GTPNewsWire
Contributing Writer
- 21,636
- GTPHQ
This is the discussion thread for a recent post on GTPlanet:
This article was published by Andrew Evans (@Famine) on December 14th, 2018 in the Automotive News category.
You wouldn't though, would you?I'd definitely get one, provided it has a manual transmission.
Didn't you know everything has to have 500hp, AWD, a manual and weigh 2500lbs!?!You wouldn't though, would you?
Nobody on the internet who says "I'd buy x as long as it has y" ever actually buys x even if it does have y, which is why manufacturers inevitably end up making z instead and slowly removing y from their options lists.
You wouldn't though, would you?
Nobody on the internet who says "I'd buy x as long as it has y" ever actually buys x even if it does have y, which is why manufacturers inevitably end up making z instead and slowly removing y from their options lists.
Uncalled for. He didn't make a demand or chastise Mazda, and he didn't exactly specify new or used, which relates to your point but makes it an unnecessary reply.You wouldn't though, would you?
Nobody on the internet who says "I'd buy x as long as it has y" ever actually buys x even if it does have y, which is why manufacturers inevitably end up making z instead and slowly removing y from their options lists.
Didn't you know everything has to have 500hp, AWD, a manual and weigh 2500lbs!?!
If they do, it will have to be a CUV.Will they make a new Ford Probe as well?
Also tongue-in-cheek (unless you thought I was being serious that literally nobody on the internet goes out and buys a car they say they're going to buy). People saying they'd buy something "as long as it's a manual" is like someone on Jalopnik saying they'd definitely buy something if it was a brown, diesel, manual, rear-wheel drive wagon (see @SlipZtrEm's post above). But apologies to @Dopplegagger if it looked like I was having a go at you. Must remember to use emojis next time.Uncalled for.
Traditionally the "MX" models haven't been rotary, but they have tended to be on the sporty side of things.Doesthismeanwe'llseethereturnoftherotary?
No. The MX-3 and MX-6 were both piston-engined four-pot (1.5 and 1.6 for the MX-3, 2.0 for the MX-6) and V6 petrols (1.8 for the MX-3, 2.5 for the MX-6) and never saw rotary power. The V6, by the way, is brilliant in all guises, but particularly the 1.8Doesthismeanwe'llseethereturnoftherotary?
No. The MX-3 and MX-6 were both piston-engined four-pot (1.5 and 1.6 for the MX-3, 2.0 for the MX-6) and V6 petrols (1.8 for the MX-3, 2.5 for the MX-6) and never saw rotary power. The V6, by the way, is brilliant in all guises, but particularly the 1.8
Mazda is planning to include a rotary in its line-up, but only as a range-extender for an electric car.
The 1.8 V6 in an MX-3 is still among the smoothest engines I've driven short of a rotary or a V12. I expect the 2-litre and 2.5-litre versions are similarly smooth. (For good sound videos, check out anything involving a BTCC Mondeo from the 1990s, as that used a Mazda V6 on ITBs too).
I did ask some Mazda engineers on a Skyactiv event whether they'd consider reintroducing V6s, now that their engine technology has allowed for significantly improved economy. They told me it was an interesting idea, but unlikely, sadly.
It's alright though. C4s are still worthless.It also sucks that Nissan 240Zs have shot up in price in the last few years and I probably won't get to own one, but then I don't furnish every thread on GTP with "I'd definitely buy a straight-six sports car if such-and-such company made it" because that obviously isn't gonna happen, apart from in maybe a three-year window fifteen years down the line when it's depreciated enough but not yet become a classic.
It didn't seem good-natured to me, no. Mutual respect is all I'm asking for.Also tongue-in-cheek (unless you thought I was being serious that literally nobody on the internet goes out and buys a car they say they're going to buy). People saying they'd buy something "as long as it's a manual" is like someone on Jalopnik saying they'd definitely buy something if it was a brown, diesel, manual, rear-wheel drive wagon (see @SlipZtrEm's post above). But apologies to @Dopplegagger if it looked like I was having a go at you. Must remember to use emojis next time.
I know you know many of those voices, probably the majority, are teenagers and young adults who have no money for that. I don't think your hypothetical is realistic. I understand the frustration over repeated refrains, but I have never been comfortable with the implication that you can only express a preference or lament your options if you can back it up with a large sum of money.Though since you jumped on it @Wolfe, I'll bite anyway: if as many people actually bought manual transmission vehicles as bang on about them on the internet, they probably would be more frequent. It's basic demand and supply. Same goes for any other dead horse enthusiasts like to kick. Money talks.
Genuinely cheaper than 240Zs in the UK too.It's alright though. C4s are still worthless.
Let's take a few steps backwards here.It didn't seem good-natured to me, no. Mutual respect is all I'm asking for.
I know you know many of those voices, probably the majority, are teenagers and young adults who have no money for that. I don't think your hypothetical is realistic. I understand the frustration over repeated refrains, but I have never been comfortable with the implication that you can only express a preference or lament your options if you can back it up with a large sum of money.
"Buy new manual transmission cars" is the correct and practical answer to the question, "How can we save the manual?" It is the reality. But it is a condescending response to someone who can only search for MT cars on a smaller budget, or who shares their $0.02 on a car that most people sharing their comments will never drive anyway. Gabbing about cars you have no honest intention (or ability) to buy unless maybe if you won the lottery is the backbone of what we all do here.