Mazda RX-8

SPYDER98

If it takes 7.5 seconds to get to 60mph without killing your drivetrain and that is enough to satisfy you...well who am I to say it isn't.

But the fact remains many modern V6 sedans and SUV's are capable of performing similarly to 60.

I personally find accelleration appealing, because it is something that can be used in real world driving and in most cases, still keep you away from bars.
Handling and braking are also important factors and I'm sure the RX8 does more than enough to suffice there.

To each their own. My opinion may very well shift after sitting in one someday..

Mr_Shiftright

I think the sensation of speed the car gives you is more important than the actual numbers. If it sounds fast and feels fast and shifts fast and brakes fast well, what more do you need for everyday driving? A stopwatch in a heads-up display?

One of Honda's great engineering feats has always been to make their cars feel faster than they are.

himiler

At 80mph+, my Prelude feels like it's going much slower than the indicated speed.

blacktalon

If you only care about handling, buy a Miata. If you only care about acceleration, buy a Cobra. The reason why the RX-8 (and RX-7), 350Z, 911, and 360 Modena exist is because many enthusiasts care about both...

Mr_Shiftright

himiler--yes of course, any modern car would...I was talking about progressive acceleration and the sensation of speed. Your Prelude feels "slower than 80 mph" because it is quiet at that speed and you aren't WOT.

blacktalon

I agree with both himiler and Shifty here...

The Prelude gives you a great rush of acceleration when you floor it and redline the VTEC engine in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd -- and then you can upshift to 5th, cruise at 90, and feel as stable and in control as most cars do at 60.

sphinx99

Perception of speed is nice but it's important to counterbalance that against cost. I think the concern being raised about the RX-8's 5-60 number is that it's on par with a wide variety of other cars that cost much less. If we were talking Mercedes SL55s here then you could say, "who cares about value." But this is supposed to be a low-cost affordable sporty coupe/sedan that appears to be priced right along top-tier sub-$30k loaded sedans, some of which offer more room, far more power, and not necessarily a whole lot less fun. For example, exactly how much better is a RX-8 than the Mazda 6 when it costs more while offering less power, less room? Is a little higher grip on a curve worth it?

I'm not saying the car's bad, only that commentary about its 5-60 isn't necessarily a bad thing either... 5-60 in 7.5 is ok for a $20 sporty coupe in my opinion... it's less okay for a $30k sporty coupe... and from the pricing I've seen a well-equipped RX-8 with the bigger engine + salex tax will be north of $30k. That may make it the single slowest 5-60 car in its class..

snaphook

I also think it's bad for a car to look faster than it is. The RX8's somewhat exotic appearance is not consistent with its performance. The Miata and TT RX7 are good examples of cars whose style matched their unique capabilities.

himiler

Which "unique capabilities" of the TT are you referring to, the terminal understeer or the incredibly cramped cabin? The FWD TT offers performance roughly equivalent to the '97-'01 Prelude, for only $5,000 more. For that extra scratch, you get the added bonuses of bad coils in the 1.8T, windows that quit working, a fussy shift linkage and a beam rear axle. Wow!

sphinx -- there is not a "bigger engine" in the 250-hp RX-8. It's the same engine as the 210-hp car, but offers better breathing beyond 6250rpm throught he use of a variable intake system and resonance tuning, something rotaries are very responsive to.

SCC mag did a preliminary road test of a pre-production RX-8 only to discover that there were problems with the 250-hp car's intake switching, resulting in performance equivalent to the 210-hp version. They suspected that many of the press cars were experiencing the same malady, which might explain the lower than expected acceleration numbers.

Mazda's take on the problem was that the intake port system was malfunctioning due to constant WOT abuse, and they promised the issue will be resolved for the production cars.

rorr

Ummm.....snaphook said "TT RX7" (as in 'twin turbo'). I don't think he was refering to the Audi......

sphinx99 - I've heard that the powerband of the new RX-8 is somewhat similar to that of the S2000. I've also heard that while it is possible to get some pretty impressive 0-60 times with the S2000, that the 5-60 times aren't really all that hot (heck, I'm sure that an Altima 3.5 could beat an S2000 5-60).

Does that mean that an Altima, with more room, torque, and lower price would make it a better buy? Well, it all depends on where your priorities are, doesn't it?

himiler

TT - ooops! My bad! I guess it's just a visceral reation I have when I see "TT." For an Audi, the car is such a dog.

rorr

Ok, I looked it up: the latest C&D comparo with the S2000 listed a 5-60 time of 7.6 seconds. I'll admit, this was with the aluminum hardtop in place, but still......7.6 seconds???

I mean, that's "ok for a $20 sporty coupe in my opinion"....but not so ok for a $32k sportster.

I guess it's time to sell the 'ol S2000, huh?

habitat1

Almost any high RPM, relatively low torque RWD sports car is going to post lower 5-60 mph times than lower RPM, torquier alternatives.

So, if 5-60 mph drag racing is your priority, let me make you a deal: I'll buy you a brand new Mustang Cobra or Dodge Viper in exchange for a Ferrari 360. Hell, I'll buy you both. Any takers?

maltb

I'll buy you all three if you get me an Enzo.

dgraves1

I saw my first RX-8 on the road today. The impression is pretty much what I expected based on the pictures I have seen. Personally, I don't really like the look. While, I think it is probably a really fun car to drive, I don't think it's going to be a big seller. I hope Mazda is not planning on selling a ton of these.

maltb

I've seen it on the road as well and it definitely has a unique but bitchen look to it.

boomn29

dgraves1

"To each their own" - Absolutely. Especially, when it comes to unusually styled cars, there tends to be a "love it or hate it" polarity. This car hits the wrong side of that for me. I'm sure there are ones I like that plenty of people hate.

"Where are these RX-8s at?" - Southern California, which is where I would have guessed you were from, if I hadn't read your profile.

himiler

The RX-8 could look like Hillary Clinton, and I'd still want to drive it. :P

dsm6

I think it looks fantastic, but I've only seen it in two dimensions at smaller than life scales.

Hopefully I will see the real thing this Saturday at the Denver auto show.

maltb

Where are these RX-8's at??

I've seen a couple with distributor plates around Irvine.

dgraves1

maltb - That's where I saw the red one this morning on the 405. Must be coming from the Mazda facility in Irvine Spectrum.

Mr_Shiftright

I don't personally see the beef with the RX-8 engine. This powerplant is the equivalent of about 1.3 liters after all. You have to be realistic about how much RELIABLE power Mazda can get out of it, and they should be complemented for how much they do get out of it.

The small engine gives the car its agility. Sure corvettes and the like handle superbly but they are still BIG and they feel BIG.

Small engines are great in sports cars and may they always remain. It's part of the fun and no big engine car can duplicate that experience, no matter how much faster they might be.

It's tough for Americans to grasp "less is more". Practically impossible as I'm sure the following posts will testify--LOL!

himiler

Not this American. I tend to be a minimalist/purist when it comes to cars. I don't want TCS, VSC, EBD, or any other of those electronic nannys.

Give me a willing engine (with modern technology, naturally) mated to a manual gearbox and clutch, mechanical LSD, proper suspension and discs at all 4 corners and I'm good to go! A rear seat and useful trunk are nice to have, but not ever a requirement. I could be happy with manual windows, too.

SPYDER98

But Shifty,
the 1.3 in the last RX7 did not have an issue with acceleration. I'm in favor of small displacement, due to exactly what you mentioned with regards to agility. However I wouldn't want a big block in front of me either, nor a peaky race car engine with a non-agile powerband. I give exception to the S2000 because it is a roadster and there is much more to such a car than just the engine. Not to mention it would make a great weekend only car.

Is it too much to ask for a competitively priced 2800-3000lb, nice looking rwd sports coupe which offers the complete handling/braking/power package?

starctk

I went talk to a dealer in Irvine Mazda, he told me I can actually see the RX-8 on april 11 in El toro base. Not sure if I can trust his word, but I won't mind calling him to confirm about it though.

maltb

I believe that's part of the Mazda Rev-it-up program that will be doing a driver's ed sort of program on the old base.

http://www.mazdarevitup.com

snaphook

I don't see how putting a small engine in a car makes it feel small. I think a car needs to be small in order to achieve this feel. 3,000 lbs. IMO, is not small. I agree with the less is more philosophy but it needs to be applied to more aspects of a car's design than just the engine. I suspect that if you stuck this 1.3L rotary in a Corvette you will not have suddenly achieved a "small" feeling even though the curb weights would be comparable.

dgraves1

The thing is that it is a cumulative effect. A bigger engine needs a bigger trans, differential, etc which means bigger engine bay and more body weight. All those things add weight which means you need bigger brakes, heavier suspension, bigger wheels and tires and on and on.

the_big_h

has nearly identical dimension as a Porsche Boxter, yet it fits 4 adults!

habitat1

but like I said previously, 4 adults weighing, say 700 lbs is 300 lbs more than the maximum total capacity of the already 250+ lb lighter Honda S2000. That's over an extra quarter ton in total and will undoubtedly bog down a 160 ft-lb 8,500 rpm engine.

Put 4 full size adults in an RX-8 and I expect it will accelerate and handle more like my Isuzu Trooper than my S2000.

It's nice to have flexibility in a pinch, but there are a lot better ways to haul 4 adults on a regular basis.

himiler

I'm not sure that anyone is suggesting that the RX-8 is as practical as a traditional sedan, but it certainly should be more fun.

Doubtless, performance will suffer with the rear seats occupied. If you want reasonable pick-up with a full load of passengers and/or cargo, buy a Taurus wagon.

3,000lbs is not an unreasonable number for a modern car that can carry four adults in relative comfort.

snaphook

>>3,000lbs is not an unreasonable number for a modern car that can carry four adults in relative comfort

Okay, I'll buy that. Even though relative comfort will be an assessment made by the person who has to sit in the back. So when talking about the RX8 let's qualify small/sporty by saying, compared to other cars that can carry 4 adults.

Does anyone know how much the 1.3L engine weighs and how that compares to the weight of the 5.7L in a Corvette? The Z06 Corvette weighs only 3116 lbs with this bigger engine, bigger tires, bigger brakes, etc... It seems to me the RX8 started out with a huge advantage when it comes to being able to keep curb weight down. For it to still weigh 3,000 lbs tells me that the engineers didn't place much of a priority on this. When your dealing with a relatively low torque engine I think curb weight should have been a top concern. BTW, I mention the Corvette because it has been alluded to as a "big" feeling car when compared to the RX8.

boomn29

Remember the Vette has no back seat...

himiler

...and is made of fiberglass.

the_big_h

3000lb is NOT heavy...

rorr

.....perhaps the "big" car feeling which shifty was alluding to is due to the feeling of steering response (turn-in) which a car with a pronounced front weight bias may exhibit vs. a car with a much smaller polar moment of inertia. With a relatively light weight engine tucked entirely behind the front axle coupled with the fuel load (tank) entirely in front of the rear axle, the RX-8 would have (I imagine) a much smaller moment of inertia. This will lead to much better steering response (eagerness to 'turn-in').

In my eyes, this would lead the RX-8 to feeling more nimble (smaller) than a vette, even given comparable overall curb weights.

Or I could be all wet.....

himiler

Sounds reasonable to me. I've always read and heard about how the Vette feels "big" compared to other sports cars.

rorr

.....perhaps the "big" car feeling which shifty was alluding to is due to the feeling of steering response (turn-in) which a car with a pronounced front weight bias may exhibit vs. a car with a much smaller polar moment of inertia. With a relatively light weight engine tucked entirely behind the front axle coupled with the fuel load (tank) entirely in front of the rear axle, the RX-8 would have (I imagine) a much smaller moment of inertia. This will lead to much better steering response (eagerness to 'turn-in').

In my eyes, this would lead the RX-8 to feeling more nimble (smaller) than a vette, even given comparable overall curb weights.

Or I could be all wet.....

sphinx99

The big feeling is also probably due to the Corvette's rather supercar-like dimensions. It's low, long and wide, and I've heard more than one person say that many low, long and wide Ferraris, Lamborghinis and even McLarens tend to "feel" heavier than they are even though they don't behave as though they are--simply due to the proportions.

My experience in the 'vette definitely suggested a feeling of mass, but it was due in very large part to the stiff steering, extremely wide track, and limited visibility.

snaphook

>>3000lb is NOT heavy

If are comparing it to 4 door/4 passenger sedans then I agree it is not heavy. If you are comparing this car to other low torque sports cars it is definitely heavy. And the so called added bonus of being able to add more weight (passengers) than traditional sports coupes represents to me a further opportunity to exploit this defficiency. I suspect the 1.3L Renesis is a very good engine. It just needs to find a platform that is better suited for it. I think it would be an interesting experiment to through this engine in the Miata.

himiler

Renesis + Miata = Monster.

Unfortunately, the Renesis won't bolt-up to the Miata's tranny, and there isn't enough room in the current Miata platform to accomodate the RX-8's box. It would work just fine if Mazda gave us a new Miata that was based in a shortened version of the RX-8 platform.

Hello, Boxster slayer!

the_big_h

rotary engines must only wear the RX nameplate :-)

himiler

I'm dreaming of a time when Mazda will only sell cars with rotaries underhood. Think of the instant brand equity!

Like I said...dreaming.

Mr_Shiftright

I don't know exactly why the Vette feels so big. Probably the width, also the special monster tires (without which the car would handle more like a washing machine I'd guess), and sure, the rear wheel PUSH is always there.

Maybe it's that a Vette takes some skill and practice to drive at a fast clip. It's not a car you want to be meat-fisted in, that's for sure.

I haven't driven the RX-8 but one thing I'll look for when I do is how friendly it is to the average driver.

I've driven the RX=7 TT quite a bit and it is definitely more agile than a Vette--for better or worse, just about anyone who drove both would feel that immediately.

snaphook

If the goal is to successfully reintroduce the rotary engine to the US I think it would have been far less of a gamble to offer it as an optional engine on an existing popular car, eg Miata. That it won't mate with Miata's current transmission shouldn't be a showstopper. There are plenty of models that can be equipped with different transmissions.

Also, this engine because of its flat power curve through a wide range of rpms absolutely does not need a 6 spd. transmission. IMO, it could get by quite well with a 4 spd. I suspect this idea will meet with some resistance but the fact is that shifting momentarily removes power from the drive wheels. The only reason to do it is to keep the engine in the optimal rpm range. The unique characteristics of this engine makes perfectly timed shifts less of a priority. So this is one of those cases where less is more, 4 speeds is better than 6.

Imagine if the Renesis engine first debuted in a Miata and then later Mazda tried to launch the RX8. Would the RX8 be perceived as anything but a very stylish pig? Who would buy one?

jaserb

Mazda used Miatas as test mules for the Renesis engine during testing, so I'm sure the tranny issues are solvable. A RX7 convert would probably be well over $30k, while a more minimalist Miata with fewer doodads than the RX8 and with, say, a 210 HP Renesis could probably come in cheaper than the RX8.

-Jason

rorr

First - my understanding is the 6 speed in the RX8 is the same unit as the 6-speed in the 10 aniversary edition Miata. This is according to one of the many mags I've read regarding the RX8 (I think it was SCC?)

Second - uhh.....4 speeds better than 6? Gee, then I guess logically, 3 speeds would be better than 4? The VTEC system in the S2000 also "flattened" the torque curve in that car. Are you saying that the S2000 would have been better with a 4 speed? Curious argument. You may want to try taking that up on one of the S2000 boards and see how far you get.

Third - "Would the RX8 be perceived as anything but a very stylish pig? Who would buy one?" We've been over this and over this. Slipping a Renesis into a Miata and upgrading the car to handle the extra power and what do you have? A very good competitor to the S2000. But guess what? IT WOULD NOT GET MY MONEY. I am simply NOT in the market for a 2-seater. Mazda didn't aim the RX8 at the 2-seater market. The ONLY reason I am considering the RX8 is because it is a reasonable priced alternative the a BMW 3-series. I NEED 4 real seats. I WANT RWD and a manual tranny. I NEED to be able to afford it. Personally, I think the market for this type of car is SUBSTANTIALLY larger than the market for another high powered 2-seater.

snaphook

Yes a 3 speed would be better than a 4 if there was no loss in performance. A 1 speed would be best yet. Your point of view would lead me to believe that you would consider a 7 speed to be inherently superior to a 6 speed. I would agree only if it facilitated keeping the revs in the optimum power range. The S2000 and Miata have no where near the power curve that the Renesis engine has. Both of these cars probably benefit from a 6 speed even though I'm not sure there is any empirical evidence to back this up. IMO, 6 speed transmissions are more of a marketing tool than a performance enhancement, particularly in the Renesis.

>>Personally, I think the market for this type of car is SUBSTANTIALLY larger than the market for another high powered 2-seater.

I think you're wrong but I actually hope your right. My reasoning is that I sincerely want to see the return of the rotary engine. And I think its immediate fate in the US will be closely tied to how the RX8 fares in the market. The Miata is a proven seller and while there are people like you that won't consider it because it is a two seater there are also some that have excluded the current Miata from their list because of its somewhat anemic power.

I also agree there is a void when it comes to affordable, RWD, manual tranny, 4 seaters. I wonder how much it would have cost Mazda to manufactur the 6 as a RWD. This is where I see the real void, not in exotic looking 30k sports cars/sedans that don't quite know what they are suppose to be.

himiler

There may have been some real problems with the power-port runners in the pre-production/press cars, after all.