Mazda RX-8

blacktalon

If I were considering a successor for my Prelude now, I'd test drive both the RX-8 and the 350Z. But since I probably won't be buying a new car for a few years, there are three other potential rivals I'm waiting for:

- RX-7
- Supra
- SVX

If all those cars live up to expectations -- well, it'll be an interesting market in a few years...

sphinx99

I agree with himiler, nyccarguy and blacktalon. Four voices, but only one cause

himiler

While the Prelude crowd is busy taking over this forum, I'd like to add that the G35 Sedan 6-spd.(gasp!) is also looking more and more attractive to me. I think I'll drive one this Saturday...

The G35 is a almost a heavy bomber when compared to the quick-strike fighter RX-8, but the looks and want for extra room has really grown on me.

I guess I'll have plenty of test-driving to do when the time comes (oh, darn).

snaphook

>>I like the specs of a low weight, high-end horspower, low-torque, RWD RX-8

I find it interesting that some posters complain about the 350Z as being too heavy yet consider the RX8 to be light/low weight. Isn't the difference only about 200 lbs? And from a hp/weight perspective the Z is superior. I personally think they are both heavier than they should be. Yes the RX8 is light for a car that can seat 4 adults. But when I hear people say that this car delivers real sports car performance I never hear them qualify this remark by saying, "for a car of its size".

Also, why is low torque an advantage? I can appreciate that some people don't care as much about torque as others but I have never heard someone say that low torque is actually desirable. Does this mean that if Mazda was able to squeeze a little more torque out of this engine it would be to its detriment?

dgraves1

Hmmm, all the Prelude owners are looking to buy RX-8s. So, the same demographic that failed to be sufficient to support continued production of the Prelude is ready to buy the RX-8. That does not bode well for the RX-8, does it?

himiler

Somehow I doubt that previous or current Prelude owners will be the only ones shopping the RX-8. Prelude buyers tended to be very sure of what type of performance and technology they were looking for and voted with their wallets.

Just because the vast majority of coupe shoppers were unable to appreciate the Prelude does not mean the car was a failure -- it was just not the right product for its segment. And given the age range of Prelude owners, I'm not certain that the intended demographic was ever nailed to begin with (see also the Honda Element).

The RX-8 has far broader appeal in terms of style, utility and performance, and effectively crosses over both the sportscar and sport sedan segments.

himiler

There are people who like the characteristics of a low-torque engine, and there are those who don't.

I wouldn't be complaining if the Renesis cranked out another 30ft-lbs. of torque, but it seems that isn't what driving a rotary is all about. Rotaries like to rev and (as a result) don't make much low-end torque. If that's not your cup of tea, try another.

As for the weight issue (again), I'll agree that the 350Z is a bit of a porker for its size. But the fact that the RX-8 offers seats for four people and weighs less than the 350Z (while essentially matching its performance) makes complaining about its overall mass a bit of a red herring.

blacktalon

The Prelude is a great car that suffered from a serious lack of marketing. Mazda isn't repeating Honda's mistake:

http://www2.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/rx8/xmen/rx8_xmen_flash.jsp

snaphook

The Prelude had one thing going for it that the RX8 will not, a reputation of extremely high reliability. From my experience this is a big issue with Honda buyers and buyers of the first RX8s will be taking somewhat of a leap of faith in this regard. On the other hand, former RX7 owners hold no such illusions and if the Renesis turns out to actually be reliable then, for them, this will be a plus.

himler
I'll agree that the RX8 is less porky than the Z. But there are plenty of cars out there that have better seating for four and weigh less than the RX8 despite having heavier engines.

I don't agree that the RX8 "essentially" matches the Z's performance. The Z is considerably faster and the RX8 probably corners better. If these two cars were pitted against each other on a track I suspect you would get a consistent winner depending on the course.

I have no problem with low torque/high revving engines. In fact, I think they are quite a bit of fun. It comes down to a matter of the right tool for the job. If I was driving by myself in the RX8 I suspect that I would be wishing that it weighed less(S2000). If I was driving with passengers I think I would want for it to have more low end torque(G35c). Mazda has done a good job convincing prospective buyers that this car has magically found the secret for doing both. Since I don't think any of us have actually driven one I'd have to say the jury is still out on that one.

If it comes back to the fact that many people can't afford to have a pure play car then I agree, this is probably an excellent compromise car, but lets promote it that way, as an excellent "compromise" car.

himiler

I've never said it was anything other than that. Mazda has not convinced me that they've discovered a "magic" formula with the RX-8 -- every car has its compromises. It just so happens that the RX-8's compromises jive exactly with the ones I'm willing to make.

I don't regularly carry passengers. If I did, I'd look at the G35 Sedan.

I don't plan on tracking the car. If I did, I'd buy a 350Z or S2000.

Good luck finding a car that weighs less, seats four more comfortably, and performs similarly to the RX-8.

nyccarguy

"Also, why is low torque an advantage?"

I actually don't see it as an advantage of an engine to have low torque. I apologize if it sounds that way. I just don't see it as a disadvantage. The Renesis Rotary's torque output (159 lb/ft @ 5500 RPM) is similar to my Prelude's (156 lb/ft @ 5250 RPM) and I would surely have no trouble adapting to it (the extra 50hp is nice though). More torque is always welcome (just not necessary) and definitely wouldn't be the RX8's detriment.

About the 350Z, I didn't mean that the weight is the car's only downfall. I'll even take back the comment. The redline is still too low for me.

"The Prelude had one thing going for it that the RX8 will not, a reputation of extremely high reliability. From my experience this is a big issue with Honda buyers and buyers of the first RX8s will be taking somewhat of a leap of faith in this regard"

I suspect the RX8's reliability will be as high as the Prelude's. My girlfriend drives a Protege and that thing is screwed together very well. From the improvements Mazda has made in the past few years in terms of quality (I don't have a JD Power survey or CR handy). I'm sure Mazda knew the old Rotary was not the most reliable powerplant in the world and worked to improve it.

About weight, a lot of guys think that cars are getting heavier. They are. I'm just more willing to accept this than most. I like a lot of the things that add weight like safety features, luxury items (sunroof, sound deadening material), and structural enhancements which in turn require a heavier duty suspension which in turn warrant a car to have more horsepower but similar performance numbers. An example of this is the BMW M3. An E30 M3 weighs nothing compared to the current E46 M3. Would I like to drive an E30 M3 for the afternoon (maybe the weekend)? Yes. Which one would I rather drive every day? The E46 M3. Which one would I most likely walk away from an accident? The E46 M3.

snaphook

The reliability issue I referred to was purely in regards to the new powerplant. This is still an unkown and was the greatest source of problems in RX7s. I agree that in other areas of car manufacturing Mazda has achieved a good reputation for quality. But even if the Renesis engine turns out to be dependable it still will require maintenance. Finding qualified/competent mechanics to work on the unconventional rotary might be a little bit of a problem. These are issues that would have been more readily dismissed by someone looking for a "play" car yet they might be the kind of nagging worries that keeps that person looking for a compromise vehicle from making the final committment to buy.

nyccarguy

I believe Mazda will factory train its mechanics & technicians and dealerships will have Rotary specialists. Much like BMW dealerships have M technicians and Mercedes-Benz Dealerships have AMG specialists.

nyccarguy

I believe somebody mentioned it before, but to make sure the RX8 doesn't meet the fate of my beloved Prelude, the base model (w/ the automatic) has to succeed in the marketplace. Our views are often distorted here on TH because a large number of posters are enthusiasts. Obviously the 6-speed model will appeal to those of us who currently own Preludes, RSX Type S', used to own RX7s...

How many RX8s does Mazda plan on selling?

Where exactly does the base model fit in the marketplace? The base is $25,700 and once you add the leather package that comes with the grand touring package, the price is about $30K. I guess it pitts the car up against the G35 Coupe pricewise. Performacewise, the G35 Coupe and its 280hp will blow the doors off it. This is assuming the non-enthusiast is looking for a car with gobs of luxury and low-end torque. An Acura CL Type S? It is FWD, but from a luxury and feature standpoint, it has a lot going for it.

Does anybody have the performance specs of the base model?

dtran2149

Just curious what people think about this particular comparison. Their HP/Torque #'s are similar. I think the RX-8 is more attractive and drives better, but the TSX is probably better from a space standpoint.

sphinx99

I think "probably" is understating things--the TSX appears to be far larger.

nyccarguy, I've been looking for performance data on the auto for a while, for the same reason as you, and can't find a thing. This is why I'm not particularly enthusiastic about the RX-8's long-term fate. I suspect that the detuned version, probably heavier with an automatic transmission, will cost $30k with tax and be a slug with four passengers. What's going to make someone choose an automatic detuned RX-8 for more money than the roomier, less expensive, possibly faster and similarly well-handling Mazda 6 sitting on the same showroom floor? Yeah, the one who wants the 6-speed sporty car will go to the RX-8 but the 95% of the people on the fence may get lured away to the others.

The RX-8 is bracketed by a heck of a sedan and a heck of a roadster. If I walked into a Mazda dealer with $30k in budget, the RX-8 would be the third most attractive car inside the showroom, after the Miata and 6. And I'm a huge coupe fan, too. I just don't see the RX-8's value quotient in anything but the upscale model.

dtran2149

But it could turn out that the auto transmission RX-8 is there specifically as part of a price point strategy with a very low % of total produced actually arriving.

Isn't it also true that the manual Mazda 6 is only 5-10% of the production? Let's say Mazda pulled the same trick with the RX-8 regarding the auto transmission (i.e., it's only 5% of produced models). This would then separate their buyer groups dramatically while allowing Mazda to claim a low starting price on the RX-8. Kinda like Boxster under $40k when it came out. . . very few ever offered at that specification.

Anecdotally, I called 4 dealers in Dallas. Every single one of the RX-8's that were pre-ordered by the dealers was manual w/ GT package no nav system ( a total of 24 out of 24 cars in my experiment)!

the_big_h

that's the way I would have it!!!!!

well I would get the Sports package to get it around 28k :-)

nyccarguy

Has anybody seen what the factory rear spoiler looks like?

himiler

I think it's just a "lip"-type spoiler with no rise, Audi TT style.

maltb

I thought the Automatic was cheaper than the manual. What am I missing here?

himiler

Per the RX-8 site:

auto -- $25,700
manual -- $27,200

argent

The isssue isn't so much high torque versus low torque, it's that many of the engine design characteristics that benefit strong low-rpm torque are harmful to high revving and top-end power, and vice versa. The wonders of modern technology have reduced that trade-off somewhat, but not eliminated it.

Stump-pulling low-end torque is useful, but high revving is often more fun, especially in a lightweight sporty car.

himiler

First you'll have to convince snaphook that the RX-8 qualifies as "lightweight."

If I want torque, I'll buy a truck.

snaphook

The RX8's weight is essentially the same as the 4cyl Accord, 4cyl Camry, 4cyl Altima. While I've never seen the RX8 in person the sense I get from pictures is that its dimensions are less than the above mentioned cars, I know its engine weighs less. So no, you won't convince me that the RX8 is lightweight, average maybe.

I have nothing against low torque/high revving engines. But I think that when dealing with this type of engine it is of greater importance to keep the vehicles weight down. I don't think the effort was made. I suspect that in the RX8 if you are ever stopped on an incline with a couple of passengers you will have to be somewhat careful not to stall the engine when letting the clutch out. Could be kind of embarrassing in a car whose appearance projects speed/performance.

himiler

Getting started on an incline with a full load of passengers shouldn't involve anything more difficult than feathering the clutch and rolling into the gas.

Generally speaking, I guess it would be tough not to be embarassed if you couldn't drive a manual tranny well and owned any sports car.

the_big_h

http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3829

including the ever-elusive Nordic Green and Pure White color :-)

can you say sexayyyy!

himiler

That white be tight!

the_big_h

too bad it won't be available for the NA market... (Japan market only) :-(

himiler

Maybe I'll buy a silver one and have it painted...

dtran2149

So far I like blue and titanium gray the best.

andyer

Perhaps one thing that could make the car seem/feel "lightweight" is the inertia of the vehicle. By this, I mean Euler's Law of M = I*alpha (i.e., turning), not the mass in F=m*a (straight-line). Inertia is basically a measure of how far away the mass is from the center of mass. So, two vehicles with the same mass can have different inertias.

With a lower inertia, going through the twisties would be a bit quicker/more responsive.

I don't know where inertia data is gathered -- thus far I can only find something like this:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/download/3272003171557.pdf

snaphook

I currently own a 94' 325. While I enjoy driving it my biggest complaint is that it feels like a heavy car. The RX8's weight is only about 50 lbs less. I suppose it's possible that Mazda figured out a way to make 3000+ lbs feel light and nimble but I doubt it. Also, I'm quite experienced with driving a manual. My first car was a Fiat 128 rated at 48 hp. Trust me, the concept of feathering the clutch is well learned. In general, my experience with performance cars is that I feather the clutch so as to avoid spinnning the tires not because I'm concerned with stalling the engine.

nyccarguy

The weight difference between the manual & automatic RX8 is minimal. The manual weighs in at 3029 lbs while the automatic weighs only 24 lbs more (unless this is a serious typo). The automatic may not be the dog we make it out to be with 40 fewer horsepower, but 5 ft/lbs extra torque that peaks at 5000 RPM as opposed to 5500 on the 6 speed model. At 3053 lbs, it weighs only 11lbs more than my Prelude Type SH (with 10 more ponies and more torque). We all know how torque converters and slow shifting automatics hamper accleration, but it doesn't look that bad.

nyccarguy

I almost forgot, I'll take a Black one.

himiler

I wasn't trying to call your ability with a MT into question -- I'm sorry if it came out that way.

As for the minimal weight difference between the RX-8 and your BMW, the only thing I can say is that I've never seen a 325 post acceleration and handling numbers like the RX-8's, so there must be a difference greater than what just 50lbs. of mass can account for.

There may not be much of a difference in how the car feels getting underway, but once it's moving -- Bingo!

habitat1

Is my prediction.

I guess Mazda is trying to leave no stone unturned in generating sales, but a high revving low torque engine mated to an automatic transmission is a formula for failure as a sports coupe, in my opinion. It certainly doesn't help that they have to give up 40 horsepower and the high end of the rev band with the automatic.

If Mazda was able to keep the power up and utilize a SMG similar to BMW's or a ultra fast shifting automatic like AMG's, I would be less suspicious. But my guess is that both of those are much, much more technologically advanced and expensive units than found in the "base" automatic RX8. My guess is that a Honda Accord will outaccelerate an RX8 with an automatic (certainly with 3 or more people in the car).

So, although I have come to accept the 4-passenger seating as an acceptable compromise for the RX-8, I think Mazda may have been wiser to leave the automatic out as an option. Garnishing a few more sales from those that can't drive a stick is not worth diluting the sporty image that the 6-speed is trying to achieve, IMO. Thankfully Honda didn't do that with the S2000.

sphinx99

"At 3053 lbs, it weighs only 11lbs more than my Prelude Type SH (with 10 more ponies and more torque). We all know how torque converters and slow shifting automatics hamper accleration, but it doesn't look that bad."

On the one hand, you're right. On the other hand, Prelude is dead because (in part) many considered it too "slow" for its price, because of its weight. Is it just me or is the 2003 Mazda RX-8 auto tranny basically a 1997 Honda Prelude SS that has RWD, looks better and costs a few thousand more? This is my dream car from 1999.

himiler

Without question, the auto RX-8 will be purchased by those primarily concerned with fasion, not performace.

Saying it somehow dilutes the image of the 250-hp car is, in my opinion, myopic. Is the AMG E55 or Audi RS6 any less sporting than the M5 just because they have torque converters? Granted, they have monster power, but a slushbox is still a slushbox, right?

himiler

The auto RX-8 will be a good choice for the shopper who wants the RSX-S, but doesn't want the third pedal.

nyccarguy

Be careful what you wish for. If the buying public says they want more torque than Mazda engineers might say "Turbocharge it!" Then the bean counters from Ford will step in and say "Gee, if people want more torque we can try and shoehorn one of our Duratec V6s in there."

himiler

I'd be less likely to consider the RX-8 if it had a turbo.

habitat1

Yes, IMO, the E55 and RS6 are much less sporting alternatives than the M5 for the driving enthusiast who considers "sporting" more than mashing your right foot down at a stoplight. I'd be willing to bet that the average 540i 6-speed owner is more of a "driving enthusiast" than the average E55 owner. The E55 can certainly satisfy anyone's instant urge for power, but I'd probably enjoy driving a 330ci 6-speed more on a day to day basis.

On the other hand, perhaps I was being "myopic" regarding the image dilution that will occur with the slower than an Accord automatic-transmission RX8. Perhaps 6-speed enthusiast buyers won't give a hoot about a performance neutered version being available. And, the good news with the RX8 is that it will have the 6-speed available from the outset. The bad news for the Prelude was that by the time it had advanced performance wise, it's image among much of the market was irreparably damaged by the non-sport early versions.

himiler

With the exception of the first generation, Preludes were alway regarded as offering a sporty driving experience, and the VTEC variants served to make serious enthusiasts sit up and take notice.

It wasn't image (or lack thereof) that killed the Prelude -- it was mundane styling and a hefty window sticker, both of which conspire to keep a sports coupe sitting on a dealer's lot.

habitat1

I think we are both right, to an extent. I'm in my mid 40's. When I was single and in the sports coupe market in 1984 (Supra) and again in 1987 (Integra), I didn't even consider the Prelude. From it's introduction in 1979, the Prelude didn't have the goods I was looking for. Not to mention that everyone I knew who owned one was a 20 something female, and the majority were automatics. By the time I reentered the sports car market in 1997 (Supra TT) and again in 2001 (S2000), I probably wouldn't have considered a "Prelude" had it been able to match a Ferrari in performance. For me, the "Prelude" image had been engrained and it wasn't positive.

On the other hand, the RX8 intentionally borrows from the "RX" nameplate, which I always held in much higher esteem than the Prelude moniker. Would that result in me buying the RX8? No. But at least I wouldn't rule it out on the basis of my admittedly biased image.

For someone in the 20's or early 30's, they probably are too young to remember the 70 horsepower versions of the first generation Prelude (I still remember road tests where the first and second generation RX7s would run circles around their Prelude counterparts). And for them, the mundane styling and inflated price of the last generation Prelude was the more likly non-starter.

For Honda, the "Prelude" name is a handicap among older enthusiasts. For Mazda, "RX" is a positive. Not that I expect too many 40 something buyers for the RX8.

sphinx99

Prelude did appeal to the enthusiast crowd, as evidenced by the fact that a full 50% of the 5th gens made had a manual transmission. There are many self-described "sports cars" that would have trouble hitting that ratio. I can't think of many 2+2s that could claim the same.

I don't think the Prelude's credentials became worth considering until '88 anyway so I could understand how someone familiar with the 79-87 models would feel differently at this point. Oh well.

Anyway, back to the RX-8. How many are they making? What's the est. volume?

the_big_h

i've heard 18000 for this year, and 30000 annually after that

this is for world-wide volume, so it's very reasonable

the_big_h

in Japan, that is.

this guy on rx8club is picking up his yellow RX-8 tomorrow, it has arrived at his dealership:

http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4116

so there! it's no longer a pipe dream! the RX-8 has arrived! (in Japan at least)

the_big_h

from this thread on rx8club:

http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4140

he went to the Mazda Rev-It-Up event in Houston on Friday (VIP/Media day), and got a ride in a Winning Blue RX-8 running on the autox course, below is the link to the in-car video he took while on the ride:

http://www.snikte.net/images/RX-8/Rev-It-Up/MOV01354.MPG

I'm near tears hearing that rotary roar, such beautiful and intoxicating sound *sniff*

nyccarguy

I also think the 350Z is more of a sports car for the masses with its 280-something pound feet of torque available with an automatic transmission as well as to the enthusiast crowd with the 6 speed and "Track" model.

When the RX8 finally does arrive on our shores, please nobody complain that dealers are price gouging and that they won't budge off 5K over MSRP. It is going to happen, so get ready.