1993 Mazda Rx-7 With 16k Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Mazda MX-5 Miata first engine shot revealed

We've dug deep for just about every scrap of 2016 Mazda MX-5 Miata info available out of the car's California reveal celebration, but powertrain particulars have been especially hard to come by. While we still don't have engine specifications, the folks over at Autoweek have scored a nice scoop - the first underhood photos of one of the display cars.
In the image above, the ND-generation Miata is clearly shown to be powered by a Skyactiv inline four-cylinder, as expected, but its displacement remains unclear. The engine is most likely either the 2.0-liter Skyactiv-G engine offered in low-end Mazda3 and CX-5 models or the 2.5-liter Skyactiv-G found in those same vehicles' upper trims. In those iterations, the 2.0-liter generates 155 horsepower and 154 pound-feet of torque, while the larger-displacement engine nets out at 184 hp and 185 lb-ft. There is no sign of a turbocharger, a feature rumored to be fitted to at least one test mule. There has also been previous rumors of a 1.5-liter Skyactiv engine, possibly for overseas markets.
The 2.0-liter strikes us as the most likely scenario, particularly as Mazda has worked diligently to save every gram in the new car, dropping a pledged 100 kilograms (220 pounds) over the current model, even while adding content. It's entirely possible that the alleged turbo car was, in fact, a mule for the Miata's Alfa Romeo sister car, which is expected to have a wholly different powertrain. Or it could simply be a second engine option for an eventual Mazdaspeed variant, perhaps.

J.D. Power dependability survey is out, but you shouldn't depend on it

J.D. Power has just released its latest automotive dependability survey, which of course has usual suspects Buick and Lexus ranking high. Those are safe and solid findings, surely. But when you look a little closer, there are curiosities. Our Consumer Editor, Jeremy Korzeniewski, offered an explanation a couple of years back for why this survey should be viewed with a degree of skepticism, and his take is worth a re-read. What jumped out at Jeremy were the relatively low spots assigned to Mazda, Subaru and Scion among the ranking of makes. Back in 2016 when he wrote his piece, they were ranked 21st, 23rd and 24th respectively. In this year's survey, Mazda ranks 15th and Subaru 26th, both below the industry average of 142 reported problems per 100 vehicles. (And Scion, of course, is in car-brand heaven.) Now, part of what is going on here is surely the fact that all automotive brands are producing dependable vehicles compared with years gone by, so the degree of variance between the best and worst on the list is not as great as it once was. "For the most part, automotive manufacturers continue to meet consumers' vehicle dependability expectations," Dave Sargent, a J.D. Power vice president, said in a statement. "A 9 percent improvement is extremely impressive, and vehicle dependability is, without question, at its best level ever." That said, when a brand like Subaru, regarded by many as mechanically bulletproof, ranks 26th, it leaves people who know cars scratching their heads. Something there does not compute. The problem, as Jeremy pointed out, is one of methodology: When he wrote his piece, there was no weighting assigned to the problems reported in the survey. And that still appears to be the case. Therefore, a problem with an infotainment system or a loose piece of trim is deemed as serious as a blown engine or leaky transmission. (And yes, infotainment is still the biggest problem across the board.) Jeremy's point: If the categories of problems were weighted, you'd see a different picture. When you look at the Consumer Reports brand rankings (subscription required), you get a very different picture. in CR's rankings, Subaru is No. 6 among brands, which, well, sounds a lot more like it. CR singles out the redesigned 2017 Impreza as a car with some new-model problems. (The BRZ had the fewest.) The two surveys jibe a little more closely when it comes to Mazda, which CR ranks 12th, a drop of six places from previous-year rankings.

Junkyard Gem: 1982 Mazda RX-7 GSL

The early Mazda RX-7 was one of the few bright spots for sports-car shoppers during the Malaise Era, a lightweight and simple rear-wheel-drive machine with a screaming Wankel engine under the hood. Even though it was designed mostly as a means of getting Japanese car buyers a loophole to keep their engine-displacement-based road taxes low, the early RX-7 sold well in North America. I still find these cars during my junkyard travels, but the 1981-1983 FB-series RX-7s have been getting scarce in recent years. Here's a very solid '82 that showed up in Denver during the winter. Japanese cars of this era tended to rust early and often, but this one appears to be absolutely corrosion-free. The odometer shows just a hair over 100,000 miles, so I'm guessing this car spent decades in covered storage. The seat leather shows a few rips, but the interior looks pretty good overall. The body has some dents and dings, nothing serious. It wouldn't have taken much to get this car back on the road and looking good. The GSL package got you four-wheel disc brakes, a limited-slip differential, and these cool-looking pillar badges.  The list price on a new 1982 Mazda RX-7 GSL came to $11,895, or about $32,350 in 2020 bucks. A new Datsun 280ZX coupe went for $14,499 that year, but was a much more powerful and prestigious car; the less opulent 200SX was just $7,739. If you wanted a new Celica Supra, the price tag was $14,598. The final year for the Fiat-badged 124 Spider (they were sold with Pininfarina badging for a few additional years) was 1982, and that car cost $12,290. Meanwhile, your Chevrolet dealer had new Z28 Camaros starting at $9,700 that year; the RX-7 would eat up the Camaro on a tight road course but would be blown away on the straights. The 12A rotary engine in this car made 100 horsepower from just 1.1 liters of displacement, putting smiles on the faces of those Japanese road-tax payers. Unfortunately, fuel consumption was scary, particularly in the immediate aftermath of the 1979 Oil Crisis. Why did this car end up in a place like this? It was found in an office parking lot with a flat tire and expired registration tags and towed away. Then it failed to attract any bidder interest at the subsequent auction and U-Pull-&-Pay picked it up for next to nothing. So, if you ever wanted an early RX-7, buy the next cheap one you find before it meets a fate similar to that of today's Junkyard Gem. This content is hosted by a third party.