the 2007 folding hard top

I'll be very surprised if the weight penalty is even half of that, after the subtraction of the 40-50 pound soft top. But the people who buy them won't care about that. I see this as expanding the MX-5 market into a segment that would never consider buying a ragtop. They'll simply get a much more capable car than they'd thought they were buying. I think it's pretty cool (though I have no interest in buying one personally).

This will probably make me re-think my decision to replace my '95 with a fixed-roof car.

I agree, both that is is pretty cool and that I probably don't want one, but I do want to see it in person.

I think that the main complaint will be the same we have been hearing or saying, that the miata is getting away from the basics and becoming more generic, more complicated, more gadgety, etc.

I can only assume that the thing is going to be operated by a motor that Mazda will charge about $1000.00 for when it goes out. Assuming that the folding hardtop itself is not prone to breakage, I guess you could balance that against the cost of replacing one or more ragtops.

Going by how much a power window motor alone adds to the weight of a door, it could be a fairly heavy motor, though I also agree that the entire top system will probably add 100 pounds or so max to the car after removing the ragtop, which is not super-light at all as you pointed out. (40 to 50 pounds)

Pat

There you go. It's another choice, not a threat to the beloved roadster. I think it'll do okay. I also think it could become Mazda's new halo product--it implies a certain sophistication that's been missing since the RX-7 went away.

The RX-8 was supposed to do that, but no one took it seriously in part because it has too many doors (stupid, but unfortunately true). OTOH, the Miata already has a solid reputation for this new model to build on, in a slightly different direction. If Mazda spins it properly, it should work well for them.

One thing, though: Mazda should not sell the folding hardtop without a supercharger* in the package, and probably equip it only with an automatic. They made the mistake of overselling the RX-8 as a sports car in a market where everyone else had more power, and it semi-flopped from the bring-a-knife-to-a-gunfight syndrome. If it chooses, Mazda could position this car out of that market and sell to the style-conscious who can't swing a Mercedes or Lexus.

*I can't find the website now, but there's a new supercharger kit for the NC. It's a low-boost centrifugal, and it fits very neatly in front of the engine. It's simple, cheap, and would be perfect for this purpose; no clutch to worry about, and just a reflash of the ECU to keep the engine safe.

Sure, not to mention that I'm tired of, uh...messing with the softtop.

I'm not so sure--Car and Driver magazine sure takes the RX-8 seriously. I'm taking it rather seriously, too, as it's at the top of a short list of cars I'm considering buying. I *like* that it discreetly has four doors.

The supercharger wouldn't be a bad idea. The auto-only would be a *horrible* mistake.

I think it semi-flopped because no one knows what it is. It's a lightweight car--it doesn't really need that much power to make it fun.

Sounds good.

C'mon, Pat, it's 2006. That might have been true a decade ago, but at least one manufacturer builds a car with power windows that are claimed to weigh 7 oz. *less* than the manual versions. The Lotus Exige, if you're curious, and of course I have a cite (third paragraph down):

No, I don't know how they did it either, but I'd expect to see more of that. I *hate* crank windows--in this day and age, there's simply no reason to have to wind them by hand.

Probably true.

No question that this is an amazing car. It is also $50,000+ in price and even more impractical than the miata. They have quite a bit more leeway in what they can do to make the car ultra-lightweight. Are manual mirrors even an option on the NC miata? If so, I wonder what the door weight difference is between manual and power on the miata rather than the Lotus. That would be the question, but I do get your point that things are changing, and sometimes that change is even good.

Personal preference would be about it.

I wonder if they had similar discussions when the electric starter first became common, with people saying, "I can still crank that sucker by hand!" Maybe Lanny can tell us, you were driving the horseless carriage back then, weren't you? ;-)

Pat - running for cover

Errr, make that manual windows, not mirrors.

Pat

Trust me, NO ONE enjoyed hand-cranking a car. It was dangerous: there was a specific trauma called the "Ford fracture" caused by the engine backfiring while being cranked.

Har, har, har. In fact, my first car (a 1948 Jaguar) did have a crank in its toolkit, but I was afraid to use it. The starter was one of its few electrical parts that always worked properly. My 1960 MGA had a crank hole in the bumper, but it didn't come with a crank.

The only thing cranky about my Miata is, occasionally, the driver.

Interesting. A quick google search turned this up.

"Automobile Self Starter. Charles F. Kettering led the automotive world in innovation for decades and holds more patents than any American except Thomas Edison. Prior to Kettering?s invention, drivers frequently broke their arms crank-starting their cars. Kettering?s automatic starter, ended all of that with the turn of a key introduced on the 1912 Cadillac.

The engineering problem took him no time at all. He offered Leland a prototype in December of 1910. Kettering's system relied on a storage battery that supplied a 24-volt charge to the starter to ignite the engine. The battery then switched to 6 volts to feed back into the battery and recharge it. His first operating model was delivered to Cadillac on February 17. Leland ordered twelve thousand units to be installed in the 1912 Cadillac. The self-starter gave women access to cars for the first time. Without the arduous task of cranking the engine to deter them, women could drive cars on their own. Since there were almost as many rich women as rich men, the self-starter drastically broadened the market for the automobile."

Pat

I had a 1976 Citroen 2CV for a while in 1981 when I lived in France, and when the starter broke I hand-cranked it for about a week until I got around to getting it fixed. It was pretty easy with a two-cylinder, 600 cc engine.

Barry

Man, can we change a topic or what?!

I wonder how common it was for people to be injured or killed by the props. I also wonder when the electric starter became commonly used in airplanes. I would guess around the same time as cars, but I am too lazy this morning to look it up, heh.

Pat

That sounds exactly like something I would have done, especially if it was dangerous. How/where did you crank it?

Pat

As I remember, at the end of the lug wrench was a little hook that went into a hole in front (I think you had to open the hood first). It never seemed dangerous to me.

Now I know who to blame.!!!!!!

......( walked right into that one, didn't ya )

PLLLLLLLLLLL...a Citroen could NEVER be described as "dangerous"...othdr things, maybe...

I am not touching that one with a ten foot pole......Those waters are too dangerous to play in. ;-)

Pat