u/CostaQuantaa

Tom Matano, designer of the NA Miata and FD RX-7, had envisioned an entire model family for the Miata. Built around a modular platform, the idea wasn’t just to create the classic MX-5 roadster, but also a Speedster and a Coupé. There were even plans for an officially sold pedal-powered children’s car.

Yet the road to that one car alone was long and complicated. As early as 1992, Matano’s team completed a clay model of the MX-5 NA Coupé and shipped it from California to Hiroshima. Instead of approving the design, however, Mazda executives refused to sign off on it. Their concern was that a Coupé might dilute the purist essence of the MX-5. Ironically, the closed-roof NA variant would have offered greater chassis rigidity at lower weight, improved aerodynamics, and even a larger trunk.

Mazda designer Tom Matano saw another opportunity when Mazda was searching for a special car for its appearance at the 1996 New York Auto Show. According to him, the team had just four weeks to complete the concept, with the intention of creating a body style that felt like a natural evolution of the Miata. This was achieved by redesigning key sections of the rear bodywork so it would flow seamlessly into the new fixed fiberglass roof.

Notable design cues borrowed from the FD3S RX-7 included the subtle double-bubble roof and the similarly styled B-pillar. Aside from that, the M Coupé remained mechanically almost identical to a standard NA8 Miata, apart from a Remus exhaust system. Inside, the seats featured embossed “M” logos, while a MOMO steering wheel, pedals, and shift knob completed the package.

Modular platform? Diversification? Filling every conceivable niche? In today’s automotive world, executives would probably applaud such an idea and greenlight the entire project lineup on the spot. Back in the 1990s, however, Mazda management remained unconvinced, and combined with the collapse of Japan’s bubble-era economy, the NA Coupé never made it into series production.

A true MX-5 Coupé that actually reached customers finally became reality in 2003. Mazda produced a small run for the Japanese domestic market based on the NB generation. Stylistically, however, the car never quite matched the elegance of its unofficial predecessor. In particular, the rear end, with its larger triangular side window and fastback-inspired lines, lacked the same visual cohesion. Only 179 examples were ever built.

https://www.dailysportscar.com/2026/05/06/heinrich-to-become-full-time-porsche-penske-gtp-driver.html

When people talk about rotary engines in road cars, the discussion always revolves around poor reliability, apex seal failures, oil consumption and engines blowing up. But if you look at Mazda’s motorsport history, the reputation seems almost completely inverted.

Cars like the Cosmo Sport 110S at the 84 Hours Marathon de la Route endurance race weren’t especially fast compared to contemporary German sports cars like the 911, yet they became famous for surviving.

The same was true for the SA/FB RX-7 in endurance racing: never the outright fastest car, but besides being praised for its handling, it was above all regarded as ultra mechanically durable. And it was hugely successful as well - winning the 24 Hours of Spa, taking class victory at the 24 Hours of Daytona, scoring over 100 IMSA class wins, and becoming one of the very few cars alongside the Porsche 935 to have already been inducted into the IMSA Hall of Fame.

Even the legendary 787B only beat the faster Group C competition at 24 Hours of Le Mans in 1991 because it was vastly more reliable than most of its rivals. In outright pace, it was slower than all the top class cars it competed against.

So how did the rotary engine end up with two completely opposite reputations depending on whether it was in a race car or a road car?

Is it because Mazda’s race engines were fundamentally different from the production ones? Or could part of the issue simply be that many road car owners never drove rotary cars hard enough?

Curious to hear what people think.

When it became clear in 1968 that the 914 would become reality, Porsche was already well established in motorsport with the 911. However, it was also evident that the displacement of the flat-six engines in upcoming 911 models would steadily increase, and that the Porsche 914/6 GT could fill the 2-litre class gap left by the absence of a suitable 911 variant.

It was obvious that the 911 itself would continue to grow in capacity over the years – by 1972 it had already reached 2.5 litres, with 2.8 and 3.0-litre versions ready for 1973, and from 1974 the Carrera RS 3.0 and RSR 3.0 began their Group 4 domination worldwide, until the 934 arrived in 1976. This development concerned racing director Rico Steinemann, as these new 911 race cars became increasingly expensive, while there was also a lack of a car suitable for both weekday commuting and weekend racing. The 914/6, in the programme from 1969 onwards, fit this role.

The 914/6 always played a secondary role within a company operating at the very limits financially and in manpower. Jürgen Barth writes in The Big Book of Porsche Types: “Although the Porsche 914/6 had only a short international racing career, it cannot be said that it did not perform respectably. However, it lacked the major, spectacular successes achieved by the 911 models at the same time.”

The 914/6 performed particularly well in endurance racing, where it could compensate for its lack of power with reliability. On 3 October, the “original” GT was completed – still without the later characteristic wide fender flares, which at this stage were only mild and rounded. This first prototype, registered “S-E 8060”, looked powerful but somewhat understated.

Beneath the black bodywork it was already highly competitive: powered by a 911 engine (901/26) producing 180 hp. It took until 17 October 1969 for chassis and body modifications to be finalised, resulting in the Porsche 914/6 GT as we know it today which was homologated in the Group 4 GT class .

Huschke von Hanstein demanded a 2-litre engine so the 914/6 could be homologated in the 2-litre class. This led to the use of the Carrera 6 engine. For rallying, the car used a modified chassis with the 160 hp 2-litre 911 S engine, while the racing version received the proven 2-litre Carrera 6 engine with an official output of 210 hp, allowing homologation as a Group 4 Special GT up to 2 litres. The chassis was also revised, with stronger lower front wishbones, anti-roll bars front and rear, and 911 S/T racing brakes with ventilated discs.

On 31 May 1970, the first customer teams entered the 1000 km Nürburgring race with the 914/6 GT. The car performed excellently, finishing 19th, 20th, 21st and 23rd overall, and taking second to fifth in the under-2-litre class behind a 911 L.

It was not until June 1970 that the 914/6 GT was officially fielded. While Porsche racing director Rico Steinemann sent no fewer than seven Porsche 917s to Le Mans in pursuit of overall victory, the factory also prepared a 914/6 GT for the event, entered by Sonauto. Driven by Claude Ballot-Léna and Guy Chasseuil, the car endured a heavily rain-soaked weekend and finished sixth overall, proving the long-distance capability of the 914/6 GT.

To meet growing customer demand, Porsche quickly began supplying conversion kits, used for factory builds as well as sold to private entrants building their own 914/6 GTs.

To understand why the 914/6 GT remained somewhat in the background among privateers, it should be noted that in 1970 a racing 911 S with a 2.3-litre engine and 230 hp cost 44,980 DM, rising to 46,660 DM the following year. By 1972, an ambitious driver could even buy a 911 with 2.5 litres and 275 hp for 49,680 DM a meaning the 914/6 GT cost the same as a far more powerful 911 S in Group 4 racing specification.

The greatest success of the 914/6 GT was the triple victory at the 1970 Marathon de la Route at the Nürburgring. This success encouraged Porsche to counter the slow sales of the 914/6 with a strong factory appearance at the 1971 Monte Carlo Rally, leading to the decision to replace the 911 S entries in favour of the 914/6.

This decision was not well received by factory drivers, who considered the 911 the better rally car, but management and marketing insisted. For the event, Porsche built three new 914/6 GTs in rally specification, entered for Björn Waldegård, Gérard Larrousse and Åke Andersson – the same team that had scored first, second and fourth the previous year in 911 S/Ts.

However, the 1971 Monte Carlo Rally ended in disappointment: Björn Waldegård, with co-driver Hans Thorszelius, finished third, while the other two factory cars retired. An internal Porsche document summarised the 914/6 GT’s record bluntly: “It began with a triple victory at the Marathon de la Route. In its second factory outing, Monte Carlo 1971, which was intended to be its breakthrough, it finished third. After that, its sporting development was discontinued.”

With that, the official racing career of the Porsche 914/6 GT was effectively over before it had truly begun – an irony of fate, as Lancia would later establish the mid-engine concept in rallying with the Stratos, which first appeared in competition in 1972. However, it still took two years before the Stratos became a winning car from 1974 onwards. Perhaps Porsche, with more belief in the car and its technology, and greater patience, could have written a different chapter in motorsport history.