Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I also never had mine flood. But, again....it stayed garaged during the winter.
If this thing works out with they buyer of my Mustang, I'll be giving my Mazda dealer a call. I'm still leary of someone offering me more money than I paid, though.
While my RX8 ownership experience was sterling (aside from a few glitches on the early model I had....plus, the whole HP buyback "thing"), I couldn't complain at all how my dealer treated me. Every time I took it in for maintenance work (for free courtesy of Mazda), they updated it with stuff I didn't even know I needed. That included all the current (at the time) reflashes, a new oil pan "grid" and sensor, A/C magnifier, oil changes, tire rotations, and some other stuff I can't recall right now. If a repair took more than 2 hours, they also gave me a free loaner. So, no complaints there.
My MPG actually got better after about 5K miles. That's not unusual, though.
My dealer has been advertising in the newspaper that all '05 RX8's (allegedly over 30 of them) with the GT package could be bought for $7K under MSRP. Is this something that most of you are hearing? If so, that puts one ~$25K.....all loaded up.
Not saying I'll buy another one. Just exploring some options.
But after having the Mustang GT (and TORQUE), how would you feel going back to the RX8? Do you think the handling/steering/brake responses of the RX8 would offset the pure acceleration advantage of the GT?
The RX-8 is the most integrated electronic car I've seen so far. Next time you get in when it's dark, notice the instrument panel lights, even when you haven't used a key yet! LEDs on low. We added "puddle lights" to ours. If you look at the bottom of the side mirrors, you'll see a triangular plastic plug. An option in Japan puts clear plugs there and lights that shine on the ground (so you can avoid stepping in puddles). We pulled the mirrors off, and added LED lamps inside (white) and clear plastic over the hole left when you remove the plug. Wired the lamps to the interior lamp power, so they come on when you use the remote to unlock the door. Had to add them that way because you can't order the parts - you have to replace the whole mirror. So we modified ours.
Even more bling.
That said, before my RX8 was wrecked, I had no intention of getting rid of it anywhere in the foreseeable future.
Bottom line....they're both good, just in very different ways.
The RX8 is a sterling handler with very good build and materials. It's quick and comfortable. It's also very refined.
The Mustang handles well, but also has hellacious acceleration. It's comfortable, too. It's not nearly as refined as the RX8, but I didn't expect it to be, either.
Even after all these months of ownership, the Mustang still draws a lot of attention, whenever/wherever I drive it. When I first bought it, I had lots of offers from others to buy it for more than I paid for it. I didn't expect those offers to keep up this long. Now, my teenage son has run into some insurance troubles (accident). And, since he's still a teen and under my policy, he can no longer afford his rates (yes, I make him pay for his car, it's upkeep and the insurance). While the accident is the main factor regarding his rates, having him insured on the Mustang (as well as all the vehicles I own), even though he doesn't drive it, has put the rates out of his reach. His fault and he knows it.
But, since I can come away with some jingle in my pocket, and the Mustang was strictly a part time car for me anyway, I've thought about finally taking the opportunity to get something a little more "every day useable". The RX8, given my past experiences, is on that list. The insurance rate may drop it from the list, however. But, I do remember the RX8's rates being much less than they were for the Mustang. Or, I may make my son get his own policy (which doesn't solve his problems).
Fact is, I think so much of the RX8, that I'd even consider getting another one.
They are different vehicles, comparisons are redundant. I suspect that previous owners of RX(X) might look at alternatives if tired of the quirks of the motor but I seriously doubt if a Mustang owner will cross shop a Mazda, it's called brand loyalty and both marques elicit fierce loyalty accordingly.
I don't understand the reason to spend many thousands on a design that is retro (old), but look at the success of the Mini (a better comparison that the VW Bug imho).
As has been stated before, the 8 is a niche vehicle and I am sure that Mazda has enough marketing gurus to realize that this is more of a "halo" vehicle than a mass market form of transport and they will continue to market it on that basis.
I for one love the fact that I rarely see another coming the other way.
As for it being a "luxury sport sedan" I take exception to the term "luxury". No seat memory, single setting seat warmer (slow to warm) no power passenger seat, harsh ride (anyone who lives in L.A. will attest to the expansion joints being poorly damped), weak A.C., cheap plastic dash and fittings, shall I go on....
Lets accept it for what it is, a beautiful looking, superbly handling sport coupe whose decent performance you can share with 3 others in relative comfort. I have an MT '04 with 12K miles, get gas mileage appropriate for the cars performance and my driving style, it's never flooded, made strange noises, or let me down other than an erratic sensor that was replaced under warranty. I love this car, shortcomings and all.
Long live the 8
They are both sport coupes (putting aside the RX8's suicide doors). RX8 discounted will cost about as much (probably less) than a Mustang GT (at MSRP....which is what they're still selling for).
Just the mere fact that they're both performance vehicles at roughly the same price, means they will be cross shopped.
Everyone has different reasons why they would choose one over the other. But, price similarities and sports car focus put them both playing in the same sandbox.
They both do different things well. But, they also will appeal to the person looking for sports car attributes....performance, handling, looks, etc. IMHO, those commonalities puts them on the same list.
Redundant? Off-hand, I can't think of very many direct comparisons between these two that I've seen. Maybe you're thinking of 'irrelevant'?
Be that as it may, I have the following criteria for my next car:
First, it must be rewarding to drive. I've had RWD; currently drive FWD. I vastly prefer RWD from a performance standpoint. I value handling/braking/steering response over pure acceleration, BUT from what I understand the current Mustang is no truck in that department (and is probably lightyears ahead of my old '93 LX 5.0). Second, I must be able to seat a couple of kids (on a very occasional basis) in rear seats. Third, it must be less than $30k. Fourth, it must be fairly reliable.
So far, the Mustang GT and RX-8 are at the top of my list.
Mustang Headroom: 35"; Leg room:31";Hip room:46.7";shoulder room:53.3"
RX8 Hrm w/sunroof: 36.5"; " " 32.2 " "48" ; " " 54.9
I find it interesting that Ford on its own website only select the Celica GT, Mitsu Eclipse and Hyundai Tiburon as competitors you can do a side by side comparison with.
I still contest that they are aimed at different demographics. The 8 is designed to carry 4 as a primary function, in the Mustang it is more of a concession
Mentioned before... by me .... but here in Boston, "street cred" among avid city drivers is of such real quality that regulars on commute routes learn their local routes' hot cars in the same way they learn their beloved Patriot's running backs.
Today I finally, caught "Black Stallion" ( a new Black 'Stang on my morning commute) idling at a double lane turning stop light. My Nordic Green RX-8 AT didn't catch the Stango's attention until I pulled ahead in a full throttle hard left turn from the light change, with 'Stang'erosa fish tailing off a late start. Equine's can't turn and take off at the same time cause the fixed rear axle lifts one wheel.
The Stallion caught up on a four land straight after speeding for a fair bit, but then my route dives off onto an old twisty road built at the turn of the century, 'Stang'ster on my tail. These old twisties in Boston live up to their name so I always paddle shift to 2nd, pop 5000 rpm, and attack every snake back beveled turn. 'Stangy baby is literally stuck waiting for the rare straight shots struggling to catch up, as I in my RX-8, disappear around every turn.
By the time our little mono y mono was over, including a few oil pan pounding monster speed bumps that my RX8 takes at full speed, poor Black Stallion was sweating hard, over heating and needing his stable boy's rub down.
'Stang bangers just go fast in straight lines on dry flat roads. On any kind of old frost heaved twisty road bed, my RX-8 AT is like an wood elf flashing in and out of view way down the road.
??? Lifts one wheel? No, they don't. I've never seen ANY car lift a rear-wheel in a turn while under acceleration. I've seen more than a few FWD cars lift the inside rear-wheel while trailbraking into a turn - and those FWD cars had IRS.
I don't want to speak for anybody else, but I'm finding it hard to take seriously a poster who compares their car to a wood elf and has a half-dozen different cutesy names for 'Mustang'......I think you're trying too hard....
In the twisties, the RX8 will out handle the Mustang, regardless of drivetrain, though.
Back to comparisons, if I were going to use the back seat, at all, I'd have to opt for the RX8. Those back doors make back seeat ingress/egress so much easier.
Mustang's back seat is cramped (putting it kindly). To add to this, when you push the front seats forward on the Mustang for entrance in the back, the seats don't return to their previous settings. So, you must re-adjust them all over again.
Well, I can't say the wheel lifts off the ground, but the Mustang's fixed axle sure doesn't help keep enough pressure for that inside tire to not spin. My '90 Mustang 5.0 would spin the inside tire on ALL turning take offs no matter what the driver did. That's what Mustang's are good for, peeling out and burning rubber. Every kid in my high school who knew how to peel out to impress when leaving school. Yank it left or right pulling out of the school's parking with those short, stiff, fixed axles and you're talk'n burn baby burn all the way home.
Sorry just having some fun. I hate writing Mustang over and over. And my RX-8 does look like an Eleven cloak with all that green mica flickering. Trying hard is not my style. I really hate sweating.
Besides, at my age strenuous exercise could really kill me.
Okay, I'll back off. I'm cranky until I get enough coffee (a pot and a half usually does the trick).
I think your problem with spinning the inside tire may be more due to the design of the rear differential than an issue of solid vs. IRS. Did your '90 5.0 have an open rearend or a limited slip?
graphic - agree on the rear-seat issue (Mustang vs. RX8). RX8 wins hands down due, mostly, to the improved accessibility. All I know right now is that BOTH offer more rear seat room than my current Celica and I envision only very OCCASIONAL use of the rear seat for my girls.
I dunno. I may just hold out for a new (rumored) '07 Supra......
You and I couldn't be more opposite on the car buying spectrum. You are "staying the course" with your Celica.
On the other hand, I've had my RX8 wrecked, replaced with a Mustang....and, if all goes well.....will be selling the Mustang this afternoon to get....who knows what. This all happened within a 12 month period.
Matter of fact, I'm going out tonight to take a look at a Shimka. We'll see if it drives any differently than what I remember my RX8 drove a year ago.
Heck - I might just keep that Celica until the wheels fall off (could be a while) and buy a toy instead. There's a company in north Texas that builds a really nice Lotus 7 knock-off using the drivetrain from the S2000. And they offer a supercharger option. Imagine - 300 hp in a 1300lb roadster with Lotus handling...... :surprise:
http://www.wcmultralite.com
.....now I've got to wipe the drool off my keyboard again....
I've seen a couple of "REAL" Loti running around southern OH. Nearest dealership is in Chicago, though. I just wonder if they have to make the 5 hour trek to Chitown every time they needed service.....or, just take it to a Toyota dealership?
As Masserati dealership opened up in Cincy about a year ago. I've yet to see one on the street, though. As conservative as it is around here, I'm surprised such a dealership could exist.
With an S2000 motor (supercharged, no less), I'd definitely find myself in jail if I had one.
I know you've been looking. So, what kind of prices are you seeing for new '05 RX8s with the GT package?
re - lotus 7 ultralite: I'm a bit curious if they could use the RX-8 drivetrain instead of the S2000. I'd think it was compact/light enough (and probably more available).
300 hp in a 1300lb. roadster, mmmmmm - do you realize that for your Mustang GT (3450lbs) to have the same power to weight ratio, you'd need nearly 800hp? :surprise:
Either would be quite interesting, though.
Just got back from lunch time at the bank. The Mustang buyer's cashier's check was "all good". I deposited the money and he drove me home in my (now his) Mustang. He drove away a happy camper.
I'm a little bummed because I had a lot of fun in that car over the last several months. But, it's one of the few (probably only) times I'll ever be able to buy a new car. Drive it around for months and months. Then turn around and make more than I paid for it. After subtracting taxes, tags and other misc charges, I figure I made about $1,200 on the deal.
It's time to go looking again.
I figure an RX8 GT 6M that stickers between $32-$33K less the $7K the dealers are all advertising, should put the price around $25K-$26K. I'll also look at Audis tonight.
Seems there isn't a shortage of them in souther OH.
Thanks!
I would first search for them on www.mazdausa.com. Their inventory database is pretty accurate. I live in Kansas City, and before I bought mine there was only one Shinka in town. I couldn't work out a suitable price with the dealership, so I went to Mazda's site and found 10 of them in L.A.. I then flew to L.A., found the one I wanted with a great bargain, and drove it all the way back. RX8s are already rare sights here in KC, but Shinkas...I've never seen them on the road...anywhere!
Even during the couple of days while I was in L.A. I already had several strangers who had asked me about it. It's a great car for a great price...and a great excuse to boast to boot!
It's a rather neat package, though don't count on extra value due to rarity. Japanese cars never seem to appreciate in value, no matter how rare. In Japan, of course, it's another matter. Cars get real rare there after 3 years due to the extreme cost of "inspection" (once they get 3 years old they have to be inspected often - to "ensure safety" - and the inspection is very expensive - so they tend to be sold overseas and new purchased).
Something profound needs to be inserted here I'm sure, and I've got some vicious stuff on Mustangs, but it's late and I've just driven 95mph down I90 from Boston to Worcester in my RX-8. There simply isn't anything better in my middle aged life than cruising high speed in a rotary powered car passing everything else on the road.
My brother Pilots Lear Jets professionally. He bought an RX-7 because it was the nearest thing to what he flew professionally. That's what I feel like when I'm driven my RX-8, a jet pilot.
Still, nice car, all-in-all.
I'm driving Audis and Acuras today.
I apologize if i'm bringing up old news, but does anyone know what changes are in store for '06? I read somewhere that production will start late, so i'm assuming there will be some changes. What about the rumors that 2006 or 2007 will bring significantly increased horsepower?
Thanks!
Well, if the rumors concerned the AUTOMATIC version, they would be correct. From what I understand, virtually all of the improvements to the RX8 apply only to the slushbox versions which get a bump in hp (to 212?) as well as a new 6-speed automatic gearbox in lieu of the old 4-sp unit.
Off-hand, I can't think of any changes (outside of color choices) for the manual-tranny equipped RX8.
Some have suggested the 6 speed AT is better, because gas millage ticks up and is smoother because of six speeds to feed torque blips to.
Can a auto pro answer the question about the 6 speed vs 4 speed AT. When I care about shifting via my paddles it's only 1st and 2nd that matter so 3rd, 4th and now 5th and 6th are really only going to be for highway. In the 4 speed AT, 3rd and 4th have overdrive assist anyway, you just can't select the the overdrive gear. So is the 6 speed AT just about being better a transmission system, or is the 6 speed AT just about matching the rest of the industries move to the more European 6 speed AT standard?
In other words, if 6th gear in the new tranny gives you essentially the same engine rpm at highway speed as 4th gear in the old tranny, then all the gears are closer together. Translation: the engine rpm drops less with every upshift and the engine can stay in the 'sweet spot' that much more.
This would be a 'good thing'. :shades:
I use the 10% ethanol fuel as well, as it burns much cleaner than other gasoline fuels, further reducing the chance of carbon buildup.
The "reason" for installing the 6 speed was simple - it became available at reasonable cost and was chosen for the new Miata. It was a natural to also put it in the RX-8. It will help reduce the "slugishness" complaints many have about the previous auto equipped RX-8.
We still don't know how the HP improvement was achieved. If it's the 6 port or just tuning of the 4 port (or sales propaganda). Waiting for 2006s to arrive to inspect.
The goals above mean one thing. To have fun in the RX-8 running rotories and twisties, which is the whole point of the freak'n car in the first place, 2nd gear is 70% of drive time, 3rd gear is 20% and 1st is 10%. Adding two more shifts between 2nd and 3rd would making the job of shifting way way to much hassle with the goals listed above. I might eek is tiny bit more gas millage out.
Now if one of the new speeds is below 2nd gear and one is above 3rd I could see how that might actually add something useful, but neither of these new gears would be used more than 5% I'm guessing.
On another note, a colleague of mine has the new 6 speed AT with paddle shifters in the 2006 Mini Cooper super charged. Her 6 speed when used in automatic mode simply skips 3rd and 4th and goes right to 5th in any city driving situation. When she flips to manual, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th are all just 500 RPM apart. She doesn't use the paddles at all because it's simply to much work trying to select the correct, but only slight different torque position. BTW, Mini-Cooper S is really really loud above 4000 RPM.
I have fun the by not slowing down through twisties, rotary traffic circles and monster speed bumps and I do like driving 85MPH on a nice smooth stretch of highway on trips out of Boston, but more that, I guess I'm just a cruiser not a racer.
A fast run for me is 1st shifting at 6000RPM, then stay in 2nd for as long as possible before reaching 50MPH then shifting back and forth between 2nd and 3rd for fun. Clearly I'm not pushing it paddle shifting like this, but hey, my hearts pounding and I've got a great big grin on my face.
The AC problems appear to be spotty. How hot has it been in Boston lately?
Most of the flooding problems have been delt with in the flash changes. Not letting the injectors go to "choke mode" until the engine is running for example. They just recently changed the O2 sensor that is after the cat. This has vastly improved the idle. It's one of the several TSBs/recalls that were performed along with the fuel tank shielding.
They aren't using reduction gears, they have limited the engine to 7500 RPM. So it puts out a little more power as the 5-6 ports open at 6800 if I remember correctly - resulting in a little more power from 7000 to 7500. Hence 212 HP compared to the previous four port 195 HP. I suspect they have also tuned the intake a little differently to boost the torque down at lower RPMs as they don't have to worry about that reducing HP above 7500 RPM. It will be interesting to see if the increase is:
1. noticable over the 4 speed transmission.
2. noticable compared to the the manual car with 238 HP.
It would be better to have a 9000 RPM torque converter (or an affordable SMG - sequential manual gearbox - the paddle shifting "clutch type gearbox" BMW uses), but the one coming looks enticing to me. Saying a lot, as I am a dedicated manual gearbox guy, as I said before.
But the secondary oil cooler in my lower driver side grill, is that new for 2006 RX-AT as well or is that not the oil cooler? Mine is smallist like a motorcyle oil cooler and it's definitely not the AC evaporator.
The AC in my Group 2 2005 RX-8 AT got a great work out on 80 and 90 degree days. Cooled nicely and only needed to run the fan on high a few time. When I was still testing driving various models of the RX-8, I drove a Group 1 RX-8 with the AC problem and it was so bad you could not breath in the back seat.
Thanks for the tips on the 2500 RPM minimum and the 3800 RPM maximum fuel economy shifting point. It's silly I know, but paddle shifting between the first three gears, in the zero to 50MPH has taken on a whole new feeling. And I think I'm getting better gas millage sticking to these strict guidelines. For the city commute 2nd gear is 35MPH and 3rd gear is 45MPH for super maximum MPG.
Using the fully automatic always drop the RPM to the bottom of the barrel where the engine really wasn't designed for anything worth a darn other than useless spinning.
Any New England folks: a bunch of RX-8 owners (including me), other Mazdas and some other car enthusiasts are going on a long 200+ mile trip through NH mountains, twisties, etc (cruising for enjoyment, not a race or anything) this Saturday, Nov 2nd.
If you're interested (trispec?), drop me an e-mail at bluerx8-at-uksiland-dot-com ...
Also wanted to add to other strands I've seen. Some people are saying the magazines are ignoring the RX8. I disagree. It mad C&D 10 best and other blurbs on the car are very favorable. If anyone watches Mythbusters, you might even notice that the "model" car in the background in the shop is an RX8. Anyone else notice that?
As many other posting have stated, for the performance and HP the consumption is not too out of line. The real issue imho is the size of the gas tank, having to fill up so often just highlights the consumption, if for example one only had to fill up once a week instead of every 4 days I think the issue might be reduced.
Does anyone know if there are plans to increase the size of the gas tank on the '06's?
So what does an RX8 get? I've heard the rotoary engine is not as efficient as a piston engine, which seems odd.
It didn't start out that way. I was getting 13-14 MPG just tooling around town and around 20-21 MPG on the highway.
After about 10K miles, I started hitting the EPA estimates. That is 24 MPG on the highway and a consistent 17-18 MPG in town. If it had not been wrecked, I would have been curious if it would have improved with even more miles on the RENESIS.
I think a lot of the disappointment came hot on the heels of some early reports (before the RX8 even hitting these shores) that 30 MPG was possible with the RENESIS.
You're right about one thing, though....none of us drive these cars in a manner that would foster good MPG.