Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
At what starting RPM; 2,200 I'd believe, at 2,800, I don't.
Which is why I don't use CC when I'm driving up to Tahoe, or in Colorado.
And of course, altitude makes everything worse.
But gently rolling country, no problemo. It's those long grades that grinds down the RPMs.
CC is great when I go across Nevada of course.
1999 Corolla LE - cruise
1993 del Sol - cruise (FUN little car!)
1994 Saturn SL2 - cruise
1994 Mazda B-2300 - no cruise
It might have been less common back in the day, but I think another poster hit it on the head... not many vehicles without CC these days, regardless of transmission!
I will 2nd that.
2 Miatas, which set the industry standard IMHO.
Also a 626, which was pretty good except for a slightly heavy clutch pedal.
As for lugging, you could DEFINITELY lug my 93 Miata. That 1.6l was a small engine with little torque, and if RPMs were low going up a hill the engine would start pinging and lose power, going nowhere fast, and wasting fuel in the process.
At what point does this happen? Below idle speed? I've had quite a few manuals and i've never experienced bucking or bogging, regardless of what I was doing to the car (ah, wait, not entirely true. my Zephyr did that once when the carb was clogged). The way I know I'm in too high of a gear for the hill is when I start losing speed even with the throttle pinned. Then I just downshift. But I've never had it buck.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Of course I'd instinctively push in the clutch, and shift.
It happened most on ramps, i.e. pull in the driveway in 2nd and it would not climb.
Some drivers by the way don't understand that pinging is actually the internal parts of your engine rattling around. I've read but can't verify that some engineers calculate that during severe pinging, the cylinder walls of the engine can actually start flexing.
Miatas have excellent manual transmissions, I agree. What I always wonder if why I rarely see a Miata being driven fast. I mean, I know they Solo and do Miata Spec and all that, but on public roads----yhey're usually just puttin' along. What is the point of that? :confuse:
Maybe those are the *automatic* Miatas....
I'm always amazed at how these days in my 08 Accord I can pretty much zoom over the small mountains here in KY in 5th gear most of the time. When I was a kid driving our 69 VW Bus you'd often have to go to 2nd and c. 25 mph to get over a big hill.
And now (although shifty will cringe) I sometimes put my 190 hp vtec engine in my accord on cc in 5th gear at 72 mpg and just glide over....I pay attention for signs telling me that I should shift to 4th. But rarely do I need to....Or at least it seems like that!
Sometimes I still miss that Bus, but every time I go over a hill like it was butter with icy AC it still seems almost like magic to me.
A 2012 Honda Civic Si Sedan:
http://automobiles.honda.com/civic-si-sedan/
This list price on this puppy is $23,175 with destination.
You might say, with good reason, why would anyone pay that for a Civic. Well, first the Civic is now pretty much the exact size of the 1986 Accord. In other words, it's now a midsize car. And in fact it is officially that according to the EPA.
To me 23k for a loaded midsize sedan that is fast and sporty doesn't sound bad what with prices today. You can easily pay more than that for a Ford Fusion. And the Si is loaded. First, it's got the 2.4 i-VTEC directly from the Acura TSX. And I can tell you from personal experience that the sound of that vtec is infinitely superior to the thrashy and just plane rude sound of the Fusion engine when pushed. It is a very nice engine. And since the Si sedan weighs about 2900 pounds, compared to 3400 pounds for the TSX (or the Fusion for that matter), it is quite a bit faster 0-60-- 6.5 to 6.9, compared to about a second more for the TSX.
It's got a smooth 6 speed manual, independent suspension, limited slip differential, handling suspension, high end stereo, special seats, fog lights, etc.
It's true for $8000 more you can get the Acura TSX, but this is a lot faster and yet still has almost as much room as the TSX--92.5 inside compared to 94.5 for the TSX.
I ran 60 on this trip in the interest of fuel economy (and to compare it to last year's trip, where I ran SL), so if I wanted to pull a grade at 60, I simply dropped the car to 4th gear, engaged the cruise, and let it do its thing. The engine held 3500 RPM and just powered right on up.
Final damage was ~18.6 mpg, versus 17.8 last year if I recall correctly. I ran a consistent 60 this year, but pushed closer to 70 last year. At less than 1 mpg, I'm not sure the extra time was worth the minor improvement.
I'm sure the all-new 2010 model is a lot better in all ways, including NVH.
Given that you were towing 1500 #s that's not bad mpg!
RE: Towing in 4th in CC --- that's a good solution actually as long as you don't keep running into slower traffic on the grade.
One problem I have with using CC is that the drivers in front of me are often not at all consistent with their gas pedals....UP....DOWN....FASTER.....SLOWER....drives me nuts, especially when there is no reason for it.
Still, the Miata lives on while competitors die by the dozen.
frankly, I think they are way overpriced. Didn't those start in the '90s at light $12-$13k? somewhere down there, I believe.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi
And back in 1990 it had a smaller engine, no ac, no airbags probably, etc. The model today probably has some other stuff standard too, like maybe cruise control. I don't know.
But it seems to me that the price is pretty close when 20 years of inflation are taken into account. Still seems like a good deal to me for a nice car like that. They aren't very practical for someone with kids like me, but I still wouldn't mind owning one...
But there were markups and oh by the way get in line. I doubt few ever sold for under $16k.
A friend paid $1750 over MSRP for his '91. Nuts. I waited and got a used one much later.
Early NA models had a 1.6l and tiny non-ABS brakes. A/C and power steering were options, but I do think they had one air bag. 14" steelies.
Nowadays 16" rims, 2.0l engine, power steering, ABS, are all standard.
Funny thing is I miss my NA, still. It was simpler, lighter, and the cowl and doors were lower so it felt more open.
The more weight/cost/features you add to a Miata, the more you take away from the simplicity that made it great in the first place.
You've probably read that in some ways the next Miata is going to be more like the first gen in at least one way--weight. Mazda ordered its engineers to get the weight below 2000 pounds if possible, which is a diet of c. 500 # off of the current model.
Once you get the weight down to 2k you can put a c. 1.6. SkyActiv engine in it and--voila--you've got a sports car that gets c. 45 mpg hwy. Sounds good to me.
Don't know when the next Miata is due, but I'd guess in about a year, and so maybe in the Fall of 2012 as a 2013 model?? Maybe we'll get a revival of sales then?
1990 = $13,800
1995 = $17,895 (should be $16k, per inflation calculator)
2000 = $20,545 (should be 18,131)
2005 = $22,098 (should be 20,531)
2010 = $22,960 (should be 22,724)
So, yes, the 2010 seems to be on track with inflation, per that calculator, although they were high in previous years.
However, a 1990 Base Vette was $31,979, which should be $52,659 in 2010 dollar. Yet, in 2010, the base vette was $48,930.
A 1990 Accord LX sedan was $14,895, which should be $24,527 in 2010, yet Honda was only charging $21,855. And, hell, a 2010 Civic LX at just $18,405 is actually the fairer comparison to a 1990 Accord.
New car prices typically buck inflation trends. So the Miata is kind of high.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Miata makes a perfect 2nd car (or 3rd), so in a lot of ways used ones make more sense. Not a lot of people have that much lying around for a non-primary vehicle.
The new ND sounds great. I don't think the downsizing on weight and engine will hurt it at all. The 1.6l was a tiny bit underpowered but the 2.0l has power to spare for its intended purposes. I'd give up a few horses for better range, the low fuel light goes on annoyingly soon, 260 miles usually.
Looking forward to seeing the Miata de-volve and go back to its roots.
Thankfully, most of the significant grades on both the Parks and Seward highways are accompanied by a secondary passing lane. In that way, most of the traffic remained fairly well sorted even with "slow pokes" like me on the road. If I held other drivers up in areas where they couldn't reasonably pass, I would move to the shoulder so they could pass in-lane.
-----
I hear many folks say they much prefer an automatic while pulling a trailer, but I don't understand it. Personally, I don't find using a manual for this purpose any more challenging, plus I don't need to worry nearly so much about heat building up in the gear box.
So far, for me, the only times an automatic wins is during vehicle recovery and while plowing snow.
But if we're talking about the best car in terms of value and performance, with manual, that's under $24K(new), it has to go the the RX-8. The only downside is it doesn't get terribly great fuel economy. But other than that, it will blow the doors off of the Civic, look great, and handle 95% as well as a Porsche Boxster.
amazing price analysis by gbrozen. Shows that some cars are actually less expensive today, even with all the safety stuff, than they were 20 years ago.
And he's right that the better comparison to an Accord of 1990 is a Civic of 2012. They are almost the same size.
The 2008-2012 Accord is great, but it's a land yacht. Kind of a sporty Honda Buick or something. I own one and love it, but I do feel that Honda has gotten a little past what an Accord should be. I hope they slim down and tighten up the next gen a bit, which should be out for the 2013 model year.
And with Civic now the size of an Accord of 20 years ago, there's room for a car the size of a Civic Hatchback of c.1980. A two door hatch about the size of a second gen Civic (considerably smaller than a Fit even) should be able to get 45 mpg hwy too....
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
"Mazda: Hanging Tough During Crisis
First-half sales for Mazda North American Operations (MNAO) were up 5.8 percent at 122,379 vehicles sold, as the brand’s increasingly popular CX-7 and CX-9 crossover models posted the brand’s best increases – 21 percent and 16.4 percent, respectively, save the 26.7-percent first-half jump for the Mazda5 wagon. Troublingly, though, sales for the best-selling Mazda3 were off 8.5 percent, the midsize Mazda6 dropped by 15 percent to a meager 15,572 six-month sales total and the MX-5 Miata sportscar now averages about 500 sales per month."
BMW 330Ci.. '06
I am averaging about 26 mpg overall..... I think that's pretty good!
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Mazda USA.com says: "Starting at $26795 for Mazda RX-8 Sport with 6-speed manual transmission. RX-8 Grand Touring model shown $32960. Vehicle MSRP excludes destination charge..."
The RX-8 is still the only production car powered by a rotary engine, which uses a pair of triangular-shaped "rotors" that spin smoothly in one direction, as opposed to pistons that move up and down. This design allows the RX-8's motor to spool up to 9,000 rpm with ease, but doesn't offer much power down low. The rotary's lack of low-end torque can be frustrating in town or in traffic, but its eagerness to scream -- along with buttery power delivery and jet-enginelike soundtrack -- makes piloting the 2011 Mazda RX-8 a real kick for enthusiasts.
But kicks cost, and the RX-8 incurs them at the pump. For all its efficiency making exemplary power from a small mill, the lithe 3,000-pound coupe gets about the same mileage as Mazda's full-size 4,300-pound seven-passenger CX-9 crossover SUV. Here our enthusiasm to recommend the RX-8 dampens. Given the car's athletic ability, we could live with the rotary's soft low-end performance if it got decent mileage. But minimal twist with a V8 thirst is a double whammy."
I've read some places (and I don't know if it's true) that the manuals on BMWs are overrated. The review I read said they were ok, but not as smooth or fun as some Hondas...
weird interior. Can't tell if I like it or not. 2005. 50k miles. Buy it now 13k. Seems steep for the year. But it's one of only 1300 made. Looks loaded to the hilt. Probably had a list near 40.
My normal "boot into the Boschware" style of driving, I average about 28 mpg. in typical combined city/hwy/traffic/chaos/BayAreaCarnage.
I drove my friend's Porsche Boxster with the Tiptronic all around town today and you know....I couldn't own a car like that, as fun as it was.
The manual on the Mustang isn't anything special, but it is quick. I'd rate it as comparable to a base previous generation CTS with manual. Solid, respectable, and straight-forward. But also quite heavy. Then again, it's not a little tin can. The Mustang is very solid on long highway drives.
On to the RX-8.
The RX-8, while it doesn't have low-end torque, just requires a few minutes to re-train your brain. Essentially you have to drive it *exactly* (and I do mean exactly) like a typical 600cc sports bike. It'll go shockingly fast and corner harder than you'll believe possible in a modern non-exotic car. You just have to drive it like you mean it
This is perfectly normal. It's not a 4-stroke engine. There is no defect in the design. It just requires oil to lubricate the rotors and seals while it is running. Expect to burn about half a quart a month, and more if you rev it hard.
This is one car that you want to buy new, though, at the end of the year. The engine burns oil and absolutely MUST be run from day 1 with high zinc oil ( 1200 ppm minimum, 1600 is better). Normal synthetic or low zinc oil will ruin the engine in a few years. The internal pressures are much greater than in a normal 4 stroke engine and the EPA lowered the zinc content in oils a couple of years ago - to low enough that most anything other than oil made for classic cars and racing is too low for a rotary engine. Synthetic oils are no good in it as well, since it burns oil while operating and synthetics will leave deposits inside it the engine.
EDIT - also, ignore Mazda USA's advice. The rest of the *world* is told to use 5W-30 and not 5W-20 oil. 5W-30 oil is easy to find as a result, any high-mileage 5W-30 or racing oil will work fine. High mileage oil is normal oil with higher zinc and anti-wear additives. You should run this in ALL of your cars from day 1, now, unless the design is made for synthetic.
(whew - oil now is a major issue due to the EPA's idiocy, in high-revving engines like the RX-8 and S2000)
http://forums.automotive.com/70/6210886/mazda/mazda-rx-8s-engine-failure-problem- /index.html
More information on this issue. If Mazda asks, just lie to the dealer until the warranty period is over. (yes, lying is bad - but corporate idiocy that results in damaged engines is worse)
The engine will run fine for about 60-80K and then it's toast without proper oil and attention. It's also why it's one of the few cars to only buy new as it's terribly easy to abuse and ruin if you are like a typical idiot who only checks the oil when the engine starts to make excessive noises or the idiot light comes on. But properly cared for, and it's a very solid and trouble-free design as it has many less parts than a typical 4-stroke engine.
IMO, it's no harder to deal with these issues than, say, driving an old classic car with carbs on it. You adjust to it and get into a routine, just like, say, if you were owning your first motorcycle.
As far as driving it, it's awesome. It's like someone took an old classic 280Z and morphed it through a time machine. It's low, it's fast, and it's a total sleeper at the same time. And like the original 280Z, it'll run neck and neck with the European brands for a lot less money.
The manual is fantastic. No computers, no idiocy, just plain and simple mechanics. I'd personally rate it as about the same in terms of quality and feel as the S2000's 6 speed gearbox.
It's real strength, as a result of the low weight. low center of gravity, and quick to rev behavior, is in transitions and maneuvering. While it's not much faster 0-60 than most cars, and auto magazines go on about how it has no low-end power, it will go from 20 to 40 or squeeze into a gap in traffic like it reads your mind.
http://www.mazda.com/mazdaspirit/skyactiv/transmission/skyactiv-mt.html
Yeah, the mini does sound gutless in 6th.
The Civic Si I just convince my in law to buy apparently revs at about 2800 at 60 mpg in 6th. That seems high to me, but on the other hand if you want to go from 60 to 75 you can probably just do it without downshifting...But that's why mpg on the hwy for the Si is only 31 according to the epa (although my guess is that real world is better by 1-3 mpg).
But they're giving em away pretty much. Look at this, a new one for $4000 off list. Mazda and the dealer both must be losing money on these:
TrueCar Certified Dealer
4.9 miles from Louisville, KY
Your Guarantee $2,400 below Invoice
Your Price with Guarantee $23,525 Best Local Price $4,065 off Sticker Price
Re-read it - I edited it.
1 - Only buy new. Why? See #2.
2 - Change the oil to 1200ppm or higher zinc 5W-30 oil as soon as you get it home/off the lot. Use conventional oil only. Do not run low zinc, synthetic, or 5W-20 oil in it. You have been warned. Mazda USA is shipping the cars with only recommends 5W-20 to make the EPA happy. The rest of the *World* is told to use 5W-30 and NEVER use a lighter oil. Mazda will void your warranty if there's an issue and you are found to be using any oil other than 5W-20. But 5W-20 will prematurely wear out your engine. Basically lie to them until the warranty period is over and save your engine as no tech will be able to tell 5W-20 vs 5W-30 short of a lab analyzing it. (note - Porsche has the same issue with the Boxster engines - you have to run high zinc oil in it or else the output bearings will eat themselves by 50K miles, almost guaranteed) The problem is not the design. It's the EPA.
3 - The oil gauge in the car is a modified idiot light that shows oil pressure and not the level. It won't show low oil until you are literally running on nothing. If you let it run even a quart low, you risk damaging the engine as it has a very small oil capacity in the sump. The higher you rev it, the faster it burns oil. This is by design. Check your oil every week. Change every 3K miles. (no, adding more oil as it burns it is not changing your oil... heh)
4 - Do not lug the engine. If need be, keep it in 5th on the highway, but never let to drop below 3000rpm if you can. Like and old-school 2 stroke bike engine, low revs mean huge carbon and gunk build-up. Since 60mph is ~3000rpm, this means to always down-shift it traffic slows to 45-50mph. 3000rpm on a rotary is the same as 2000prm on a 4 cylinder engine. Below that is too slow.
Other than that, enjoy.
Thanks for as good a review of the RX-8 as I've ever read, with a primer on oil in the bargain. Very well done!
I've been following the progress of the rotary engine since I saw a cutaway and article in Popular Science sometime in the late '50s. The seal lubrication and drag issues appear to be about the only drawbacks, but they are significant.
1990 = $13,800
1995 = $17,895 (should be $16k, per inflation calculator)
2000 = $20,545 (should be 18,131)
2005 = $22,098 (should be 20,531)
2010 = $22,960 (should be 22,724)
But as someone else mentioned, what were the transaction prices when it first came out? I think Mazda's original $13,8 MSRP was a bit under what the actual market for the car was. If you run the inflation calculator from 1995, at which point MSRP was probably more in line with the market, you'll probably find a more "typical" trend.
If I had a use for a 2-seater I'd be all over a Miata. Fun little cars.