Spannerhead Dot Com

How might the automotive landscape been different had an automaker made a critical decision differently? Decided to see a particular concept through to production? Persisted with the production of a flawed model a little longer? Kept developing a promising technology? Changed a key part of a model whose sales were flagging?

It’s hard to play revisionist historian, what with the infinite number of variables that swirl around us on a daily basis. That said, there are definitely cars, ideas and technologies that deserved a lot more success than they actually achieved. This is the first installment of a new series examining “What Might Have Been,” key decisions by various automakers that, frankly, I wish they had made differently.

Today we discuss the Eunos Cosmo, a RWD luxury coupe built by Mazda between 1990 and 1995 for their upmarket Japan-only Eunos division. Never heard of it, you say? Good reason: It was never exported outside Japan, and remained a right-hand-drive domestic-market-only vehicle.

It was a technological tour de force. The first mass production car to feature sequential twin turbochargers, it remains also the only production car equipped with a 3-rotor, 300 hp version of Mazda’s signature rotary engine, the 20B-REW:

The innovations continued inside the car, with the world’s first built-in GPS navigation system as well as a color touchscreen. Sadly, no manual transmission option was offered on a production car, though a few enterprising owners have adapted the later third-generation RX-7’s manual to their Cosmos.

The late ’80s saw an explosion of luxury sub-brands associated with Japanese automakers: Honda launched Acura, Nissan debuted Infinti and Toyota unveiled Lexus. Mazda was set to follow suit, building momentum for their upcoming Amati luxury marque. The Cosmo, along with a car which later became the Mazda Millenia, were pegged as the two Amati “launch vehicles.” But for reasons unknown, Mazda decided to change course and shelve plans for the new sub-brand. As a result, the Cosmo never crossed the Pacific, and remained a vision from afar for American enthusiasts.

It didn’t help us, either, that the development of the Cosmo occurred during a period of great aesthetic success for Mazda, when they released some their best-ever looking models, and some of the most beautiful cars to arise from Japan, ever. The lines of the stunning third-generation RX-7, Mazda’s final 929 and MX-6 were penned by their then-brilliant design department, but the Cosmo’s sinuous curves arguably topped them all. Had it been released here, between its technological prowess and overwhelming styling grace, I’ve no doubt it would have been a credible rival to the successful Lexus SC coupe. If only, Mazda, if only.

Editor’s note: This post is part of an ongoing series highlighting key decisions I wish automakers had made differently, for divers reasons. Read the other installments here:

• 1992-1995 Pontiac Bonneville
• Infiniti Q45
• Honda S2000
• BMW 840Ci

I really hope I’m reading this wrong.

In their August issue, Car and Driver reports (emphasis mine):

Only 1134 Mazda RX-8s were purchased here in 2010. The lack of interest means that Mazda will probably shelve its rotary engine later this year. But weep not, rotorheads, because salvation is at hand. […]

The Audi A1 E-Tron, a concept car revealed at last year’s Geneva auto salon, is a showcase of rotary possibilities. Like practically every future-think demonstration vehicle, the E-Tron is electrically propelled, in this case by a 101-hp AC motor driving the front wheels. To forestall range anxiety when the 12-kWh lithium-ion battery pack peters out after 30 or so miles of city driving, there’s an onboard alternator located between the rear wheels. Enter the rotary: A 254-cc, single-rotor Wankel engine provides the power to generate up to 15kW of electrical energy, stretching total range to 155 miles on one battery charge and one 3.2-gallon tank of gasoline.

Except…it’s not really the same. Nothing against the Audi per se, but as any rotary enthusiast will tell you, relegating the engine to secondary duty providing power for an electric motor may make some sense from an efficiency standpoint, but it’s a gross waste of the engine’s potential, character, and just seems, well, undignified. Better to go out in a blaze of glory like the manner in which the FD RX-7 departed our shores in ’95 rather than carry on in some kind of nursing-home existence as the “backup” to the method of propulsion du jour.

I don’t know. A first-generation RX-7 was my first project car, so I’ve been a rotorhead from way back, and I’ve been simultaneously saddened by the fact that the engine never caught on, and heartened by Mazda’s dogged devotion to it. The wording of the Car and Driver article is a bit ambiguous, and leads me to believe that they have some kind of inside tip that Mazda has decided to cancel their long-awaited overhaul of the rotary concept, the 16X (shown below).

There are a number of reasons (of varying degrees of validity) the rotary never really caught on. Many of them are misconceptions borne out of ignorance, or the negative reputation, somewhat unfair at this point, the engine developed in its infancy, when the kinks were still being worked out. A few of them are more difficult to dispel, though, among them criticisms of the engine’s poor fuel economy and lack of low-end torque. Mazda’s 16X was specifically designed to address both of those issues with the first-ever clean sheet redesign of their Wankel engine. The larger rotor diameter effectively increases the engine’s “stroke,” greatly improving torque, and changes to the port design and engine management, coupled with the aforementioned rotor optimization, cut fuel consumption considerably.

I just hope I’m misinterpreting the Car and Driver article’s wording, and that Mazda is in fact continuing to inch the engine closer to production. I know it’s not as fashionable as, say, a hybrid or pure electric system, but the engine is Mazda’s heart and soul, their primary claim to uniqueness, and is one of the few really different pieces of core automotive technology out there.