Development
Following Mazda's success in winning the 1991 24 Hours of Le Mans with their rotary powered 787B, Mazda had hoped to continue in sportscar racing and prove that their lone win was not a fluke. However, with the reorganizing of the World Sportscar Championship in 1992 by the FIA, Mazda found itself with a problem in that their rotary engines were now banned. Instead, teams would be required to use technologically advanced V10 powerplants similar to those used in Formula One. Mazda, not having had many racing engines outside of their rotaries, decided that the cost of developing an entirely different engine was not worth it, especially with budgetary concerns within the company. At the same time, if Mazda were to use a V10 powerplant, they would be required to build an entire different car, since the 787B could never hold a V10.
Thus, Mazda came to the decision of buying an existing V10 engine. They turned to Judd (Engine Developments), who had developed their GV10 3.5L V10 for Formula One in 1991, and arranged a deal in which the Judd engines would be badged as Mazdas, carrying the name MV10.
For a new chassis, Mazda also turned to an existing design, this time going to Tom Walkinshaw Racing (TWR), who had worked with Jaguar until they dropped out of sportscar racing at the end of 1991. Jaguar's final entry, the XJR-14, was offered by TWR to customers for 1992, and Mazda jumped at the opportunity to use the car which helped win the 1991 championship for Jaguar. Again, the car would be rebadged and renamed as the Mazda MXR-01.
Unfortunately, although the XJR-14 was the 1991 champion, it had not been updated since the end of that season, and Mazda had neither the technical understanding of the XJR-14 nor the cash flow to continually upgrade their MXR-01 on the same scale as Peugeot and Toyota were able to do in 1992. Their Judd powerplant was also considerably underpowered in comparison to the other factory teams.
Read more about this topic: Mazda MXR-01
Famous quotes containing the word development:
“Dissonance between family and school, therefore, is not only inevitable in a changing society; it also helps to make children more malleable and responsive to a changing world. By the same token, one could say that absolute homogeneity between family and school would reflect a static, authoritarian society and discourage creative, adaptive development in children.”
—Sara Lawrence Lightfoot (20th century)
“Theories of child development and guidelines for parents are not cast in stone. They are constantly changing and adapting to new information and new pressures. There is no “right” way, just as there are no magic incantations that will always painlessly resolve a child’s problems.”
—Lawrence Kutner (20th century)
“Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity, quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace.”
—Benito Mussolini (1883–1945)