes mostly suspension mods (you bring the safety gear and slicks). The only real power train change was a cat back pipe. If they created a mazdaspeed2 that was 4-wheel disc brakes, maybe a mild TQ/HP increase, up to 175 or something...then you'd have a 2 with no franchise. It might actually damage, or at least make more difficult, their goals for the base 2.
That being said, 4 wheel discs, a bit more torque/power to use and a bit less commuter suspension, and they'd have a great street machine. I don't know if that would be a proper MPS though. It reminds me of the GLI trim that VW used to have to bridge the gap from Base to GTI. Those mki and mkiis were a blast to drive, and they had the same strut/torsion suspension too.
I'd definitely be interested in a mazdaspeed2 though...wish list: 4-wheel discs, bluetooth, a bit more power, FI or displacement, whichever is lighter really. keep the dash and controls simple! fancy, functional pedals, nice bolstering.
Though as a street machine, it could compete with the cooper S and 500 abarth.
Last edited:
Well, Mazdaspeed vehicles have always been, and I think will always be, turbocharged variants of the base car with everything turned up a notch on the sporty scale. So, in that case "small turbo, stiffer springs, thicker sway bars, disk breaks all around, 16" wheels" would absolutely be in the MS spirit (except I don't think we'd see rear disks. i want them as much as the next guy but cost outweighs benefit in terms of a niche production model like a mazdaspeed car). That's pretty much what the MSP and the MS MX-5 were.
That said, I read an interview with Dave Coleman talking about the development of the 2010 MS3, and he talked about how over in Japan, the thought was always that you take the base car, beef everything up, add a turbo, and you've got a mazdaspeed car. His team over here at Mazda USA developed the suspension for the new MS3, and he talked a lot about not wanting to just stiffen it up and call it a day, but instead engineer everything so it was the best possible suspension for performance. They described it as the difference between a "sporty car" and a "sports car." Most reviews of the 2010 agreed that it did in fact bridge that gap, almost miraculously so.
If Mazdaspeed can still be the old way, bolting a turbo on, stiffening things up, and putting it out there as a tuner pocket-rocket, then i think we've got a chance at it. If Dave Coleman and his guys got their way and changed how mazdaspeed vehicles are engineered and viewed (which i think overall would be a good thing), then I can't imagine we'll see one.
Nothing at Detroit, nothing at TAS, and i've yet to hear anything on Chicago yet, i've just resigned myself to build my own or save up for a slightly used MS3 come spring time.
That said, I read an interview with Dave Coleman talking about the development of the 2010 MS3, and he talked about how over in Japan, the thought was always that you take the base car, beef everything up, add a turbo, and you've got a mazdaspeed car. His team over here at Mazda USA developed the suspension for the new MS3, and he talked a lot about not wanting to just stiffen it up and call it a day, but instead engineer everything so it was the best possible suspension for performance. They described it as the difference between a "sporty car" and a "sports car." Most reviews of the 2010 agreed that it did in fact bridge that gap, almost miraculously so.
If Mazdaspeed can still be the old way, bolting a turbo on, stiffening things up, and putting it out there as a tuner pocket-rocket, then i think we've got a chance at it. If Dave Coleman and his guys got their way and changed how mazdaspeed vehicles are engineered and viewed (which i think overall would be a good thing), then I can't imagine we'll see one.
Nothing at Detroit, nothing at TAS, and i've yet to hear anything on Chicago yet, i've just resigned myself to build my own or save up for a slightly used MS3 come spring time.
AzteCypher
black ops modifications..
- :
- 2001 Mazda Protege LX
I'd love to see a 3 door model of the Mazda2.
Toyota gave the Yaris a Supercharger in their concept with 180HP and 162 torque with their 1.5L engine. I don't see why Mazda won't do something similar.
http://www.topspeed.com/cars/toyota/2012-toyota-yaris-turbo-concept-by-grmn-ar123142.html
http://www.topspeed.com/cars/toyota/2012-toyota-yaris-turbo-concept-by-grmn-ar123142.html
Its a Demio
Member
- :
- 2011 Mazda Mazda2
Of all the options I've seen in this thread, the one thing I'd like to see considered is dropping the 2.5 from the stock Mazda3 into the engine bay of the 2 as it looks like the space and fabrications would be so little to fit. If you really wanted to turbo charge it, I say go ahead (as corksport is working on, thanks!) as it is a very viable option for cheaper, but what about just boring out the engine packaged with a MazdaSpeed intake and exhaust? Yes, all the typical suspension options would be nice as well. Maybe Mazda doesn't want to actually manufacture and sell an assembled MazdaSpeed2, but hey, why not just engineer and release the parts as just dealer bolt on options? I don't need a badge on the back of my M2 to have fun, but I would like to bolt on some more fun and still have the reassurance that it won't void my warranty.
This over the 2.0 MZR from the current miata?
While I still love the idea of a MS2 I still think most of you guys have your heads in the clouds. Four-wheel disc brakes? Forced induction? 2.5L motor? 16 in. wheels? Bluetooth?! Add one or more of those and you put a potential MS2 well into the $20k+ range. This puts a MS2 well into the price range of a 3, which will have similar HP, TQ and MPG numbers. Also, the Fiat Abarth, Veloster Turbo, Cooper 2, etc. you all have been comparing a potential MS2 to are all easily $25k+.
It would definitely be a niche car and based on Mazda's current financial issues I don't see this happening anytime soon.
It would definitely be a niche car and based on Mazda's current financial issues I don't see this happening anytime soon.
i do.... they had a turbo 2 at the detroit auto show with a speed3 motor in it. but let me pick at what you said a little.
why are 4 wheel disc brakes a ridiculous thought? the protege had 4 wheel disc and was offered for 16k... the 2.5L motor would not have to be developedd as it is pre existing. all that would be needed would be mounts right? bluetooth can be added for cheap but never would because mazdaspeed only adds upgrades for performance not luxury. 16 inch wheels were also on the proteges for 16k.... forced induction is not all that expensive. just look at the price of the msp when it was released. this is all very possible.
why are 4 wheel disc brakes a ridiculous thought? the protege had 4 wheel disc and was offered for 16k... the 2.5L motor would not have to be developedd as it is pre existing. all that would be needed would be mounts right? bluetooth can be added for cheap but never would because mazdaspeed only adds upgrades for performance not luxury. 16 inch wheels were also on the proteges for 16k.... forced induction is not all that expensive. just look at the price of the msp when it was released. this is all very possible.
Also from a point of view, would you buy a vxr corsa or mazda 2, sorry but if i had the cash, the new corsa vxr looks damn good, the market for hot hatches is way to full and mazda being a new comer would't do it with the big boys who been there a while, sorry
Chris
Chris
I'll reply as someone who's actually purchased a 2 and is aware of their cost.
I purchased my nearly fully loaded 2 (everything minus AT and auto-dimming mirror) at the "dealer invoice price of $15.5k". By the time everything was done I paid $17.5k out the door. FWIW, I never said they were "ridiculous thoughts" but the idea of adding all those for under $2.5k is indeed ridiculous. So onto my counter points:
1. I don't believe the 2 shares its chassis with anything other than the Fiesta, which also does not have rear disc brakes, which means the whole setup has to be developed. While not overly expensive in its own right (maybe $500 on the low end) given the size and weight of the car most would argue why the 2 needs rear disc brakes. The answer is likely for the given size and weight of the car rear drums perform just as well as discs while being a fraction of the cost. Either way, by itself it's not a major cost-adder.
2. The 2.5L motor does not need to be developed, correct, but do we know it fits? Assuming it does, yes, new engine mounts are needed but that's only the beginning. The ECU would have to be relocated to the cabin (current it's in the engine bay), which is an extensive modification to the existing wire harness. The ECU would have to be retuned to account for the 2's smaller size and weight (likely detuned). The suspension would likely have to be modified to account for the significant weight increase from going from a 1.5L engine to a 2.5L engine. This alone I see requiring more than $2.5k. Combine a $20k total price with fuel economy and power ratings equal to a similarly priced 3, which do you think the average consumer will purchase?
3. Bluetooth itself is cheap, correct. Adding a bluetooth system (I assume we're talking about something like Ford's SYNC system) to a car, which currently has no provision for one, is not. This again goes back to requiring a unique wiring harness, or at least modifying the existence of the current one to allow for a modular addition of said bluetooth system. Also, don't forget adding new steering wheel controls and/or headunit controls for which there also is no current provision. All-in-all this is probably a $500-$1k adder. Again, not that signficant in its own right but this stuff adds up.
4. You keep comparing the 2 to a Protege when they are very different cars. Although the 3 has gotten larger, the 2 is still a much smaller car than the Protege in both size and weight. Sure you could fit 16 inch wheels on a 2 but for a moment think about how car manufacturers deal with wheel options. First of all, larger wheels usually come at a premium price (+$1k or more). Second of all, look at Mazda's history with wheels - they're boat anchors. The last thing needed on the 2 is more weight.
5. This one really got me. Forced induction not all that expensive? What was the price difference between a fully loaded Protege ES and a MSP? I bet it was more than $2.5k. While this is in all aspects better than a 2.5L option (lighter, more fuel efficient, etc.) there is still a tremendous amount of engineering work involved. New hardware and a new ECU tune are required at minimum.
I would love to see a MS2, don't get me wrong. The problem I see is the total price to the consumer is going to be over $20k with all these options. When I went looking at the 2 I went in looking for a small, cheap, fuel efficient car and a MS2 does not fit that bill.
With all due respect, I tend to disagree. Putting in the NA 2.5L, even if it fits in just fine, would probably make the Deuce too front-heavy, and as a result you'd lose quite a bit in handling. While force-feeding the existing 1.5 with turbo/super-charger should leave the weight and weight distribution about the same (which is good). IMHO, 2.5L is to be considered only if you're trying to make it into a drag strip rocket, otherwise no good.
As for bolt-on turbo kit -- well, it's fine if you're building a dedicated track or solo racer or if you have a garage and time to play with it often. Otherwise, for DD having a factory-installed forced induction (with the associated factory warranty) is another thing altogether.
Magnum P5 nailed it. You're not just paying for raw materials cost, you're paying for R&D and Logistics.
Also, I believe the Abarth is already announced at $22k, and I expect the Veloster turbo to come in right around there as well.
I dunno what the cost of the MSP was, but the $2.5k cost is about what the MS3 launched over a 3 hatch back in the day (currently a 3 GT is 300 bucks cheaper than an MS3). A big portion of that is that Mazda sells MS3s for very little over invoice compared to the 3. Basically, because they're niche products anyway, they accept that they're not going to be hugely profitable vehicles and instead use them as a means of conversion to the brand and banners for the Zoom-Zoom. The 2 is already pretty close to invoice as is, which again they can justify because it's targeted at first-time car buyers so they can start building brand loyalty. and MS2 would pretty much be sold for no profit, and likely price itself out of the first time market as well.
Really, the target market for an MS2 would be Mazda loyalists who appreciate what the 2 is, and they've already got our money and loyalty. From a business standpoint, it makes more sense to try to channel us into getting an MS3 or a miata instead of building a new product.
Also, I believe the Abarth is already announced at $22k, and I expect the Veloster turbo to come in right around there as well.
I dunno what the cost of the MSP was, but the $2.5k cost is about what the MS3 launched over a 3 hatch back in the day (currently a 3 GT is 300 bucks cheaper than an MS3). A big portion of that is that Mazda sells MS3s for very little over invoice compared to the 3. Basically, because they're niche products anyway, they accept that they're not going to be hugely profitable vehicles and instead use them as a means of conversion to the brand and banners for the Zoom-Zoom. The 2 is already pretty close to invoice as is, which again they can justify because it's targeted at first-time car buyers so they can start building brand loyalty. and MS2 would pretty much be sold for no profit, and likely price itself out of the first time market as well.
Really, the target market for an MS2 would be Mazda loyalists who appreciate what the 2 is, and they've already got our money and loyalty. From a business standpoint, it makes more sense to try to channel us into getting an MS3 or a miata instead of building a new product.
well i didnt say all of those things needed to be done. i like the idea of either a 2.5 skyactive or a small turbo or sc in the 2. turbo would follow the lines of the mazdaspeed heritage. but could you see this being done?
1. small turbo kit, turbo, manifold, smic, piping, ecu. -2500 dollars approximately
2. aerodynamic front bumper and rear valence- 800
3. exhaust system- 250
4. sportier springs, and sway bars-600
and possibly disc brakes for the rear.
but think about it this way
mazdaspeed ( when developing the protege ) was minimalistic in a sense. there was no sunroof because it compromised structural integrity, there was no cruise control because a performance car doesnt need it, etc. if they stick to that mentality with the ms2 then it will become more cost effective. with a skyactive 2.5L motor, and a 2300llb car, the gas mileage would have no problem coming up to 40 mpg on the highway. remove cruise control, steering wheel audio controls, and things not necessary for performance that could potentially bring the car to the 22000 dollar range. thats not bad for a car with a motor that has potential for 40 mpg... unlike the speed 3.
1. small turbo kit, turbo, manifold, smic, piping, ecu. -2500 dollars approximately
2. aerodynamic front bumper and rear valence- 800
3. exhaust system- 250
4. sportier springs, and sway bars-600
and possibly disc brakes for the rear.
but think about it this way
mazdaspeed ( when developing the protege ) was minimalistic in a sense. there was no sunroof because it compromised structural integrity, there was no cruise control because a performance car doesnt need it, etc. if they stick to that mentality with the ms2 then it will become more cost effective. with a skyactive 2.5L motor, and a 2300llb car, the gas mileage would have no problem coming up to 40 mpg on the highway. remove cruise control, steering wheel audio controls, and things not necessary for performance that could potentially bring the car to the 22000 dollar range. thats not bad for a car with a motor that has potential for 40 mpg... unlike the speed 3.
Fixed that for you...
What is wrong with just putting the 2.0l from the MX-5 in there? 170hp normally aspirated, is not enough for a 2? The other problem you are missing is that this car was brought out to be an entry level econo-box, meant to fill in a gap in the line-up. While the 3 is a nice car, and aside from the fact I would never buy one with the Joker face it currently has; it is not cheap enough for entry level car buyers. Making a MS2 would price this car out of the econo-box pricing and put it directly in competition with the 3 or even the MS3 in price. If you had to choose between two cars in the same price range, would you pick the MS3 or the MS2, given that they had similar performance levels?
- :
- 1989 RX-7 GXL Blaze Red
I wish they would do a speed sedan again. other than the 6
Something's gotta give... It just can't be that two cars -- one smaller, one larger -- would have the exact same everything: performance, gas mileage, price, everything except one is smaller than the other.
But otherwise I agree -- if there was 2 with the same price as 3, approx. same power and same amenities, most people would probably pick the bigger 3.
A Mazdaspeed version would be awesome. Have only had my 2 for a month, logged just over 6500kms and am already wondering what I can do for upgrades. Great little car but I can never own anything for long before I crave more power/more speed etc.
As for what it should have? Turbo for sure, maybe borrow their Fiesta cousins ecoboost engine slightly tuned? Or the 2.3 turbo out of the 'speed 3? All wheel disc brakes would be nice, 16" rims instead of the 15s, a few little aero pieces and a tuneable suspension, or at least upgraded sway bars and strut tower brace. Some snazzy seats to finish the package off on the inside, sold to me for sure if they can keep the price point reasonable.
As for what it should have? Turbo for sure, maybe borrow their Fiesta cousins ecoboost engine slightly tuned? Or the 2.3 turbo out of the 'speed 3? All wheel disc brakes would be nice, 16" rims instead of the 15s, a few little aero pieces and a tuneable suspension, or at least upgraded sway bars and strut tower brace. Some snazzy seats to finish the package off on the inside, sold to me for sure if they can keep the price point reasonable.
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/02/21/troubled-mazda-looking-to-raise-2b-in-shares-fund-mexico-plant/ this doesn't bode well on the "can Mazda justify it financially" debate that's been ongoing.
eff.
eff.
