We've got info on the Miata reveal.

Man oh man does that look good. I have a similar problem to others. I dont stinking fit in a NA or NB. at 6ft4in there is no decent choice for roadster.

Mother has a 2006 NC. I fit ok in it. (door cupholders kill my knees). It's a blast to drive though. (does need more torque...) Very interested to see just how big this car is. KT could you tell if it's NC or NB sized?

Big Block >> SkyActive. I wanna cram a Chrysler RB into that thing.

mazdeuce wrote: I keep hearing the 2200 lbs number being thrown about on the internet. I'd be willing to forgive a lot of styling issues for that. As more pictures emerge I like it more. The "official" pictures had that whole light playing over shapes weird photography thing going on. Even on the reveal stand they only used certain angles and lighting perhaps to highlight what they wanted? Whatever it is, the more pictures of the car from normal angles and with normal lighting, the better it looks. Choice of engine will matter.

This.

Assuming that it costs somewhere near what the NC costs, and actually weighs 2200 lb. Does it render the Elise obsolete? It will likely be stiffer, since it's much newer (despite the Elise's really cool construction). It will likely have the same power, a tiny bit more weight, much higher rate of maintenance, and it will probably be easier to get in and out of, too.

volvoclearinghouse wrote: Big Block >> SkyActive. I wanna cram a Chrysler RB into that thing.

Makes sense, not much that you say does.

racerdave600 wrote: A better reveal would have been to simply driver it on stage and have a guy going through the spec list. Know your audience Mazda!

What makes you think that they don't?

Sorry, I couldn't resist!

tuna55 wrote: Assuming that it costs somewhere near what the NC costs, and actually weighs 2200 lb. Does it render the Elise obsolete? It will likely be stiffer, since it's much newer (despite the Elise's really cool construction). It will likely have the same power, a tiny bit more weight, much higher rate of maintenance, and it will probably be easier to get in and out of, too.

Depends on how hard you want to drive.

For a garage queen the Elise will appreciate in value and the MX5 will depreciate.

If you want to drive in anger for a decade (including fender benders) I'd probably take the MX5...

Just a thought, does anyone know what the manual/automatic rate on the NC is? I keep thinking that if they don't keep the power up they made a mistake. But I'm thinking as an enthusiast. The auto/manual rate would probably tell me that the car is purchased more by normal people, and those people are money for Mazda. Perhaps the whole point of the 2200 lbs and 1.5 liter engine is spectacular economy numbers. The 2 was high thirties with those specs and I bet this new Miata could do 40+. Small, cute, 40mpg will sell more cars for Mazda than 200hp.

jv8 wrote:

tuna55 wrote: Assuming that it costs somewhere near what the NC costs, and actually weighs 2200 lb. Does it render the Elise obsolete? It will likely be stiffer, since it's much newer (despite the Elise's really cool construction). It will likely have the same power, a tiny bit more weight, much higher rate of maintenance, and it will probably be easier to get in and out of, too.

Depends on how hard you want to drive. For a garage queen the Elise will appreciate in value and the MX5 will depreciate. If you want to drive in anger for a decade (including fender benders) I'd probably take the MX5...

That's stunning to me.

Of course I will have to wait to see real tests.

Assuming I am right, that a ND can hang with an Elise around a real track, though. That means a mass produced unibody that you can legitamately live with every day can run with a special handbuilt glued together aluminum chassis trick car built by a manufacturer known for their handling. Now of course there is a decade or two of advancements involved, but it's still amazing.

tuna55 wrote:

volvoclearinghouse wrote: Big Block >> SkyActive. I wanna cram a Chrysler RB into that thing.

Makes sense, not much that you say does.

Ouch. So not feeling the love this morning, tuna. Is this because of your Saturn thread?

volvoclearinghouse wrote:

tuna55 wrote:

volvoclearinghouse wrote: Big Block >> SkyActive. I wanna cram a Chrysler RB into that thing.

Makes sense, not much that you say does.

Ouch. So not feeling the love this morning, tuna. Is this because of your Saturn thread?

I thought the yoda-speak would lighten it a bit. Plenty of love. I'd give you a hug if you were still down the hall from me.

Ok, maybe not, but still.

Or, maybe you'd prefer this Heart:

conesare2seconds wrote: It looks like a 6 had a baby with a Z4.

Or an Esperante and a z4 from that side view.

It has a good overall shape and the rear end looks good, but the front end was a total letdown. I couldn't stay up to watch last night, but when I saw the front end this morning, my reaction was to say out loud "No. What? WHAT? No."

There's definitely some Chris Bangle influence, especially in the front, and to me Chris Bangle is the Hitler of automotive design.

I think the headlights are most of the problem. They're too small, and it creates a "face" that looks like a big half sleepy/half angry animal with beady little eyes. The headlights should have been more like an F-type or Mazda3. And unfortunately it would be impossible to fix with aftermarket headlights alone because all the front bodywork would have to change around them.

But if anyone does want to go through with all of that expenditure, I found this sketch that looks far better:

Wow, I think they knocked the design out of the ball park. Looks awesome to me. Oh, and thank Berk there’s no hard top Why would you saddle a great sports car with a solid top? I do hope the PRHT is back though, was there any mention of that?

I just hope it still feels solid at 2,200lb’s. I really hope power and torque come in at just a bit above the current NC. The NC is just not quite quick enough in standard form. I hope someone comes out with a 100% reliable DDable supercharger within a couple of years to bring it up to 250hp and make it a legitimate competitor to a 3-5 year old Boxster.

GameboyRMH wrote: It has a good overall shape and the rear end looks good, but the front end was a total letdown. I couldn't stay up to watch last night, but when I saw the front end this morning, my reaction was to say out loud "No. What? WHAT? No." There's definitely some Chris Bangle influence, especially in the front, and to me Chris Bangle is the Hitler of automotive design. I think the headlights are most of the problem. They're too small, and it creates a "face" that looks like a big half sleepy/half angry animal with beady little eyes. The headlights should have been more like an F-type or Mazda3. And unfortunately it would be impossible to fix with aftermarket headlights alone because all the front bodywork would have to change around them. But if anyone does want to go through with all of that expenditure, I found this sketch that looks far better:

I hit "Quote" instead of "Reply" because I want to propagate this image. Pop up headlights would totally make this car.

Love it. Can't wait to see it in person.

I just had a dream on the way to drop the kids at school. What if they released a "track" version with a fixed roof with a Gurney bubble for helmet clearance. A fastback with tie downs in the floor for wheels. It could out 86 the 86. There HAS to be someone at Mazda that can think of something like this. They made that very limited Japan only fixed top NB didn't they? Call the guy who penned that and get him working!

I like what I see in the photos, so it passes the eye test for me. I'm much more curious for the tech specs and pricing details.

Each to their own on styling design. I think the pop up headlight rendering image is fugly.

Sorry, I haven't had a chance to read the whole thread. Is there a public release date?

Appleseed wrote: Screw it, next time get the Foo Fighters.

They at least have Dave Grohl!

I really like the looks of it.

I was reading an Aussie auto article and it was saying that it would cheaper then the old one. Any truth to that?

I wonder how that would look with a pair of big round driving lights set into the grill opening...

mazdeuce wrote: I just had a dream on the way to drop the kids at school. What if they released a "track" version with a fixed roof with a Gurney bubble for helmet clearance. A fastback with tie downs in the floor for wheels. It could out 86 the 86. There HAS to be someone at Mazda that can think of something like this. They made that very limited Japan only fixed top NB didn't they? Call the guy who penned that and get him working!

I honestly don't get why people don't like drop tops. But if you really want a hard top why not buy a power retractable hard top version, gut the mechanism. Build a roll bar and screw, weld, fiberglass the hard top in place?

Adrian_Thompson wrote:

mazdeuce wrote: I just had a dream on the way to drop the kids at school. What if they released a "track" version with a fixed roof with a Gurney bubble for helmet clearance. A fastback with tie downs in the floor for wheels. It could out 86 the 86. There HAS to be someone at Mazda that can think of something like this. They made that very limited Japan only fixed top NB didn't they? Call the guy who penned that and get him working!

I honestly don't get why people don't like drop tops. But if you really want a hard top why not buy a power retractable hard top version, gut the mechanism. Build a roll bar and screw, weld, fiberglass the hard top in place?

Yeah. I don't either. You can put the top up if it is raining...

More pics from Autocar, having difficulty hotlinking so here's the link to the page. link-e-dink