I recently bought a Lotus Elan. I got it for two reasons. One, because Gordon Murray, the McLaren F1 and Rocket designer, always gushes about it, and it seemed to be the inspiration for his cars, so I wanted to find out what the fuss was all about. And two, because it was the inspiration for the Mazda MX-5.

When you park the two side by side you see how much smaller the Lotus is, but you see the similarities as well. The MX-5 that I have has a supercharger and a couple of suspension modifications. The extra 50bhp you get with the supercharger makes it a really fast, fun sports car.

The MX-5 was my brother’s and he died of cancer a few years ago. He had the Mazda, an Austin Healey Sprite and a Triumph TR3. I inherited all three cars and kept them.

That was the first Mazda I got and it means a lot to me. Then I got a Mazda I’d always been interested in, which was a Cosmo. I remember when I was a kid the Toyota GT had just come out. So had the Mazda Cosmo, but the Toyota GT was in a James Bond movie and it was a convertible. And it had a TV in the dashboard. When you’re 16, nothing’s better than that.

Consequently, the Cosmo got pretty much eclipsed by the Toyota GT. The Toyota GT had a Yamaha-built motor with 150bhp, overhead cam and all that type of thing. The Mazda was a rotary and at the time there was a certain amount of scepticism about a type of engine nobody had heard of.

It also wasn’t cheap; it was probably about the same price as a Corvette or an XKE (Jaguar E-type). But it had everything. It was a five-speed; it had air-conditioning and what were considered cool accessories of the day – the map light on the dashboard that you could move around; a wooden steering wheel.

The styling was uniquely Japanese. It looked like it took a little bit from an Austin Farina, a bit from a Thunderbird – it was just such an unusual-looking car. I think people liked it but I don’t think people wanted to take a chance. In fact they never exported any.

I found the Cosmo when I went to this guy’s house looking to buy a Monteverdi and he had this thing in the corner, and I went: “Wow, how much do you want for that?” And he said: “Well, the engine doesn’t run.” So I wasn’t actively seeking it out. To me those are the most fun cars to buy – when you just stumble upon it.

I even tracked down the U2 pilot who had bought it in Japan and brought it back to the US. I called him and left a message and his wife thought it was a joke. I called back and said: “Hi, this is Jay Leno,” and someone said: “Stop calling here!” I said: “Wait! Wait! I bought your car. Did you own a Mazda Cosmo?” And she said: “Yes.” So I said: “Well, I bought it and I fixed it up.”

Then she got really friendly. She said: “He drove that car everywhere. We drove it from San Diego to the air force base in Omaha, Nebraska, to Virginia Beach. Everywhere.” So then we talked for about an hour, and whenever there’s an article on the car I pop it in the mail and send it to them.

Then recently I got my third Mazda: the RX-8. I’d picked the RX-8 as the best-handling car for Road & Track. The magazine did the 10 best cars for under whatever price, and that was my choice.

I thought it had the best gearbox. I thought it was the lightest on its feet. You had to work the engine to make it go – it didn’t have all kinds of torque – but it was a great deal of pleasure running it up to 9500rpm and just tapping the gearlever and it all seemed very linear. I just liked the way it felt.

The rotary motor fascinates me because it’s really the only new engine of the 20th century. Mazda perfected it and made it popular and I like the fact that the company sticks with it. It doesn’t have as good fuel consumption as the conventional internal combustion engine, but the reliability seems to be there. People say they burn oil but mine doesn’t. Putting half a pint of oil in every 1,000 miles doesn’t seem excessive to me. If you’re an enthusiast and you like your car, that doesn’t seem crazy.

I also like the design of Mazdas. I like the RX-8 because, whether you love it or hate it, at least it doesn’t look like any other car on the road. When I was a kid growing up in America you could tell by a rear tail light, by a rear quarter-panel or a front quarter-panel, whether you were looking at a Ford or a Chrysler or a Chevy. Everything was distinctive.

Nowadays there’s a line of cars from Buick and Chevrolet that all kind of look the same. The Lexus, the Infiniti, these cars kind of look the same. The RX-8 looks different and I like the original thinking. I like the rear quarter-door that opens. It looks like a two-door but it’s really a four-door. I like the haunches on the fenders. When I see one on the road I immediately identify it.

It’s the same with the Mazda Kabura concept car, which I have been driving recently. It looks like a Mazda but because it’s a concept car it’s hard to appraise its handling and performance accurately. It will only go 50mph!

I had it down at my garage with the designer Franz von Holzhausen. He has already designed the Pontiac Solstice for GM and so knows all about good things coming in small packages. The Kabura is based on the MX-5 platform and has the same powerplant: a twin overhead cam, four-cylinder motor. That means if Mazda chooses to build it the tooling should be fairly easy. It also means it handles well.

I had it on one of my favourite local roads, and even with oversized wheels and less than normal power it was tight and well balanced. There’s no doubt that if it were made, Mazda would carry over the handling and nimbleness of the MX-5 to this 3+1 (as opposed to 2+2).

It’s a pretty car with some trick features, such as a solar panel on the back and the way that the panel opens up to let air out of the cabin. Other elements I like are the side-hinged rear hatch and the rear quarter-door that slides forward.

I just like it design-wise – it looks more expensive than it probably is and it has uniqueness. Either you like the option of a Klingon interior or you don’t. I’ve always thought Mazda must have Klingons working in its design department. If you’re a Star Trek fan, you look at a Mazda and you think Klingon. You think: “This was designed by Klingons.” Which I like. It looks like a young person designed this car to be a practical car for someone of their age. Even though it was designed by a guy in the US, it looks Japanese.

It’s clever the way they have thrown out the 2+2 tradition and created a 3+1. It has three seats, one proper one behind the passenger, and a fold-down fourth seat behind the driver, like you would find in a 2+2. It means the insurance won’t price it out of the reach of the younger owners it is aimed at. It also creates lots of rear space for luggage and stuff.

If there’s one complaint with modern cars, it’s that there are tremendous blind spots with these enormous A pillars. I have a ’67 Chrysler Imperial that I bought from an old man in Beverly Hills and the windshield is enormous. It’s like looking out of a plate glass window. And the A pillars are tiny, and if the thing rolled over, it would crush your head in less than a second.

Assuming you’re not rolling your 2¾ton car, it’s a pleasure to drive because you can see out.

I find myself, even driving my Ford GT, having to look to either side to see anybody, to see the kid on the bike. That’s the thing I like about the Kabura: there’s plenty of glass space, even right up over into the roof. I guess that will go if it’s ever made, but the feeling of space is excellent.

There are other elements I like and that I hope make it to production – the electric doors might happen, the extra RX-8-style rear door on the passenger side is neat, too, but as much as I like them I don’t know if the fabric seats would catch on.

But for me, with the Kabura, which is Japanese for “arrow”, Mazda seems to be holding up the sports car mantle and the creation of distinctive, attractive cars very well.

Popularity: 1% [?]

Sphere: Related Content